Are you stating these things are bugs versus original d&d rules? Or bugs versus original bg2? Because 1, 2, and 5 not bugs. The game originally had these features.
#2 is a bug because the Kensai, Berserker etc should all only be able to Specialise (2 pips) in a single weapon, just like Rangers, Paladins and multiclass Fighters.
That doesn't answer the question of why that is a bug? Is it because it doesn't match D&D rules or something? Because if that's the case it isn't a bug as the developers clearly intended fighter kits to be able to get GM.
By that logic they clearly intended for Mislead to be the most powerful spell in the game, for Ghoul's Touch to replace your polymorphed weapons with your original weapons when it wore out, for Timestop + Shapechange to be able to kill anything in the game, including literal immortals, and for Ranger/Clerics to be better Druids than Druids.
Trying to divine which of these is intentional and not intentional, however, is entirely irrelevant in the context of this thread.
In the context of his statement, deriving what was intentional or not was of no relevance sir, you seemed to have missed the point. His argument clearly addressed the false statements of game features claimed to be bugs.
Also, time stop + mind flayer has always been the most powerful attack in the game. And it definitely wasn't an accident seeing as how much emphasis is put on the power of the mind flayer throughout the game and why they are both level 9 spells (much love to you as well limited wish).
1: Dual class from a Fighter if they fixed the dual-class proficiency bug? Ex-Fighters retain whatever proficiencies they had originally, but all proficiency points they gain in future are as members of their new class, 1 pip and class specific weapons only.
2: Use Fighter Kits if they fixed the Kit proficiency bug? Unless an actual kit ability, only pure unkitted Fighters may put more than 2 pips into a weapon type (with the exception of Two Weapon Fighting).
3: Still use Mislead if they fixed the invisibility bug? Mislead currently allows you to remain utterly undetectable and untargetable if your mislead clone isn't around to be dispelled or destroyed, rather than behaving like Improved Invisibility when you attack.
4: Play a Ranger/Cleric if they fixed the spellcasting bug? Ranger/Clerics currently get all Cleric and all Druid spells, rather than a limited number of druid spells up to level 3.
5: Dual Wield if they introduced a Shield that added +1 Attack? Or fixed the bug such that extra Attacks apply to the weapon that grants them? Currently all weapons that add attacks do so to the main hand, meaning dual wielding such weapons gives you more attacks of your primary (and usually best) weapon.
Feel free to answer, or add your own.
1-Yes 2-No, because to me the only point of playing a warrior is the possibility of reaching Grand Mastery. 3-Yes 4-No, what makes the R/C interesting are the druid spells. 5-Yes, the powers of the secondary weapon can be very useful.
15: Would you still ignore Colour Spray if they amended it to use the PnP stats it should have had?
Upon casting this spell, the wizard causes a vivid, fan-shaped spray of clashing colors to spring forth from his hand. From one to six creatures (1d6) within the area are affected in order of increasing distance from the wizard. All creatures above the level of the spellcaster and all those of 6th level or 6 Hit Dice or more are entitled to a saving throw vs. spell. Blind or unseeing creatures are not affected by the spell. Creatures not allowed or failing saving throws, and whose Hit Dice or levels are less than or equal to the spellcaster's level, are struck unconscious for 2d4 rounds; those with Hit Dice or levels 1 or 2 greater than the wizard's level are blinded for 1d4 rounds; those with Hit Dice or levels 3 or more greater than that of the spellcaster are stunned (reeling and unable to think or act coherently) for one round.
tl;dr: No save for enemies under both the mage's & 6th level, Unconsciousness for 2-8 rounds if their level is lower than yours. Enemies over 6th level get a save but are still at least stunned if they fail it. Colour Spray was a beast of a spell.
16: Play a human, if they made it so that any race with a single class could dual class?
17: Play a non-human if they made it so that humans could multiclass?
18: Would you still use the BG1 style Ring of Wizardry if it existed in BG2? The BG1 Ring(s) of Wizardry double your level 1 spells per day. BG2 add singular spell slots of much higher level spells.
19: Would you still play a Cavalier as a Paladin if it was also a Fighter kit? In PnP it was.
20: If all the special NPC-only items were made freely removable and exchangable after completing a character's quest, would you still play with those characters, or just steal their goodies and dump them? Alora's Lucky Rabbit Foot and Edwin's lucky pendant? Mage/Thief CHARNAME thanks you for your donation.
15. Oh gods. Is that what it was supposed to do? Yes. Hell yes.
16. Yes. For RP reasons.
17. Same as 16. :P
18. My evil sorcerer cackles as he places the ring on his finger. "To the pain!" Just shortly before he starts eradicating forest creatures with dozens of magic missiles...
(That's a yes.)
19. Eh. Not one for paladins anyway. But sure, why not.
20. But that's their special items! I couldn't possibly... Well, maybe. That amulet of Edwin's is pretty impressive... Hmmm...
1: Yes, but for fewer character types; I already tend to prefer multiclasses in most cases. 2: I might still use Berserker for some dual-classes, but it would reduce my use of them. 3: Don't use it anyway. 4: Nah, I usually play F/C or F/D anyway. 5: Yes and yes, though the second would probably shake up my weapon choices. 6: Yes, but then the only specialists I usually play are Illusionists, who get plenty of good spells. 7: Yeah, I use Edwin because he's an Evil Mage, not because he gets buckets of spells 8: Yes 9: Yes, though it would have reduced utility in some areas (like ankheg hunting) 10: Yeah, I might actually use it. 11: Probably not, most of the time 12: Nope 13: Depends on the CHARNAME, but I'd probably spread the love a little 14: Yes, unless playing an evil character 15: Nope, it'd be a great alternative to magic missile spam. 16: Yes, but only because there would still be human-exclusive classes 17: Oh yes 18: Only with Wild Mages 19: Yes, especially if #2 was in play 20: Most of the character specific items aren't so amazingly good that they're tempting to steal, barring Edwin and Hexxat's amulets, which are mainly placeholders for rules that ideally should be inherent.
21: If they changed Single Weapon Style to give +1 Attack for 2 Pips, would you play any differently? For bonus considerations, would you consider Single Weapon Style to be better than the Two Weapon or Two Handed Weapon styles?
22: If they made it so that all of your gear from BG1 carried over and ended up somewhere in Amn, (whilst everything else didn't), would you still play BG1 the same way? Currently very, very few of your item choices matter, just armour, magic items and pantaloons (and even then a tiny subset).
23: If they changed it so that party members didn't catch up to you in level, and all had their own starting levels, would you play any differently?
21: Hell yes; most of the benefit of dual wielding with easier swapping to ranged weapons? Sign me up. I think Two Weapon Style would still be marginally better, both for pure damage (even in TOB, it's not like every enemy needs +3 or better to hurt) and for utility from equipped weapon effects, but it would be a slim enough margin that the utility of SWS would often win out. Two Handed style would just be left in the dust, since most one-handed weapons will easily outperform a two-handed weapon with an extra attack per round (some of them do that with the same number of attacks).
22: Yeah. As nice as it would be to have Stupefier around in the early stages of SoA, most of the equipment you get in BG1 would be pretty quickly outclassed by what's available in BG2.
23: I just recently started doing the trick in BG1 where you go around solo and level up a bit before picking up NPCs; I'd probably stop that and go back to the previous strategy of picking everyone I wanted up ASAP if this were the case. I never stopped doing that in BG2 because I value getting as much time for banters in as possible (not to mention controlling proficiency distribution) more than a bit of XP.
Comments
Also, time stop + mind flayer has always been the most powerful attack in the game. And it definitely wasn't an accident seeing as how much emphasis is put on the power of the mind flayer throughout the game and why they are both level 9 spells (much love to you as well limited wish).
2-No, because to me the only point of playing a warrior is the possibility of reaching Grand Mastery.
3-Yes
4-No, what makes the R/C interesting are the druid spells.
5-Yes, the powers of the secondary weapon can be very useful.
Upon casting this spell, the wizard causes a vivid, fan-shaped spray of clashing colors
to spring forth from his hand. From one to six creatures (1d6) within the area are affected
in order of increasing distance from the wizard. All creatures above the level of the
spellcaster and all those of 6th level or 6 Hit Dice or more are entitled to a saving throw
vs. spell. Blind or unseeing creatures are not affected by the spell.
Creatures not allowed or failing saving throws, and whose Hit Dice or levels are less
than or equal to the spellcaster's level, are struck unconscious for 2d4 rounds; those with
Hit Dice or levels 1 or 2 greater than the wizard's level are blinded for 1d4 rounds; those
with Hit Dice or levels 3 or more greater than that of the spellcaster are stunned (reeling
and unable to think or act coherently) for one round.
tl;dr: No save for enemies under both the mage's & 6th level, Unconsciousness for 2-8 rounds if their level is lower than yours. Enemies over 6th level get a save but are still at least stunned if they fail it. Colour Spray was a beast of a spell.
16: Play a human, if they made it so that any race with a single class could dual class?
17: Play a non-human if they made it so that humans could multiclass?
18: Would you still use the BG1 style Ring of Wizardry if it existed in BG2?
The BG1 Ring(s) of Wizardry double your level 1 spells per day. BG2 add singular spell slots of much higher level spells.
19: Would you still play a Cavalier as a Paladin if it was also a Fighter kit?
In PnP it was.
20: If all the special NPC-only items were made freely removable and exchangable after completing a character's quest, would you still play with those characters, or just steal their goodies and dump them?
Alora's Lucky Rabbit Foot and Edwin's lucky pendant? Mage/Thief CHARNAME thanks you for your donation.
16. Yes. For RP reasons.
17. Same as 16. :P
18. My evil sorcerer cackles as he places the ring on his finger. "To the pain!" Just shortly before he starts eradicating forest creatures with dozens of magic missiles...
(That's a yes.)
19. Eh. Not one for paladins anyway. But sure, why not.
20.
2: I might still use Berserker for some dual-classes, but it would reduce my use of them.
3: Don't use it anyway.
4: Nah, I usually play F/C or F/D anyway.
5: Yes and yes, though the second would probably shake up my weapon choices.
6: Yes, but then the only specialists I usually play are Illusionists, who get plenty of good spells.
7: Yeah, I use Edwin because he's an Evil Mage, not because he gets buckets of spells
8: Yes
9: Yes, though it would have reduced utility in some areas (like ankheg hunting)
10: Yeah, I might actually use it.
11: Probably not, most of the time
12: Nope
13: Depends on the CHARNAME, but I'd probably spread the love a little
14: Yes, unless playing an evil character
15: Nope, it'd be a great alternative to magic missile spam.
16: Yes, but only because there would still be human-exclusive classes
17: Oh yes
18: Only with Wild Mages
19: Yes, especially if #2 was in play
20: Most of the character specific items aren't so amazingly good that they're tempting to steal, barring Edwin and Hexxat's amulets, which are mainly placeholders for rules that ideally should be inherent.
For bonus considerations, would you consider Single Weapon Style to be better than the Two Weapon or Two Handed Weapon styles?
22: If they made it so that all of your gear from BG1 carried over and ended up somewhere in Amn, (whilst everything else didn't), would you still play BG1 the same way?
Currently very, very few of your item choices matter, just armour, magic items and pantaloons (and even then a tiny subset).
23: If they changed it so that party members didn't catch up to you in level, and all had their own starting levels, would you play any differently?
22: Yeah. As nice as it would be to have Stupefier around in the early stages of SoA, most of the equipment you get in BG1 would be pretty quickly outclassed by what's available in BG2.
23: I just recently started doing the trick in BG1 where you go around solo and level up a bit before picking up NPCs; I'd probably stop that and go back to the previous strategy of picking everyone I wanted up ASAP if this were the case. I never stopped doing that in BG2 because I value getting as much time for banters in as possible (not to mention controlling proficiency distribution) more than a bit of XP.