Review Baldur's Gate II: Shadows of Amn Retrospective Review

[Xor]

Most interesting fight is probably the ascension version of the dragon bhaalspawn in TOB. It's fucking impossible.

 

[The Feral Kid]

I think encounter design was, generally, better in Baldur's Gate 1 with all the adventuring parties that were out to get you. In BG 2 you mostly fought against hordes of monsters which is kinda boring. With the exception of 2-3 encounters including the Guarded Compound one in Athkatla which is the most memorable (and probably the toughest but also most rewarding) battle in the entire series. Also the abundance of magic items ruined a lot of the fun in BG 2. BG 1 was far more balanced in that aspect.

BG1 offers such gems like endless combat with Xvarts, kobolds, gnolls and other trash mobs. Just read the LP that we have here for accurate description.

Just because you need an LP to actually get a clue about a game - and still manage not to - as opposed to simply from playing it doesn't mean everyone has your disabilities. Take your patronizing and condescending attitude and shove it in your world's origin, moron man.

 

[Melcar]

Most interesting fight is probably the ascension version of the dragon bhaalspawn in TOB. It's fucking impossible.

Rather easy to cheese that one though. The Melissan battles are fucking insane, but I think I used SCS2 with it last time I played. Demogorgon is a close second in difficulty, but for some reason it's not that enjoyable (I think it's due to the cheese and demon rape).
And yeah, I kind of preferred BG1 combat encounters to BG2 ones. Except for a few key encounters in BG2 (Firkraag, Twisted Rune), I always enjoyed the many encounters against opposing parties of humanoid characters in BG1. My favorite is that bar brawl at the Helm and Cloak.

 

[Needles]

1) My point was that the encounters - even trashmobs - offered variety
2) While most of the encounters I listed are easy, some are challenging too btw prebuffing ie preparing is also a form of tactic

1) Well yes, to a point. However, at least for me, their variety couldn't mask the fact that they were trash mobs.
2) Prebuffing is a controversial topic... and while I think it can be interesting, I don't think it was implemented that well in BG2 (I remember several encounters like this: Fight starts -> enemy uses insta-gib spell on my main character -> game ends -> reload -> prebuff against that spell -> kill enemy easily)

You have a point with those self-imposed limitations, of course you can ruin the experience by using all those cheater methods, spike traps, scrolls of pro magic/undead, the anti beholder shield etc and since "winning" encounters that way isn't rewarding you can then complain. Bio is certainly to blame for even including that shit. But as it so often happens mods can fix it! SCS2.

Of course they can -and do- but I think this should not be used as an argument when judging the quality of a game.

No, one couldn't.

Flemeth, Spider Queen, Revenants are actually relatively hard fights, if you encounter them early on (pretty much like Firkraag).
But yeah, you're right, BG2 wins through quantity alone.
And there's no herping in the derp roads.

I'd rather call it encounter scaling. The enemies don't scale, there are just more powerful enemies added.

I fail to see the difference.

 

[VentilatorOfDoom]

1) Well yes, to a point. However, at least for me, their variety couldn't mask the fact that they were trash mobs.

Very few RPGs don't have trash mobs. Ever played Arcanum, Wiz8? At least in BG2 real trash mobs are a matter of seconds, cast a skulltrap and move on.
Mysteries of Westgate didn't have trash encounters. Worked very well in that game.

2) Prebuffing is a controversial topic... and while I think it can be interesting, I don't think it was implemented that well in BG2 (I remember several encounters like this: Fight starts -> enemy uses insta-gib spell on my main character -> game ends -> reload -> prebuff against that spell -> kill enemy easily)

That's the charm of it, for every spell there is some other spell that can protect you.

Of course they can -and do- but I think this should not be used as an argument when judging the quality of a game.

I merely mentioned it as an alternative to restrain yourself from using cheese.

Flemeth, Spider Queen, Revenants are actually relatively hard fights, if you encounter them early on (pretty much like Firkraag).
But yeah, you're right, BG2 wins through quantity alone.
And there's no herping in the derp roads.

Boss fights in DA were silly. Beefed up massive HP pools on the bosses, who obviously don't play by the rules, and arcade-style encounters like the broodmother, where everytime you hit a certain HP threshold some event happens like the spawning of a new wave of minions. Lame.

I fail to see the difference.

Well, there is a difference. Kobolds don't magically become epic kobolds with 500HP for instance. Just some more powerful monsters spawn to provide a bit of a challenge for higher level parties. On a few selected spots. What's the alternative anyway? Make the game completely linear so that encounters can be balanced properly? Level-scaling is not always a bad idea in my opinion.

 

[Xor]

Flemeth was the only difficult fight in DA. And I fought her at around level 10. On nightmare. All other encounters were trivial to moderate difficulty. I did have to reload a few times when I did something retarded like let my healer get raped.

 

[Needles]

Very few RPGs don't have trash mobs. Ever played Arcanum, Wiz8? At least in BG2 real trash mobs are a matter of seconds, cast a skulltrap and move on.
Mysteries of Westgate didn't have trash encounters. Worked very well in that game.

You're right, most RPGs do have trashmobs, but I see people constantly criticising.. say ToEE, for epic amounts of bugbears. So it's bad to have filler combat, but it's okay if the critters look differently (or use flaming arrows which do small amounts of damage as oposed to +1 arrows which do small amounts of damage).
And moreover, at least you can switch on RT mode in Arcanum and zip through dungeons very fast - you don't have to endure empty animations while waiting for the next 6 sek round.

That's the charm of it, for every spell there is some other spell that can protect you.

Which is good, of course, but it really encourages either savescumming (in case of insta-gib spells) or being perma-buffed in dungeons, which is kind of lame.

Boss fights in DA were silly. Beefed up massive HP pools on the bosses, who obviously don't play by the rules, and arcade-style encounters like the broodmother, where everytime you hit a certain HP threshold some event happens like the spawning of a new wave of minions. Lame.

Well-implemented boss fights based on phases are in my opinion a very valid approach to tactical combat. Not the only one obviously, and I do think that in DA:O these phase transitions don't happen very naturally/dynamically. While this is probably a bit of-topic: I believe that current RPGs could learn a bit about encounter design from MMOs...

Well, there is a difference. Kobolds don't magically become epic kobolds with 500HP for instance. Just some more powerful monsters spawn to provide a bit of a challenge for higher level parties. On a few selected spots. What's the alternative anyway? Make the game completely linear so that encounters can be balanced properly? Level-scaling is not always a bad idea in my opinion.

Why do they have to be balanced "properly", what ever that means? You put enemies with appropriate capabilities in the logical place and that's pretty much it. Didn't games do that for most of their history? Having encounters perfectly balanced all the time actually kills any sense of progression - hence the hate for levelscaling.

 

[Topher]

Why do they have to be balanced "properly", what ever that means? You put enemies with appropriate capabilities in the logical place and that's pretty much it. Didn't games do that for most of their history? Having encounters perfectly balanced all the time actually kills any sense of progression - hence the hate for levelscaling.

Did you play BG2. The game doesn't take an encounter with Knolls and turn them into Liches because the players level is "x". It might take an the encounter with Knolls and add an extra 2-3 Knolls and a Knoll leader/whatever to the fray because the players level is "x". To be honest it isn't even noticeable unless you've played the game through several times and take a different path each time so that you don't arrive at the locations at the same level as you did previously and it doesn't even scale every encounter, it only scales a few pre-set ones as far as I know.

 

[VentilatorOfDoom]

You're right, most RPGs do have trashmobs, but I see people constantly criticising.. say ToEE, for epic amounts of bugbears.

Who complains about Bugbears in ToEE constantly? Darth Roxor? Besides, it's true that ToEE had just not enough challenging encounters. Of course it had some cool fights like the Balor or the salamanders in the fire temple but it just wasn't enough. Generally speaking the encounter difficulty went down the shitter as soon as you got Fireball.

So it's bad to have filler combat, but it's okay if the critters look differently (or use flaming arrows which do small amounts of damage as oposed to +1 arrows which do small amounts of damage).
And moreover, at least you can switch on RT mode in Arcanum and zip through dungeons very fast - you don't have to endure empty animations while waiting for the next 6 sek round.

You mean it's ok in Arcanum to fight absolutely identical encounters with wolves/assassins again and again because you can switch on realtime-mode and it goes fast then, whereas trash encounters in BG2 which do actually differ and go by equally fast are a problem? As for enduring empty animations: do you mean after you have used up your attacks per round and don't want to move/cast a spell/use an item - which you could do in the remaining seconds of that round - but keep on attacking the game shows some fake attack animations until the next round starts? Yes, waiting the remaining 2 seconds watching this animation can be very taxing on one's endurance. Especially considering that you have a whole party to manage. Of course once you have a couple attacks per round it will hardly happen anyway but whatever.

Which is good, of course, but it really encourages either savescumming (in case of insta-gib spells) or being perma-buffed in dungeons, which is kind of lame.

Frankly, I do not like insta-gib spells being cast at the party, at least not if they destroy a character permanently. It sucks because it enforces reloads. Normally you would just raise the char afterwards but you can't. I prefer it like in IWD where Finger of Death etc just kill characters normally and you can resurrect them.

Well-implemented boss fights based on phases are in my opinion a very valid approach to tactical combat. Not the only one obviously, and I do think that in DA:O these phase transitions don't happen very naturally/dynamically. While this is probably a bit of-topic: I believe that current RPGs could learn a bit about encounter design from MMOs...

What bothered me in DAO is that bosses don't play by the rules. Irenicus might be a difficult foe to defeat but he's still a DnD wizard with the HP of a wizard casting spells like a wizard etc. Of course, considering the sorry excuse of a spell system in DA it might be pretty much impossible to have a caster like that, so they probably did what they could and just gave them awesum resistances and super-HP instead.

Why do they have to be balanced "properly", what ever that means? You put enemies with appropriate capabilities in the logical place and that's pretty much it. Didn't games do that for most of their history? Having encounters perfectly balanced all the time actually kills any sense of progression - hence the hate for levelscaling.

Take KotC for example, or IWD. Those games are linear. You do area A after which you progress to area B etc. That way it's easy to balance the encounters in a given area to provide a decent challenge for a party of a level that's to be expected at that point. You still have a sense of progress in those games, also not every single fight has to take you to the limits.
In BG2 in chapter 2/3 you have an aweful lot of content that can be tackled in any order. Everything is roughly balanced to provide a challenge for a party in the lower teens level-wise. If you start doing all this stuff you will eventually reach a level where it becomes too easy. So what's the problem if here and there a lich spawns on top of the regular undead wussies inhabiting the area to give a bit of excitement? Do you really want to compare that with Oblivion-like levelscaling?

 

[Xor]

Irenicus does have more HP than he should by the book rules IIRC.


But then I pull that crap all the time on my villains when running D&D.

 

[Vibalist]

Irenicus does have more HP than he should by the book rules IIRC.


But then I pull that crap all the time on my villains when running D&D.

It's been a long time since I've played BG2, but I don't remember Irenicus having more HP than any other mage. What made him so difficult to kill was all his protection spells, but if you dealt with those he went down incredibly fast.

I think he was 'within the rules', so to speak.

 

[oneself]

Don't know about Irenicus, but Wraith Saverok in Hell had 560 HP.
Within the rules? Unlikely.

 

[VentilatorOfDoom]

Irenicus had 96HP. Certainly a very good value for a lvl 30 wizard. I hope you see the difference to DA bosses though.

 

[Malakal]

Don't know about Irenicus, but Wraith Saverok in Hell had 560 HP.
Within the rules? Unlikely.

Templates perhaps? Insane CON (if it works on undead anyway)? But yes, some enemies have gotten stronger than normal rules would suggest. But Irenicus did suck dry the tree of life and Warath is met in goddamn HELL. Special rules apply too.

 

[Topher]

Don't know about Irenicus, but Wraith Saverok in Hell had 560 HP.
Within the rules? Unlikely.

Templates perhaps? Insane CON (if it works on undead anyway)? But yes, some enemies have gotten stronger than normal rules would suggest. But Irenicus did suck dry the tree of life and Warath is met in goddamn HELL. Special rules apply too.

Seems fair to me.