Beamdog has full control of IWD EE project if i'm not wrong, at least that was what i read here in these forums (unlike happened with Baldurs Gate).
No one is asking to plug off the option of make your entire party, nothing of the old will be taken off, but me and many here want the new also, he option of Joinable NPCs. The statement of "no" for the sake of personall feelings is a selfish one and the "no" for other works to be focused on are fallacious ones, as we have the entire life toward on to make an JNPC DLC.
Be it made now or later, the compromise with this future project to me, and to at least for 53 other people (37%), is of ultmost importance. And more than that, if we sum the number of people that want at least JNPC mods we have 76 people (52%) that stated that they enjoy Joinable NPCs.
We are not few, we are not a minor group of customers, and more important, the majority of "no" votes would come ONLY from old players, as new customers would not have an nostalgic feeling to feed and are too much used to Joinable NPCs in this kind of game.
I hope @TrentOster and the crew take this in account for a possible future project. If they don't we can do nothing, but there's people wanting to buy this product.
Obs: If unsure, a kickstarter project could be developed for JNPC DLCs, this forum functions more than over based on trust anyway, so my suggestion is:
$10 buckets (or more/less based on the rights of each investment), open the kickstarte now and evaluate it by 3 to 3 months (or more/less months), make a minimum income standart (but be open with the info, as how many already invested and the minimum income at least).
For each minimum income reached by each set of months, the deep and extension of the DLC will be improved.
IF the first month sequence doesn't even reach the first minimum income, convert any investment made in credit to buy other Beamdog avaliable games in the site.
It's an win/win idea and no matter what, it will infuse the company with money, for this OR other projects.
you shouldn't have opened the poll if you were going put blame on people for answering one way and not the other. it now looks like you've baited people into the "wrong answer" in order to gain traction in promoting the opposite idea and that looks a wee bit manipulative.
you shouldn't have opened the poll if you were going put blame on people for answering one way and not the other. it now looks like you've baited people into the "wrong answer" in order to gain traction in promoting the opposite idea and that looks a wee bit manipulative.
but i agree on everything else
Blame? I'm not blaming anyone, i'm picking logic results from the amount of answers provided.
Anyway as i said it's a point of view. It's logic and reasonable, but with space for other arguments and that's what will keep this discussion running i guess. There's no right or wrong answer, there's:
I want JNPCs and i don't Want JNPCs.
If you absolutely don't want JNPC there's an straight answer for that with 36% of all votes of this thread (52 votes).
If the point isn't block JNPCs but keep the game loyal to the original version, then there's a 2° "no" option.
If you want JNPCs as core content, then there's 2 yes options. One, for example, is soft asking them as DLC only.
If you see the the old IWD as wrong (as i do) and want the JNPC mistake of the past fixed, OR if you have any other reason to want the JNPCs in the core game from the begin, then you pick the option i picked.
you did, because you said: "The statement of "no" for the sake of personall feelings is a selfish one and the "no" for other works to be focused on are fallacious ones, as we have the entire life toward on to make an JNPC DLC."
There's no blame, i just attacked their point of view with arguments. I formulated reasons to dischard these 2 "no" arguments. To blame i would need to put feelings in the subject, and i don't hate, despise, or am angry in any form or reason with the people that voted "no", and i have no animosity toward them.
Please no. Black Isle would never have added joinable NPCs. They didn't in any of the expansions and they still didn't in the sequel. I would bet there's nothing in the design documents about this either. It's simply not part of the game design for Icewind Dale. Please stay true to the original designers' intentions.
Well, that was their market choice, but the rights belongs to beamdog now. We don't have to stand only in their steps, cos if i'm not wrong Dorn, Neera and Rasaad aren't original NPCs either and Black Isle surely didn't planed these ones.
You don't get my point. Baldur's Gate already had plenty of joinable NPCs with personal quests. Adding new NPCs with their own personal quests simply expanded on the existing game design (which was from Bioware, not Black Isle of course). However, there is not a single instance of a joinable NPC in all of the Icewind Dale series, so it was clearly part of Black Isle's intentions explicitely not to have joinable NPCs in Icewind Dale. Adding joinable NPCs would not be mere content addition as for Baldur's Gate, it would run contrary to the spirit of the game and significantly alter the experience. This clearly should be left up to mods.
Also I would question the value of a poll posted on a forum called "forum.baldursgate.com" where 98% of the people are Baldur's Gate fans. Of course such people tend to think favorably of making Icewind Dale play more like Baldur's Gate; many who voted in this poll actually never even played Icewind Dale. It's like asking World of Warcraft fans if making Baldur's Gate an MMO would be a good idea. Of course some will say yes.
And even with this biased group less than 30% actually want joinable NPCs in Icewind Dale.
There's no blame, i just attacked their point of view with arguments. I formulated reasons to dischard these 2 "no" arguments. To blame i would need to put feelings in the subject, and i don't hate, despise, or am angry in any form or reason with the people that voted "no", and i have no animosity toward them.
No. Your arguement was not good.
Most of the people, including myself, said "No" because we consider a follower system wasted when that time can be spent polishing the game in many other ways or adding new quests and other such goodies. You briefly addressed this point and dismissed it by calling it fallacious but you are wrong. Any such addition drains resources that could be spent adding something else.
The Kickstarter idea, however, is not disagreeable.
Please no. Black Isle would never have added joinable NPCs. They didn't in any of the expansions and they still didn't in the sequel. I would bet there's nothing in the design documents about this either. It's simply not part of the game design for Icewind Dale. Please stay true to the original designers' intentions.
Well, that was their market choice, but the rights belongs to beamdog now. We don't have to stand only in their steps, cos if i'm not wrong Dorn, Neera and Rasaad aren't original NPCs either and Black Isle surely didn't planed these ones.
You don't get my point. Baldur's Gate already had plenty of joinable NPCs with personal quests. Adding new NPCs with their own personal quests simply expanded on the existing game design (which was from Bioware, not Black Isle of course). However, there is not a single instance of a joinable NPC in all of the Icewind Dale series, so it was clearly part of Black Isle's intentions explicitely not to have joinable NPCs in Icewind Dale. Adding joinable NPCs would not be mere content addition as for Baldur's Gate, it would run contrary to the spirit of the game and significantly alter the experience. This clearly should be left up to mods.
In fact i understand you pretty well @Zeckul, i just didn't agree with the argument.
The new JNPCs would be a new element without precedent in IWD, while in Baldur's Gate they're the expansion of an already applied concept.
That beying said, i don't see JNPCs harming the game in any way, the don't want don't use/pursue solution used to introduce gay content in the new JNPCs of baldur's gate are for some reason being completly ignored here (where we would have an even better truth of that concept as the JNPCs can be made passive, to only talk with the party if the party directly talks to him.
Second point is, we don't have to follow Black Isle steps by any way. While i find Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale and Planescape: Torment great games, i have also points that if i have the devs/investors power of choice, i would surelly change some things in these games. Beamdog have the power now, so i serious ask to this team of devs of Beamdog to follow their concept of what is best for the enhanced game, not to follow blindly the steps of the past.
The spirit of the game is different of the intent of the previous devs, the spirit of the game with no doubt is entirely compatible with JNPCs. If the Beamdog own answer get to be still a no, well nothing can be done about that.
Also I would question the value of a poll posted on a forum called "forum.baldursgate.com" where 98% of the people are Baldur's Gate fans. Of course such people tend to think favorably of making Icewind Dale play more like Baldur's Gate; many who voted in this poll actually never even played Icewind Dale. It's like asking World of Warcraft fans if making Baldur's Gate an MMO would be a good idea. Of course some will say yes.
And even with this biased group less than 30% actually want joinable NPCs in Icewind Dale.
That would be an astounting fallacy, with the respect of the word, almost every baldur's gate player passed through IWD, PS:T and the other alike games, the forum is www.baldursgate.com because baldur's gate was the first enhancement, if IWD was the first enhancement the forum would probally be called www.icewinddale.com.
It was an "market" choice. It was a storytelling choice.
You presume that, as much as i presume it's an marketing choice.
No. It's a FACT. Marketing choice = decision made to sell more copies. jNPCs would have sold more copies of IWD, and could have been added easily (remember, this is in the time of BG1, before NPCs had to have elaborate backstories and dialogue).
A fact based in the subjective intent of the old devs and their patronage? ok then...
It was an "market" choice. It was a storytelling choice.
You presume that, as much as i presume it's an marketing choice.
No. It's a FACT. Marketing choice = decision made to sell more copies. jNPCs would have sold more copies of IWD, and could have been added easily (remember, this is in the time of BG1, before NPCs had to have elaborate backstories and dialogue).
Baldur's Gate had to have the unfinished business mod because it was launched before being ready, in reason of a "marketing" choice, so maybe, just maybe, the company that make the work not always have full control of all the decisions toward the game it produce.
BG was finished, in that the whole of the core questline was complete. The developers work on many more optional sidequests than are needed, well aware that some won't make the cut.
An example of a game that was launched before it was ready was KOTOR2 - it's core questline was incomplete.
Joinable NPCs are evolution, tell me the name of a single actual RPG party structured game without joinable NPCs, cos in my mind the names that come to favor my example are many.
Many of them, prior to BG. The two Dark Sun games for example. They aren't an evolution, they where present in JRPGs since the start of CRPGs. They are a way of telling a certain type of story, with a group of characters provided for you, and have now become a tiresome cliche.
If we're speaking of fallacies, then to say that "almost every baldur's gate player passed through IWD" is surely one of them. A great many people on this forum have openly stated that they never played the game. While there are certainly plenty on the forums who have, the phrase "almost every... player" is completely incorrect. Please stop speaking in such overestimates. You only invalidate your opinions more by using them.
(As a side note, I've mostly given up paying much attention to this thread since I don't see it going anywhere but down now. Spiraling down into arguments over semantics, mostly done with poor logic, that is. I don't intend to wade into this argument, but I just had to say that.)
There's no blame, i just attacked their point of view with arguments. I formulated reasons to dischard these 2 "no" arguments. To blame i would need to put feelings in the subject, and i don't hate, despise, or am angry in any form or reason with the people that voted "no", and i have no animosity toward them.
No. Your arguement was not good.
Most of the people, including myself, said "No" because we consider a follower system wasted when that time can be spent polishing the game in many other ways or adding new quests and other such goodies. You briefly addressed this point and dismissed it by calling it fallacious but you are wrong. Any such addition drains resources that could be spent adding something else.
The Kickstarter idea, however, is not disagreeable.
Sorry misted judge if my argument isn't good for you, but surprisingly i disagree with you. Let me quote myself:
(...) The statement of "no" for the sake of personall feelings is a selfish one and the "no" for other works to be focused on are fallacious ones, as we have the entire life toward on to make an JNPC DLC.
No one told to do it now, no one told to do it in detriment of other works, yes vote just asked for it be done a day. So how the "better/other works to do first" fit as an valid argument? By the way, "...briefly adressed this point..." is a random affirmative, an poor attempt of undermine my argments.
Joinable NPCs are evolution, tell me the name of a single actual RPG party structured game without joinable NPCs, cos in my mind the names that come to favor my example are many.
Many of them, prior to BG. The two Dark Sun games for example. They aren't an evolution, they where present in JRPGs since the start of CRPGs. They are a way of telling a certain type of story, with a group of characters provided for you, and have now become a tiresome cliche.
I actually am not so sure if I'm happy with the way NPCs were implemented in BG:EE. Most of the new content, including all of the new areas, required having the new NPCs in the party for an extended period. All fine and dandy if you like that NPC, but if you don't, or if it doesn't fit the party, you're basically forced to either skip that part of the game, or recruit one of them, rest a while, unlock the new area, and then kick them out again, which feels a bit meta.
I guess it's fine if those areas exist mostly for the plot advancement of that NPC, including some minor magical items that can easily be found elsewhere and possibly items specifically for the NPC in question, but both the Rasaad questline (Strength 19 girdle) and the Dorn questline (Best Bastard Sword in game, other useful items in slots that had limited options) had some interesting items down the line. Neera's seemed better, though the area felt a bit incomplete, like not being able to enter the house and random huts, and the goblins having nothing to say to you.
Of course, things would be more fair if every single NPC in the game would be like that, so it would be more of a choice between content X and content Y, rather than, do I want content X or not. Receiving some kind of content regardless of your preference for NPCs would fix the above issue.
Yeah, since then the trend has been for RPGs to turn into soap operas with fixed characters, to the extent that much of the actual role playing has been removed.
Doctor Who has the same problem these days.
I wish these people would stop angsting about their love lives and focus on saving the gdamn world!
Surely there's talented enough modders around to make this dream a reality instead of relying on Beamdog (I thought their NPCs were very weakly written anyway)
Surely there's talented enough modders around to make this dream a reality instead of relying on Beamdog (I thought their NPCs were very weakly written anyway)
I have faith in Beamdog, they made a first not so good job, but they got experience with this. I believe in nice JNPCs for IWD EE, but then now lets wait to see how things will evolve.
(...) i don't see JNPCs harming the game in any way, the don't want don't use/pursue solution used to introduce gay content in the new JNPCs of baldur's gate are for some reason being completly ignored here (where we would have an even better truth of that concept as the JNPCs can be made passive, to only talk with the party if the party directly talks to him.
All the Baldur's Gate NPCs are optional too, that doesn't make them somehow not part of the core experience of the game. The option's there to create your own custom party in Baldur's Gate, or even play solo, it's just not the way Bioware intended for you to enjoy this game and it goes largely ignored by players because you miss out on some of the most interesting content.
I don't see how joinable NPCs can be made a meaningful addition to Icewind Dale without strongly enticing the player not to create a full party of adventurers in order to enjoy all that added content. Icewind Dale is about creating a full party of adventurers so there's just no place in the design for that.
Or then the joinable NPCs could be mere templates standing there with no meaningful content but then that seems entirely pointless. If you want such NPCs in Icewind Dale you can already add them to your party at any time. You don't need some pre-defined templates standing around in the game world for that.
Second point is, we don't have to follow Black Isle steps by any way. While i find Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale and Planescape: Torment great games, i have also points that if i have the devs/investors power of choice, i would surelly change some things in these games. Beamdog have the power now, so i serious ask to this team of devs of Beamdog to follow their concept of what is best for the enhanced game, not to follow blindly the steps of the past.
I entirely disagree with that premise, it's just an absurd thing to say. If we don't have to follow Black Isle steps in any way, then why even call the game "Icewind Dale"? Sorry, but the point of the "Enhanced Editions" has always been to stay as truthful to the original as possible, that was the philosophy for the BG:EEs and that's what everyone's expecting out of future Enhanced Editions from Beamdog.
Heck, I argued all I could for the inclusion of Ascension in BG2:EE because I thought that fitted the original design (being designed, you know, by one of BG2's designers), and even that was considered too much.
New content is welcome as long as it fits the original design of the game. Anything that goes beyond that should be left to mods.
Well @kulyok has made a IWD NPC Project, all it needs is to be made compatible with IWD:EE.
I also think some NPCs were made for IWD-in-BG2.
Yes, and IWDNPC Is compatible with IWD-in-BG2, which IWD:EE is based on. So, it should hopefully be straightforward to get IWDNPC working on IWD:EE.
There are joinable NPCs for IWD-in-BG2, but they are definitely BG1 style NPCs, i.e., minimal dialog. They don't have banter, quests, or romances. They use some of the built-in soundsets for voicing and make a few interjections (most less than a dozen).
Hmm, interesting, I didn't knew about that second part. Both @Camdawg and @DavidW are still around, so I guess there's a decent chance it'll get updated to IWD:EE?
If that pack and Koyluk's pack would be compatible, that's a total of 17 NPCs available, and gives players a good pool to choose from, and still get close to a party setup they'd like.
Other players can then build on that, and can do with adding only 1 or 2 NPCs, without having to worry about getting all bases covered.
(Yes, I do realize the IWD-in-BG2 pack has little character dialog for the NPCs, but it's a start. Say you like 3 NPCs from Koyluk's pack, but don't like 2 of them, you could then fill the last 2 slots with those more generic NPCs, and when other players add other NPCs you like, you can then swap them out for those.)
I've planned out 6 NPCs in my head that add story depth to each chapter of the game, e.i. a Paladin for Vale of Shadows, a Druid for Dragon's Eye etc. My dream would be to have a party of these BG2-style characters that add depth to the slender story of each zone, and breath new life into the same old areas. Alas, I'm not a talented modder.
Hmm, interesting, I didn't knew about that second part. Both @Camdawg and @DavidW are still around, so I guess there's a decent chance it'll get updated to IWD:EE?
awesome!!! didn't know this existed.
the creators (kulyok and g3) should just combine the two mods, add just a pinch more stuff (hopefully a mercenary mechanic for those more rudimentary npcs) and that's pretty much it, for me, a dream come true!
Considering they're different kinds of mods, of a different scope, I don't think they need to be merged, as long as they are compatible with one another. I think for anything more than simply making them IWDEE compatible, and perhaps making Koyluk's NPCs recruitable the old fashioned way, you should probably create different NPCs with a different mod (which then should of course be compatible with both those mods).
in my opinion neither mod is self sufficient because neither has enough NPCs. neither 5 nor 12 is enough but 17 is already getting there. that's the basic reason they could be combined. the fact that one has extensively written characters and the other doesn't is aesthetically fine with me because BG1 is similar, some NPCs there are more nuanced, some less.
when it comes to adding stuff, they can always be added as a component.
if i was to make a new mod with 30-40 npcs, it likely wouldn't work with at least one of these mods because there'd be clutter.
also none of these have kits so in any case they need revision and updating. [^^^edit^^^ they do actually, my bad]
I'm sure this is bound to be an unpopular opinion, but I don't even want the spells from BGII:EE brought over. I feel they'll completely change how the game plays. JNPCs even less so. IWD was all about the player created party. Hell, I'm not even sure how I feel about the class kits
Someone else made the comment, which I agree with: At what point does this become no longer Icewind Dale?
But, I understand there probably aren't many who will agree with me.
@Ironhalo How can you know how it will feel if you didn't play the game yet? maybe it will still be the good old IWD, but just better, we just have to wait and see how stuff were implanted into the game, it all talks right now, one can never know how something feel like until one actually try it.
And maybe it won't. I don't mean to sound pessimistic or argumentative, but I could turn those very questions back around. I'll be honest, I don't know.
Some people have pointed out that the enemy mages don't even have access to the higher level spells (although, I don't know how that affects HOF). Perhaps that's true. I hope it is, because although I've adored BGII over the many years, if that same spellcaster buff/debuff/spell/counterspell/remove magic nonsense comes to IWD, I won't be happy.
Sorry, that's a bit off-topic. When it comes to NPCs, I just fail to see what they can actually -add- to the game, so why bother? I get that other people want them. I do. And I'm certainly not out to try to take away from another's experience. However, the poll only asks the question, "Do you want...?" No, sir. No, I don't .
in my opinion neither mod is self sufficient because neither has enough NPCs. neither 5 nor 12 is enough but 17 is already getting there. that's the basic reason they could be combined. the fact that one has extensively written characters and the other doesn't is aesthetically fine with me because BG1 is similar, some NPCs there are more nuanced, some less.
when it comes to adding stuff, they can always be added as a component.
if i was to make a new mod with 30-40 npcs, it likely wouldn't work with at least one of these mods because there'd be clutter.
also none of these have kits so in any case they need revision and updating.
They do have kits.
IWD-in-BG2 NPCs: Ragnar, lawful good male dwarven fighter (in the tavern in Easthaven) Marcus, neutral evil male human assassin (in the Snowdrop Inn in Easthaven) Vilmar, chaotic good male human barbarian (in the Temple of Tempus in Easthaven) Endricane, neutral male good human priest of Lathander (on the western lakeshore in Easthaven) Eloise, chaotic good female half-elven thief/mage (upstairs in the room above Pomab's shop, in Easthaven) Ilauna, neutral good female human mage (in Orrick the Grey's tower in Kuldahar; talk to Orrick to recruit her) Moranir, true neutral male human avenger (near the druid statue in Kuldahar) Morgana, chaotic neutral female half-elven bard (in the tavern in Kuldahar) Syleen, lawful good female human undead hunter (in the tavern in Kuldahar) Arris Carthimon, chaotic good male elven sorceror (in Oswald's airship in Kuldahar) Elyvir Blacksheaf, chaotic good female elven archer (in the inn in Kuldahar) Kori Fire-Eye, lawful good female dwarven fighter/cleric (in the smithy in Kuldahar)
Comments
No one is asking to plug off the option of make your entire party, nothing of the old will be taken off, but me and many here want the new also, he option of Joinable NPCs. The statement of "no" for the sake of personall feelings is a selfish one and the "no" for other works to be focused on are fallacious ones, as we have the entire life toward on to make an JNPC DLC.
Be it made now or later, the compromise with this future project to me, and to at least for 53 other people (37%), is of ultmost importance. And more than that, if we sum the number of people that want at least JNPC mods we have 76 people (52%) that stated that they enjoy Joinable NPCs.
We are not few, we are not a minor group of customers, and more important, the majority of "no" votes would come ONLY from old players, as new customers would not have an nostalgic feeling to feed and are too much used to Joinable NPCs in this kind of game.
I hope @TrentOster and the crew take this in account for a possible future project. If they don't we can do nothing, but there's people wanting to buy this product.
Obs: If unsure, a kickstarter project could be developed for JNPC DLCs, this forum functions more than over based on trust anyway, so my suggestion is:
$10 buckets (or more/less based on the rights of each investment), open the kickstarte now and evaluate it by 3 to 3 months (or more/less months), make a minimum income standart (but be open with the info, as how many already invested and the minimum income at least).
For each minimum income reached by each set of months, the deep and extension of the DLC will be improved.
IF the first month sequence doesn't even reach the first minimum income, convert any investment made in credit to buy other Beamdog avaliable games in the site.
It's an win/win idea and no matter what, it will infuse the company with money, for this OR other projects.
but i agree on everything else
I didn't baited no one, the options of this pool were defined in the thread IWD:EE Joinable NPCs - A vital question.
Anyway as i said it's a point of view. It's logic and reasonable, but with space for other arguments and that's what will keep this discussion running i guess. There's no right or wrong answer, there's:
I want JNPCs and i don't Want JNPCs.
If you absolutely don't want JNPC there's an straight answer for that with 36% of all votes of this thread (52 votes).
If the point isn't block JNPCs but keep the game loyal to the original version, then there's a 2° "no" option.
If you want JNPCs as core content, then there's 2 yes options. One, for example, is soft asking them as DLC only.
If you see the the old IWD as wrong (as i do) and want the JNPC mistake of the past fixed, OR if you have any other reason to want the JNPCs in the core game from the begin, then you pick the option i picked.
"The statement of "no" for the sake of personall feelings is a selfish one and the "no" for other works to be focused on are fallacious ones, as we have the entire life toward on to make an JNPC DLC."
And even with this biased group less than 30% actually want joinable NPCs in Icewind Dale.
Most of the people, including myself, said "No" because we consider a follower system wasted when that time can be spent polishing the game in many other ways or adding new quests and other such goodies. You briefly addressed this point and dismissed it by calling it fallacious but you are wrong. Any such addition drains resources that could be spent adding something else.
The Kickstarter idea, however, is not disagreeable.
The new JNPCs would be a new element without precedent in IWD, while in Baldur's Gate they're the expansion of an already applied concept.
That beying said, i don't see JNPCs harming the game in any way, the don't want don't use/pursue solution used to introduce gay content in the new JNPCs of baldur's gate are for some reason being completly ignored here (where we would have an even better truth of that concept as the JNPCs can be made passive, to only talk with the party if the party directly talks to him.
Second point is, we don't have to follow Black Isle steps by any way. While i find Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale and Planescape: Torment great games, i have also points that if i have the devs/investors power of choice, i would surelly change some things in these games. Beamdog have the power now, so i serious ask to this team of devs of Beamdog to follow their concept of what is best for the enhanced game, not to follow blindly the steps of the past.
The spirit of the game is different of the intent of the previous devs, the spirit of the game with no doubt is entirely compatible with JNPCs. If the Beamdog own answer get to be still a no, well nothing can be done about that. That would be an astounting fallacy, with the respect of the word, almost every baldur's gate player passed through IWD, PS:T and the other alike games, the forum is www.baldursgate.com because baldur's gate was the first enhancement, if IWD was the first enhancement the forum would probally be called www.icewinddale.com. A fact based in the subjective intent of the old devs and their patronage? ok then...
An example of a game that was launched before it was ready was KOTOR2 - it's core questline was incomplete.
Many of them, prior to BG. The two Dark Sun games for example. They aren't an evolution, they where present in JRPGs since the start of CRPGs. They are a way of telling a certain type of story, with a group of characters provided for you, and have now become a tiresome cliche.
(As a side note, I've mostly given up paying much attention to this thread since I don't see it going anywhere but down now. Spiraling down into arguments over semantics, mostly done with poor logic, that is. I don't intend to wade into this argument, but I just had to say that.)
I guess it's fine if those areas exist mostly for the plot advancement of that NPC, including some minor magical items that can easily be found elsewhere and possibly items specifically for the NPC in question, but both the Rasaad questline (Strength 19 girdle) and the Dorn questline (Best Bastard Sword in game, other useful items in slots that had limited options) had some interesting items down the line. Neera's seemed better, though the area felt a bit incomplete, like not being able to enter the house and random huts, and the goblins having nothing to say to you.
Of course, things would be more fair if every single NPC in the game would be like that, so it would be more of a choice between content X and content Y, rather than, do I want content X or not. Receiving some kind of content regardless of your preference for NPCs would fix the above issue.
So I'm actually on the fence now...
Doctor Who has the same problem these days.
I wish these people would stop angsting about their love lives and focus on saving the gdamn world!
I also think some NPCs were made for IWD-in-BG2.
I don't see how joinable NPCs can be made a meaningful addition to Icewind Dale without strongly enticing the player not to create a full party of adventurers in order to enjoy all that added content. Icewind Dale is about creating a full party of adventurers so there's just no place in the design for that.
Or then the joinable NPCs could be mere templates standing there with no meaningful content but then that seems entirely pointless. If you want such NPCs in Icewind Dale you can already add them to your party at any time. You don't need some pre-defined templates standing around in the game world for that. I entirely disagree with that premise, it's just an absurd thing to say. If we don't have to follow Black Isle steps in any way, then why even call the game "Icewind Dale"? Sorry, but the point of the "Enhanced Editions" has always been to stay as truthful to the original as possible, that was the philosophy for the BG:EEs and that's what everyone's expecting out of future Enhanced Editions from Beamdog.
Heck, I argued all I could for the inclusion of Ascension in BG2:EE because I thought that fitted the original design (being designed, you know, by one of BG2's designers), and even that was considered too much.
New content is welcome as long as it fits the original design of the game. Anything that goes beyond that should be left to mods.
There are joinable NPCs for IWD-in-BG2, but they are definitely BG1 style NPCs, i.e., minimal dialog. They don't have banter, quests, or romances. They use some of the built-in soundsets for voicing and make a few interjections (most less than a dozen).
http://www.gibberlings3.net/readmes/readme-ice_tutu_tweaks.html
If that pack and Koyluk's pack would be compatible, that's a total of 17 NPCs available, and gives players a good pool to choose from, and still get close to a party setup they'd like.
Other players can then build on that, and can do with adding only 1 or 2 NPCs, without having to worry about getting all bases covered.
(Yes, I do realize the IWD-in-BG2 pack has little character dialog for the NPCs, but it's a start. Say you like 3 NPCs from Koyluk's pack, but don't like 2 of them, you could then fill the last 2 slots with those more generic NPCs, and when other players add other NPCs you like, you can then swap them out for those.)
the creators (kulyok and g3) should just combine the two mods, add just a pinch more stuff (hopefully a mercenary mechanic for those more rudimentary npcs) and that's pretty much it, for me, a dream come true!
we should petition them to do it.
when it comes to adding stuff, they can always be added as a component.
if i was to make a new mod with 30-40 npcs, it likely wouldn't work with at least one of these mods because there'd be clutter.
also none of these have kits so in any case they need revision and updating.
[^^^edit^^^ they do actually, my bad]
Someone else made the comment, which I agree with: At what point does this become no longer Icewind Dale?
But, I understand there probably aren't many who will agree with me.
Some people have pointed out that the enemy mages don't even have access to the higher level spells (although, I don't know how that affects HOF). Perhaps that's true. I hope it is, because although I've adored BGII over the many years, if that same spellcaster buff/debuff/spell/counterspell/remove magic nonsense comes to IWD, I won't be happy.
Sorry, that's a bit off-topic. When it comes to NPCs, I just fail to see what they can actually -add- to the game, so why bother? I get that other people want them. I do. And I'm certainly not out to try to take away from another's experience. However, the poll only asks the question, "Do you want...?" No, sir. No, I don't
IWD-in-BG2 NPCs:
Ragnar, lawful good male dwarven fighter (in the tavern in Easthaven)
Marcus, neutral evil male human assassin (in the Snowdrop Inn in Easthaven)
Vilmar, chaotic good male human barbarian (in the Temple of Tempus in Easthaven)
Endricane, neutral male good human priest of Lathander (on the western lakeshore in Easthaven)
Eloise, chaotic good female half-elven thief/mage (upstairs in the room above Pomab's shop, in Easthaven)
Ilauna, neutral good female human mage (in Orrick the Grey's tower in Kuldahar; talk to Orrick to recruit her)
Moranir, true neutral male human avenger (near the druid statue in Kuldahar)
Morgana, chaotic neutral female half-elven bard (in the tavern in Kuldahar)
Syleen, lawful good female human undead hunter (in the tavern in Kuldahar)
Arris Carthimon, chaotic good male elven sorceror (in Oswald's airship in Kuldahar)
Elyvir Blacksheaf, chaotic good female elven archer (in the inn in Kuldahar)
Kori Fire-Eye, lawful good female dwarven fighter/cleric (in the smithy in Kuldahar)
IWDNPCs (IWD-in-BG2 version):
Holvir, paladin
alternate class: cavalier, inquisitor, undead hunter
Korin, ranger
alternate class: archer, beast master, stalker,
multiclass cleric/ranger
Nella, fighter, possible dual-class - cleric, druid
alternate class: berserker, kensai, wizard slayer, monk,
multiclass fighter/cleric, multiclass fighter/druid
Severn, bard
alternate class: blade, jester, skald, mage, sorcerer, wild mage,
multiclass fighter/mage
Teri, multiclass fighter/thief
alternate class: thief, assassin, bounty hunter, swashbuckler,
multiclass mage/thief, multiclass fighter/mage/thief