GameBanshee Forums

This thread is for comments or criticisms, thoughts or emotional reactions to the GameBanshee informal editorial about playing VERY High Levels in AD&D called found here:
[url="http://www.gamebanshee.com/editorials/point&counterpoint1_03202001.php"]http://www.gamebanshee.com/editorials/point&counterpoint1_03202001.php[/url]

Applebrown & Flagg

Personally I belive that a successful CRPG must have two essential elements: Story and Fun. Gaining high levels of experience takes care of the fun bit, but the story needs to float right alongside it, otherwise all you have is a bunch of high level characters that can beat anything and everything, which removes the fun. The two are mutually exclusive, one can't exist without the other.

So you think that playing level 40 characters in a Forgotten Realm setting is fun?

If the story is done right, then it wouldn't matter if I had a 100th level character. Well perhaps with the certain confinements of the Forgotten realms such a thing isn't possible, but if the story finds a way to validate such a transition, then IMO it is ok.

Well if you look at a couple of facts of the 2nd edition Forgotten Realms setting. Powerful mages such as the Symbul, Elminster, Khelben Blackstaff, and others are around level 30. Imagine running around in such a world with level 40 characters.

On a side note: It is my opinion that offering high levels is just a commercial ploy to increase sales.

I agree strongly with Flagg (on this point only! ). I think playing a level 20 character is boring and departs from the realism in the story and setting. RPGs are about developing characters, not caricatures. The storylines get weaker and less credible as you become able to dominate the world around you. I like playing ordinary people flung into extraordinary circumstances. I feel like the developers should have simply made it more dificult to advance in levels rather than add more levels. More is not better. It is simply more.

Souping up monsters for us to fight does not sound appealing, either. We've already beat those monsters when they were less powerful. Why would we want to go through it all over again. I could have just turned the dificulty level up, if I wanted that. Give us new plot twists and new creatures. I think most gamers enjoy the struggle far more than the victory.

I have been told in other threads, however, that I am simply being olf fashioned. Perhaps playing rediculously powerful, god-like beings is more appealing to a younger audience. Like under 29.

Chalk another one up for the "realists". Sure its fantasy but a believable fantasy is *grounded* in reality. If I wanted to level up to 40+ I'd play Gauntlet Legends. If I want story and plot development I'll play BG - but maybe not if the series continues to(or ends at) level 40.

Higher levels are a substitute for the lack of any real story, roleplaying or game progression. Maybe its OK this time around - end the BG games at level 40 when you ascend to demi-godlike status but I'll look elsewhere for CRPG if originality doesn't appear in the future.

The secret to using the 40th level characters and keeping it fun is the use of the good story. Perhaps by the end of BG2, the story was drawing thin and was not able to support these massive players. The fundamental point here is this, the story is geared towards a certain level. If you have a level 3 character, then a good story can be done on the challenges that face that character. If you have a 40th level character, while the challenges we've all seen in BG2 would suggest that a significant challenge will not exist, however, there will always be challenges to a character, no matter their power. Haven't your mothers ever told you that violence doesn't solve anything? Ok, it solves some things, but your going to have to look outside of your windows here people and see that if the story is told correctly, the level of the character is inconsequential to the fact that your gonna be having fun!

On this subject I partially agree with both applebrown and Flagg. When played BGII and figured out that I could NOT reach level 18 and therefore not get level 9 spells with my mage I became quite furious. However I also craved for more than high level advancement in the game. To become a high level will always be a popular option BUT I believe that this (at least to a certain degree) can be made up for by creating other things to capture the gamers attention. For example I would jump to the roof if I had the abillity to be a Drow Elf in the game, possesing all its inate abillities and such or maybe become a battlemage. This would in my case, and hopefully many others more make up for the fact that I would not reach an insanely high level. A thing that Flagg was critical to which I also totally agree with is the manner of realism in the games when you are able to attain such mighty powers. Even though my lvl 18 fighter is a couple of lvls above Artemis Entreri. He would NEVER EVER beat him in combat becouse his fighting style is unique and matching his exsquisite prowess would always prove hard no matter what. Also another thing. In todays roleplaying games there are to many computer people that worries all about graphics with too little respect for the Forgotten Realms setting and AD&D rules. What we need is more enthusiastic game masters cooperating with these computer technicians who can become to mixed up with the visual element instead of the gaming expierience.

In my playing experience with BG2, the fun comes from the storyline and the challenge -- not the accumulation of levels. After about level 15 I get bored with levels and all the nifty new toys. I don't think the problem is necessarily with the levels, though, but rather with knowing the game too well and how to exploit it. I enjoy my levels and toys more when they have some reason to exist other than for me to lay waste to everything in my path.

I had the most fun on my first cold run through BG2. I paid attention to the storyline and every fight was a challenge because I didn't know well in advance how to defeat every foe. After completing the game and replaying it a few times however, I find that I have to actively add handicaps to make it fun and challenging. This is independent of my level. My level 7 fighter can be a force of nature if I know in advance how to beat or avoid all the obstacles the game can throw at me.

So, I imagine that with ToB that the first cold run through will be the most fun. I will be powerful, but so will my foes. I'll pay attention to the storyline to learn whatever clues I can about what's coming, and probably feel satisfied that I earned my God-hood. Will I want to replay ToB? I don't know. With a static plotline it's easy to ignore the plot the second time around and just lay waste. There's not much challenge in that once you know all the tricks to do it. More than likely I bet players will start dueling and fighting each other. What else will be left to do at level 40?

My two cents:
I agree that extremely high level characters deter from the "reality" experience of an RPG. Even the end of BG2 started to feel somewhat like an arcade game due to the tremendous power at your disposal.

Its going to be a real challenge to keep such high level adventuring from becoming boring. Such power limits your adversaries and dilutes the "gee whiz" factor. ("ho hum. Another trip to Hell")

I'd like to see this power mitigated somewhat, perhaps with things like:

- slower development. There are enough other types of rewards in the games that xp shouldn;t need to be handed out like candy.

- penalties as well as rewards. For example, giving up an ability point was brilliant! It forced you to make a painful choice.... only such moment I can think of however. Giving up magic items, or having them destroyed, might also work well.

- limit the hack and slash. Anyone keep track of how many people/creatures you killed in BG2? Sure, there were usually other options, but you miss out on the xp and goodies if you don't slaughter pretty well everybody! Make those other options more interesting - there are lots of other games out there if combat is all your looking for.

After all is said and done, I really doubt that high levels will add anything to the BG experience. I'll play ToB to finish the series, of course, but will be more interested to see what they come up with next.

Flagg, you must be in shock, so many people agreeing with you j/k
I think the level 40 is complete overkill. I don't mind a higher xp cap for the expansion, I'm looking forward to memorizing 9th lvl spells. @ level 40, who are going to be fighting? Cyric? Helm? All the 7 sisters?
It reminds me of the Hollywood effect..more pretty explosions, more cool gadgaets..less plot. What struck me most about the BGseries in the first place was the character interaction..your npcs had their own feelings and agendas. There were consequences for certain behaviors.I'd like to see more story line, more quests based on previous actions and allegiances, more interaction between the npcs. This makes the story so much more robust.I'd like to see alignment tweaks..(as was covered in a thread some time ago) i.e. should a paladin be allowed to get the girdle of giant strength from the Kuo Toa dungeon without some form of punishment? After all..sacrificing to Demogorgon is a no no for a follower of good.
I understand the designers have to make the game as appealing as possible to a broad spectrum of potential customers..the people who are choosing between that and Diablo2 or the latest Tomb Raider..but I don't think just handing out gimmicks is the way to do it.
I understand the points made by Applebrown and Vehemence about the leveling in conjunction with the storyline being fun. I just think there's a point where the character and party members (who aren't supposed to be potential avatars) being more powerful than the avatars for major deities is going to be awfully tricky to balance.I have visions of a player spending a couple minutes each battle saying hmm I used Meteor Swarm last time for those orcs..something different this time..maybe Wail of the Banshee..this is just too easy..I wonder if Morrowinds out yet?
Well that's my rant for the day

Hmm. I'll try to keep this brief, but I don't make any promises.

I'm an avid fan of the Forgotten Realms setting. In fact, it's the very setting that I use in virtually all of my PnP games. With that in mind, I'll agree with the general consensus that such high levels seems more like a gimmick than an actual gameplay element.

My only real criticism of Baldur's Gate II is that the advancement of the PC is far too rapid. 10,000+ experience points are doled out for even the simplest of tasks, some even more so than the ones found in the original Baldur's Gate that rewarded you with only 100 xp.

Black Isle was bent on including high-level spells and powerful items, and I just don't think this was at all necessary, even in the framework of the existing game. With a little effort, it's still quite possible to make mid-level characters powerful and fun to play. In fact, if all the creatures in BG2 hadn't been pumped up, such a party would be ideally suited to the task.

Ultimately, I think Throne of Bhaal will still be lots of fun to play, and won't be devoid of depth and storyline. I just think it's a shame that Black Isle feels the need to continuously outdo themselves in terms of level advancement when there is so much to the D&D game that they could have worked with in the meantime.

[edit]
Forgot to mention this. Though not typical of AD&D, there is one setting where such high levels aren't all that uncommon: Dark Sun. I'm not too familiar with it, but I think you can challenge for demi-Godhood at level 30. Throne of Bhaal's high-level status isn't completely baseless.
[/edit]

[This message has been edited by TheHellion (edited 03-20-2001).]

I think many people have touched on one of the major flaws in such high levels here. I the matter of just a few days (weeks if you're going at a normal pace) you go from a mid-level adventurer to one ready to challenge Elminster in power and best Drizzt in prowess. This is a story flaw!!! Sure, you can have plenty of other story pieces in place to try and make it interesting, but one of the major cogs here is extremely flawed. This story could easily have been accomplished with half the levels. It would have been better. Drizzt would have been a valued ally instead of just getting in the way of my more efficient fighting machines. I'm afraid it's only getting worse.

Will I buy ToB? Yes! Would it have been better without reaching such levels? Absolutely!

But, then again, I'm just old school!

I beleieve there are two frames of mind here. One for each type of D&D. The ones Black Isle are producing is one, the isometric view, were you control multiple people in your party. Then, games like Vampire: The Masquerade Redemption, 3D, single person Multi (Or PnP).

For the Isometric games, levels should be more rounded, and with cap. That keeps the people from running around with six gods, instead of a group of adventurers, that can, indeed, get there ass kicked by some Demon. It keeps it even and balanced, and challenging. In the long run, it becomes more entertaining to play, and more satisfying when you finally manage to defeat that blasted Dragon who killed you so many times, until you thought of an ample strategy to defeat him. It actually gets people to use their heads, instead of their brawn.

Then, in PnP (I'll use V:tMR as an example) Over the summer, I played V:tMR online religously. In it, My friend and I had formed a clan of legit players (difficult to do now adays) So, aside from me, and few others who had worked their asses off to gain the age og Methusalah, and actually become a force in the game (Took me three solid gameplay weeks) the clan was low level vampires. Of course, because of this, in clan wars a lot of our troops were killed quickly, and the wars were then faught by the nobles of my clan, (Me, my friend, and two other people) againest there entire clan. We barely suvived the first week. Although, over time, we all played the game, became stronger, which took time, and was fun in the long run, and eventually became a well known clan, and became feared! So, I know I wnet on for a bit here, but my point for that kind of game is that if your one person, and only one person, then it's alright to become god-like. Because it takes longer, it's harder with just one person, and the work is satisfying when you ally with others. Unfortuneatly, I did have another point, but I typed so much, I can't remember it.

So, to sum up. It all depends on the type of game being played. Isometric, or single PnP. Powerful characters can be dangerous in an isometric, because it reduces a lot of the challenge. Powerful is needed in PnP online because of the amount of un-legit cheaters, but make sure you don't stoop to their level. In the end, it's all opinon based.

I apologize for the rant, but it had to be said.

------------------
All for one, and one for all!

Agree with many of the statements here. And I think one of the main things about being level 40 or an ultra high level character is that people are just in bewilderment as to what to expect because it's so unheard of.

------------------
Applebrown @
www.GameBanshee.com
Make YOUR Gaming Scream!

The BG series was the first CRPG in a long time that did a good job of implementing true D&D. It'd be a shame if they give up on the things that make it different from most others - i.e. role playing - and let it degenerate into a hack and slash where levels and items are everything.

This is particularly vexing since there are lots of other games that give exactly that experience. I'd like to see this line do something different.

I think people are getting a little too hung up on "level 40"....Bioware's probably just setting the cap so high no-one will ever reach it.

And besides, what level is the main character at the end? 18? 17?
Starting there it'll take at least a few major quests before it gets totally unreasonable.

As for powerlevelling vs "roleplaying" how much roleplaying was there really in the earlier games?(BG1 especially.)
I've always seen the BG series as focused on combat.

I think people are getting a little too hung up on "level 40"....Bioware's probably just setting the cap so high no-one will ever reach it.

Both BG1 and BG2 featured a system where your character could relatively easily max out. There's no reason to assume that they are going to make level 40 impossible to reach in ToB. Simply up the experience for every quest... just what they did with BG2. Instead of 200,000 experience to divy up we could be getting about 750,000 during particular quests at a time.

Applebrown

I too have to agree with most statements.
I really think that lvl 40 or 30 is overkill, I've always prefered middle level settings. I do think they could have gone with a lower xp progression... Some people would say that it may became boring, and yes it could be, with the actual setting. What I mean, is that in BG series, ther is no real difference in playing a lvl 2 over a lvl 18. The challenges are similar, lvl 2 fights Ogres, and lvl 18 dragons or beholders. The problem is that you never get the feeling of how powerful you are at lvl 18. After all, at lvl 18 you are one of the best in your profession in the world of Faerun (Artemis Entreri is somwhere between lvl 16 right? and he's the best assassin in the realm). I think Bioware should have introduced a few easy encounters against lower level parties or old monsters (like a battle against loads of gnolls Drizzt makes in BG1). That way, we could really have felt how powerful our character is. If you see, that the party you kill in the Iron Throne in BG1, is piececake, you gain a new inshigt on your character. You start to see him/her as what he truly is, one of the heavy-hitters in the Sword Coast. I belive that would have reduced people hunger to get more levels.