Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Categories

Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!
Curious about our plan for the next update? Read more about it Here!
Baldur's Gate: Siege of Dragonspear now available on Steam and GOG!
Baldur's Gate: Siege of Dragonspear is out! Order your copy at SiegeOfDragonspear.com!

Would you buy Icewind Dale II: Enhanced Edition?

1789101113»

Comments

  • semiticgodsemiticgod Member, Moderator Posts: 5,172
    edited February 9
    I would totally play the shit out of this game
    Frankly I wouldn't even mind if we lost all the cool 3E stuff in IWD2. I currently have the original IWD2 from GOG, and I think it would be great to play IWD2 with standard 2E stuff.

    Come to think of it, it might be less work to just re-create the game using the EE 2.X engine (copying over all the areas and critters and dialog and scripting and so forth) than to try to revamp the 3E system and all of those feats and unique 3E effects. Like creating a giant quest mod.
    JuliusBorisovtherdre
  • rapsam2003rapsam2003 Member Posts: 1,388
    I would totally play the shit out of this game

    Frankly I wouldn't even mind if we lost all the cool 3E stuff in IWD2.

    I would. That Sneak Attack damage is much better than Backstab, imho. Plus, the fact that Tieflings, Aasimar, Elven subraces, etc., etc. were a thing in 3.X is much better than how AD&D2 did it, where you were just "Elf" or just "Halfling". And the emphasis on the player choosing.
    In AD&D2, if your DM wasn't kind, you were rolling for just about everything. Your build could suck completely, and you were stuck with it. Having 73 stat points and being the dumb wizard (because you literally don't have enough points for a decent wizard build) sucks terribly. In 3.X, stat rolling was standardized; everyone got the same amount of rolls. It's much more consistent. Yeah, in BG and IWD1, I can just keep rerolling stats, but it's more fun (imho) to just assign your points.
    ThacoBellVallmyrVarwulf
  • brusbrus Member Posts: 924
    edited February 9
    I would totally play the shit out of this game
    Does IWD2 engine have 3D characters or 2D spritesheets like in BG2 ?
  • semiticgodsemiticgod Member, Moderator Posts: 5,172
    I would totally play the shit out of this game
    @brus: IWD2 has 2D sprites, created from 3D models that have since been lost, just like the other Infinity Engine games. Moving IWD2 sprites like Isair and Madae into an EE engine would not be a major problem.
  • AstroBryGuyAstroBryGuy Member Posts: 2,537
    edited February 9
    I would totally play the shit out of this game

    Frankly I wouldn't even mind if we lost all the cool 3E stuff in IWD2.

    I would. That Sneak Attack damage is much better than Backstab, imho. Plus, the fact that Tieflings, Aasimar, Elven subraces, etc., etc. were a thing in 3.X is much better than how AD&D2 did it, where you were just "Elf" or just "Halfling". And the emphasis on the player choosing.
    In AD&D2, if your DM wasn't kind, you were rolling for just about everything. Your build could suck completely, and you were stuck with it. Having 73 stat points and being the dumb wizard (because you literally don't have enough points for a decent wizard build) sucks terribly. In 3.X, stat rolling was standardized; everyone got the same amount of rolls. It's much more consistent. Yeah, in BG and IWD1, I can just keep rerolling stats, but it's more fun (imho) to just assign your points.
    You're confusing 2E/3E differences with the Infinity Engine's implementation of the rules.

    Subraces: Subraces aren't a 3E invention. Subraces for PCs were added to AD&D 1st Edition in Unearthed Arcana (1985). 2nd Edition included subraces in the "Complete Book of ..." series for various races in the early 1990s. Also, the 3E Player's Handbook doesn't mention subraces, they were an optional rule in the DMG. Bioware decided not to implement subraces in the Baldur's Gate games. Black Isle decided to implement the rule in IWD2. It's not a 2E vs. 3E thing.

    Sneak Attack: Ok, Backstab vs. Sneak Attack *is* a 2E vs 3E difference, but Beamdog has already implemented Sneak Attack rules for IWDEE, so remaking IWD2 under the current Infinity+ Engine could have Sneak Attack.

    Point Buy: In 3E, roll "4d6 drop lowest" is the default ability score generation method, not point buy. However, 8 optional attribute generation rules are presented in the DMG, including point buy (with various amounts of points for low- to high-powered campaigns) and the old "roll 3d6 six times, record scores in order" method. AD&D 2E gave 6 methods in the Player's Handbook with the "roll 3d6 six times, record in order" as Method I and "roll 4d6 drop lowest" as Method V (point buy for 2E didn't come until the Skills & Powers sourcebook). So, the main changes in rolling attributes from 2E to 3E were to make 2E's Method V into 3E's default (which many pen and paper players had already gravitated towards) and move the alternative methods to the DMG. Again, this is developer choice, not 2E vs. 3E rules. Black Isle decided to implement an optional point buy rule for IWD2.
    ThacoBell
  • rapsam2003rapsam2003 Member Posts: 1,388
    edited February 9
    I would totally play the shit out of this game
    @AstroBryGuy Actually, I'm aware of all of that. I do have all the Player Handbooks and the Dungeon Master's Guide for AD&D2 and 3.X.

    And what I'm referring to that very few players actually bothered to do rolls in 3.X, because point buy was a thing. (Don't believe me? Look up guides for 3.5 Classes, many of which still exist today.) Unless your DM or group forced you to do for some reason, which is insane. Players should have the freedom to control all aspects of their character creation, only bounded by what's sensible for the setting. (For instance, there are no Bariaur in the Forgotten Realms. Why should the DM let you make one, if that's the setting?)
    Another example of unnecessarily limiting things: in 2E, tiefling characters were basically roll 1d100 3 times. (Of course, a good DM probably just let you select the 3 features you wanted.) There's numerous other things that changed with 3.X because the player base as a whole started doing different things and wanted to actually play characters, not dice rolls. Really, there was a difference in perception between AD&D editions and 3rd Edition on.

    See, the way player base did things as a whole was basically what 3.X (note I keep using that term not, just 3E) became in practicality, and that's fairly reflected in IWD2. The IWD2 devs were smart enough to realize that rolling for stats was silly and annoying, just like a lot of players realized that.
  • AstroBryGuyAstroBryGuy Member Posts: 2,537
    I would totally play the shit out of this game
    So, 3E is better than 2E, because the IWD2 developers chose different optional rules than the BG1/BG2 developers. K.
  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 6,427
    I would totally play the shit out of this game

    Frankly I wouldn't even mind if we lost all the cool 3E stuff in IWD2. I currently have the original IWD2 from GOG, and I think it would be great to play IWD2 with standard 2E stuff.

    Come to think of it, it might be less work to just re-create the game using the EE 2.X engine

    This! A thousand times this!

    Frankly I wouldn't even mind if we lost all the cool 3E stuff in IWD2.

    I would. That Sneak Attack damage is much better than Backstab, imho.
    IWDEE already has Sneak Attack instead of backstab (in fact, it has an option for either one) so IWD2-in-the-IWDEE-engine would as well. :smiley:


    See, the way player base did things as a whole was basically what 3.X

    Eh, no. You /= everybody.
  • rapsam2003rapsam2003 Member Posts: 1,388
    edited February 9
    I would totally play the shit out of this game

    IWDEE already has Sneak Attack instead of backstab (in fact, it has an option for either one) so IWD2-in-the-IWDEE-engine would as well. :smiley:

    It's a toggleable option, yes. But original IWD didn't have it, that's what I mean. Why BGEE and BG2EE don't have it yet, I don't know.


    See, the way player base did things as a whole was basically what 3.X

    Eh, no. You /= everybody.
    Ok, well...as I said:

    (Don't believe me? Look up guides for 3.5 Classes, many of which still exist today.)

    ...

    I'm not a fan of 3.X, as a whole, but it actually made a lot more sense than AD&D2 did. There were a lot of things in AD&D2 that were unnecessarily complex, because it was "advanced D&D".

    semiticgod
  • AstroBryGuyAstroBryGuy Member Posts: 2,537
    edited February 9
    I would totally play the shit out of this game

    @AstroBryGuy Actually, I'm aware of all of that. I do have all the Player Handbooks and the Dungeon Master's Guide for AD&D2 and 3.X.

    And what I'm referring to that very few players actually bothered to do rolls in 3.X, because point buy was a thing. (Don't believe me? Look up guides for 3.5 Classes, many of which still exist today.) Unless your DM or group forced you to do for some reason, which is insane. Players should have the freedom to control all aspects of their character creation, only bounded by what's sensible for the setting. (For instance, there are no Bariaur in the Forgotten Realms. Why should the DM let you make one, if that's the setting?)
    Another example of unnecessarily limiting things: in 2E, tiefling characters were basically roll 1d100 3 times. (Of course, a good DM probably just let you select the 3 features you wanted.) There's numerous other things that changed with 3.X because the player base as a whole started doing different things and wanted to actually play characters, not dice rolls. Really, there was a difference in perception between AD&D editions and 3rd Edition on.

    See, the way player base did things as a whole was basically what 3.X (note I keep using that term not, just 3E) became in practicality, and that's fairly reflected in IWD2. The IWD2 devs were smart enough to realize that rolling for stats was silly and annoying, just like a lot of players realized that.

    3E still used dice rolls as the standard for ability score generation. "roll 4d6 drop lowest" is the only method in the Player's Handbook. Point-buy is not the default. It is an optional rule in the DMG. Personally, I've never played a point-buy pen-and-paper campaign.

    And regarding subraces, you said:
    Plus, the fact that Tieflings, Aasimar, Elven subraces, etc., etc. were a thing in 3.X is much better than how AD&D2 did it, where you were just "Elf" or just "Halfling". And the emphasis on the player choosing.
    That's demonstrably false. Subraces are an optional rule in 1E, 2E, and 3E. In 3E, they are an optional rule in the DMG. AD&D (1E and 2E) also both had subraces as optional rules in supplement books. The difference between BG1/BG2 and IWD2 is that Bioware didn't implement an optional rule, Black Isle did.
  • AstroBryGuyAstroBryGuy Member Posts: 2,537
    I would totally play the shit out of this game

    IWDEE already has Sneak Attack instead of backstab (in fact, it has an option for either one) so IWD2-in-the-IWDEE-engine would as well. :smiley:

    It's a toggleable option, yes. But original IWD didn't have it, that's what I mean. Why BGEE and BG2EE don't have it yet, I don't know.
    Heart of Winter added the toggleable option for 3E Sneak Attacks. You had to use the config.exe program. It's under the Game tab.
  • rapsam2003rapsam2003 Member Posts: 1,388
    edited February 10
    I would totally play the shit out of this game

    IWDEE already has Sneak Attack instead of backstab (in fact, it has an option for either one) so IWD2-in-the-IWDEE-engine would as well. :smiley:

    It's a toggleable option, yes. But original IWD didn't have it, that's what I mean. Why BGEE and BG2EE don't have it yet, I don't know.
    Heart of Winter added the toggleable option for 3E Sneak Attacks. You had to use the config.exe program. It's under the Game tab.
    Yes, but I was very specific with what I said. "Vanilla IWD", Icewind Dale without mods or expansions, did not have that option, as I said.

    And quit maintaining that I said "3E". (I used 3.X for a reason.) By 3.5E's release, much of the player base had started using many of the optional features and alternative rules, to the point where most folks knew about them without needing to see the DMG or the "extra option" in the PHB.
  • AstroBryGuyAstroBryGuy Member Posts: 2,537
    edited February 10
    I would totally play the shit out of this game
    3E, 3.X - po-tay-to, po-tah-to. 3.5 was a minor edit; it's still 3rd Edition.

    And I was maintaining that you said 2E didn't have subraces, while 3.X did. Both editions have them, as an optional rule, one that started in 1E.
  • rapsam2003rapsam2003 Member Posts: 1,388
    edited February 10
    I would totally play the shit out of this game

    3E, 3.X - po-tay-to, po-tah-to. 3.5 was a minor edit; it's still 3rd Edition.

    That's oversimplifying it, but if you say so. /rolleyes

    http://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/69772/what-are-the-major-differences-between-dd-3-0-and-dd-3-5
  • semiticgodsemiticgod Member, Moderator Posts: 5,172
    I would totally play the shit out of this game
    @AstroBryGuy @rapsam2003: I think by now the issue has devolved into semantics. Let's stay on topic: this is about IWD2 specifically, not the different rulesets in PnP.
    ThacoBellJuliusBorisov
  • DJKajuruDJKajuru Member Posts: 2,406
    I would totally play the shit out of this game
    I must disagree with the idea of keeping it 2E. Why not simply make a mod, then?
    Besides, I want 3E multiclass combinations!

    Kamigoroshi
  • inethineth Member Posts: 398
    I would totally play the shit out of this game

    Frankly I wouldn't even mind if we lost all the cool 3E stuff in IWD2. I currently have the original IWD2 from GOG, and I think it would be great to play IWD2 with standard 2E stuff.

    Come to think of it, it might be less work to just re-create the game using the EE 2.X engine

    This! A thousand times this!
    Isn't this something the EET guys are/were planning?
  • KamigoroshiKamigoroshi Member Posts: 3,505
    I would totally play the shit out of this game
    DJKajuru said:

    I must disagree with the idea of keeping it 2E. Why not simply make a mod, then?
    Besides, I want 3E multiclass combinations!

    While I don't think modders can just "simply" recreate IWDII's campaign into IWD, (actually I'm quite sure this would pose to be an endless nightmare for all involved), I have to agree that the best course of action for a potential IWDII:EE would be to stick with its original 3rd edition ruleset.

    If anything, I'd actually wish for an EE to even further enhance its 3rd edition engine: like adding the Shaman as a base class. Or the implementation of the four Genasi subraces. Maybe even the inclusion of the Inugaakalikurit (aka arctic dwarves). You get the drift.

    But most of all I'm looking forward for said EE to actually fix the mind-boggling amount of bugs within this sequel... Improved Initiative feat, anyone? *ugh*
    ThacoBellsemiticgod
  • kozkoz Member Posts: 7
    I would totally play the shit out of this game
    I *loved* IWD2, really just the flexibility that 3rd edition enabled was a lot of fun to tinker with - either for pure powergamery goodness or to fully embrace the RP and have far more unique builds.

    In all honesty the creation / development process in IWD2 was a lot more fun than putting together various groups in all the other IE games.
    rapsam2003Varwulfformer_customerDJKajuru
  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 6,427
    I would totally play the shit out of this game
    Anyone who's really into having more character options and tinkering with different builds should really look into using (our) mods. New kits, new class/race options, new multiclass combinations, kitted multiclasses... I recently started four different IWDEE games, with six characters each, and I barely scratched the surface of the new stuff to try.
    DJKajuru said:

    I must disagree with the idea of keeping it 2E. Why not simply make a mod, then?
    Besides, I want 3E multiclass combinations!

    *Simply*?
    ineth said:

    Frankly I wouldn't even mind if we lost all the cool 3E stuff in IWD2. I currently have the original IWD2 from GOG, and I think it would be great to play IWD2 with standard 2E stuff.

    Come to think of it, it might be less work to just re-create the game using the EE 2.X engine

    This! A thousand times this!
    Isn't this something the EET guys are/were planning?
    Eh, someone did it, in another language, as a TC built by hand in a way that doesn't really lend itself to being recreated with Weidu. As far as I'm concerned, it's a pipe dream. (I'd love to be proven wrong though.)
  • DJKajuruDJKajuru Member Posts: 2,406
    I would totally play the shit out of this game
    I realise that making full conversion mods ain't *simple* and it takes quite an effort from you modders. Thank you for your collaboration throughout the years.
    P.S: I regret nothing.
  • Woolie_WoolWoolie_Wool Member Posts: 118
    edited February 23
    I would totally play the shit out of this game
    I bought the original version of IWD2 on GoG but didn't play it for very long because I was completely put off by the vanilla UI and how it copes (or not) with the game running in 1920x1200. Planescape: Torment really deserves the EE treatment too.

    I did greatly enjoy creating my party with the wacky new races (so THAT'S where Caelar Argent came from...) and the much more flexible stat system (no more "you MUST have 18 STR on EVERY warrior to be competitive" nonsense).

    Also as a sword-and-board lover, the way switching weapons works in the vanilla Infinity games (and even in EE 1.3/1.4) infuriates me. You have to go into the menu and fiddle with your inventory just to switch between sword and bow if you're using a shield or dual wielding. It's horrible.
    semiticgod
  • rapsam2003rapsam2003 Member Posts: 1,388
    I would totally play the shit out of this game

    I did greatly enjoy creating my party with the wacky new races (so THAT'S where Caelar Argent came from...)

    Technically, Aasimar have been around since AD&D1, iirc.
1789101113»
Sign In or Register to comment.