Why add 3ed Prestige classes when there are 2ed ones left out there?

Mordeus

As a 2ed purist it's a little disappointing to see 3ed Prestige classes make it into the game over 2ed kits. Out of the 6 new kits, none of them are really from 2ed. With the Blackguard it was fine because there wasn't anything like it in 2ed, there was actually a novelty in having one prestige class among 2ed kits. But aside from the new 3ed Monk kits, there are 2ed kits that could either fill their roles or bring something new to the game.

There was no need to introduce the Shadow Dancer from 3ed when there is the Shadow Walker from 2ed (Wizards and Rogues of the Realms) that fills in that role with some differences.

Or introducing the Dwarven Defender from 3ed when there are Dwarven Fighter kits like the Axe for Hire, Clansdwarf, Hearth Guard, Battlerager, Highborn, Outcast, Sharpshooter.

Or the Dragon Disciple from 3ed when there is the Wyrmkeeper or Wyrmlaird (Powers and Pantheons).

So my request is really that, if new kits are to be added, that at least one of them would come from 2ed. It's fine to draw material from 3ed where it doesn't exist in 2ed but there are still some great 2ed ideas that never made it to BG2.

I'm no fan of Psionics but I'd rather see something like that introduced. I'm sure you could move the Barbarian among the Fighter kits since it is a Fighter kit and use the space leftover in the interface for a completely new class. One that modders could use as the basis of new kits.

ajwz

A certain someone will be along shortly to inform you that bg is not 2e pnp...

Jalily

BG may not be 2e pnp, but it's 3e even less. Few are arguing for kits exactly as they are in 2e pnp, only that the inspiration for at least some new kits be taken from a source closer to the core of the original.

Archaos

Yeah. I agree that BG is not pure ADnD 2E also.
But I think it makes sense that it's not. It was released when the 3.0 Edition was coming out and even more so with BG2 and lore-wise, I think it's the same.

BG's timeline is only a few years away from the NwN2 games. Not even a decade, lore-wise.
So I think it's fair to include stuff from 3E. BG2 started that trend and now they're expanding on it. I'm a fan of 3E even if I despise some stuff about it and I'm pretty good with those choices.

Mordeus

True that BG2 isn't strictly 2ed but the selection of kits are mostly sourced from 2ed. For example:

Berserker, Cavalier (The Complete Fighter's Handbook 2ed)
Wizard Slayer, Barbarian (The Complete Barbarian's Handbook 2ed)
Kensai, Monk (Oriental Adventures 1ed)
Archer, Undead Hunter (The Complete Book of Elves 2ed)
Stalker, Beastmaster (The Complete Ranger's Handbook 2ed)
Inquistor (The Complete Paladin's Handbook 2ed)
Priest of Talos/Lathander/Helm (Faith & Avatars 2ed)
Wild Mage (Tome of Magic 2ed)
Assassin, Bounty Hunter, Swashbuckler (The Complete Thief's Handbook 2ed)
Blade, Jester & Skald (The Complete Bard's Handbook 2ed)

The only kit you can argue never existed before 3ed was the Sorcerer. Although there was most definitely Sorcerers from a lore perspective.

The inclusion of the 6 3ed kits probably isn't such a big deal to fans of 3ed or games like NWN or IWD2. But what NWN did for fans of 3ed, Baldurs Gate did for fans of 2ed. There was always that distinction between those two gaming universes.

But kits can always be modded out of the game, so it's not really a deal breaker. Still, if 3ed kit concepts are to be brought into BG:EE, then why not do a 50/50 deal where some of the kits are set aside to be from 2ed or even 1ed. I'm honestly surprised that the first prestige class ever created back in 1985 by Gary Gygax, the Acrobat-Thief has not been brought into the game. Or even its' 2ed incarnation.

IchigoRXC

Perhaps it is simply some of the 3rd edition abilities lend themselves to the constraints of the engine or are more easily reproducible than their 2e versions

I am however all for 2e kits, complete book of necromancers please Deathslayer

Kilivitz

A similar complaint could have been made when BG2 brought out 3e classes like Monk and Sorcerer. Although the Barbarian was a 2e class, it's safe to assume it's been put there because of the 3e version. Same goes for the Half-Orc as a new race.

Now don't get me wrong, I personally dislike 3e, but if you want it's influence away from the BG series, might as well stick to the original BG1 and IWD (without the expansion, which introduced a couple of 3e features like Sneak Attack).

The choice for those kits seems a little obvious - 3e is still the most popular version of the game nowadays. The popularity of kits like Shadowdancer and Dragon Disciple has also been tested in NWN.

Mordeus

@IchigoRXC: The Infinity Engine is pretty rigid regardless of 2ed or 3ed. But I don't think that's the problem since there was no real trouble in bringing in all those 2ed kits into BG2.

@Kilivitz: I don't really mind the Monk or the Sorcerer. Especially since the Monk's attributes were largely developed in 1ed's Oriental Adventures and was explored again in 2ed's Faith and Avatars, the 3ed version wouldn't have existed if it weren't for its' previous incarnations. And the Sorcerer was really just a standard wizard kit with a divine caster's spell progression but was mentioned in the lore of 1ed and 2ed. You can build a 2ed justification surrounding their inclusion.

Sure BG2 dabbled in some 3ed concepts, but the core of the game was 2ed, if not the majority of it.

It's mainly the popularity reasoning that is troubling to me. I don't think just because something has a fanbase in NWN or 3ed means that it should necessarily be included or emulated in the BG's gaming universe. I just don't want to see the original 2ed based kits outnumbered or overshadowed by 3ed prestige classes already brought to life in games like NWN. Let's give some kits never brought to virtual life a chance first.

I probably wouldn't have noticed it so much if the kits were handled like the Blackguard. There was a rationale built around the character of Dorn to warrant its' inclusion. But there really was no rationale surrounding the 5 new 3ed prestige classes. They might give one to a BG2 NPC in the future but for now they just suddenly happened.

These 6 new kits probably aren't the last 3ed additions on the horizon, so all I can really do is request that 2ed kits be taken in consideration alongside the 3ed candidates. It would be a win-win situation if they introduced one 2ed kit for every 3ed kit.

Kilivitz

Mordeus said:

I don't think just because something has a fanbase in NWN or 3ed means that it should necessarily be included or emulated in the BG's gaming universe. I just don't want to see the original 2ed based kits outnumbered or overshadowed by 3ed prestige classes already brought to life in games like NWN. Let's give some kits never brought to virtual life a chance first.

I completely agree with this. But I couldn't say how that would go with the majority of players and how it translates in terms of keeping the franchise afloat financially.

I do think that after these fan favorites we could see some different stuff, though. I'm sure that with BG2:EE more new kits will come (and I'm sure they'll also be put in BG:EE).

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Avenger_teambg

BG2 was always on the edge of 2nd and 3rd ed. BG1 was like that only with TuTu.
It is easier to find enough 3rd ed source material and features to cherry pick from them, while 2nd ed is probably scarce and less balanceable.
You might say that Kensai was taken from 1st ed, but, heh, it is not even a monk kit.

suddenly_human

Always preferred 2nd ed but the 3rd ed kits are there now... could always give them 2nd ed names just to really shake things up... :P

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

smeagolheart

Bhaaldog said:

They resist the changes to Baldur's Gate. They cling to the old game as if it actually matters. They will learn.

My problem is the shoe doesn't fit. The 3E prestige classes were meant to be sprinkled into another class after meeting certain prerequisites. Instead they are ported over, while adapting to 2E as little as possible to a whole different ruleset. 2E you start with one of these prestige classes and can only dual class out of them (if human).

Dwarven Defender, for example, was never meant to be a class someone had the whole way through a game, it was a prestige class to sprinkle onto some other stuff. However creative you wanted to be, if you could meet the prereqs you could take this class.

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

smeagolheart

@Bhaaldog Yes (from BG2). I was giving my opinion on the opposite side of the topic of 3e classes as 2e kits. Not so much a direct disagreement with the quote (I suppose that would be to rail against developers decisions?), just showing my support for better implementation or using 2e kits.