IWD2 has much less spell variety.
And also, what are the factors by which a spell affects you? And which factors comes into play when?
Like Saves, Magic Resistance, Spell Immunity, Wizard Level ( in case of Dispel Magic), ?
Why is there a difference between IWD2 high level spells and BG2 high level spells?
-
Keldorn's Justice
- Posts: 30
- Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:03 am
- Contact:
-
magisensei1
- Posts: 66
- Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 11:45 am
- Contact:
Well the easy answer is that its two different game engines that you area dealing with BG2 is 2e while IWD2 is 3e. In IWD2 3e universe - spells tend to have saves even things that are helpful to you e.g. if you have spell resistance and your mage casts dispel magic there is a chance that your SR will negate dispel magic - in IWD2 dispel magic has been severely limited - you can no longer dispel charmed team mates for example they get a save to see if they can save against it and remained charmed (which they do about 99% of the time.) and enemy mages gets saves against dispel magic.
3e spells are for the most part much weaker than 2e spells - a lot less choices and a bit less powerful in general - throw in the fact that saving throws are done completely different from 2e and you have spells that although seem familiar to 2e are different when it comes to saves and even how they affect others. There is also the fact that characters progression is different in the 3e world and it was in 2e.
While mages are very powerful in BG2 the higher they get with spells like contingency/time stop etc in IWD2 3e the spells are more balanced - yes mages are still powerful but not over the top as in BG2 - no spell casting so your can cast everything in their spell book in one go.
Saves in the 3e world you get 3 types of saving throws: reflex; fortitude and will save these coincide with dexterity (to evade fireballs for example); fortitude (coincides with constitution for spells that affect your body for example e.g ray of enfeeblement) and will (coincides with wisdom - for saves against enchantments and such spells in general) - as characters go up in levels these improve depending on your class and character level.
Spell resistance (natural or magical) - the easiest way to understand it is imagine an AC against spells/magic - if the spell and caster is able to role higher than your SR than the spell affects you but if they can't role higher than the your SR then the spell has no affect on you.
Spell immunity - means that the creature has immunity to that sort of spell and it can't be overcome by that type of spell e.g. elves has sleep immunity - you can't cast sleep spell on an elf regardless of how powerful your mage is because they are immune to sleep spells.
Hope this helps some.
3e spells are for the most part much weaker than 2e spells - a lot less choices and a bit less powerful in general - throw in the fact that saving throws are done completely different from 2e and you have spells that although seem familiar to 2e are different when it comes to saves and even how they affect others. There is also the fact that characters progression is different in the 3e world and it was in 2e.
While mages are very powerful in BG2 the higher they get with spells like contingency/time stop etc in IWD2 3e the spells are more balanced - yes mages are still powerful but not over the top as in BG2 - no spell casting so your can cast everything in their spell book in one go.
Saves in the 3e world you get 3 types of saving throws: reflex; fortitude and will save these coincide with dexterity (to evade fireballs for example); fortitude (coincides with constitution for spells that affect your body for example e.g ray of enfeeblement) and will (coincides with wisdom - for saves against enchantments and such spells in general) - as characters go up in levels these improve depending on your class and character level.
Spell resistance (natural or magical) - the easiest way to understand it is imagine an AC against spells/magic - if the spell and caster is able to role higher than your SR than the spell affects you but if they can't role higher than the your SR then the spell has no affect on you.
Spell immunity - means that the creature has immunity to that sort of spell and it can't be overcome by that type of spell e.g. elves has sleep immunity - you can't cast sleep spell on an elf regardless of how powerful your mage is because they are immune to sleep spells.
Hope this helps some.
In IWD2 3e universe - spells tend to have saves even things that are helpful to you
Not sure if that's a typo as that's true of AD&D 1st and 2nd Editions.
The answer is essentially correct though, they are two very different games, don't let the very misleading titles mislead you, that's just a sales ploy.
[QUOTE=Darth Gavinius;1096098]Distrbution of games, is becoming a little like Democracy (all about money and control) - in the end choice is an illusion and you have to choose your lesser evil.
And everything is hidden in the fine print.[/QUOTE]
And everything is hidden in the fine print.[/QUOTE]
magisensei1 wrote:Well the easy answer is that its two different game engines that you area dealing with BG2 is 2e while IWD2 is 3e. In IWD2 3e universe - spells tend to have saves even things that are helpful to you e.g. if you have spell resistance and your mage casts dispel magic there is a chance that your SR will negate dispel magic - in IWD2 dispel magic has been severely limited - you can no longer dispel charmed team mates for example they get a save to see if they can save against it and remained charmed (which they do about 99% of the time.) and enemy mages gets saves against dispel magic.
3e spells are for the most part much weaker than 2e spells - a lot less choices and a bit less powerful in general - throw in the fact that saving throws are done completely different from 2e and you have spells that although seem familiar to 2e are different when it comes to saves and even how they affect others. There is also the fact that characters progression is different in the 3e world and it was in 2e.
While mages are very powerful in BG2 the higher they get with spells like contingency/time stop etc in IWD2 3e the spells are more balanced - yes mages are still powerful but not over the top as in BG2 - no spell casting so your can cast everything in their spell book in one go.
Saves in the 3e world you get 3 types of saving throws: reflex; fortitude and will save these coincide with dexterity (to evade fireballs for example); fortitude (coincides with constitution for spells that affect your body for example e.g ray of enfeeblement) and will (coincides with wisdom - for saves against enchantments and such spells in general) - as characters go up in levels these improve depending on your class and character level.
Spell resistance (natural or magical) - the easiest way to understand it is imagine an AC against spells/magic - if the spell and caster is able to role higher than your SR than the spell affects you but if they can't role higher than the your SR then the spell has no affect on you.
Spell immunity - means that the creature has immunity to that sort of spell and it can't be overcome by that type of spell e.g. elves has sleep immunity - you can't cast sleep spell on an elf regardless of how powerful your mage is because they are immune to sleep spells.
Hope this helps some.
It's been a while since I visited these forums but I have to disagree strongly that the IWD spells are "weaker" than the BG2 ones.
IWD 2 spells are much stronger compared to BG2 when it comes to instant death effects and damage in general while having weaker "utilitiy" and "misc" spells and some defense spells are weaker too like Stoneskin.
To give an example I am sure close to no one here would ever pick Wail of the Banshee as a Sorcerer or even Wizard. Why? Because most enemies in ToB will save against it and most bosses are immune. In IWD 2 thanks to your main attribute modifier and Spell Focus feats you can basically make it nigh impossible to resist it and you can wipe out entire battlefields with it. Horrid Wilting for example deals up to 25D8 damage and again thanks to the save modifiers with proper build nigh impossible for many enemies to save against.
Delayed Blast Fireball deals 20D8 + 20% damage with Spirit of Flame plus again nigh impossible to resist for many enemies bar rogues and monks.
Thanks to these elemental feats and the save modfications through main attribute and certain feats plus several spells which can also modify saves due to reduction directly or through attribute reduction makes it much more varied what spells you can use. Enchantment is a nastily strong school in fact unlike in BG2 when every mother and their dog will save against most enchantment spells bar Chaos. In IWD 2 again through all the modifications and the right target selection you will make them stick even against many high level enemies.
Just my 5 cent.
Well I'm far from competent to debate this, I gave up on the horror of 3ED very early, but
Comes across very much as a "yes, but sniff the cheese" responce, and highlights one of the reasons I was disgusted with 3 ED.
I'm not quibbling with Sykar by the way, but with 3ED in general and in particular it's over indulgence of power players at the expense of role players.
In IWD 2 thanks to your main attribute modifier and Spell Focus feats you can basically make it nigh impossible to resist it and you can wipe out entire battlefields with it.
Comes across very much as a "yes, but sniff the cheese" responce, and highlights one of the reasons I was disgusted with 3 ED.
I'm not quibbling with Sykar by the way, but with 3ED in general and in particular it's over indulgence of power players at the expense of role players.
[QUOTE=Darth Gavinius;1096098]Distrbution of games, is becoming a little like Democracy (all about money and control) - in the end choice is an illusion and you have to choose your lesser evil.
And everything is hidden in the fine print.[/QUOTE]
And everything is hidden in the fine print.[/QUOTE]
I cannot say that I can agree with that. Roleplay imho had never much to do with what the current ruleset has to offer and more with your own and your parties/DM mindset. I could always roleplay in 2nd and 3rd and had a great DM for both. One of my best P&P session was with a 3rd D&D party in which we had 0 dice rolls and it was pure roleplay.
One of my worst experiene was with a DM in 2nd Edition who let us role 5d6 for character creation and reroll the two lowest so no one had lower than 15 in any attribute score nearly and many had more than one 18 in attributes.
He did nothing for story and just threw us from one combat to the next while I tried to roleplay actually as a half-elf bard. The very first combat was bandits in plate and full plate armor (leader). Yeah right....
Needless to say already after the first evening they called me and told me that they did not want to play further with me because our "playstyles" differ and they did not appreciate my "roleplay effort". If they would have not called me I would have done so and told them the same just that I was bored by their "lack of roleplay". Or actually the complete abscence of it.
D&D 3rd edition eased up on a lot of strange restrictions D&D 2nd Ed. had. The whole Dual Class/ Multiclass issue for example was streamlined and made fair for most races. Previously Dual Class ruled and Multi Class were just as easily abusable imho especially in cRPGs. Just look at Kensai/Mage or FMT. The artificial waepon restrictions were also lifted and everybody could learn to use any weapon and could even carry any weapon just with severe penalties if they tried
The increase in Spell DC and through attributes was partially countered by other feats like Evasion (taking 0 damage from fireballs is just as "op" imho) and feats which improved saving throws.
The 3-4 big flaws D&D 3 had was for once that you got those first level bonus even when you got the first level later. They should have made it so that you get those special level 1 boni only when it was your first character level, not your first class level like for example the many bonus armor and weapon feats fighters received indicating their long and ardenous decade long training.
Another flaw was that many of the really good special abilities some classes got you already received at level 1 like Paladins Divine Grace, Monk Evasion or figher weapon specializationmaking it easy to just take 1-4 levels and still could reach high enough levels in a caster class to be very powerful.
Oh and priest became to powerful. Basically with priests you have a hybrid of wizard and warrior which gives up too little in both departments. You could say priest is 80% warrior and 80-90%% wizard who can also cast with no armor restrictions. And had more spells per day than a normal wizard and could heal, and spontanously change any non healing spell into a damage spell as good/neutral or damage spell as evil or neutral. -_-
Paladins, Rangers, Fighters and Barbarians were also too similar especially at lower levels. Rangers were plain aweful because the spells came late, the boni for two weapon fighting could easily be gotten by 2 Fighter levels and the boni to racial enemy was pretty low first 10 levels and could barely compensate for anything.
IWD 2 in normal mode can be played with a roleplaying mind, too maybe not to the same degree as BG 2 but it's possible you usually have at least the option to play "evil" or "good" albeit the end result is ultimately the same.
IWD 2 only required extreme powergaming in HoF mode in which the enemies have extremly high to hit boni, saves, damage and HP. For example an AC of 35 in Normal is quite impressive, but means nothing because even lowly Goblins have something around +25 to +30 to hit and will hit you regularly with that and they can hit for up to 30 damage.
One of my worst experiene was with a DM in 2nd Edition who let us role 5d6 for character creation and reroll the two lowest so no one had lower than 15 in any attribute score nearly and many had more than one 18 in attributes.
He did nothing for story and just threw us from one combat to the next while I tried to roleplay actually as a half-elf bard. The very first combat was bandits in plate and full plate armor (leader). Yeah right....
Needless to say already after the first evening they called me and told me that they did not want to play further with me because our "playstyles" differ and they did not appreciate my "roleplay effort". If they would have not called me I would have done so and told them the same just that I was bored by their "lack of roleplay". Or actually the complete abscence of it.
D&D 3rd edition eased up on a lot of strange restrictions D&D 2nd Ed. had. The whole Dual Class/ Multiclass issue for example was streamlined and made fair for most races. Previously Dual Class ruled and Multi Class were just as easily abusable imho especially in cRPGs. Just look at Kensai/Mage or FMT. The artificial waepon restrictions were also lifted and everybody could learn to use any weapon and could even carry any weapon just with severe penalties if they tried
The increase in Spell DC and through attributes was partially countered by other feats like Evasion (taking 0 damage from fireballs is just as "op" imho) and feats which improved saving throws.
The 3-4 big flaws D&D 3 had was for once that you got those first level bonus even when you got the first level later. They should have made it so that you get those special level 1 boni only when it was your first character level, not your first class level like for example the many bonus armor and weapon feats fighters received indicating their long and ardenous decade long training.
Another flaw was that many of the really good special abilities some classes got you already received at level 1 like Paladins Divine Grace, Monk Evasion or figher weapon specializationmaking it easy to just take 1-4 levels and still could reach high enough levels in a caster class to be very powerful.
Oh and priest became to powerful. Basically with priests you have a hybrid of wizard and warrior which gives up too little in both departments. You could say priest is 80% warrior and 80-90%% wizard who can also cast with no armor restrictions. And had more spells per day than a normal wizard and could heal, and spontanously change any non healing spell into a damage spell as good/neutral or damage spell as evil or neutral. -_-
Paladins, Rangers, Fighters and Barbarians were also too similar especially at lower levels. Rangers were plain aweful because the spells came late, the boni for two weapon fighting could easily be gotten by 2 Fighter levels and the boni to racial enemy was pretty low first 10 levels and could barely compensate for anything.
IWD 2 in normal mode can be played with a roleplaying mind, too maybe not to the same degree as BG 2 but it's possible you usually have at least the option to play "evil" or "good" albeit the end result is ultimately the same.
IWD 2 only required extreme powergaming in HoF mode in which the enemies have extremly high to hit boni, saves, damage and HP. For example an AC of 35 in Normal is quite impressive, but means nothing because even lowly Goblins have something around +25 to +30 to hit and will hit you regularly with that and they can hit for up to 30 damage.
Roleplay imho had never much to do with what the current ruleset has to offer and more with your own and your parties/DM mindset. I could always roleplay in 2nd and 3rd and had a great DM for both. One of my best P&P session was with a 3rd D&D party in which we had 0 dice rolls and it was pure roleplay.
One of my worst experiene was with a DM in 2nd Edition who let us role 5d6 for character creation and reroll the two lowest so no one had lower than 15 in any attribute score nearly and many had more than one 18 in attributes.
I am right with you on that Sykar, when push comes to shove it's the DM that really matters, if he/she is good then the system will be made to fit the needs of the players. So yep in live play 3ED could be made to work, but in my/our case we already had a system in place that worked perfectly for us.
The problem here though is there is no live DM just a pre-packaged 'DM' with content and interpreation rigidly fixed to suit both Hasboro and the prejudices of the devs. For me they did a an acceptable job with BG1, less so with BG2 and even less again with IWD. With 3ED for me NWN was a serious disappointment, and NWN2 a complete joke; so no way was I going to invest time and money in IWD 2. As it happens I was given a copy of IWD2 a few years back; it's still sitting, unopened, somewhere round here.
[QUOTE=Darth Gavinius;1096098]Distrbution of games, is becoming a little like Democracy (all about money and control) - in the end choice is an illusion and you have to choose your lesser evil.
And everything is hidden in the fine print.[/QUOTE]
And everything is hidden in the fine print.[/QUOTE]
I do think that you have slightly too high standards for cRPG. No offence meant. 
Me personally, I like all IE games, my favourites being BG2 and PS:T albeit BG1 is very close behind.
IWD 1 and IWD 2 are more classic dungeon crawlers which are more about running through dungeons and slaying stuff which can be fun too. Story was ok, nothing special, first one had a nice twist at the end, second was a bit too predicatble but had some unique elements too like the Fell Forest.
Me personally, I like all IE games, my favourites being BG2 and PS:T albeit BG1 is very close behind.
IWD 1 and IWD 2 are more classic dungeon crawlers which are more about running through dungeons and slaying stuff which can be fun too. Story was ok, nothing special, first one had a nice twist at the end, second was a bit too predicatble but had some unique elements too like the Fell Forest.
-
roller1234
- Posts: 191
- Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2007 12:42 am
- Contact: