I think you're being unreasonable to object against negative impacts to the current bg2 experience.
It really wouldn't be hard to make some effort to keep intact the game experience of bg2 and could lead to an improvement in experience across the entire franchise.
But what Schneidend is saying is that such an improvement already exists as an optional tweak. BG2 Tweaks includes a component that does exactly what Gallowglass is looking for: "This component will alter all joinable NPCs to join in the same fashion as Throne of Bhaal, where NPCs immediately level-up upon joining, with a caveat: all creature files are moved down to their lowest experience version, so if you pick up an NPC early enough they will not level upon joining. However, later in the game they will, allowing you to select weapon proficiencies, thieving points, and other goodies from the level-up process."
Given that he is complaining about a problem that specifically bothers him but isn't necessarily an issue for everyone who uses Mazzy, there's no reason not to use the Tweak. And that goes for anyone else who has this problem. Why does it need to be officially implemented?
It needs to be officially implemented because iOS.
Disproportionate? How much effort do you think it would take?
Why are you all so vehemently defending this? Why can't you just agree that Gallowglass wants to be able to allocate proficiency points as he sees fit? It seems like if they don't make any change to the leveling system, you are all fine with it, and if they DO, then you also don't care. This entire thread has become pointless now, since it's just the same points back and forth of "I want to be able to level my characters as I like" and "Just edit your save or skip this new expansion."
Disproportionate, yes. One person has an issue that affects their personal experience. Even a single minute spent changing the game to suit the preferences of a single person is too much effort. I have plenty of concerns about these games, too. I don't expect Overhaul to spend time tailoring the game entirely to my tastes. Even when I have vehemently pushed for my own suggestions, when multiple viable alternatives are presented to me that solve my problem, I'm willing to back down and concede the point. I expect the same concession from my peers on this board when their "issue" has been solved a dozen different ways by a dozen different people.
You're right, the thread has become pointless, because all of the viable alternatives to Gallowglass's non-problems are somehow not good enough, and that is supremely frustrating. He doesn't even have to edit his save. There's EE compatible mods that accomplish exactly what he's asking for, as @shawne has illustrated. But, soon enough, we're going to hear yet another rebuttal from @Gallowglass about how a mod that caters to his exact whim is not sufficient.
Gallow's not some kind of victim we're "ganging up on." He put forth a problem. Solutions have been provided, reasons why his "problem" was part of the game to begin with have been provided, reasons why his problem is so narrow and specific that fixing it would be a waste of Overhaul's time have been provided, and he has stubbornly disregarded all of it in favor of carrying on.
Disproportionate? How much effort do you think it would take?
Why are you all so vehemently defending this? Why can't you just agree that Gallowglass wants to be able to allocate proficiency points as he sees fit? It seems like if they don't make any change to the leveling system, you are all fine with it, and if they DO, then you also don't care. This entire thread has become pointless now, since it's just the same points back and forth of "I want to be able to level my characters as I like" and "Just edit your save or skip this new expansion."
Disproportionate, yes. One person has an issue that affects their personal experience. Even a single minute spent changing the game to suit the preferences of a single person is too much effort. I have plenty of concerns about these games, too. I don't expect Overhaul to spend time tailoring the game entirely to my tastes. Even when I have vehemently pushed for my own suggestions, when multiple viable alternatives are presented to me that solve my problem, I'm willing to back down and concede the point. I expect the same concession from my peers on this board when their "issue" has been solved a dozen different ways by a dozen different people.
You're right, the thread has become pointless, because all of the viable alternatives to Gallowglass's non-problems are somehow not good enough, and that is supremely frustrating. He doesn't even have to edit his save. There's EE compatible mods that accomplish exactly what he's asking for, as @shawne has illustrated. But, soon enough, we're going to hear yet another rebuttal from @Gallowglass about how a mod that caters to his exact whim is not sufficient.
Gallow's not some kind of victim we're "ganging up on." He put forth a problem. Solutions have been provided, reasons why his "problem" was part of the game to begin with have been provided, reasons why his problem is so narrow and specific that fixing it would be a waste of Overhaul's time have been provided, and he has stubbornly disregarded all of it in favor of carrying on.
@Gallowglass didn't create the thread so there is at least one other person who sees the same issue being a problem for them (ie, me). Furthermore, he hasn't been stubborn or any of the other things that you've said, he's simply articulated the issue much better than I did (or probably could).
Except he is not alone in his issue... I agree with it being a problem, as have some others. Also, you again ignore the fact that not everyone playing this game is playing on PC, and therefore they do not all have the options of editing or modding their game.
This thread was started by @Wowo to discuss opinions on the fact that characters would be at higher levels because of SoD. Whether or not you feel @Gallowglass and others are being unreasonable or not is irrelevant, he is entitled his opinion on what he views as a problem with the topic that Wowo began, and is also allowed to argue that he should NOT have to use outside resources for his problem to be resolved.
I agree with you that modding or editing a save is a solution, and doing so wouldn't really bother me too much personally. HOWEVER, I also see the other side of the argument and agree that it would be frustrating to have this issue remain unaddressed when it is caused directly through the addition of Beamdog's SoD expansion.
Looking back over how this conversation digressed so much, it seemed to mainly be that many people got offended at the very idea that people playing this game would want to powergame, and instead dismissed Gallowglass' opinion as pointless because he should be "roleplaying" in his RPG.
No one here is in the wrong or the right, it is just differing opinions on whether this is something to be viewed as a problem, and how it should be dealt with. Something that you view as viable may not be seen that same way to others, and ultimately it's on Beamdog as to whether they view this as something worth addressing or not. You however do not have the right to tell Gallowglass that he is wrong to feel a certain way or how he should choose to enjoy playing a video game, you can just say that you disagree with his opinion and move on.
I can't remember the exact wording, but in one of the recent interviews they said that they would be going back to BG2 and rebalancing things like this to make up for the additional starting experience.
EDIT:
[quote]“You’ll come out of Siege of Dragonspear about three levels higher,” is Oster’s estimate. “So we’re going to go in and tweak some stuff in Baldur’s Gate II.[/quote]
Not sure if this means they will rebalance NPC starting levels too, but fingers crossed.
I am surprised at the strength of opinion in this thread, and the assertion as 'facts' assumptions different players make about the original games designers' intents a decade or more ago, and whether we should be bound by them today.
It seems fairly non-controversial that, unless BeamDog do something they are not telling us about, the higher level characters leaving SoD are going to have an impact on the flexibility of some characters that you can recruit - Mazzy being the most egregious example. IIRC, we get the opposite issue with Haer'Dalis who gains illegal extra longsword masteries that the PC cannot assign to him, put are entirely a perk of recruiting him late in the game at a higher level.
I'm not sure 'nerf' is the right way to describe this, although I can see why some may think so. However, the loss of flexibility will diminish (slightly) one of the standout characteristics of the original game. In exchange, we get the play the whole of SoD. Is that a worthwhile trade-off? I certainly hope so
It is probably a good idea to raise the issue now though, while the devs have time to think and see if there really is anything that can be done to retain the original feel of NPCs the player could mould, vs. NPCs that are entirely pre-canned. It is also possible that the original announcement hints that they have already thought and put something in place, or that hint could be referring to something else entirely. Will have to wait till we can play the update game ourselves to be sure.
In a semi-related note, this topic reminds me a lot of the evolution of most major programming languages. They rapidly evolve to a sweet spot for their enthusiasts, solving problems in a neat elegant way that just cannot be expressed so clearly in other languages. Then (hopefully) they get popular, and the audience grows. Now more people are using the language, it is being used (yay!) to solve a wider variety of problems, and new features are cautiously added, and so the language and user base grow in a virtuous cycle. At some point though, the language will have become so large and bloated that that original idea of writing simple, clean expressive code feels like it got lost along the way. Eventually, inspiration strikes and someone comes up with a new, simpler language that solves the same problems, but in a simple, neat way without all of that un-necessary complexity that the old language got saddled with...
I think with SoD we are getting to the end stage of the BG saga. EEs have been adding features on top of features, pack ported the UI so the whole series feels consistent, and are now adding significant extra plot material for the party to stumble though. There simply is not room to add more stuff without fundamentally changing the game experience, and this thread seems to be a sure sign of that.
Still looking forward to SoD. Still nervous about the impact on the game experience as a whole, but prepared to trust the developers one more time
After thinking about all of this in detail, I would like to change my stance from being staunchly against editing the game for people like @Wowo and @Gallowglass ... to a more middle of the line stance. I can see both sides.
I would like to say, however, that I feel if there truly is a problem here, making it so every character joins at the lowest level so you can level them up as you see fit would be akin to treating the symptom and not the problem.
So what's the problem? I would make an argument that the problem is NOT the fact that you'll end up recruiting Mazzy at a higher level. The problem is that your character is at a higher level. The fact that you'll recruit characters like Mazzy later in your progression is probably only one symptom. I'm a touch concerned about how other parts of the game are going to be impacted. Let's be honest... it's not like the game is incredibly hard as it is now. I already hold myself to certain rules and limitations to make the game more challenging. Now that I'll possibly be starting a couple levels higher, I don't see how BG2 can be as challenging. I looked at some of the differences between 160k xp and 500k xp:
-Sorcerers will have access to level 5 spells -Mages can cast three level 5 spells instead of just one -Clerics can cast extra 1st and 2nd level spells as well as have access to 5th circle spells -Monk hands do 1d12 damage that count as +1 weapons (instead of 1d10), they'll have one less AC (a total of 2 less against missiles), an extra half attack per round, -1 to all saving throws, 3 (instead of 2) stunning blows, and immunity to charm -Paladins have the ability to cast 1st circle spells -Thieves don't have much of a change... but they're only a stone throw away from getting the x5 backstab multiplier
Don't get me wrong; I'm still very excited about SoD. I am just slightly concerned with how things are going to be dealt with in BG2. Maybe a new higher difficulty setting that adjusts the level of all enemies to two levels higher or something like that?
Anyway, I just wanted to point out that the characters you're recruiting aren't the only thing that's going to change. I'm interested to see how things are dealt with to balance everything.
First of all, the enemys in SoA do scale in strength and the devs have said they will look into problems with overleveling.
Secondly.. I keep hearing "the game isn't difficulty".. Yes it is. Being able to reload doesn't mean it is easy. Just because some people can solo it with every class at the highest difficulty doesn't mean it is easy.. Not all of the people who play (and enjoy) BG are veteran players who are bored with the "overly easy" game. I just keep hearing that statement, what makes people think so? I never considered myself a bad player (just a lazy one), but OP stats AND knowing every encounter beforehand didn't stop me from regulary reloading because I got wrecked. Hell, this is one of the games that can get you killed even if you get nuts with a savegame editor, that is a feat.. So, if you know exactly what you are doing and when you should do it, then it is easy (as is every game aside from luck based games) if not? it is a difficulty game and a couple of levels arn't going to change it.
A couple of levels will change the difficulty of the game in the beginning stages. In the end, I can't see there being a difference, but looking at the list of differences that I listed earlier... it is just pure closed minded ignorance talking when you claim that there will be no change whatsoever in the first portion of the game.
I understand the viewpoint of someone not wanting the game to fundamentally change, but would someone please explain the viewpoint of someone who wants their concerns completely shut down? We're all hoping for the best. None of us want to see things turn out badly.
I think we should all remember that the point of this is to grow and help the game be the best that it can possibly be.
@Wayniac: Speaking only for myself? This whole discussion is founded on a fundamental point of ignorance - we don't actually know what Beamdog is planning to do. It's all empty, premature speculation at this point.
Mazzy doesn't become unusable as a result of a higher cap. And if you feel strongly enough that she does, there are multiple solutions that work on an individual/personal level that are both quicker and more efficient than raising this as a problem that needs to be addressed for everyone.
@Wayniac: Speaking only for myself? This whole discussion is founded on a fundamental point of ignorance - we don't actually know what Beamdog is planning to do. It's all empty, premature speculation at this point.
Mazzy doesn't become unusable as a result of a higher cap. And if you feel strongly enough that she does, there are multiple solutions that work on an individual/personal level that are both quicker and more efficient than raising this as a problem that needs to be addressed for everyone.
The game isn't being developed in a vacuum and the developers have been proven to read the forums and been willing to address community concerns if feasible. I remember making multiple posts about the desire to plane insane difficulty in IWDee without the xp and/or damage bonus and low and behold now we have the option, perfect!
It's worthwhile to discuss because it's not clear cut how the issue should be resolved as there are multiple options (of which doing nothing is one option).
Overall I'd like to be able to level up NPCs myself when I accept them into the party but then that would nerf Haer'dalis' long sword proficiences ...
@Wayniac: Speaking only for myself? This whole discussion is founded on a fundamental point of ignorance - we don't actually know what Beamdog is planning to do. It's all empty, premature speculation at this point.
The game isn't being developed in a vacuum and the developers have been proven to read the forums and been willing to address community concerns if feasible.
as is this.
I don't think there is anything wrong with people voicing their concern over this issue, and if Beamdog chooses to address it they will, and if they feel that the outside resources are enough they will leave it at that. We will just have to wait and see. Discussing it until then though does no harm.
It seems there is a pretty simple solution that I don't think anyone has mentioned yet. Allow the option to have NPCs leveled to their lowest possible starting level but have the XP they would normally have when you recruit them. That way you can level up a few level upon recruitment to gain the slots you wish. I do believe Bioware did this with KOTOR. I know when you recruit Bastilla you can level her up 2-3 times immediately if your character's XP is high enough. This should be optional so that players who do not wish to use this feature do not have to. I only really see a two negatives. Mages won't start with certain spells in their spell books already (or maybe they could but just not be able to cast it). I don't think most people that are passionate about this issue would mind and it really would only be a problem in BG1. The other issue would be that the NPCs then have the option to have max their HP for those levels. This might be considered unbalancing but there are many players who skip over certain NPCs because their autoleveled HP is unattractive. Thoughts?
It seems there is a pretty simple solution that I don't think anyone has mentioned yet. Allow the option to have NPCs leveled to their lowest possible starting level but have the XP they would normally have when you recruit them. That way you can level up a few level upon recruitment to gain the slots you wish. I do believe Bioware did this with KOTOR. I know when you recruit Bastilla you can level her up 2-3 times immediately if your character's XP is high enough. This should be optional so that players who do not wish to use this feature do not have to. I only really see a two negatives. Mages won't start with certain spells in their spell books already (or maybe they could but just not be able to cast it). I don't think most people that are passionate about this issue would mind and it really would only be a problem in BG1. The other issue would be that the NPCs then have the option to have max their HP for those levels. This might be considered unbalancing but there are many players who skip over certain NPCs because their autoleveled HP is unattractive. Thoughts?
That's exactly what the "ToB-Style NPCs" component of BG2 Tweaks does that @Shawne mentioned above.
Another solution would be to take away any control we have over NPC's choices when they level up. They are meant to be individuals so why can we choose what they do? I think it would be better if the only person I could make choices for was the CHARNAME and all other NPCs made their own decisions. After all, I'm not God (at least not until the end of ToB, by which time it is irrelevant).
Another solution would be to take away any control we have over NPC's choices when they level up. They are meant to be individuals so why can we choose what they do? I think it would be better if the only person you could make choices for was the CHARNAME and all other NPCs made their own decisions. After all, you're not God (at least not until the end of ToB, by which time it is irrelevant).
While I personally could live with that I doubt that Beamdog would survive the lynchmob if they do *that*..
Also, the Gods of Ferûn can't control mortals (aside through spells like domination and such ofc ;-) ), so no, even after ToB you can't dictate their talents =P
Good night everyone, time to go before I become completly unintelligible through my spelling errors
That would be a terrible idea both thematically and gameplay-wise. What kind of party leader doesn't at least have some say in what weapons the party would benefit the most from? Never mind the fact that it would be a horrible gameplay mechanic.
That would be a terrible idea both thematically and gameplay-wise. What kind of party leader doesn't at least have some say in what weapons the party would benefit the most from? Never mind the fact that it would be a horrible gameplay mechanic.
Mmm I've never played a D&D game where id let the party leader tell me what weapons to use.
I've been testing the game a bit and it seems that you can pick up the level 9 versions of NPCs even if you have a level 12 PC, thanks to some Beamdog additions. First up, Wilson. A level 12 character who picks up the mighty bear during Rasaad's quest gets a level 9 version of Wilson (from what I can tell that's the only version of Wilson that exists). If you go to Mazzy's area with just Wilson and your level 12 PC the version of Mazzy you pick up is the Level 9 version. It's not perhaps as good as a level 8, for those who want to maximize her proficiencies, but it's better than the level 12 version. Next, if you're a level 12 thief you can pick up the level 9 version of Dorn (since Dorn seems to be based on the experience points rather than level). Then you can visit Mazzy, or another NPC, and get a version lower than level 12.
If you're on the PC and you're willing to make use of the console commands (i.e. cheats), but you don't like third party mods of any sort then you do have another option. Through clever use of the Ctrl-Q command you can get Mazzy at her lowest even if you're level 12. Go to the Copper Coronet and use Ctrl-Q to take command of either one of the Bouncers at the doors to the back, or one of the Copper Coronet Guards you'll meet within. Both are level 2 fighters. Visit Mazzy and the level averaging will grant you her level 8 variant. I'm sure you can probably find a low level character somewhere else within the game as well, if you want lower level versions of Korgan, Nalia, Anomen, and Hexxat. Commoners and many others won't work because they don't seem to have levels at all.
Mmm I've never played a D&D game where id let the party leader tell me what weapons to use.
But you probably have played a D&D game where you work as a team. The suggestion doesn't work from a role-play sense. If you were part of a party and you all had the ability to learn to become proficient in whatever weapon you wanted, you would never agree that all six people learn how to use long swords just for the hell of it.
Take Coran, for example. If he was in a party with a couple of fighters and no thieves, he could conceivably want to learn how to detect traps and pick locks since nobody else can do it. That would really increase his value as a party member. If, on the other hand, he were in a party with another thief, he could conceivably want to become better at moving silently or hiding in shadows to make him better with backstabbing and such.
Besides... it would have been super lame if Donatello, Michelangelo, and Leonardo all decided that they too wanted to learn to fight with twin sai under the premise that they've never played a D&D game that didn't allow them to choose their own weapon.
And how do you do this if you don't play on a PC? Did something change? Is it possible to mod the game on other platforms? While it is game design the way that Mazzy get her proficiency points as you get her at a later level, it's also game design that we're able to pick her up earlier to change this. So by starting the game at quite a bit higher level, Beamdog is removing game design, removing our choices. I don't speak for everyone, but I really don't like it when my choices get removed in a RPG game.
Remember people, you need to take everyone into consideration, also the people without access to mods. Yes you can get a feature like this from BG2tweak, but is that a reason the developers at Beamdog can't add that feature into the game? Make it a game feature that you pick NPC's up in BG2:EE at their lowest level and then you get to assign the points yourself. If you want to follow the 'game design' you can put them where they are put in the original game, if you rather have the choice to change this, you're able to do that as well and put the points somewhere more to your liking. I doubt that a change like this would take up much of their time.
And last but not least, isn't the reason we have a forum like this so we can share our ideas and worries with Beamdog? So that they get to know how we feel about certain things, and change those if they feel that it's a valid reason. I actually feel a bit sick reading some posts in this thread, just because you don't share the same view on things or like the idea, doesn't mean it's a bad idea.
It wont be a huge deal. I've done a playthrough where I uncapped BG1EE's xp cap by changing xpcap.2da manually and added several mods to BG1 that increased content. As a result I took a CHARNAME with well over 300K XP into BG2. The scaling of certain fights ensured to provide a challenge while trash fights were admittedly trivial at first. But I can't say the starting XP of hard to reach NPCs was unsatisfactory as a result.
Beamdog could easily ensure there are appropriate-level character copies if they feel differently as BG2EE will be getting patched.
I'm more curious about their solution items wise. I hope CHARNAME's party wont end up having to start butt-naked twice in the span of a couple months. It works ONCE as a plot mechanic reasonably well, but forcing the party to lose everything twice in a row would feel weird and gimmicky. So I hope Dragonspear will let us use our BG1 items (or have us start with a good amount of default gear ala TOB).
I think it's already been said that all gear carries over from BG1 to SoD. There wouldn't be any reason to remove it anyway, we know it starts with "help us hero of Baldur's Gate, you are our only hope", not locked in a dungeon.
Comments
You're right, the thread has become pointless, because all of the viable alternatives to Gallowglass's non-problems are somehow not good enough, and that is supremely frustrating. He doesn't even have to edit his save. There's EE compatible mods that accomplish exactly what he's asking for, as @shawne has illustrated. But, soon enough, we're going to hear yet another rebuttal from @Gallowglass about how a mod that caters to his exact whim is not sufficient.
Gallow's not some kind of victim we're "ganging up on." He put forth a problem. Solutions have been provided, reasons why his "problem" was part of the game to begin with have been provided, reasons why his problem is so narrow and specific that fixing it would be a waste of Overhaul's time have been provided, and he has stubbornly disregarded all of it in favor of carrying on.
This thread was started by @Wowo to discuss opinions on the fact that characters would be at higher levels because of SoD. Whether or not you feel @Gallowglass and others are being unreasonable or not is irrelevant, he is entitled his opinion on what he views as a problem with the topic that Wowo began, and is also allowed to argue that he should NOT have to use outside resources for his problem to be resolved.
I agree with you that modding or editing a save is a solution, and doing so wouldn't really bother me too much personally. HOWEVER, I also see the other side of the argument and agree that it would be frustrating to have this issue remain unaddressed when it is caused directly through the addition of Beamdog's SoD expansion.
Looking back over how this conversation digressed so much, it seemed to mainly be that many people got offended at the very idea that people playing this game would want to powergame, and instead dismissed Gallowglass' opinion as pointless because he should be "roleplaying" in his RPG.
No one here is in the wrong or the right, it is just differing opinions on whether this is something to be viewed as a problem, and how it should be dealt with. Something that you view as viable may not be seen that same way to others, and ultimately it's on Beamdog as to whether they view this as something worth addressing or not. You however do not have the right to tell Gallowglass that he is wrong to feel a certain way or how he should choose to enjoy playing a video game, you can just say that you disagree with his opinion and move on.
EDIT:
[quote]“You’ll come out of Siege of Dragonspear about three levels higher,” is Oster’s estimate. “So we’re going to go in and tweak some stuff in Baldur’s Gate II.[/quote]
Not sure if this means they will rebalance NPC starting levels too, but fingers crossed.
It seems fairly non-controversial that, unless BeamDog do something they are not telling us about, the higher level characters leaving SoD are going to have an impact on the flexibility of some characters that you can recruit - Mazzy being the most egregious example. IIRC, we get the opposite issue with Haer'Dalis who gains illegal extra longsword masteries that the PC cannot assign to him, put are entirely a perk of recruiting him late in the game at a higher level.
I'm not sure 'nerf' is the right way to describe this, although I can see why some may think so. However, the loss of flexibility will diminish (slightly) one of the standout characteristics of the original game. In exchange, we get the play the whole of SoD. Is that a worthwhile trade-off? I certainly hope so
It is probably a good idea to raise the issue now though, while the devs have time to think and see if there really is anything that can be done to retain the original feel of NPCs the player could mould, vs. NPCs that are entirely pre-canned. It is also possible that the original announcement hints that they have already thought and put something in place, or that hint could be referring to something else entirely. Will have to wait till we can play the update game ourselves to be sure.
In a semi-related note, this topic reminds me a lot of the evolution of most major programming languages. They rapidly evolve to a sweet spot for their enthusiasts, solving problems in a neat elegant way that just cannot be expressed so clearly in other languages. Then (hopefully) they get popular, and the audience grows. Now more people are using the language, it is being used (yay!) to solve a wider variety of problems, and new features are cautiously added, and so the language and user base grow in a virtuous cycle. At some point though, the language will have become so large and bloated that that original idea of writing simple, clean expressive code feels like it got lost along the way. Eventually, inspiration strikes and someone comes up with a new, simpler language that solves the same problems, but in a simple, neat way without all of that un-necessary complexity that the old language got saddled with...
I think with SoD we are getting to the end stage of the BG saga. EEs have been adding features on top of features, pack ported the UI so the whole series feels consistent, and are now adding significant extra plot material for the party to stumble though. There simply is not room to add more stuff without fundamentally changing the game experience, and this thread seems to be a sure sign of that.
Still looking forward to SoD.
Still nervous about the impact on the game experience as a whole, but prepared to trust the developers one more time
I would like to say, however, that I feel if there truly is a problem here, making it so every character joins at the lowest level so you can level them up as you see fit would be akin to treating the symptom and not the problem.
So what's the problem? I would make an argument that the problem is NOT the fact that you'll end up recruiting Mazzy at a higher level. The problem is that your character is at a higher level. The fact that you'll recruit characters like Mazzy later in your progression is probably only one symptom. I'm a touch concerned about how other parts of the game are going to be impacted. Let's be honest... it's not like the game is incredibly hard as it is now. I already hold myself to certain rules and limitations to make the game more challenging. Now that I'll possibly be starting a couple levels higher, I don't see how BG2 can be as challenging. I looked at some of the differences between 160k xp and 500k xp:
-Sorcerers will have access to level 5 spells
-Mages can cast three level 5 spells instead of just one
-Clerics can cast extra 1st and 2nd level spells as well as have access to 5th circle spells
-Monk hands do 1d12 damage that count as +1 weapons (instead of 1d10), they'll have one less AC (a total of 2 less against missiles), an extra half attack per round, -1 to all saving throws, 3 (instead of 2) stunning blows, and immunity to charm
-Paladins have the ability to cast 1st circle spells
-Thieves don't have much of a change... but they're only a stone throw away from getting the x5 backstab multiplier
Don't get me wrong; I'm still very excited about SoD. I am just slightly concerned with how things are going to be dealt with in BG2. Maybe a new higher difficulty setting that adjusts the level of all enemies to two levels higher or something like that?
Anyway, I just wanted to point out that the characters you're recruiting aren't the only thing that's going to change. I'm interested to see how things are dealt with to balance everything.
with overleveling.
Secondly.. I keep hearing "the game isn't difficulty".. Yes it is. Being able to reload doesn't mean it is
easy. Just because some people can solo it with every class at the highest difficulty doesn't mean it is easy..
Not all of the people who play (and enjoy) BG are veteran players who are bored with the "overly easy" game.
I just keep hearing that statement, what makes people think so?
I never considered myself a bad player (just a lazy one), but OP stats AND knowing every encounter
beforehand didn't stop me from regulary reloading because I got wrecked.
Hell, this is one of the games that can get you killed even if you get nuts with a savegame editor, that
is a feat..
So, if you know exactly what you are doing and when you should do it, then it is easy (as is every game
aside from luck based games) if not? it is a difficulty game and a couple of levels arn't going to change it.
I understand the viewpoint of someone not wanting the game to fundamentally change, but would someone please explain the viewpoint of someone who wants their concerns completely shut down? We're all hoping for the best. None of us want to see things turn out badly.
I think we should all remember that the point of this is to grow and help the game be the best that it can possibly be.
Mazzy doesn't become unusable as a result of a higher cap. And if you feel strongly enough that she does, there are multiple solutions that work on an individual/personal level that are both quicker and more efficient than raising this as a problem that needs to be addressed for everyone.
It's worthwhile to discuss because it's not clear cut how the issue should be resolved as there are multiple options (of which doing nothing is one option).
Overall I'd like to be able to level up NPCs myself when I accept them into the party but then that would nerf Haer'dalis' long sword proficiences ...
I don't think there is anything wrong with people voicing their concern over this issue, and if Beamdog chooses to address it they will, and if they feel that the outside resources are enough they will leave it at that. We will just have to wait and see. Discussing it until then though does no harm.
http://www.gibberlings3.net/bg2tweaks/npc.php
https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/comment/658350/#Comment_658350
Also, the Gods of Ferûn can't control mortals (aside through spells like domination and such ofc ;-) ), so
no, even after ToB you can't dictate their talents =P
Good night everyone, time to go before I become completly unintelligible through my spelling errors
Also, 100 post (in 3 years.... oO) yaay ^_^
If you're on the PC and you're willing to make use of the console commands (i.e. cheats), but you don't like third party mods of any sort then you do have another option. Through clever use of the Ctrl-Q command you can get Mazzy at her lowest even if you're level 12. Go to the Copper Coronet and use Ctrl-Q to take command of either one of the Bouncers at the doors to the back, or one of the Copper Coronet Guards you'll meet within. Both are level 2 fighters. Visit Mazzy and the level averaging will grant you her level 8 variant. I'm sure you can probably find a low level character somewhere else within the game as well, if you want lower level versions of Korgan, Nalia, Anomen, and Hexxat. Commoners and many others won't work because they don't seem to have levels at all.
Take Coran, for example. If he was in a party with a couple of fighters and no thieves, he could conceivably want to learn how to detect traps and pick locks since nobody else can do it. That would really increase his value as a party member. If, on the other hand, he were in a party with another thief, he could conceivably want to become better at moving silently or hiding in shadows to make him better with backstabbing and such.
Besides... it would have been super lame if Donatello, Michelangelo, and Leonardo all decided that they too wanted to learn to fight with twin sai under the premise that they've never played a D&D game that didn't allow them to choose their own weapon.
Remember people, you need to take everyone into consideration, also the people without access to mods. Yes you can get a feature like this from BG2tweak, but is that a reason the developers at Beamdog can't add that feature into the game? Make it a game feature that you pick NPC's up in BG2:EE at their lowest level and then you get to assign the points yourself. If you want to follow the 'game design' you can put them where they are put in the original game, if you rather have the choice to change this, you're able to do that as well and put the points somewhere more to your liking. I doubt that a change like this would take up much of their time.
And last but not least, isn't the reason we have a forum like this so we can share our ideas and worries with Beamdog? So that they get to know how we feel about certain things, and change those if they feel that it's a valid reason. I actually feel a bit sick reading some posts in this thread, just because you don't share the same view on things or like the idea, doesn't mean it's a bad idea.
Beamdog could easily ensure there are appropriate-level character copies if they feel differently as BG2EE will be getting patched.
I'm more curious about their solution items wise. I hope CHARNAME's party wont end up having to start butt-naked twice in the span of a couple months. It works ONCE as a plot mechanic reasonably well, but forcing the party to lose everything twice in a row would feel weird and gimmicky. So I hope Dragonspear will let us use our BG1 items (or have us start with a good amount of default gear ala TOB).