Gold Box SSI's Gold Box Series Thread

[Cael]

But battle axes are weak compared to long swords, which can be used with shields. Not much of an exception except for as a Dwarf Aesthetic. Why do people always feel sorry for the Stunties anyway? Dirty, grumpy little bastards the lot of ‘em. I say, when one steps on them by accident, eff em! Grow taller ya little bastard!

In Treasures, you get a few battleaxes +3 and only one longsword +3, IIRC. In Krynn, it doesn't matter as you get +4 weapons starting in DKK, more than enough to equip your whole party. It really depends on the game.

 

[ProphetSword]

See what I mean? This is why you should play the game blind.

All this stuff everyone's talking about...none of it matters. Ultimately, none of it is necessary to beat the game. Don't listen to people who say you shouldn't multiclass or that you should dual-class everyone. I've played all these games multiple times and I always play a few multiclass characters and have never once dual-classed anything...and I have zero issues beating any of these games. You do not need to do any of this. Anyone who tells you otherwise is full of crap.

Roll up the party you want to play and have some fun. We all played it blind back when the games were new, and not knowing some of these things people are talking about won't destroy the experience one bit.

 

[KeighnMcDeath]

I need to hobbit party the whole pool series and kender the Krynn.

 

[Dorateen]

Why do people always feel sorry for the Stunties anyway? Dirty, grumpy little bastards the lot of ‘em. I say, when one steps on them by accident, eff em! Grow taller ya little bastard!

 

[The Limper]

Why do people always feel sorry for the Stunties anyway? Dirty, grumpy little bastards the lot of ‘em. I say, when one steps on them by accident, eff em! Grow taller ya little bastard!

Ok, ok, maybe i’m being a tad harsh. I’m sure they would make wonderful
pets.

 

[ProphetSword]

Any geniuses out there know if it's possible to inject artwork into the Gold Box games to replace the original artwork? I've been working on updating the images from Champions of Krynn, and I'd love to know if there's a way to do that.

Here's an example of what I'm doing using AI and Photoshop:

 

[Harlin]

Any geniuses out there know if it's possible to inject artwork into the Gold Box games to replace the original artwork? I've been working on updating the images from Champions of Krynn, and I'd love to know if there's a way to do that.

Yes, but you're going to be limited by the original engine requiring EGA (320 x 200 x 16).

Let's take Maya for instance. I still use Gold Box Explorer in addition to Gold Box Companion for this purpose. Here's an explanation of how this works:

The file you need to change is PIC1.DAX. If you open this file with GBE, you'll see that Maya's graphic is image #23. It's animated, and how that works in this game is that all the frames are stored and the game cycles through them, eight frames in this case.

You can unpack the DAX file library with GBC's DAXBuilder. Replace the eight files for image #23, but the images must be the same size, must be 16 color EGA (you can't change the palette), must remain numbered as #23, and there must be still exactly eight of them (this is stricter than what the game's code actually requires). Then repack the library and you can see your new images in-game.

You'll have to convert your images to EGA, and you'll also have to animate some of your graphics. Except that's work SSI already has done for you ... you're unlikely to be able to do a better job than they did. If you want to use higher-quality graphics, the easiest way to do this is to rewrite the game engine from scratch.

 

[KeighnMcDeath]

It annoyed me FRUA didn’t allow multi-currency and just stuck with one you could name change. Maybe I want a dozen types of coins. Perish the thought of a Greyhawk campaign using:
250 iron drabs = 1 copper common
50 brass bits = 1 copper common
5 bronze zees = 1 copper common
4 copper commons = 1 silver noble
20 copper commons = 1 electrum lucky
200 copper commons = 1 gold orb
220 copper commons = 1 platinum plate

Though, I’d prefer

10 copper pieces (cp) = 1 silver piece
10 silver pieces (sp) = 1 gold piece
2 electrum pieces (ep) = 1 gold piece
5 gold pieces (gp) = 1 platinum piece (pp)
100cp = 10sp = 2ep = 1gp = 1/5pp

And maybe
10 iron = 1 copper
5 brass = 1 copper
5 copper = 1 bronze

Or something like that. Probably fucked it up for now. Anyway, you can’t do any of that in FRUA.

 

[mediocrepoet]

It annoyed me FRUA didn’t allow multi-currency and just stuck with one you could name change. Maybe I want a dozen types of coins. Perish the thought of a Greyhawk campaign using:
250 iron drabs = 1 copper common
50 brass bits = 1 copper common
5 bronze zees = 1 copper common
4 copper commons = 1 silver noble
20 copper commons = 1 electrum lucky
200 copper commons = 1 gold orb
220 copper commons = 1 platinum plate

Though, I’d prefer

10 copper pieces (cp) = 1 silver piece
10 silver pieces (sp) = 1 gold piece
2 electrum pieces (ep) = 1 gold piece
5 gold pieces (gp) = 1 platinum piece (pp)
100cp = 10sp = 2ep = 1gp = 1/5pp

And maybe
10 iron = 1 copper
5 brass = 1 copper
5 copper = 1 bronze

Or something like that. Probably fucked it up for now. Anyway, you can’t do any of that in FRUA.

Currency conversion is a lost and missed quality from fantasy games.

 

[KeighnMcDeath]

Probably why I also loved wizards crown and apshai. Generally, most games just use gold.

 

[octavius]

And we should also have the option to by hundred differently named pole arms. Otherwise it's not authoritative.

 

[The Limper]

And we should also have the option to by hundred differently named pole arms. Otherwise it's not authoritative.

“No good merchant, I have no interest in purchasing your silly Glaive. But that Glaive-Guisarme?! Wowsers! I’d pay platinum for that!”

 

[Harlin]

And we should also have the option to by hundred differently named pole arms. Otherwise it's not authoritative.

I've never seen those differently named polearms ever include the spontoon, the traditional US military polearm. Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson both probably even met people who actually used one, as they were issued until about 1900.

 

[KeighnMcDeath]

Damn them for missing many. Don’t forget those awesome treasures like rotted tapestries and such.

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

The game with the greatest variety of pole arms is the truest expression of the RPG genre.

 

[Sukhāvatī]

Definitely need more money types and polearm supremacy in fantasy games.

 

[Rincewind]

What's the best way to play Pool of Radiance?

By not rolling 18s. No, seriously. You'll be penalised for it. The game will troll you by sending massive hordes of enemies at you if you min/max your characters.

 

[Rincewind]

See what I mean? This is why you should play the game blind.

All this stuff everyone's talking about...none of it matters. Ultimately, none of it is necessary to beat the game. Don't listen to people who say you shouldn't multiclass or that you should dual-class everyone. I've played all these games multiple times and I always play a few multiclass characters and have never once dual-classed anything...and I have zero issues beating any of these games. You do not need to do any of this. Anyone who tells you otherwise is full of crap.

Roll up the party you want to play and have some fun. We all played it blind back when the games were new, and not knowing some of these things people are talking about won't destroy the experience one bit.

Honestly, this is how to play *any* game. Have fun, experiment, fail, try again, etc. Then *maybe* if you're stuck with something for days (not minutes, not hours, not an afternoon, at least *days*), then *maybe* try to ask for help. But usually that just spoils the fun, and it's better to wait a few weeks before searching for solutions.

Many people treat games as some homework assignment or fucking household chores... Or trying to find the "most optimal way" to blaze through them.

What always triggers a "not sure if serious" reaction in me is when people complain about dying and dead-ends in Sierra adventures. Uh, that's like half the fun? They elevated dying in those games to an art form—you *wanted* to find all the amusing death scenes!

I respect the design choices in Wizardry a lot, and the same goes for Uukrul. Dungeon of Naheulbeuk also tried hard to "de-condition" people from avoiding failure states in a rather ingenious way.

 

[The Jester]

See what I mean? This is why you should play the game blind.

All this stuff everyone's talking about...none of it matters. Ultimately, none of it is necessary to beat the game. Don't listen to people who say you shouldn't multiclass or that you should dual-class everyone. I've played all these games multiple times and I always play a few multiclass characters and have never once dual-classed anything...and I have zero issues beating any of these games. You do not need to do any of this. Anyone who tells you otherwise is full of crap.

Roll up the party you want to play and have some fun. We all played it blind back when the games were new, and not knowing some of these things people are talking about won't destroy the experience one bit.

So is DOS version the way to go?

 

[Harlin]

By not rolling 18s. No, seriously. You'll be penalised for it. The game will troll you by sending massive hordes of enemies at you if you min/max your characters.

That's not how Pool of Radiance works: experience levels and magic weapons/armor contribute much more to horde size than your stats do.

By your definition of "min/max", you should never gain levels, equip magical weapons with positive pluses, equip significantly better armor, etc. Going from 17 to 18/99 Strength on one character (+0.5 Party Strength) causes exactly the same increase in monster horde size as upgrading that character from a plain Long Sword to a Long Sword +1 (also +0.5 Party Strength), and less than gaining a fighter/mage/cleric level (almost always at least +0.5 Party Strength, and usually much more than that).

 

[Cael]

By not rolling 18s. No, seriously. You'll be penalised for it. The game will troll you by sending massive hordes of enemies at you if you min/max your characters.

That's not how Pool of Radiance works: experience levels and magic weapons/armor contribute much more to horde size than your stats do.

By your definition of "min/max", you should never gain levels, equip magical weapons with positive pluses, equip significantly better armor, etc. Going from 17 to 18/99 Strength on one character (+0.5 Party Strength) causes exactly the same increase in monster horde size as upgrading that character from a plain Long Sword to a Long Sword +1 (also +0.5 Party Strength), and less than gaining a fighter/mage/cleric level (almost always at least +0.5 Party Strength, and usually much more than that).

Going from 17 to 18(99) is +1 to-hit, +4 damage, on top of increased carrying capacity. This is far better than the +1/+1 you get going from Longsword to Longsword +1. Sounds like the advice given is the complete opposite of what you should be doing.

 

[Ladonna]

So is DOS version the way to go?

Depends what sort of experience you want.

Fast gameplay/shit sound and maybe using that goldbox companion program = dos

Best sound and visuals = Amiga

I have played the C64 version the most, but that is because that was how I played it originally.

 

[Rincewind]

So is DOS version the way to go?

Depends what sort of experience you want.

Fast gameplay/shit sound and maybe using that goldbox companion program = dos

Best sound and visuals = Amiga

I have played the C64 version the most, but that is because that was how I played it originally.

Yeah, the Amiga versions, of course!

 

[octavius]

See what I mean? This is why you should play the game blind.

All this stuff everyone's talking about...none of it matters. Ultimately, none of it is necessary to beat the game. Don't listen to people who say you shouldn't multiclass or that you should dual-class everyone. I've played all these games multiple times and I always play a few multiclass characters and have never once dual-classed anything...and I have zero issues beating any of these games. You do not need to do any of this. Anyone who tells you otherwise is full of crap.

Roll up the party you want to play and have some fun. We all played it blind back when the games were new, and not knowing some of these things people are talking about won't destroy the experience one bit.

Honestly, this is how to play *any* game. Have fun, experiment, fail, try again, etc. Then *maybe* if you're stuck with something for days (not minutes, not hours, not an afternoon, at least *days*), then *maybe* try to ask for help. But usually that just spoils the fun, and it's better to wait a few weeks before searching for solutions.

Well, I disagree with you guys, at least partly.

It's annoying to find out you have a sub-optimal party because the manual didn't show the full level progression tables for the various races, for example.

And generally with older games it's nice to know beforehand which version of a game has least bug, and which version which allow party transfers across a whole series, as another example.

But I agree with the non-fun of using walkthroughs, and I absolutely deplore save scumming.

 

[Rincewind]

And generally with older games it's nice to know beforehand which version of a game has least bug, and which version which allow party transfers across a whole series, as another example.

Yeah, that's obvious, and that's just good common sense.

What I personally dislike is reading up a lot about a game, the mechanics, etc., so basically you spoil half of it, just to have some kind of "optimised" build. But how cares, you can still have fun with a suboptimal build, I'd dare to say even more fun, perhaps.