"Closely follow the rules, only break them when necessitated by the video game."
This was a major gripe (for me) in D&D: Online. They just didn't "fudge" the rules to make a better game, they outright ignored them completely.
A classic example was the blanket immunities the "boss/raid monsters" enjoyed. Basically, it turned into a "tank n' spank" fest where a mage or cleric spells were practically useless. I won't even go into the odd mechanics of their dungeon design.
IMHO, if you are going to make a D&D game (that caters to D&D players), then follow the rule set and don't deviate unless you don't have a choice.
BG is not DDO. No-one is suggesting murdering the rules like DDO did. What makes sense is that there is some of the same freedom enjoyed by DMs in PnP.
By grossly altering the rules to favor certain classes above others, with no identifiable reason for doing so. I don't mind balance concerns between classes per say, as long as they're by the book, but BG is incoherent mess of almost randomly picked out rules up held here, thrown out there, or made completely up for lulz over yonder.
Specialist mages - Barely implemented, for no reason.
Two-weapon style, altered, again for no real reason. AND preventing rogue-types from mastering it, which by the books they're able to do, if they wish to spend the points to do so.
Several kits given overpower abilities that in no way resemble the PnP versions which aren't even all that difficult to implement. (RR corrected basically all the rogue problems...aside from a few issues such as bard songs, but no one has touched the berserker kit yet, since that would be a MASSIVE (and much needed) nerf, due to much stricter penalties and much less powerful rage (and a 10% chance per round of losing control while enraged)).
You seem to misunderstand the difference between the principle of being able to bend the rules and some actual problems caused in the making of the game. If something's broke, whether in the rules or without, it needs fixin'!
Well the reason Bioware made BG combat real time is because in the beginning Bioware was developing RTS game, code named "Battleground Infinity"- hence the name "Infinity Engine". Interplay saw the pro type, and suggested that the engine could be better for RPG... And voila, BG series are born, with each round lasting 6 seconds instead of one minute. And the formula actually worked quite well, going all the way to DA1... DA2, I won't go into that less I risk opening the can of worm...
You need to look at temple of elemental evil with strict adherence of turn-based combat... While a good game itself, it doesn't provide the player with the frantic nature of real time combat which are more exciting. Hey, there's a reason why RTS games are in most cases much more popular than turn-based games in MP...
Well if one wants to be AD&D purist, then this real time system is a joke... Dex based characters have big advantage due to better initiative rolls but is not implemented in BG and subsequent Bioware games.... Improved initiative feat is almost worthless...
So although I voted for no. 1, I say that if following the certain rule makes the game less fun, then by all means break it...
Comments
This was a major gripe (for me) in D&D: Online. They just didn't "fudge" the rules to make a better game, they outright ignored them completely.
A classic example was the blanket immunities the "boss/raid monsters" enjoyed. Basically, it turned into a "tank n' spank" fest where a mage or cleric spells were practically useless. I won't even go into the odd mechanics of their dungeon design.
IMHO, if you are going to make a D&D game (that caters to D&D players), then follow the rule set and don't deviate unless you don't have a choice.
Specialist mages - Barely implemented, for no reason.
Two-weapon style, altered, again for no real reason. AND preventing rogue-types from mastering it, which by the books they're able to do, if they wish to spend the points to do so.
Several kits given overpower abilities that in no way resemble the PnP versions which aren't even all that difficult to implement. (RR corrected basically all the rogue problems...aside from a few issues such as bard songs, but no one has touched the berserker kit yet, since that would be a MASSIVE (and much needed) nerf, due to much stricter penalties and much less powerful rage (and a 10% chance per round of losing control while enraged)).
Ranger/Cleric druid spell progression debacle.
Lots of other things I'm too tired to list atm.
You need to look at temple of elemental evil with strict adherence of turn-based combat... While a good game itself, it doesn't provide the player with the frantic nature of real time combat which are more exciting. Hey, there's a reason why RTS games are in most cases much more popular than turn-based games in MP...
Well if one wants to be AD&D purist, then this real time system is a joke... Dex based characters have big advantage due to better initiative rolls but is not implemented in BG and subsequent Bioware games.... Improved initiative feat is almost worthless...
So although I voted for no. 1, I say that if following the certain rule makes the game less fun, then by all means break it...