The IWD version of Abi-Dalzim's Horrid Wilting (I do not recall if that is the correct spelling as compared to old 2nd ed AD&D from the late 80s) does not have any effect on undead. The IWD engine gets to use opcodes 206 or 290 to include or exclude certain groups from a spell's effects in a very efficient manner; BGEE approximates this by applying the spell to everyone then an extra .eff which can make certain groups immune to the spell.
At one time I was going to edit ADHW to exclude party members but I never got around to it. Your thieves may use evasion to escape its effects unscathed, of course. High-level thieves in IWD have a wonderful benefit and can avoid most of the damaging spells cast in their general vicinity.
I think it's still canon, in a way, because Bioware made the game. It's not AD&D canon, of course, but Baldur's Gate canon. Whatever that may mean, but I wouldn't advise on opening the floodgates. If Bioware got the spells wrong and they need improvement, then what else did they get wrong and where would you end the "improving"?
That's why I favour mods for changes like those discussed. Everyone can have what they feel is "right" for the game.
No that was my point: in BG2/EE ADHW does exclude party members; but it really should NOT.
I never did understand why there was a difference; I suppose it was simply a matter of "different implementation teams". I suppose we could always edit pwilt.pro in BGEE and remove the "not affecting allies" flag, making the BG version match the IWD version.
You've all made some great points. Thank you all for your input. I agree, the spell tweaks I suggested could just as easily be in a mod. The question is, how far could you extend that argument? Most of the changes that have been made in these enhanced editions could have been done in mods. So what is their excuse to change anything about the game?
I'm sure there is a good answer for this. I just want to see it.
Modding is time-intenseive, unpaid, sometimes thankless, unintentionally unoriginal (you might have a great idea but five other modders also had the same great idea at about the same time), and limited only to things which do not change the hard-coding of the game.
Hi there. I'm new to this site, but I've been a fan of the IE games for almost a decade now. I want to share quite a few changes I suggest be made in the Enhanced Edition for Icewind Dale. Here we go:
No. Just no to all of the snipped changes. Obviously you have never played D&D which IWD is supposed to be a simulation of.
No. Just no to all of the snipped changes. Obviously you have never played D&D which IWD is supposed to be a simulation of.
In the same line of thinking, we might as well move the level cap to level 10 to better simulate the dnd experience most people play right?
But I understand. Beamdog does not need to implement balance changes that can be implemented via mod; especially when said changes would lead to an uproar from a large part of the community.
Comments
At one time I was going to edit ADHW to exclude party members but I never got around to it. Your thieves may use evasion to escape its effects unscathed, of course. High-level thieves in IWD have a wonderful benefit and can avoid most of the damaging spells cast in their general vicinity.
That's why I favour mods for changes like those discussed. Everyone can have what they feel is "right" for the game.
I'm sure there is a good answer for this. I just want to see it.
No. Just no to all of the snipped changes. Obviously you have never played D&D which IWD is supposed to be a simulation of.
But I understand. Beamdog does not need to implement balance changes that can be implemented via mod; especially when said changes would lead to an uproar from a large part of the community.