I like that Viconia's romanced ending is still rather sad: Viconia's entire story is solemn and fraught with tribulations, and it would feel dishonest to do away with that sentiment in her ending. At least in her romance ending, however, there is a bittersweetness about how her story ends. Very fitting.
I honestly don't know how I feel about the ending. On one hand, its obvious that the only reason Lolth even let her live so long was because Viconia was getting nothing but pain her entire life on the surface world. Then she meets someone, someone who brought her comfort and then boom, Lolth strikes and Viconia dies leaving the who brought her happiness and their child untouched.
It just doesn't feel fufilling for me, then again one could say that I just want her to live. Aerie gets a lid and gets to go back home to mommy and daddy. Neera gets a man to chase her all across the freaking realma, and Jaheira geta to disappear and come home to someone who love her, even years later.
Viconia gets death... Doesn't even get to see her son grow.
I also think EEs are overall improvement over original saga. No clue why it is considered unpopular opinion, but here it is.
Because to some people, nothing.can be as good or better than the original. I've seen people hate EE for thing that people actually modded into the original game...
Hell I've seen people hate EE for letting stacks of arrows got to 80 instead of stopping at 20, and even hate it for filling the negative space with the calculated numbers instead of forcing the player to do the math themselves. Calling it "completely unnecessary stuff."
I thought that, at least on this forum, EE is considered to be better than the original. So, it's probably not that unpopular of an opinion.
My apologies in advance for being nitpicky:
I'm one of those "some people", but I don't "hate" EE. I simply find it disappointing, not because of ammo stacks, etc. To me BG and BG2 are actually two different games. The engine seems to be the same, but it's not. It irks me each time when I see some kind of retrospective about Baldur's Gate and the footage of EE, TuTu, or BGT is being used.
Before the release of EE I sincerely hoped they would not use the BG2 engine with BG1EE, but sadly they did. I played it though (up to chapter 5) and gave up on it. The overall gameplay is way too different for me. I can be called a purist, elitist, or driven by nostalgia, but until there'll be a type of EE that doesn't mix the two games, nothing will be as good as the original in my eyes.
Unpopular opinion: The user interface of original Baldur's Gate is awesome, the stone, menu background, drawings in loading screens, etc.:
It completely ruins looking reading forum posts of other people's BG runs with their main character is min/maxed or simply maxed on a stat roll of 95+, for me. I roleplay my character's stats, and generally I find it difficult to allocate over 90 points for most of my PCs - generally, I just leave a few points out and go with what feels right instead.
It completely ruins looking reading forum posts of other people's BG runs with their main character is min/maxed or simply maxed on a stat roll of 95+, for me. I roleplay my character's stats, and generally I find it difficult to allocate over 90 points for most of my PCs - generally, I just leave a few points out and go with what feels right instead.
Yeah... it makes me feel like giving the slow handclap... "congrats, your 98pt 18/00 behemoth has steamrollered the game... bravo"
My new "magic number" is 87. I rank the ability scores according to my vision of the character and assign them scores of 17-12 in the order of precedence.
For example, my new Cleric/Mage has S12, D15, C13, I17, W16, Ch14
A Paladin (with their high base requirements) would be S16, D14, C15, I12, W13, Ch17
A Fighter/Druid would have to sacrifice physical scores to accommodate their Charisma requirement
The resulting character has few critical weaknesses, but also isn't a total Mary Sue. It also means that ability boosting items and spells become critical... adding an extra challenge to the game.
To cut down on tedious rolling time, I normally ctrl-8 and just leave the remaining 21 points on the shelf.
It completely ruins looking reading forum posts of other people's BG runs with their main character is min/maxed or simply maxed on a stat roll of 95+, for me. I roleplay my character's stats, and generally I find it difficult to allocate over 90 points for most of my PCs - generally, I just leave a few points out and go with what feels right instead.
Given that this IS the unpopular opinions thread, I'm not sure whether you are being facetious or not. Assuming that you are serious, I have several comments to make.
First of all, I'm not sure why you would find a high starting stat roll unrealistic. CharName is the offspring of a god; superior mental/physical abilities would not be terribly unexpected.
Secondly, what the heck are you getting upset about? What other people do should have no bearing on your enjoyment of the game. Want an extra challenge? Want to RP being Caspar Milquetoast with a stat roll of 76? Go for it. But don't rain on other people's parades. It's a single player GAME; there is no right or wrong way to play it, unlike team sports where rules are mandatory.
That having been said ... I don't think I have ever even HAD a starting stat roll of 90, except once by total accident on the second roll; my average is 86. I don't have the patience to hit the re-roll tab for an hour or so. I can skimp on Str (plenty of giant strength items running around loose) and I'm perfectly happy with a Char of 8. My peeps aren't out to win any popularity contests. (Kits with minimum charisma requirements being obvious exceptions). Wizard with a Wis of 9 is fine by me, as long as Int is around 17. Etc.
But hey! If someone does take the time to go after great stats, they deserve the reward for their effort.
I'm not getting upset about anything @FrdNwsm , and I'm not raining on anyone else's parade: check every forum-documented BG run that's been posted, you'll not find one complaint nor criticism for me. You won't because that isn't an appropriate thing to do or the place to post that opinion, but if the unpopular opinions thread is also not the place to post it, I confess that I'm really sunk as to what I ought to do.
Who is raining on whose parade here? I never criticised anyone. I specifically said 'for me', 'generally I find' and 'I just leave a few points'. Never once did I attack anyone, and I'll admit that I didn't expect to be attacked for it either, if you're wondering why now it seems as though I am getting upset about something.
@recklessheart: Some people do get upset about high stat rolls, or anything that decreases the difficulty of the game, and some of them are kind of jerks about it, which is why I think you got the reaction you did. You were mistaken for a person with a less agreeable viewpoint. I've seen it happen a lot, from BG2 to politics.
@FrdNwsm: I agree with your point, too, but this isn't the gamer you're looking for.
If you say that what someone else does upsets you, to me that is a criticism of what that person is doing. You may not mean it that way, but that's how it comes off. Apologies if I misinterpreted your intention.
And I guess this thread is appropriate for posting such.
87? 0.o with my protagonists i generally roleplay with less than 70 and rarely do i have two stats above 15. They do gain stats from tomes and things but they never need to for a fun game.
Be reminded that an average commoner has stats of 9-10... all joinable npcs are overpowered in the stats department.
Not sure if this is unpopular or not, but I think that high mastery is ridiculous and it's only added value is that it opens up for grand mastery. It could eg add a half APR with GM adding the other half instead or add AC bonus or whatever.
I think that more classes should have access to becoming specialized in their weapon of choice, like rogues, but without the APR (only fighters, like Haer'dalis with his swords). I also think that specialized non-fighters (paladins and rangers) should get mastery. I think it's a waste to have a five-point system where you either get 1, 2 or 5 and very, very rarely anything in between 2 and 5 (DD's get 4, but that's an exception). It's under utilized and could be revamped.
It completely ruins looking reading forum posts of other people's BG runs with their main character is min/maxed or simply maxed on a stat roll of 95+, for me. I roleplay my character's stats, and generally I find it difficult to allocate over 90 points for most of my PCs - generally, I just leave a few points out and go with what feels right instead.
*Storms up to @recklessheart with his 18/00 strength, 18 dex, and 18 con* Hey, buddy, you got a problem with how I play? I lost two fingers to the the reroll button with all the clicking I did to get these stats so you better not be trying to start anything!
Joking of course, I respect both sides of the fence. I suppose that's my unpopular opinion - because I'm pretty bad at these games I feel particularly rewarded for ending up feeling god-like. I feel so "above it all" at the oasis in ToB when I order a planetar to just massacre the whole attack force sent to get me. I'll fully admit it's cheap but it feeds my ego.
Most people: "Make this game harder!" Me: "Why!? Why didn't I memorize that extra casting of breach!? Why didn't I learn my lesson the first time!?" *dies and reloads*
It completely ruins looking reading forum posts of other people's BG runs with their main character is min/maxed or simply maxed on a stat roll of 95+, for me. I roleplay my character's stats, and generally I find it difficult to allocate over 90 points for most of my PCs - generally, I just leave a few points out and go with what feels right instead.
*Storms up to @recklessheart with his 18/00 strength, 18 dex, and 18 con* Hey, buddy, you got a problem with how I play? I lost two fingers to the the reroll button with all the clicking I did to get these stats so you better not be trying to start anything!
Joking of course, I respect both sides of the fence. I suppose that's my unpopular opinion - because I'm pretty bad at these games I feel particularly rewarded for ending up feeling god-like. I feel so "above it all" at the oasis in ToB when I order a planetar to just massacre the whole attack force sent to get me. I'll fully admit it's cheap but it feeds my ego.
Ability scores make zero difference to your ability to summon a Planetar.
It completely ruins looking reading forum posts of other people's BG runs with their main character is min/maxed or simply maxed on a stat roll of 95+, for me. I roleplay my character's stats, and generally I find it difficult to allocate over 90 points for most of my PCs - generally, I just leave a few points out and go with what feels right instead.
*Storms up to @recklessheart with his 18/00 strength, 18 dex, and 18 con* Hey, buddy, you got a problem with how I play? I lost two fingers to the the reroll button with all the clicking I did to get these stats so you better not be trying to start anything!
Joking of course, I respect both sides of the fence. I suppose that's my unpopular opinion - because I'm pretty bad at these games I feel particularly rewarded for ending up feeling god-like. I feel so "above it all" at the oasis in ToB when I order a planetar to just massacre the whole attack force sent to get me. I'll fully admit it's cheap but it feeds my ego.
Ability scores make zero difference to your ability to summon a Planetar.
I know. I meant the stats part to be more of a joke than anything else. When I play my sorcerer I'm much less hung up on his stats than, say, my FMT.
I feel so "above it all" at the oasis in ToB when I order a planetar to just massacre the whole attack force sent to get me. I'll fully admit it's cheap but it feeds my ego.
Most people: "Make this game harder!" Me: "Why!? Why didn't I memorize that extra casting of breach!? Why didn't I learn my lesson the first time!?" *dies and reloads*
I know what you mean, @Empyrial ! I'm the exact same! I'm all for reloading when things go wrong, and BG2 remains a very fresh game in part because things always can go wrong.
Next time try dropping down web, grease, and then throw a ton of your Mage's Dragon Breath spells on those guys. It's one of the highlights of ToB for me, doing that.
A Dynaheir's romance from the BG1 NPC mod is very-well written, adds greatly to learning what a character Dynaheir is. What's her story? What about her country?
Also can make sense to get a situation when both charname and Jaheira lose their love interests at the start of BG2, to have something more in common.
A Dynaheir's romance from the BG1 NPC mod is very-well written, adds greatly to learning what a character Dynaheir is. What's her story? What about her country?
Also can make sense to get a situation when both charname and Jaheira lose their love interests at the start of BG2, to have something more in common.
This happening could make me actually romance Jaheira and not feel weird. /stands and claps GOOD JOB! YOU DID THE THING!
I just came across a truly amazing thread from 2012-2013 where a someone steadfastly insisted over multiple long posts that spamming Find Familiar and export/import to get thousands of HP was an intended benefit of the Beastmaster kit. It's a shame this thread didn't exist back then; that user would have been a star.
I just came across a truly amazing thread from 2012-2013 where a someone steadfastly insisted over multiple long posts that spamming Find Familiar and export/import to get thousands of HP was an intended benefit of the Beastmaster kit. It's a shame this thread didn't exist back then; that user would have been a star.
You know you've read too much about BG when you know that discussion
I thoroughly dislike the very idea of dual- and multi-classes; I find them immersion-breaking. Classes give character. For example, when I hear of an assassin or a barbarian or a sorceror, I will have some sort of an image in my mind on who they are; on the other hand, when I hear of a 'fighter/mage/thief', nothing pops up. Come to think of it, do we really hear about dual- or multi-classed characters ingame? There are like a dozen dual- and multi-classed companions in the series, but I can only remember Anomen introducing himself as 'warrior priest of Helm'. It is almost as if the whole concept solely exists as a technical convenience to satisfy the player.
Now kits I very much like. In fact, I think they are a viable, immersion-friendly substitute for dual- and multi-classing. Want a thief that leans a bit towards a warrior? Have yourself a swashbuckler. Read the description of this kit and the image of Coran will be conjured in your head, who is of course a 'fighter/thief' in the actual game. *sigh*
I thoroughly dislike the very idea of dual- and multi-classes; I find them immersion-breaking. Classes give character. For example, when I hear of an assassin or a barbarian or a sorceror, I will have some sort of an image in my mind on who they are; on the other hand, when I hear of a 'fighter/mage/thief', nothing pops up. Come to think of it, do we really hear about dual- or multi-classed characters ingame? There are like a dozen dual- and multi-classed companions in the series, but I can only remember Anomen introducing himself as 'warrior priest of Helm'. It is almost as if the whole concept solely exists as a technical convenience to satisfy the player.
Now kits I very much like. In fact, I think they are a viable, immersion-friendly substitute for dual- and multi-classing. Want a thief that leans a bit towards a warrior? Have yourself a swashbuckler. Read the description of this kit and the image of Coran will be conjured in your head, who is of course a 'fighter/thief' in the actual game. *sigh*
I actually agree. Things like the Elven Fighter/Mage could be a Bladesinger or a Fighter/Mage/Thief could be called a Bard. Oh wait. It's one thing I did enjoy about the prestige class system in 3.5 (though sometimes could be cheesed >_>) was the idea that your classes created a "whole class."
Like a Fighter/Wizard/Eldritch Knight you called yourself an Eldritch Knight. Or a Cleric/Wizard/True Necromancer is a True Necromancer.
I like racial restrictions on classes. Generally. For example, I'm glad only humans get to be paladins, but I suppose some of them don't make much sense like elves not being allowed to be bards or druids.
In fact, I wouldn't mind some gender restrictions as well. Like only males getting to be some new monk kit, or only females getting to be shadowdancers or whatever. Things like that would only spice things up, in my opinion.
I don't mind those with illegal race-class combinations (e.g. Dorn) too much, but I prefer characters like Mazzy who bend but not actually violate the rules.
I like racial restrictions in general as well, but not on Blackguards. Since the biography of the PC is even changed to indicate you found a tome within candlekeep. Hence I don't think that path should be racially restricted at all.
I like racial restrictions on classes. Generally. For example, I'm glad only humans get to be paladins, but I suppose some of them don't make much sense like elves not being allowed to be bards or druids.
In fact, I wouldn't mind some gender restrictions as well. Like only males getting to be some new monk kit, or only females getting to be shadowdancers or whatever. Things like that would only spice things up, in my opinion.
I don't mind those with illegal race-class combinations (e.g. Dorn) too much, but I prefer characters like Mazzy who bend but not actually violate the rules.
Although I disagree with your previous comment (!This is unpopular opinions!) I agree with this very much. I think many such class restrictions are a big part of setting. I don't care per se about human paladins or what not; but I think its important that such restrictions match the mythology and religions. So if the only LG warrior type religion in the world is a human religion, then only those adherents should have the possibility of being paladins. Now as I've said before, variety is the spice of life; at least in PnP if a player comes up with a good reason why their Halfling should be a warrior in a LG HUMAN church, and they have the required scores, well; that might be fun to try...
Given that a computer is just a computer; I'm fine with the CRPG version more slavishly following those rules too.
But I'm also up to the idea that if there is an appropriate LG warrior HALFLING sect, then maybe the setting should just allow Halfling paladins; OR maybe a kit for Halfling warriors that gives them some paladin-like abilities. Of course such a sect also might have a few fighter/clerics too...
Comments
It just doesn't feel fufilling for me, then again one could say that I just want her to live. Aerie gets a lid and gets to go back home to mommy and daddy. Neera gets a man to chase her all across the freaking realma, and Jaheira geta to disappear and come home to someone who love her, even years later.
Viconia gets death... Doesn't even get to see her son grow.
My apologies in advance for being nitpicky:
I'm one of those "some people", but I don't "hate" EE. I simply find it disappointing, not because of ammo stacks, etc. To me BG and BG2 are actually two different games. The engine seems to be the same, but it's not. It irks me each time when I see some kind of retrospective about Baldur's Gate and the footage of EE, TuTu, or BGT is being used.
Before the release of EE I sincerely hoped they would not use the BG2 engine with BG1EE, but sadly they did. I played it though (up to chapter 5) and gave up on it. The overall gameplay is way too different for me. I can be called a purist, elitist, or driven by nostalgia, but until there'll be a type of EE that doesn't mix the two games, nothing will be as good as the original in my eyes.
Unpopular opinion:
The user interface of original Baldur's Gate is awesome, the stone, menu background, drawings in loading screens, etc.:
My new "magic number" is 87. I rank the ability scores according to my vision of the character and assign them scores of 17-12 in the order of precedence.
For example, my new Cleric/Mage has S12, D15, C13, I17, W16, Ch14
A Paladin (with their high base requirements) would be S16, D14, C15, I12, W13, Ch17
A Fighter/Druid would have to sacrifice physical scores to accommodate their Charisma requirement
The resulting character has few critical weaknesses, but also isn't a total Mary Sue. It also means that ability boosting items and spells become critical... adding an extra challenge to the game.
To cut down on tedious rolling time, I normally ctrl-8 and just leave the remaining 21 points on the shelf.
Given that this IS the unpopular opinions thread, I'm not sure whether you are being facetious or not. Assuming that you are serious, I have several comments to make.
First of all, I'm not sure why you would find a high starting stat roll unrealistic. CharName is the offspring of a god; superior mental/physical abilities would not be terribly unexpected.
Secondly, what the heck are you getting upset about? What other people do should have no bearing on your enjoyment of the game. Want an extra challenge? Want to RP being Caspar Milquetoast with a stat roll of 76? Go for it. But don't rain on other people's parades. It's a single player GAME; there is no right or wrong way to play it, unlike team sports where rules are mandatory.
That having been said ... I don't think I have ever even HAD a starting stat roll of 90, except once by total accident on the second roll; my average is 86. I don't have the patience to hit the re-roll tab for an hour or so. I can skimp on Str (plenty of giant strength items running around loose) and I'm perfectly happy with a Char of 8. My peeps aren't out to win any popularity contests. (Kits with minimum charisma requirements being obvious exceptions). Wizard with a Wis of 9 is fine by me, as long as Int is around 17. Etc.
But hey! If someone does take the time to go after great stats, they deserve the reward for their effort.
like how in ToEE you can either roll or use 25 pt buy
Who is raining on whose parade here? I never criticised anyone. I specifically said 'for me', 'generally I find' and 'I just leave a few points'. Never once did I attack anyone, and I'll admit that I didn't expect to be attacked for it either, if you're wondering why now it seems as though I am getting upset about something.
@FrdNwsm: I agree with your point, too, but this isn't the gamer you're looking for.
If you say that what someone else does upsets you, to me that is a criticism of what that person is doing. You may not mean it that way, but that's how it comes off. Apologies if I misinterpreted your intention.
And I guess this thread is appropriate for posting such.
I like the blue and gold scheme and everything, but there's something about the stony look that feels comforting. Call it pure nostalgia if you will.
with my protagonists i generally roleplay with less than 70 and rarely do i have two stats above 15. They do gain stats from tomes and things but they never need to for a fun game.
Be reminded that an average commoner has stats of 9-10... all joinable npcs are overpowered in the stats department.
Non-roleplay, any stats amount will work.
I think that more classes should have access to becoming specialized in their weapon of choice, like rogues, but without the APR (only fighters, like Haer'dalis with his swords). I also think that specialized non-fighters (paladins and rangers) should get mastery. I think it's a waste to have a five-point system where you either get 1, 2 or 5 and very, very rarely anything in between 2 and 5 (DD's get 4, but that's an exception). It's under utilized and could be revamped.
Joking of course, I respect both sides of the fence. I suppose that's my unpopular opinion - because I'm pretty bad at these games I feel particularly rewarded for ending up feeling god-like. I feel so "above it all" at the oasis in ToB when I order a planetar to just massacre the whole attack force sent to get me. I'll fully admit it's cheap but it feeds my ego.
Most people: "Make this game harder!"
Me: "Why!? Why didn't I memorize that extra casting of breach!? Why didn't I learn my lesson the first time!?" *dies and reloads*
Next time try dropping down web, grease, and then throw a ton of your Mage's Dragon Breath spells on those guys. It's one of the highlights of ToB for me, doing that.
Also can make sense to get a situation when both charname and Jaheira lose their love interests at the start of BG2, to have something more in common.
/stands and claps
GOOD JOB! YOU DID THE THING!
https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/comment/260948/#Comment_260948
[/spoiler]
Now kits I very much like. In fact, I think they are a viable, immersion-friendly substitute for dual- and multi-classing. Want a thief that leans a bit towards a warrior? Have yourself a swashbuckler. Read the description of this kit and the image of Coran will be conjured in your head, who is of course a 'fighter/thief' in the actual game. *sigh*
Like a Fighter/Wizard/Eldritch Knight you called yourself an Eldritch Knight. Or a Cleric/Wizard/True Necromancer is a True Necromancer.
In fact, I wouldn't mind some gender restrictions as well. Like only males getting to be some new monk kit, or only females getting to be shadowdancers or whatever. Things like that would only spice things up, in my opinion.
I don't mind those with illegal race-class combinations (e.g. Dorn) too much, but I prefer characters like Mazzy who bend but not actually violate the rules.
Given that a computer is just a computer; I'm fine with the CRPG version more slavishly following those rules too.
But I'm also up to the idea that if there is an appropriate LG warrior HALFLING sect, then maybe the setting should just allow Halfling paladins; OR maybe a kit for Halfling warriors that gives them some paladin-like abilities. Of course such a sect also might have a few fighter/clerics too...