Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Baldur's Gate Beamdog's Baldur's Gate 1 & 2 Enhanced Editions

Delterius

Arcane
Joined
Dec 12, 2012
Messages
15,956
Location
Entre a serra e o mar.

Delterius

Arcane
Joined
Dec 12, 2012
Messages
15,956
Location
Entre a serra e o mar.
Ring of human influence plus some +smthing items (likely the cloak since horrible 3 AC).
Ring of Human Influence sets CHA to 18.

Correct. And what's your point?
You shouldn't be able to add attributes to a set value.

Despite how you wish things would work... you are still able in BG2.
Well, at this point its hard to remember what is a bugfix and what isn't.
 

Arthandas

Liturgist
Joined
Apr 21, 2015
Messages
1,371
Is there a convenient list of every single change they've made to the originals?
 

a cut of domestic sheep prime

Guest
nothing. the bit in the original kit description (edit: actually where was this??? was it patched out because I don't see it now, but I remember being left with this impression too) hinting at them being dependent on char was bogus.

you could have 3 in every stat and still cast spells fine
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Dzupakazul

Arbiter
Joined
Jun 16, 2015
Messages
707
nothing. the bit in the original kit description (edit: actually where was this??? was it patched out because I don't see it now, but I remember being left with this impression too)
My own version of Baldur's Gate II - which is very, very much the vanilla version, albeit with a Polish translation - gives you a big, fat warning message in the class description that Sorcerers do not learn spells from scrolls and that "the casting attribute of sorcerers is INTELLIGENCE." (exact wording). The bit with charisma is probably you extrapolating the way Sorcerers work in the 3rd edition of D&D onto BG2, since the three new classes in BG2 are hackjobs of 3e classes. So the original, 3E Sorcerer uses Charisma to cast, the BG2 Sorcerer is supposed to use Intelligence, and the net result is that Sorcerers don't have a casting stat. Wrap your head around that.

It's also somewhat funny to note that Sorcerers in PnP are supposed to be a very specialized artillery that excels at its own field of expertise but has a hard time out of its comfort zone, and Wizards are supposed to be preparation gods with a possible answer to everything. In BG2, the reality is that there aren't that many fantastic spells every level that you absolutely want, and there's little in terms of spells with non-combat utility, so Sorcerers tend to just pick the cookie-cutter spells and have them available multiple times a day, however they choose to allocate their resources, while Mages absolutely suffer if their few spellslots are occupied by spells that aren't useful on a given day, and can cast less overall, without on-the-fly freedom to spend all of their spellslots on, say, Fireballs or Dispels on a given day. It probably doesn't help that Mage progress in BG2 is gated by the scrolls you get throughout the game whereas the Sorcerer can become epic on his own and advances at the same pace as the Mage (which is another deviation from the 3rd Ed.).
 
Last edited:

Grunker

RPG Codex Ghost
Patron
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
27,385
Location
Copenhagen
nothing. the bit in the original kit description (edit: actually where was this??? was it patched out because I don't see it now, but I remember being left with this impression too) hinting at them being dependent on char was bogus.

you could have 3 in every stat and still cast spells fine

The manual was always in the wrong, and so is the older in game description that claims it is Intelligence. AD&D is pretty incongruent with casters (as with everything) and has no real caster stat for any arcanist. INT isn’t exactly a caster stat for Wizards either - it only determines how big the wizard’s Spellbook can become. Priests do gain bonus spells for wisdom, though.

I suppose it would be somewhat meaningful to make Sorcererer spells known depend slightly on Charisma in that light.

Since the sorcerer was an import from 3rd edition, there is no “correct” P&P way to handle it. The only former version of Sorcerer existing in AD&D were in spin-off series where they used mana points.
 
Last edited:

a cut of domestic sheep prime

Guest
I'm just not sure where I got the idea that it depended on CHAR though. I seem to remember always thinking this. Not sure if I looked it up online and got some bad info or what. I didn't play P&P, so I'd have had no idea about 3rd Edition.
 
Joined
Jan 7, 2012
Messages
14,152
It seems it was definitely intended for Sorcerers to have CHA as a casting stat. It has a minimum stat requirement of 9 for the class, same as for INT. Most likely Bioware simply forgot or didn't have time to make it do something. I imagine somewhere in the BG2 source code is a comment "TODO: give Sorcerors bonus spells from CHA".
 

Grunker

RPG Codex Ghost
Patron
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
27,385
Location
Copenhagen
I'm just not sure where I got the idea that it depended on CHAR though. I seem to remember always thinking this. Not sure if I looked it up online and got some bad info or what. I didn't play P&P, so I'd have had no idea about 3rd Edition.

It might be from 3rd which popularized the Sorcerer as a D&D archetype, or it might be from old BG2 paper manuals some of which I believe referenced quite a lot of things wrongly based on the updates inspired by 3rd edition.

Also, Sorcerers have a min CHA of 9.
 

a cut of domestic sheep prime

Guest
BG2 paper manuals
this was probably it (or maybe a patched game description too), but I have no idea where my old B2 manual is. I tried looking in the GOG manual, but it's been fixed I think.
 

agris

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Apr 16, 2004
Messages
6,764
BG2 paper manuals
this was probably it (or maybe a patched game description too), but I have no idea where my old B2 manual is. I tried looking in the GOG manual, but it's been fixed I think.
It's not in the SoA manual, I checked mine. Neither in the description of Charisma or Sorceror, nor in the tables in the Appendix. It might have been in the original in-game CHA description text though, as I was under the same assumption and never played any 3.X games. Maybe there was a tweak mod that introduced CHA dependence?
 

Jason Liang

Arcane
Joined
Oct 26, 2014
Messages
8,337
Location
Crait
It would not be an easy thing to mod, since it cannot be done by changing .2da files. Most non- HLA class abilities are pretty much hard coded in Infinity Engine.
 

Parabalus

Arcane
Joined
Mar 23, 2015
Messages
17,432
Beamdog enforced max spell level to be limited by INT for wizards, presumably they could have done the same for sorcerers for INT or CHA if they thought it appropriate.

Since the class is kinda stolen from 3ed it doesn't really matter.
 
Joined
Jan 7, 2012
Messages
14,152
Since the class is kinda stolen from 3ed it doesn't really matter.

Yeah, considering the IE stat system (basically automatic min-maxing to 18 in whatever your primary is), lack of secondary usage for INT or CHA, and the Ring of Why-didn't-you-dump-CHA, it wouldn't change much at all. It's not like INT Sorcerors are qualifying for perks of getting skill points they wouldn't if they were running with CHA.
 

Zombra

An iron rock in the river of blood and evil
Patron
Joined
Jan 12, 2004
Messages
11,540
Location
Black Goat Woods !@#*%&^
Make the Codex Great Again! RPG Wokedex Strap Yourselves In Codex Year of the Donut Codex+ Now Streaming! Serpent in the Staglands Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 BattleTech Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag. I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
So a lot of people in the Steam Releases thread are talking about how Beamdog are the antichrist, they eat babies etc. and no one should ever support them.

Personally, I have no interest in replaying the IE games but I'm curious why these guys draw so much hate. Trying to clean up the interface etc. of old games doesn't seem particularly evil to me.

In 50 words or less, what's your take?
 

Correct_Carlo

Arcane
Joined
Jul 19, 2012
Messages
8,468
Location
Pronouns: He/Him/His
So a lot of people in the Steam Releases thread are talking about how Beamdog are the antichrist, they eat babies etc. and no one should ever support them.

Personally, I have no interest in replaying the IE games but I'm curious why these guys draw so much hate. Trying to clean up the interface etc. of old games doesn't seem particularly evil to me.

In 50 words or less, what's your take?

I don't hate beamdog, but this will be your answer:

1. Charging for an experience that mods already provide.
2. SJWs!
3. All new things are by default shit, especially in comparison to old things.
 

Lacrymas

Arcane
Joined
Sep 23, 2015
Messages
17,948
Pathfinder: Wrath
My take on the matter is they didn't do enough while having access to the source code. Stuff that couldn't have been fixed by mods essentially. They truly did just charge for mods, but also had to churn out patches for years (they are still churning them out) to fix stuff they broke. Their characters were also shit, the Monk and the Wild Mage for narrative and thematic reasons, Dorn for mechanical ones, even though I think he isn't that bad as a character. He muscles out both Minsc and Shar-Teel and is grotesquely overpowered. Even though I think they put at least some work into these EEs, they still feel cash grabby, they didn't put too much thought into them and they come off as unnecessary and lazy.
 

octavius

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
19,184
Location
Bjørgvin
So a lot of people in the Steam Releases thread are talking about how Beamdog are the antichrist, they eat babies etc. and no one should ever support them.

Personally, I have no interest in replaying the IE games but I'm curious why these guys draw so much hate. Trying to clean up the interface etc. of old games doesn't seem particularly evil to me.

In 50 words or less, what's your take?

You like spending 20 bucks on a patch?
 

Tigranes

Arcane
Joined
Jan 8, 2009
Messages
10,350
Take perfectly good game, add a bunch of minor shit that ranges from fuckugly UI to retardo NPCs to a few QOL improvements, charge twice the price

You figure out if you think this is a company worth existing
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom