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 The Baldur's Gate Series Thread

GarfunkeL

Racism Expert
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
15,463
Location
Insert clever insult here
Usually you can customize it - it's possible to turn off dissenting comments, desertions and attacks - or any combination of them. At least in the mods that I've tried.

And the Minsc attack is different at Nashkel, if you outright refuse to help him straight off the bat before he has actually joined up. I think that's unavoidable without changing the dialogue same as with the fight when Shar-Teel joins up.
 
Last edited:

Mrowak

Arcane
Joined
Sep 26, 2008
Messages
3,947
Project: Eternity
Did you have NPCProject or Level1NPCs? They prevent fights. IIRC, SCS has a module that does the same, and there's probably many other mods that do the same.

True I use Level1NPCs this time around, but I marked to option to have party fights (at the very least I see more banters now). Still, I have not seen them in vanilla, even back in the day. This maybe because I played potato version - I wager some of the scripts could have been botched during localization.
 

Infinitron

I post news
Staff Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
97,503
Codex Year of the Donut Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
Found this post on the Beamdog forums: http://forum.baldursgate.com/discussion/comment/596612/#Comment_596612

Toth said:
This is going to ba a long post, so be warned. I have already stated my opinion about both games several times, but I like this thread, so I will try my best to tell my story with Baldur's Gate saga and the reasons, why I love the first game so much.

My road with the game was really bumpy, colorful and I think I made a full circle with it. I do not think I have spend as much time on any game to this day.

It all begun in 1998 when I was a 10 years old kid, who was really fascinated with video games. My journey with computer games so far was not as explored as I would like at that time. I did not own a computer back then, I only had a NES console, which I treated as a cool toy to play with friends and family. I also had Amiga with some good games, like Mortal Kombat II, but still gaming was not such a major part of my life.

My cousin started buying a computer magazine at that time, since he owned a computer. He would let me play some games that he had there e.g. Doom which I really liked and Supaplex, a really hard game, I have never finished it. In this magazine I read some of the software and hardware stuff, but I was mostly interested in the video games section, which was just a few pages per issue.

One of my best friends to this day, had a PC at that time, his older brother was mostly showing us games that he liked. The three games that I was fascinated with at that time were WarCraft II, Transport Tycoon and Anvil of Dawn. This was the point I started to treat games more seriously, I was hooked.

Another thing was that since I did not own a PC back then I was spending most of my time outside. Either with friends walking around and playing in woods, or alone exploring since I always liked the area where I am living (not a very large town lots of woods, lakes, small hills and rivers).

Finally back on the topic of Baldur's Gate. The newest issue of the computer magazine back then featured a new game that was coming out soon. The screenshots looked really promising, adventurers fighting in a forest (I always wanted to be such an adventurer as a kid) and the encounter with a strange, yellow lizard, with one of the characters having their portrait almost all covered in red. The last page was an ad with some armored guy's head and the big title: Baldur's Gate. I was amazed.

I wanted to know more about this game, when walking through the forests I imagined myself as the adventurer of that game. Some time has passed and during the Spring of 1999, my friend told me that his brother has got a brand new and awesome game. He told me it was similar to Diablo, but I did not know much about Diablo at that time (saw some screenshots here and there). He wanted me to come to his house to watch with him as his brother was playing this new game.

I could not believe what I saw, it was that great game from the magazine. It looked even better on the computer screen. I was totally blown away by it, I have never seen such a game before. The graphics of the environment, the music, the portraits, the character's voices (Polish voiceover is better than English imo) it was all just perfect. My friend's brother was inside the Nashkel Mines near the lava river, changing his party. I believe he was switching Jaheira for Branwen. I remember seeing the outside of Nashkel temple as well.

My hunger to play this game was even bigger and some time later my friend was playing the game himself, then he let me play it. I created my character (did not know what I was doing really) and walked around Candlekeep, learning the basics of the gameplay. I saw some NPCs while he was playing, he really liked Xan with his moonblade and so did I. Apart from him he had Imoen, Jaheira, Khalid and Kivan in his party. Later on he was using Gatekeeper when the enemies were too strong. I remember seeing parts of Cloakwood, Ankhegs and the areas of the first 2 chapters: from Candlekeep to Nashkel mines.

Year 2000 arrived and I finally got my first PC. I was suddenly ovewhelmed by the thought that I could play by myself the games I loved. At first I played some other games (WarCraft II and Crmageddon II mostly), since I did not have my copy of Baldur's Gate. I wanted to play it so bad and finally the day had come that I got my own copy of the game. I played it so much that most of the CDs had so many scratches, the game was crashing. My first character was a human chaotic evil (sounded awesome by the time, even though i was not playing as evil actually) cleric. I asked my friend many questions about the game and he said to me that cleric was basically fighter + mage and I thought it sounded awesome.

That char was of course terrible and I used the same party as my friend and found about other NPCs later as I was discovering the game. I remember going north from the Friendly Arm Inn and getting smashed by the Ankhegs, I was afraid of those guys for a long time. I stayed close to the main plot for the most part and in the Bandit Camp I permanently lost a party member and saved anyway, since I tried so many times to win the fight inside Tazok's tent. I asked my friend if there are some other NPCs to join and he recommended a paladin in the area with Ankhegs. I was scared to go there, but I got Ajantis and immediately liked him. My first playthrough ended on the second level of the Cloakwood Mines, where I was unable to beat Harieshan and her lightning bolt. After many tries I gave up.

This is how my journey with Baldur's Gate begun. I loved the outside calm areas, ther reminded me of my own journeys through the woods. The stone interface was simple and clear and fit the atmosphere, I really like the stuff lying in the menu screen (gold, weapons, helmet etc.). The game just looked simple and clear and reminded me of the first Lord of the Rings movie. Slow pace with great atmosphere. Later on I beat the game with my elven Fighter/Thief and more playthroughs came after that. Some months after that I got my copy of Tales of the Sword Coast and really liked the expansion pack overall, even though after finishing it for the first time I only liked the Isle of Balduran, since the rest was just a dungeon crawling.

Then I discovered Dark Side of the Sword Coast mod and the journey got a lot more colorful and bumpy. Some mods were really unstable and buggy, but I wanted more and more stuff put into the game. Finishing it whole would last for months, but it was fun nonetheless.

I do not remember the exact date (around 2004?) when my sister told me that her friend has Baldur's Gate II and I was shocked, beacuse I did not know that there was a sequel. I could not wait to play it and wanted to know more about it. She only told me that he did not like it as much as the first one, but I thought that it is impossible, a sequel to such a game cannot be bad. Later I got my own copy of BG2 and was really nervous when launching it for the first time, I wanted it to be such a great game as the first one, if not better.

The menu itself caught me by surprise, it had a very different feel to it. It was not a medieval fantasy of the frist game that I loved so much. It was weird and together with the music had a creepy atmoshpere. The art style was not my thing, but I had to give the game a chance, the menu cannot destroy the game for me. I created the character and I have found that I did not like how the weapons categories were split up to individual weapons. The cutscene with Irenicus played out and my thought was "Oh, in the first game the bad guy was a fighter, now it's time for a mage, I do not like mages.".

It actually was not the fact that Irenicus was a mage that took me back, but the fact that I already knew who the villain was. the magic of discovery suddenly disappeared. Then Imoen joined me and I thought that her portrait was terrible and ugly as the rest of those from BG2, why so many piercings and stuff in their hair? Even Keldorn's armor looked like a metal frisbee got stuck in his neck. I was getting more and move convinced that the artstyle was just ugly for me. It did not have the simplicity and clarity of the first game. The plate mail icon from BG2 will always be a turtle shell in my eyes and those silly paperdolls, just plain awful.

Anyhow I did not give up I was exploring the Irenicus's dungeon and I thought that it was not what I exactly imagined sequel to Baldur's Gate look like. I felt that I was playing a mix between a medieval fantasy with sci-fi with weird tubes and clones. The character animations were laughable as well, especially the streching and 2-handed sword knees-to-the-ground swing. I was in denial at first, I could not believe that this was how Baldur's Gate II looked. After many annoying parts I finally was able to exit the dungeon and got what I thought was just a middle finger from the game. Not the fact tha Irenicus took Imoen, or that I could not cast spells in the city, not even annoynig constant screaming from Minsc. It was the city itself. It was just plain ugly and illogical. I thought that the promenade is the worst looking location I have ever seen in a video game. Am I somewhere in Saudi Arabia? Where is the medieval city of Baldur's Gate?

I still gave the game a chance thinking it should get better later on, it is still a Baldur's Gate game. I do not like the games that start you off inside the big city, immediately I get lost and discouraged (Neverwinter Nights still not finished to this day). One thing that I really disliked about Athkatla is that how fake it feels. Almost every building is connect to some kind of quest. This is not a city, it is a quest-web and I felt like people were almost running at me and slaming their quests into my face. Talk about freedom. My first playthrough ended on the Graveyard District, where I saw a giant mural of a Pharaoh on the floor. This was too much for me, the scenery and atmosphere of the game was just not my thing and I did not care for Irenicus and Imoen, so I had no reason to continue.

To me this was not a game worthy of name Baldur's Gate, but some years later I forced myself to finish it with the hack'n'slash expansion, just so I can say my full opinion about it. So, other things I did not like about the game: They killed off my favourite characters from the first game - Montaron, Xzar and Ajantis. NPCs may be batter developed, but did not like most of them, especially constantly screaming Minsc, captain "I wanna be cool brute" obvious Korgan and walking cominc relief Jan Jansen. This left me with not so many NPCs to choose. Another point is magic items, in BG2 they do not feel magical as in "unique", they just have bigger + number. My favourite weapon is flail and I use it quite often even though there is only +1 in BG1.

When playing Baldur's Gate I felt like at home, but BG2 did not felt this way at all. There were almost no calm and beautiful woods to wander, just dungeon after dungeon. I did not like the bias towards magic especially with liches and dragons. The spell chess game got boring pretty fast. I did not feel that the spells were more powerful than the first game, they just had bigger numbers and so did the defensive spells. In the first game one spell could turn the situation around. I do not like dragons in fantasy, I think it just screams "lazy", there are more interesting creatures.

I never liked Irenicus as a villain and even more after I have discovered his motives. He is not a troubled soul, he is an emo kid with ego as big as 20 dragons. The whole game is just not my thing I guess, it was one of the biggest disappointments I had. After finishing it I do not want to play it again, Inifnity Animations gives me hope as it can restore BG1 character animations, this is also the reason why I stopped playing BG:EE and returned to the classic BG.

Now after so many years I still play Baldur's Gate from time to time, not as often as then I was a teenager, but I like going back to it a bit differently. Currently I have installed vanilla Baldur's Gate without TotSC with Baldurdash fixes and a little tweaks - max hp per level and no wear limitations (I could not go back to the restriction after playing pen and paper D&D) and that is all. Playing just like in the old days and having no problem with 64bit windows 7 and black bars to the sides on my monitor. I use normal dice to roll my character, with no overpowered stats and roll for random race/class/alignment/skills/NPCs. This keeps the game fresh after playing so much.

So, this is my story with Baldur's Gate and where my dislike for the sequel came from. This is quite an enormous post, but I have posted several times about my opinion about both games and did not want to repeat myself, now I can just post a link to this post. I think I might have omitted some of the points about both games, my memory may have failed me. I will not try to defend BG1 over BG2, each of us has different story with both games and likes both, just one, or none of them. Anyway, grab a drink, or something to eat and enjoy this long post and have a nice day.
 

Lone Wolf

Arcane
Vatnik
Joined
Apr 17, 2014
Messages
3,703
Of all the dumb shit in that post, this takes the cake:

It actually was not the fact that Irenicus was a mage that took me back, but the fact that I already knew who the villain was. the magic of discovery suddenly disappeared.

What, as opposed to finding out Sarevok's the villain of BG1 in the first twenty minutes?
 

Infinitron

I post news
Staff Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
97,503
Codex Year of the Donut Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
Of all the dumb shit in that post, this takes the cake:

It actually was not the fact that Irenicus was a mage that took me back, but the fact that I already knew who the villain was. the magic of discovery suddenly disappeared.

What, as opposed to finding out Sarevok's the villain of BG1 in the first twenty minutes?

Well, you didn't know that he was Sarevok though. When I played BG1 for the first time in high school, I actually forgot who exactly had murdered Gorion and how he looked like. Some random dude with a bunch of ogres?

And then somebody named "Sarevok" started getting mentioned in the Iron Throne correspondences you ran across...
 

Azeot

Arbiter
Joined
Dec 4, 2013
Messages
179
Location
Trieste
The first game was actually a good-ish attempt to throw in a bit of political intrigue on an otherwise ordinary fantasy. BG2 is much more straightforward with the plot.
 
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Messages
1,387
Location
Australia
Shadorwun: Hong Kong
This guy speaks a fair bit of sense.

My first impression of BG2 was a lot like his, but it grew on me.

The first time I came across the
Dark Sun halflings in the Planar Sphere
, that was something.

So what made you post this, 'tron?
 

Infinitron

I post news
Staff Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
97,503
Codex Year of the Donut Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
This guy speaks a fair bit of sense.

My first impression of BG2 was a lot like his, but it grew on me.

The first time I came across the
Dark Sun halflings in the Planar Sphere
, that was something.

So what made you post this, 'tron?

No particular reason. Found the thread because our Brent Knowles interview was linked there.
 

Ellef

Deplorable
Joined
Dec 29, 2014
Messages
3,506
Location
Shitposter's Island
PC RPG Website of the Year, 2015
What sense is he making? I don't think he has a point, except that the second game didn't have the same nostalgia that bg1 did with his woodlands LARP'ING.
 
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Messages
1,387
Location
Australia
Shadorwun: Hong Kong
No particular reason. Found the thread because our Brent Knowles interview was linked there.

Fair enough.

I think it's a decent cross-post. Even though his thoughts are simplistic, it shows he has a crystal clear mind, to me at least, and getting such a view from someone is always good for putting things into perspective.

What sense is he making? I don't think he has a point, except that the second game didn't have the same nostalgia that bg1 did with his woodlands LARP'ING.

In a nutshell, yeah - bear in mind it's his perspective. He's very clear about the differences, that's where his sense lies.
 

Lone Wolf

Arcane
Vatnik
Joined
Apr 17, 2014
Messages
3,703
The only mysterious thing left after that cut scene was the name. The game intro showed the same figure throw a knight off the roof of a building, and then that cut scene had him kill your foster parent. Whatever. Ultimately, I guess, it's a subjective experience, anyway.

In any case, Irenicus was far more interesting as a villain. While his ultimate goal - becoming a god - was similar to Sarevok, the player character gradually unpacked his motivations and nuances. Irenicus' personal relationships (failed, destructive and otherwise), his eccentricities and his past were laid bare over the course of many chapters. In the end, like all the best villains, he was a tragic figure. That dialogue with Ellesime was more potent and revealing than anything Sarevok said at any point in BG1.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wdy-k_qLdQg - From 0:55-1:30

David Warner, man.

This is a villain you interacted with in many ways from the beginning of the game all the way to it's last scene. He is your nemesis, and he's given the limelight to develop under properly. Sarevok is a dude you meet like... twice... in the game before your final confrontation. The only character development he experiences is through a few letters barking out political/tactical orders that you get from chests and corpses.
 

Infinitron

I post news
Staff Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
97,503
Codex Year of the Donut Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
More:

SharGuidesMyHand said:
"My only regret is that I have but one 'like' to give for this post."

I'm very thankful that you did take the (quite a bit of) time to post this, because you've articulated some of the things that I've had trouble putting into words in the past.

I especially like the part about the "fake" feel of Athkatla. I remember during my very first playthrough of BG2, looking over Athkatla and thinking that it was a vast improvement over Baldur's city; but once I had explored it, I realized that it was very shallow, even somewhat lazy beneath the surface. As you said, every structure in the city is quest-oriented - be it a temple, a store, or a place that's directly tied to a quest. By contrast, BG1 cities like Baldur's and Beregost are interspersed with simple townsfolk's houses that have no direct ties to any quests, which gives the game a more immersive/"open world"-type feel. In fact, most of the shops in Waukeen's gives you a message that says, "This place has nothing of real value," and then won't even let you enter - that's some very rushed and/or lazy game-design IMO. I know that there are people who enjoy the more direct, streamlined approach of BG2 and they will likely approve of the removal of "superfluous" houses; but I would've preferred that BG2 stayed more true to the style of its predecessor and retained more of the core RP aspects of the game to which it sequeled.

Like you, I also hate the artwork in BG2, although I was willing to look past it if the game had been more fundamentally to my liking.

Like you, I also don't like dragons as enemies, or even monsters in general for that matter. BG1 had a whole slew of very memorable and colorful enemies - i.e: the seductive bard Silke, the fiendish assassin Nimbul, the deeply deranged Bassilus, the murderous, yet redeemable Brage, Zal, "the fastest dart thrower in the west," etc. By contrast, the standout enemies in BG2 are often things like dragons, "troll kings," "shade lords," "demogorgons," liches/demiliches, beholders, etc. - in other words, creatures that are certainly more elaborate on the surface, but lack an identifiable personality or persona, which actually makes them less memorable/iconic than BG1 enemies IMO.

And like you, I also hate the "magical chess match" combat style of BG2. I suppose that its makers thought that by restricting the variety of strategies that could win battles, it would make those battles more challenging; in actuality, it often makes them more boring and repetitive as you stated, because every battle becomes either impossibly hard (until you've found the "correct" strategy) or ridiculously easy (once you do). Trying to make the game more challenging also undermines the RP aspect of the game, since it gives you less freedom to choose character classes and party compositions based on your own personal preferences.

On the whole, I would say that my general problem with BG2 is that it emphasizes novelty and shock value over depth. For example, the first time that I ever stepped into the Circus Tent in Waukeen's, I exclaimed, "Holy crap, where am I???"; but underneath the initial novelty, the quest just feels like a lineal, repetitive routine that I have to go through every time that I've finally escaped Irenicus' dungeon. I also have mixed feelings about Irenicus as a villain - although I do enjoy David Warner's voice acting, I feel that the game just tries way too hard to portray him as the epitome of evil (i.e: giving vague, quasi-philosophical speeches about "seeing through the pain," or Imoen repeatedly telling you flat out, "This guy is sooooo evil" during the escape from his dungeon). One of my favorite aspects of BG1 is feeling the hatred for Sarevok build subtly and gradually over the course of the game, until it finally explodes in the final confrontation; by contrast, BG2 basically gets in your face and instructs you right from the beginning that you have to hate Irenicus. His "master plan" is also extremely convoluted and results in plotholes and conflicts with the storyline of the original game - it's as if the makers devised the characters and scenarios of BG2 first, and then tried to weave a storyline through it.

And like you, I also enjoy just sitting back and appreciating the lush green landscapes and chirping bird sound effects of the wooded areas of BG1.
 
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Messages
1,387
Location
Australia
Shadorwun: Hong Kong
I felt the same way about Athkatla after I had played the game a few times.

An idea I had for an RPG, and something I've never been able to get out of my head since, was for the setting of the game to be in a fully realized fantasy town with a couple thousand npcs. I always imagined it as kind of like Balmora in Morriwind, but on a HUGE scale, with taller multi-leveled buildings, full of intrigue, gangs competing in pub brawls, etc, etc... I won't go on. :oops:
 

Lone Wolf

Arcane
Vatnik
Joined
Apr 17, 2014
Messages
3,703
One of my favorite aspects of BG1 is feeling the hatred for Sarevok build subtly and gradually over the course of the game, until it finally explodes in the final confrontation;

What game was this dude playing?

Sarevok had a deep voice and... what? You could do that Red Letter Media character test for him, where you try to describe his character without referring to his job/role/physical features. What would you end up with? He's ruthless? He's power hungry?

From the first scene, you can see that Irenicus is callous, smart, massively arrogant and manipulative. Within minutes, you discover his delusions, failings and hubris. Then you see his power, as he confronts the Cowled Wizards. Later, you discover he's broken, angry and vengeful. There's a ton to this character. Sarevok's a joke, by comparison.

I feel that the game just tries way too hard to portray him as the epitome of evil

Except, you know, the game did no such thing.
 

Infinitron

I post news
Staff Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
97,503
Codex Year of the Donut Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
One of my favorite aspects of BG1 is feeling the hatred for Sarevok build subtly and gradually over the course of the game, until it finally explodes in the final confrontation;

What game was this dude playing?

Sarevok had a deep voice and... what? You could do that Red Letter Media character test for him, where you try to describe his character without referring to his job/role/physical features. What would you end up with? He's ruthless? He's power hungry?

From the first scene, you can see that Irenicus is callous, smart, massively arrogant and manipulative. Within minutes, you discover his delusions, failings and hubris. Then you see his power, as he confronts the Cowled Wizards. Later, you discover he's broken, angry and vengeful. There's a ton to this character. Sarevok's a joke, by comparison.

Well, he isn't saying that Sarevok has rich characterization. Just that Sarevok worked better for him as an "iconic foe".

BTW, the OP I quoted actually isn't that popamole:

Toth said:
One thing I wanted to add to my rant about BG2 is my problem with romances. I never liked them. In fact, I finished the game without romanceable NPCs. To me it felt forced and unecessary and I am glad there will be no romances in Pillars of Eternity. Maybe it is just me, but when I think about adventure I do not associate it with flirting, relationships etc.

I used to joke about mods that added NPCs and of course they have to be romanceable, are gamers that horny these days? Having all party able to romance, I can just imagine the sexual tensions within the group. To me a romance does not make a character interesting. I want to like NPCs, not get turned on by them.

Again, example from Lord of the Rings. The popular joke is that Frodo and Sam had something going on between them. Whereas Tolkien wanted to show the power of friendship. It may be the fault of the movie adaptation, I personally would not think for a second that there could be a romance between the two hobbits.

Planescape: Torment did it so much better with Anna and Fall-from-Grace. The first one had a very subtle romance and the second was an example of a strong friendship. Fall-from-Grace even tells that she will find The Nameless One no matter what and I do not think she meant to confess her love to him by that. I know that there were complains about Anna and that her romance was "just a kiss". Well, that was enough for me. Paradoxically, I felt the stronger bond that way.

Morte's story has more impact in my eyes than both females in Planescape: Torment. I love Anna and Fall-from-Grace as much as any other NPC in this game (pun intended). So, romances are a kind of big "no no" for me in games, I can give a pass to subtle ones. I will however, try to avoid romanceable NPCs.
 
Last edited:

bloodlover

Arcane
Joined
Sep 5, 2010
Messages
2,039
Question not related to the above: are monks OP in 2e too? I know they are fragile as shit low levels, but BG 2 starts at level 6 (if I remember correctly) so it's less crappy. How does it compare to... let's say Nwn 1 monk, both in feats but more important in the way you can play it? Can you faceroll with it?
 

Lone Wolf

Arcane
Vatnik
Joined
Apr 17, 2014
Messages
3,703
He just says that he worked better for him as an "iconic foe"

He comes across as a dude who forgot to take the kiddie nostalgia glasses off.

BG2's writing, when compared to BG1, is superior by orders of magnitude. Naljier Skal ("I used to have pretties piled high to the sky... Don't remember where they are though... Pretties...") and Tiax - two of the insane characters locked up in Spellhold - are given more characterization in 4-6 lines of spoken dialogue than almost anyone in BG1.
 
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Messages
1,387
Location
Australia
Shadorwun: Hong Kong
BG2 starts at around 161000 xp - level 8 for a monk. Monks start kicking arse around level 12, and are kinda op, if memory serves, around level 18 and onwards.
 
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Messages
1,387
Location
Australia
Shadorwun: Hong Kong
BG2's writing, when compared to BG1, is superior by orders of magnitude. Naljier Skal ("I used to have pretties piled high to the sky... Don't remember where they are though... Pretties...") and Tiax - two of the insane characters locked up in Spellhold - are given more characterization in 4-6 lines of spoken dialogue than almost anyone in BG1.

Tiax was in BG. Quayle. The crazy mage on Balduran Isle - Dradeel - who says, "You're not figments are you? I'm not wasting anymore time talking to figments!'. Durlag.

Ultimately you're comparing something that is uneven between these games. Few will disagree that BG2 shines on this front.
 

Lone Wolf

Arcane
Vatnik
Joined
Apr 17, 2014
Messages
3,703
Ultimately you're comparing something that is uneven between these games. Few will disagree that BG2 shines on this front.

When we're talking character comparisons (e.g. Sarevok v Irenicus), we're talking writing. I don't understand complaints about Jon Irenicus as a villain when compared to Sarevok. In terms of characterization, style, exposition method and interaction, the former is just a far more fleshed out and better realized villain.

Obviously, I'm not throwing BG1 as a whole under the bus.
 
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Messages
1,387
Location
Australia
Shadorwun: Hong Kong
When we're talking character comparisons (e.g. Sarevok v Irenicus), we're talking writing.

Yeah, I just mean that it's apparent a lot more effort went into BG2's writing.

I don't understand complaints about Jon Irenicus as a villain when compared to Sarevok. In terms of characterization, style, exposition method and interaction, the former is just a far more fleshed out and better realized villain.

Totally agree. Sarevok did very little for me except have me move my arse to the edge of my seat nervously in the final battle. The whole Candlekeep thing was ok-ish, but he was never anything remotely close to FFVII's Sephiroth for me, not to even mention Irenicus.

It seems like Toth might be a 'theater of the mind' type. That's all I got.
 

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