I was bothered by the game's lack of early damage soaks but to be honest I actually quite like it now because it encouraged me to get creative. In one SoD run I took Glint, gave him gauntlets of ogre strength and put plate mail on him until I got Khalid. There was another time where I used Voghiln as a singing tank which he was excellent as. Though to be honest I think the combat in SoD is very tank-unfriendly and it's much easier to just AoE nuke everything.
I have to say I find the concept that a Good character should not have any Evil NPCs in their party, and vice versa, really rather odd and would never have independently even considered such a restriction.
it's due to the fact evil character leave the party when you hit 20 rep and some good and evil characters brake into fights. sure the tweak pack has parts that turns those off [ i personally use those for future runs throughs where i may have edwin or viconia in a good party] but some people just don't like useing mods.
Cos, bring some of the left characters to SoD through mods would surelly be relatively easy and proper.
I see the following characters with more than good reason to join SoD campaing:
Kagain - He's an mercenary and SoD gives much more reason for his presence (hired by the dukes) than his act of charity of continue with Main Char even after the caravan question is solved in BG1.
Ajantis - He's going to Akhlata as we all know from Firkgaark quest, so why not be in SoD? He could start as one of Shinning Lady followers, mesmerised for her ideals and apparent good aura.
Brawen - Has a life debt with main char and no reason to part ways.
Eldoth - Not as joinable NPC, but some reckoning with Skie after his scheme in BG1 would be surelly welcome.
Shar-Teel - While i don't have a good reason for her to join, i don't have any for her to not join, dunno, would make a good joinable NPC. I kinda of really like this character.
Xzar + Montaron - Have no idea why this couple isn't in the game. They're Zenths... but would be so cool to play with Xzar again! TT!
I'm skeptical of the notion of "cheese" to begin with, but I'm pretty sure using AC-boosting items for their intended purpose is not cheesy.
I keep seeing people bringing up story mode and various other "why don't you just" questions to denigrate people. You're trying to beat the game using an effective tactic? Why not just play story mode if you don't want to try a REAL challenge?
And no, I'm not misusing the word "denigrate" here. It is denigrating to call into question another person's playstyle and then equate it with zero-difficulty story mode.
The point is the game is designed to be completed with the tools available. Not having all the best tools from the start is part of the intended difficulty of the game.
I'm skeptical of the notion of "cheese" to begin with, but I'm pretty sure using AC-boosting items for their intended purpose is not cheesy.
I keep seeing people bringing up story mode and various other "why don't you just" questions to denigrate people. You're trying to beat the game using an effective tactic? Why not just play story mode if you don't want to try a REAL challenge?
And no, I'm not misusing the word "denigrate" here. It is denigrating to call into question another person's playstyle and then equate it with zero-difficulty story mode.
The point is the game is designed to be completed with the tools available. Not having all the best tools from the start is part of the intended difficulty of the game.
If that was true, it wouldn't be possible to import all of them into Siege of Dragonspear. It is. Beamdog added that feature. Beamdog made those items available.
The only game that uses item scarcity as part of the intended difficulty is BG2.
And your party members tell you that they will be leaving after the first dungeon. So there is no reason to let them walk off with your best stuff unless you want to make the game more difficult. But the game is balanced around starting with the default gear that characters have from a clean start. Any imported gear is just making the game easier from that point. It's importing multiple +3 weapons that really affects the difficulty though, +2 Rings of protection are neither here nor there.
Cos, bring some of the left characters to SoD through mods would surelly be relatively easy and proper.
I see the following characters with more than good reason to join SoD campaing:
Kagain - He's an mercenary and SoD gives much more reason for his presence (hired by the dukes) than his act of charity of continue with Main Char even after the caravan question is solved in BG1.
Ajantis - He's going to Akhlata as we all know from Firkgaark quest, so why not be in SoD? He could start as one of Shinning Lady followers, mesmerised for her ideals and apparent good aura.
Brawen - Has a life debt with main char and no reason to part ways.
Eldoth - Not as joinable NPC, but some reckoning with Skie after his scheme in BG1 would be surelly welcome.
Shar-Teel - While i don't have a good reason for her to join, i don't have any for her to not join, dunno, would make a good joinable NPC. I kinda of really like this character.
Xzar + Montaron - Have no idea why this couple isn't in the game. They're Zenths... but would be so cool to play with Xzar again! TT!
I would loved to have seen a few more of these, particularly Xzar and montaron.
As for Kagain I think it made more sense for him to retire after Sarevok.. If he's gotten rich, I doubt he would want join a long and arduous journey to Dragonspear. I always had figured out as a local mercenary for hire, but too lazy to travel all the way to Dragonspear.
Ajantis and Shar-teel could have worked as well.
I also understand why they weren't included though.
I know this. But killing a random pack of orogs shouldn't really require vast amounts of tactics. This is my point.
If killing a random pack of orogs doesn't require at least basic tactics, then why bother?! Let's make sure everything is on storymode-like difficulty, except bosses - who should be super hard! /sarcasm
If you expect a D&D-based game to feel like a Diablo killfest, then you're barking up the wrong tree.
I know this. But killing a random pack of orogs shouldn't really require vast amounts of tactics. This is my point.
If killing a random pack of orogs doesn't require at least basic tactics, then why bother?! Let's make sure everything is on storymode-like difficulty, except bosses - who should be super hard! /end sarcasm
If you expect a D&D-based game to feel like a Diablo killfest, then you're barking up the wrong tree.
But I have got a fair way through and found it was difficult early levels to find someone to hit stuff and take hits as using Edwin so Minsc not available.
Corwin being a bow user is just stupid after BG when chances are, you have ensured that you are as well as possible equipped for archer/ranged attack as in BG it's the game breaker/winner.
So dragged her around and then found game had so much melee fighting against large mobs. Thankfully had fully charged wand of monster summoning (100 charges).
It's far from ideal, I even ended up recruiting Jaheira and if you understood how much I dislike her you would understand the sacrifice.
If killing a random pack of orogs doesn't require at least basic tactics, then why bother?! Let's make sure everything is on storymode-like difficulty, except bosses - who should be super hard! /sarcasm
If you expect a D&D-based game to feel like a Diablo killfest, then you're barking up the wrong tree.
Are you seriously trying to argue that the original Baldur's Gate wasn't pack full of trash mobs that required little to no strategy? Even Baldur's Gate 2 had them - admittedly less numerous, but the difference in power between your side and theirs made these encounters even more trivial.
Sometimes I get the impression we're not playing the same games.
Are you seriously trying to argue that the original Baldur's Gate wasn't pack full of trash mobs that required little to no strategy?
And that's why BG1 bored me... "Oh, yay...another pack of bandits who don't matter". I understand why they had so many trash packs in BG1, but it was a really bad design imho.
Even Baldur's Gate 2 had them - admittedly less numerous, but the difference in power between your side and theirs made these encounters even more trivial.
And the garbage encounters in BG2 were a snoozefest as well. Fortunately, they were less numerous.
Sometimes I get the impression we're not playing the same games.
Oh, we are. I just get bored by stupid Diablo-esque hack 'n' slash. Combat should require strategy in ANYTHING D&D. D&D combat should require you to think, not just click and forget. The fact that you want click and forget encounters is pretty ridiculous to me.
@semiticgod (I think) mentioned that SoD merges IWD and BG encounter design: big groups (like IWD) but with appropriate equipment and abilities (like BG). So you end up with enemies that look like trash mobs but are actually extremely dangerous. You can't just plow through everything in SoD unless you really know what you're doing.
But on the other hand you don't need to kill everything to farm XP. The cap is 500000 and it happens when the experience per level needed starts to skyrocket. You will gain 2-3 levels maximum and you will do so even if you avoid unnecessary battles. The large stock available of potions, scrolls and wands can carry you through the campaign's mandatory battles anyway.
But having a couple more beatsticks would ease a bit the beginning that's for sure.
Basically SoD plays differently compared to BG and BG2.
Combat should require strategy in ANYTHING D&D. D&D combat should require you to think, not just click and forget. The fact that you want click and forget encounters is pretty ridiculous to me.
I guess it's a matter of perception and what we mean when we talk of trash encounters.
To me an encounter just sitting there in the middle of the map, with no tie to the plot, no sidequest relevance, no build up, no theme, no real reward for beating it - basically something that only exists to fill space between the stuffs that actually matter - is the definition of a trash encounter. Doesn't matter how brainless or challenging the encounter is, it's still a trash encounter and it's still wasting my time. And here's the thing: making the encounter more challenging actually makes the problem worse. An easy click and forget encounter will waste my time but at least it's over quickly and I can move on to more interesting stuffs, while a challenging encounter will waste even more of my time and patience on something that's still as irrelevant as before.
To me the solution to trash encounters is not more difficult encounters, it's less encounters, each being more unique and challenging in its own way. But if I have to choose between brainless and challenging trash encounters, I'll always choose the one that's going to waste less of my time.
I guess this is the approach taken by Torment: ToN. I'm inclined to agree. If the battle isn't a challenge, it is just filler for a lack of story. Although I don't mind the occasional faceroll battle, just to make me fell like a badass.
To me the solution to trash encounters is not more difficult encounters, it's less encounters, each being more unique and challenging in its own way. .
I actually agree completely. But if "trash encounters" exist, I'd rather not that such encounters bore me.
Also, running away is a good way to save time, if your group has enough AC to avoid arrows pot-shotting everyone.
I wish Bioware had done similar things elsewhere - why on earth would Irenicus let you keep your loot when he knocks you unconscious in Spellhold?? (Some of it was his to begin with!) Why would the illithids in the Underdark let you keep your loot??
"why dont you just..."
make a mod that strips you of loot and puts it in a locked chest
SoD removes some of the loot that you were (let's be honest) a bit too comfortable with. Ditto for party distribution. I think it is very much intentional that Beamdog decided to take away a few crutches to force you to consider different tactics. I think it's not something that was overlooked during development, but rather a challenge given to you. I for one enjoy it.
While I certainly agree with the philosophy behind such an idea in general, I question its implementation in SoD. A game forcing players to abandon a tactic that had been effective so far to make them explore the depth of its combat system is a good thing - but it's not what happened here, at least not for me. The Baldur's Gate saga is 15 year old and SoD didn't actually bring anything new to the table when it comes to tactics available to the player. The effective tactics in this game have been known for years at this point, so forcing me to abandon one has just made me fall back on another.
In the end I didn't discover anything about the game's combat system I didn't already knew, so it just felt like the game was trying to force my playstyle for no real reason.
Heh. The singular lesson I personally take from this entire thread and other similar threads on this forum is that it is extreme folly, a no-win situation, for Beamdog or anyone else to try and create an expansion (or new content of any kind) for a much-loved old game. They are so better off starting with a clean slate and creating a new game that has no association with any other existing game.
I wish Bioware had done similar things elsewhere - why on earth would Irenicus let you keep your loot when he knocks you unconscious in Spellhold?? (Some of it was his to begin with!) Why would the illithids in the Underdark let you keep your loot??
"why dont you just..."
It's been a component in SCS and Big Picture for years.
I wish Bioware had done similar things elsewhere - why on earth would Irenicus let you keep your loot when he knocks you unconscious in Spellhold?? (Some of it was his to begin with!) Why would the illithids in the Underdark let you keep your loot??
"why dont you just..."
It's been a component in SCS and Big Picture for years.
Few people use the "Bodhi steals your rad lootz in Spellhold" option in SCS. I tried it once, though. It was really hard.
Heh. The singular lesson I personally take from this entire thread and other similar threads on this forum is that it is extreme folly, a no-win situation, for Beamdog or anyone else to try and create an expansion (or new content of any kind) for a much-loved old game. They are so better off starting with a clean slate and creating a new game that has no association with any other existing game.
Yup.
People don't get happy for having new content on a beloved game. Sometimes I think they wish to see Beamdog crash and burn despite all the amazing things they did in behalf of our loved game.
It's so much whining over so little things that I sometimes wonder what's the age of the person behind the keyboard.
Don't get me wrong, I don't love everything Beamdog did, but I prefer to support them and help guide them towards a better game development.
Because the alternative is to see BG on limbo once again, scavenging mods to let it breath a little longer, and I love too much this saga to allow that.
While it's certainly true for a portion of grognards (have you ever visited the BG2 GameFaqs board?), pointing out perceived flaws doesn't necessarily mean one is averse to change or wants to see the company fail.
While it's certainly true for a portion of grognards (have you ever visited the BG2 GameFaqs board?), pointing out perceived flaws doesn't necessarily mean one is averse to change or wants to see the company fail.
It's not a matter of pointing out flaws. It's how it's done and the weight that is put in things that are truly insignificant.
Saying what is wrong as a way to give feedback to Beamdog so they can improve their work is a good thing. Complaining about every minor details is something very different.
Party composition is not a minor detail. On the contrary, it's of vital importance for a game centered around combat. The fact threads bemoaning the lack of melee-oriented party members pop-up regularly points a legitimate problem, it's not "complaining about every minor detail."
And the fact most of the replies boil down to "lol play story mode you noob" does not help matters.
As already pointed out, Baldur's Gate is NOT a game centred around combat. Diablo is a game centred around combat, Baldur's Gate is a game centred around STORY.
Comments
Cos, bring some of the left characters to SoD through mods would surelly be relatively easy and proper.
I see the following characters with more than good reason to join SoD campaing:
Kagain - He's an mercenary and SoD gives much more reason for his presence (hired by the dukes) than his act of charity of continue with Main Char even after the caravan question is solved in BG1.
Ajantis - He's going to Akhlata as we all know from Firkgaark quest, so why not be in SoD? He could start as one of Shinning Lady followers, mesmerised for her ideals and apparent good aura.
Brawen - Has a life debt with main char and no reason to part ways.
Eldoth - Not as joinable NPC, but some reckoning with Skie after his scheme in BG1 would be surelly welcome.
Shar-Teel - While i don't have a good reason for her to join, i don't have any for her to not join, dunno, would make a good joinable NPC. I kinda of really like this character.
Xzar + Montaron - Have no idea why this couple isn't in the game. They're Zenths... but would be so cool to play with Xzar again! TT!
The only game that uses item scarcity as part of the intended difficulty is BG2.
I would loved to have seen a few more of these, particularly Xzar and montaron.
As for Kagain I think it made more sense for him to retire after Sarevok.. If he's gotten rich, I doubt he would want join a long and arduous journey to Dragonspear. I always had figured out as a local mercenary for hire, but too lazy to travel all the way to Dragonspear.
Ajantis and Shar-teel could have worked as well.
I also understand why they weren't included though.
If you expect a D&D-based game to feel like a Diablo killfest, then you're barking up the wrong tree.
But I have got a fair way through and found it was difficult early levels to find someone to hit stuff and take hits as using Edwin so Minsc not available.
Corwin being a bow user is just stupid after BG when chances are, you have ensured that you are as well as possible equipped for archer/ranged attack as in BG it's the game breaker/winner.
So dragged her around and then found game had so much melee fighting against large mobs. Thankfully had fully charged wand of monster summoning (100 charges).
It's far from ideal, I even ended up recruiting Jaheira and if you understood how much I dislike her you would understand the sacrifice.
Sometimes I get the impression we're not playing the same games.
"Oh, yay...another pack of bandits who don't matter". I understand why they had so many trash packs in BG1, but it was a really bad design imho. And the garbage encounters in BG2 were a snoozefest as well. Fortunately, they were less numerous. Oh, we are. I just get bored by stupid Diablo-esque hack 'n' slash. Combat should require strategy in ANYTHING D&D. D&D combat should require you to think, not just click and forget. The fact that you want click and forget encounters is pretty ridiculous to me.
But on the other hand you don't need to kill everything to farm XP. The cap is 500000 and it happens when the experience per level needed starts to skyrocket. You will gain 2-3 levels maximum and you will do so even if you avoid unnecessary battles. The large stock available of potions, scrolls and wands can carry you through the campaign's mandatory battles anyway.
But having a couple more beatsticks would ease a bit the beginning that's for sure.
Basically SoD plays differently compared to BG and BG2.
To me an encounter just sitting there in the middle of the map, with no tie to the plot, no sidequest relevance, no build up, no theme, no real reward for beating it - basically something that only exists to fill space between the stuffs that actually matter - is the definition of a trash encounter. Doesn't matter how brainless or challenging the encounter is, it's still a trash encounter and it's still wasting my time. And here's the thing: making the encounter more challenging actually makes the problem worse. An easy click and forget encounter will waste my time but at least it's over quickly and I can move on to more interesting stuffs, while a challenging encounter will waste even more of my time and patience on something that's still as irrelevant as before.
To me the solution to trash encounters is not more difficult encounters, it's less encounters, each being more unique and challenging in its own way. But if I have to choose between brainless and challenging trash encounters, I'll always choose the one that's going to waste less of my time.
Also, running away is a good way to save time, if your group has enough AC to avoid arrows pot-shotting everyone.
...srsly, i'd use it
In the end I didn't discover anything about the game's combat system I didn't already knew, so it just felt like the game was trying to force my playstyle for no real reason.
People don't get happy for having new content on a beloved game. Sometimes I think they wish to see Beamdog crash and burn despite all the amazing things they did in behalf of our loved game.
It's so much whining over so little things that I sometimes wonder what's the age of the person behind the keyboard.
Don't get me wrong, I don't love everything Beamdog did, but I prefer to support them and help guide them towards a better game development.
Because the alternative is to see BG on limbo once again, scavenging mods to let it breath a little longer, and I love too much this saga to allow that.
Saying what is wrong as a way to give feedback to Beamdog so they can improve their work is a good thing. Complaining about every minor details is something very different.
And the fact most of the replies boil down to "lol play story mode you noob" does not help matters.