@PlasticGolem, you make an interesting point. The Might and Magic games also incorporated this tradition.
Critical, can't-do-without spells included Light (care to adventure with a black screen? didn't think so), Wizard Eye (you were tactically blind without it), Water Walk (many areas were completely inaccessible without it), Fly (ditto), Teleport (ditto), Planar Bind (stopped the enemy from teleporting or blinking), Create Food and Water, Part Water (if you didn't have Water Walk), Telekinesis (many quest items could not be obtained without it), Feather Fall (falling deaths abounded, and many areas had to be jumped into from the rim of thousand-foot drops), and so many other spells of practical realism that have been lost in the transition to computer gaming (post-Might & Magic). Charm and divination spells were required to gain critical quest information.
Mages and clerics were critical party members as so very much more than healing machines and dps blasting machines. Fighters were critical to hold off the enemy and prevent spell interuptions. And rogues, of course, have always been critical to disarm all the deathtraps (none of that NWN2 "you take 3 damage" crap - it was more like "you fall into a pit of spikes, save for 100 damage or die instantly", or "a small needle in the handle of the chest pricks your finger; you are poisoned for 25 damage per round for 10 rounds, save to take only 5 rounds,", or "you step on a pressure plate, and your party takes 4 fireballs from hidden tubes in each of the 4 walls of the chamber." And you would miss at least half of a dungeon's treasure and magic items without a good lock-picker.
And, I agree strongly that traditional, classical, tabletop gaming was at its best from levels 1-12. That principle carries over into computerized rpg's as well. I think that's why I love BG1 and pre-Spellhold SoA the best.
In the golden days of tabletop playing, you got together with your friends, you had sleepover parties, you worked as a team to solve problems, and every player had a critical team job role. The best of the computerized versions duplicate this experience virtually for people who no longer have the time or the social connections to have the same social experience face-to-face with real life friends.
Simple: Enforce "daily" spells. If you rest, you cannot rest until at least eight in-game hours have passed.
Hard: Enforce camping supply requirements - Unless you have food in your inventory, you cannot rest. Rest too much? Go back to town, enjoy your repopulated dungeon for the time it takes. Want to spam rest? Fill yourself up with rations, costing you money, weighing you down and preventing you from filling up with treasure instead.
Either way, Magic is ridiculously overpowered; by high levels you're literally Wishing for objective reality to change to suit you better. That's just D&D.
No, that's not 'Just D&D'. In PNP spells have material components that need to be in the mages inventory. Some of the more powerful spells need rogue stones and star sapphires. Every cast of stoneskin needs diamond dust. In BG they completely removed the material requirements. In games like DDO, materials are too cheap and easy to buy at any merchant, so much so that the only annoying purpose they serve is to waste about 12 slots in a mages inventory.
In PNP you would never have enough materials to infinitely cast powerful spells, you would need to save them for the most difficult encounters.
I agree that magic is definitely overpowered in BG2 (which has always been one of my biggest complaints about BG2), but NOT in BG1. BG1 is a more well-rounded game, which you can win using just about any single approach if you do it well enough. For example, I've typically played BG1 with an all-ranged weapon party, with minimal use of magic, and I basically owned the game. I never had any problem with spellcasters, because I could pump them full of poisoned arrows/bolts before they had a chance to cast a single spell. In BG2, the makers deliberately cheated spellcasters so that they can continue to cast certain spells even when getting hit. BG2 basically forces you to be proficient in casting and dispelling magic - which was especially troublesome for me, since I hadn't really honed by magic-using skills in BG1.
The problem people is complaining abut is NOT a problem of BG2, but inherent to Dungeons & Dragons.
High level magic is tremendously powerful in D&D, that's the reason many people avoid playing above a certain level.
This worry about balance, in my opinion, really belongs to MMOs where PVP matters and balance is a concern. D&D, and so BG, is a team game where every class has its role. The warriors start as heavy damagers and in high level are the protectors of the party, holding off enemies and giving the arcane classes protection so that they can cast their spells. Rogues are strikers, dealing high damage to one target. Priests are party boosters and healers and secondary protectors, being good enough in battle to hold whatever manages to pass by the warriors. Arcane classes are controllers, dealing damage in areas and changing the conditions of battle as well as dealing high damage to a certain area.
Although I don't really like 4th edition, I have to say I completely agree when they divided the classes in categories such as controllers and strikers. It has always been so.
So what needs to be understood is that this game is not about balance between classes, but about roles in a party. And is extremely well done in this aspect.
They are following the DnD sistem. In it magic IS more powerful then fighters, but that is balanced with the fact that few mages ever get to that level. Most of them die before they become so powerful, while fighters... well they are fighters, you know how much they can take and on that way survive.
BG series (aka ToB) has a few to many powerful spellcasters but with the storyline they are following I can actually accept that. Mages would rally in exchange for favor of a new deity.
I agree that magic is definitely overpowered in BG2 (which has always been one of my biggest complaints about BG2), but NOT in BG1. BG1 is a more well-rounded game, which you can win using just about any single approach if you do it well enough. For example, I've typically played BG1 with an all-ranged weapon party, with minimal use of magic, and I basically owned the game. I never had any problem with spellcasters, because I could pump them full of poisoned arrows/bolts before they had a chance to cast a single spell. In BG2, the makers deliberately cheated spellcasters so that they can continue to cast certain spells even when getting hit. BG2 basically forces you to be proficient in casting and dispelling magic - which was especially troublesome for me, since I hadn't really honed by magic-using skills in BG1.
In BG1 fighters and archers are generally stronger than mages. I don't think it is any more well rounded in that sense than BG2.
I agree that magic is definitely overpowered in BG2 (which has always been one of my biggest complaints about BG2), but NOT in BG1. BG1 is a more well-rounded game, which you can win using just about any single approach if you do it well enough. For example, I've typically played BG1 with an all-ranged weapon party, with minimal use of magic, and I basically owned the game. I never had any problem with spellcasters, because I could pump them full of poisoned arrows/bolts before they had a chance to cast a single spell. In BG2, the makers deliberately cheated spellcasters so that they can continue to cast certain spells even when getting hit. BG2 basically forces you to be proficient in casting and dispelling magic - which was especially troublesome for me, since I hadn't really honed by magic-using skills in BG1.
In BG1 fighters and archers are generally stronger than mages. I don't think it is any more well rounded in that sense than BG2.
No they arent. At least not after a mage hits level 5.
I agree that magic is definitely overpowered in BG2 (which has always been one of my biggest complaints about BG2), but NOT in BG1. BG1 is a more well-rounded game, which you can win using just about any single approach if you do it well enough. For example, I've typically played BG1 with an all-ranged weapon party, with minimal use of magic, and I basically owned the game. I never had any problem with spellcasters, because I could pump them full of poisoned arrows/bolts before they had a chance to cast a single spell. In BG2, the makers deliberately cheated spellcasters so that they can continue to cast certain spells even when getting hit. BG2 basically forces you to be proficient in casting and dispelling magic - which was especially troublesome for me, since I hadn't really honed by magic-using skills in BG1.
In BG1 fighters and archers are generally stronger than mages. I don't think it is any more well rounded in that sense than BG2.
No they arent. At least not after a mage hits level 5.
Firstly, I did say generally. Secondly, a mage takes 20,000 experience to even get to level 5, which in a party is going to take some time to do. Thirdly, your best access to spells in the game you don't get until the end of cloakwood/entering Baldur's Gate (for the most part you need to have access to Baldurs Gate to get level 3 and especially level 4 spells). Using level 5 as an example by level 5 as a fighter it would be very easy to have one of two +2 weapons, plate mail, possible even 19 or 20 constitution giving you potentially 75 health (next to a mages 30 health), possible health regeneration (assuming 20 constitution), and damage bonuses from having above 18 strength. Not to mention the fairly easy access to haste potions before you even get to Baldur's Gate (which help fighters I would say quite a bit). Meanwhile a mage, while having a great amount of controlling spells like sleep, and possibly access to fireball (if you've found a scroll for it or bought it in Baldur's Gate), still has a fairly limited ability to cast spells even at his highest levels in Baldurs Gate (level 1 spells being the exception notably because of the ring of wizardry). But for clarities sake I will clarify my statement in saying that generally a mage is going to be less powerful in BG1 when compared to a fighter/archer of equal level.
As a counterpoint, though, mages get wands. One of the only ways I've ever found to beat that godawful final battle with Sarevok is to spam the Wand of Monster Summoning. My melee fighters are always pretty useless in that battle, unless one of them winds up being the sole survivor against Sarevok alone, and can start spamming all the invisibility and healing potions.
As a counterpoint, though, mages get wands. One of the only ways I've ever found to beat that godawful final battle with Sarevok is to spam the Wand of Monster Summoning. My melee fighters are always pretty useless in that battle, unless one of them winds up being the sole survivor against Sarevok alone, and can start spamming all the invisibility and healing potions.
Give them a bow. Just because some of them may be a little rusty doesn't mean they can't try to hit him lol
But yea, I will concede that wands do help mages a lot (once you can get them and afford them). Monster (or animal) summoning in general is very good for mages, druids, and clerics in the game. Though that will be reduced somewhat by the use of the BG2 engine. Likewise the fireball wand is pretty useful for both its fireball and scorcher attacks.
The problem people is complaining abut is NOT a problem of BG2, but inherent to Dungeons & Dragons.
High level magic is tremendously powerful in D&D, that's the reason many people avoid playing above a certain level.
This worry about balance, in my opinion, really belongs to MMOs where PVP matters and balance is a concern. D&D, and so BG, is a team game where every class has its role. The warriors start as heavy damagers and in high level are the protectors of the party, holding off enemies and giving the arcane classes protection so that they can cast their spells. Rogues are strikers, dealing high damage to one target. Priests are party boosters and healers and secondary protectors, being good enough in battle to hold whatever manages to pass by the warriors. Arcane classes are controllers, dealing damage in areas and changing the conditions of battle as well as dealing high damage to a certain area.
Although I don't really like 4th edition, I have to say I completely agree when they divided the classes in categories such as controllers and strikers. It has always been so.
So what needs to be understood is that this game is not about balance between classes, but about roles in a party. And is extremely well done in this aspect.
Well said. I've been noticing also the pvp, sibling rivarly idea of game balance that underlies many design choices. And I think it needs to be pointed out again that, although high level magic rules in D&D, the specific issue that sparked this thread is a BUG OF THE INFINITY ENGINE, not of AD&D's already potent (with no apologies to the jocks) 9th level magic. CONTIGENCY SPELLS DO NOT STACK. : )
Mages are definitely not weak at low-level. Sleep will win you almost every battle past the Nashkel Mines, and once it stops working you can just switch to horror. That's not even taking into account wands which are amazing.
It's kind of funny to say that magic is even more OP than people think in a thread about magic being OP, but a lot of people get obsessed with meleeling for 15-20 damage once a round and turning people into giblets (which is great, don't get me wrong, but having an ~80% probability instant AE death spell at level 1 is way more powerful =P).
E: Hey massive necro and I can't delete this post. Alas...
Horror doesn't work as well in the BG2 engine. The creature under the fear state still has a chance to attack the nearest creature, similarly to confusion.
Complaining that non-SCS/Tactics BG/BG2 can be cheesed is like... I dunno, you must be new to this. Of course it can be cheesed. One of the hardest bosses in Shadows of Amn can be killed with one scroll and a magic weapon...
Try SCS/SCS2 with all improvements/additions and then complain about difficulty..
Mages are definitely not weak at low-level. Sleep will win you almost every battle past the Nashkel Mines, and once it stops working you can just switch to horror. That's not even taking into account wands which are amazing.
It's kind of funny to say that magic is even more OP than people think in a thread about magic being OP, but a lot of people get obsessed with meleeling for 15-20 damage once a round and turning people into giblets (which is great, don't get me wrong, but having an ~80% probability instant AE death spell at level 1 is way more powerful =P).
E: Hey massive necro and I can't delete this post. Alas...
And how many times can a low level wizard cast this spell?
Magic in Baldur's Gate is one of its greatest attractivities!
Spells *are* that powerful in pen-and=paper AD&D as well, the only difference is that pnp requires "material components" , which balances things a bit (you need diamond dust to cast stoneskin!) .
All that does is drain either the mage's money, or bar him from using his spells.
Unless a material component has a cost, you're assumed to keep a reasonable supply on hand. It only becomes an issue if your component pouch gets lost, confiscated, or stolen, which prevents you from casting most spells. And/or you're in a area where basic spell components can't be purchased.
And of course, forum.baldursgate.com/discussion/12201/overhaul-of-arcane-magic-system
Also, rest limits. It's completely ridiculous in most cases being to rest 8 hours, room to room, just to continue spamming spells. The game isn't supposed to work that way. Warriors and rogues deal less damage, but they can keep going for as long as stamina and hp permits. Casters however have a very finite amount of power that has to be used as effiecently possible over the same period of time. Wands and scrolls allow them to continue after they've expended their personal power, but wands are generally supposed to be fairly expensive, and rarely come with a lot of charges (and aren't supposed to be rechargeable) making you consider whether it makes more sense tactically to save it, or just throw some darts at the enemy.
Much like that other guy, I only rest when my party becomes fatigued, or unless there's no pressing matters requiring immediate attention, when arriving at a new town (after hitting up the tavern/inn for rumors).
A lot of other spells were altered to better fit a more action oriented game such as this, and a lot of the more interesting utility spells aren't even included.
Also, bare in mind, Baldur's Gate is a quite Monty Haul game. In actual PnP, +2 weapons, wands out the wazoo and brokenly powerful artifacts don't just drop into your lap at level at lvl 1....at least not without serious repercussions down the road.
Most of the problem is down to it being too easy to rest in the BG games. Realistically you wouldn't be able to go partway into a fortress, sit down outside a door with a tough opponent in, rest for 8 hours then go in and kill him.
The alarm would be raised as soon as a few missing people are discovered, and the leader of the fortress isn't just going to sit in his room while you catch up on your beauty sleep outside.
The other issue is that the NPCs aren't played well. But nobody would want them to use the levels of cheese that some people justify. If the final fight with Irenicus consisted of him instantly destroying the party by launching 6 wiltings from his chain contingencies then it wouldn't be very exciting.
And if by some miracle you survived that, he could just reload and try again with a different combination of spells...
And how many times can a low level wizard cast this spell?
Infinitely with wands and the ability to rest whenever you want. Now if you choose not to rest very often or mod it so you can't or whatever, then it's totally different. As Zanath said, it's basically a completely different game with infinite rest. NWN and NWN2 had this problem also. It's one aspect of Tabletop gaming that doesn't translate well into video games.
Why wouldn't you want to play an Elminster or Raistlin like mage in a single player game? I found the combat much more interesting in SoA and beyond. I had to start buffing my party with certain cleric spells and healing in combat in order to survive certain encounters. In BG1 most of the combat involves your fighters getting lucky shots and everyone pinging away with a ranged weapon from the rear. It can get fairly boring at times. There isn't much strategy or thinking about what to use involved. Having read a lot of forgotten realms and dragonlance books I feel Mages that of the max level are almost god like. Raistlin became a god and Elminster could travel to different dimensions.
I disagree with the OP. There obviously needs to be a wand of rapid-fire Fireball and Cloudkill cluster-bombs. I also need to be able to summon bacon at will, for an infinite number of times per round. :P
I dunno though...I don't think Eliminster has personally bitch-slapped Demogorgon by his lonesome before (or an avatar thereof, depending on which stance you take on the matter, still a massive accomplishment, since Avatars are only slightly weaker then the real deal). Or a Goddess. And Irenicus was actually built using Elminster's stats as a base (sans the fighter/thief/cleric) and the Chosen benefits, and is actually a higher level mage then the big E is (31 vs 24).....
In light of all that, the stuff he says in his final meeting with you are very understandable.
I disagree with the OP. There obviously needs to be a wand of rapid-fire Fireball and Cloudkill cluster-bombs. I also need to be able to summon bacon at will, for an infinite number of times per round. :P
Just watch someone make a mod. Instead of cows falling from the sky because of a wild surge it changed to pigs, with chunks of bacon flying everywhere.
Yes, the issue of finite resources over a day of adventuring, sleeping at appropriate times, material components, the need for utility spells and the ability to ever even find spells in the first place were all big parts of pen-and-paper roleplaying. It doesn't translate well. Also... if you failed a spell-learning roll, didn't that mean you could never learn the spell and had to skip on to the next spell on your wishlist?
Also, mage is a bit like monk in that it starts out as a weak class and becomes godlike towards the end. Monk is the martial equivalent of mage, starting out weak and ending by punching the heads off of dragons, and having untouchable AC while you do. 2nd edition wasn't trying to create a smooth upward curve of ultra-balanced classes that would fare equally well whether against monsters or in PvP. For heaven's sake, the XP charts for the classes are all different, they clearly were emphasizing inconsistent power curves. A level 1 mage is not powerful. Even if you do manage to put a group of enemies to sleep, on a dungeon crawl you probably don't have enough to do that to everything in the dungeon and your team isn't going to put up with you going back to town to sleep (in fact, in a pnp game there may be additional time constraints due to your quest that prevent you from wasting a day to sleep).
The problem is exaggerated in the Baldur's Gate series since you don't have the original concerns of pen-and-paper roleplaying, but to some extent the designers always meant it to be this way. If your mage manages to survive to reach higher levels, you tap into the archetypal power of Merlin and you can move heaven and earth. That's a big "if" though with a d4 hit die and a maximum of +2 HP per level.
Threads like this make me glad I don't really care what anyone else thinks. We get at least one a week, and they are all odious.
AD&D was always make believe with rules. Name a fantasy world where a dude with a sword is more powerful than a wizard. In your own head, is a guy who can literally create funnels of fire just because he wills it at risk from a meathead with a pointed stick?
SO QUIT IT! STOP IT! SKFDJSLKDJFJKSDFJK
If you want a "balanced" game, go to World of Warcraft or something.
Comments
Critical, can't-do-without spells included Light (care to adventure with a black screen? didn't think so), Wizard Eye (you were tactically blind without it), Water Walk (many areas were completely inaccessible without it), Fly (ditto), Teleport (ditto), Planar Bind (stopped the enemy from teleporting or blinking), Create Food and Water, Part Water (if you didn't have Water Walk), Telekinesis (many quest items could not be obtained without it), Feather Fall (falling deaths abounded, and many areas had to be jumped into from the rim of thousand-foot drops), and so many other spells of practical realism that have been lost in the transition to computer gaming (post-Might & Magic). Charm and divination spells were required to gain critical quest information.
Mages and clerics were critical party members as so very much more than healing machines and dps blasting machines. Fighters were critical to hold off the enemy and prevent spell interuptions. And rogues, of course, have always been critical to disarm all the deathtraps (none of that NWN2 "you take 3 damage" crap - it was more like "you fall into a pit of spikes, save for 100 damage or die instantly", or "a small needle in the handle of the chest pricks your finger; you are poisoned for 25 damage per round for 10 rounds, save to take only 5 rounds,", or "you step on a pressure plate, and your party takes 4 fireballs from hidden tubes in each of the 4 walls of the chamber." And you would miss at least half of a dungeon's treasure and magic items without a good lock-picker.
And, I agree strongly that traditional, classical, tabletop gaming was at its best from levels 1-12. That principle carries over into computerized rpg's as well. I think that's why I love BG1 and pre-Spellhold SoA the best.
In the golden days of tabletop playing, you got together with your friends, you had sleepover parties, you worked as a team to solve problems, and every player had a critical team job role. The best of the computerized versions duplicate this experience virtually for people who no longer have the time or the social connections to have the same social experience face-to-face with real life friends.
Ah, those were the days.
In PNP you would never have enough materials to infinitely cast powerful spells, you would need to save them for the most difficult encounters.
High level magic is tremendously powerful in D&D, that's the reason many people avoid playing above a certain level.
This worry about balance, in my opinion, really belongs to MMOs where PVP matters and balance is a concern. D&D, and so BG, is a team game where every class has its role. The warriors start as heavy damagers and in high level are the protectors of the party, holding off enemies and giving the arcane classes protection so that they can cast their spells. Rogues are strikers, dealing high damage to one target. Priests are party boosters and healers and secondary protectors, being good enough in battle to hold whatever manages to pass by the warriors. Arcane classes are controllers, dealing damage in areas and changing the conditions of battle as well as dealing high damage to a certain area.
Although I don't really like 4th edition, I have to say I completely agree when they divided the classes in categories such as controllers and strikers. It has always been so.
So what needs to be understood is that this game is not about balance between classes, but about roles in a party. And is extremely well done in this aspect.
BG series (aka ToB) has a few to many powerful spellcasters but with the storyline they are following I can actually accept that. Mages would rally in exchange for favor of a new deity.
I'm calling your bluff. :-)
But yea, I will concede that wands do help mages a lot (once you can get them and afford them). Monster (or animal) summoning in general is very good for mages, druids, and clerics in the game. Though that will be reduced somewhat by the use of the BG2 engine. Likewise the fireball wand is pretty useful for both its fireball and scorcher attacks.
It's kind of funny to say that magic is even more OP than people think in a thread about magic being OP, but a lot of people get obsessed with meleeling for 15-20 damage once a round and turning people into giblets (which is great, don't get me wrong, but having an ~80% probability instant AE death spell at level 1 is way more powerful =P).
E: Hey massive necro and I can't delete this post. Alas...
Try SCS/SCS2 with all improvements/additions and then complain about difficulty.. And how many times can a low level wizard cast this spell?
Neither really is a decent balance adjustment.
motive to change the game for the other players.
And of course, forum.baldursgate.com/discussion/12201/overhaul-of-arcane-magic-system
Also, rest limits. It's completely ridiculous in most cases being to rest 8 hours, room to room, just to continue spamming spells. The game isn't supposed to work that way. Warriors and rogues deal less damage, but they can keep going for as long as stamina and hp permits. Casters however have a very finite amount of power that has to be used as effiecently possible over the same period of time. Wands and scrolls allow them to continue after they've expended their personal power, but wands are generally supposed to be fairly expensive, and rarely come with a lot of charges (and aren't supposed to be rechargeable) making you consider whether it makes more sense tactically to save it, or just throw some darts at the enemy.
Much like that other guy, I only rest when my party becomes fatigued, or unless there's no pressing matters requiring immediate attention, when arriving at a new town (after hitting up the tavern/inn for rumors).
A lot of other spells were altered to better fit a more action oriented game such as this, and a lot of the more interesting utility spells aren't even included.
Also, bare in mind, Baldur's Gate is a quite Monty Haul game. In actual PnP, +2 weapons, wands out the wazoo and brokenly powerful artifacts don't just drop into your lap at level at lvl 1....at least not without serious repercussions down the road.
The alarm would be raised as soon as a few missing people are discovered, and the leader of the fortress isn't just going to sit in his room while you catch up on your beauty sleep outside.
The other issue is that the NPCs aren't played well. But nobody would want them to use the levels of cheese that some people justify. If the final fight with Irenicus consisted of him instantly destroying the party by launching 6 wiltings from his chain contingencies then it wouldn't be very exciting.
And if by some miracle you survived that, he could just reload and try again with a different combination of spells...
In light of all that, the stuff he says in his final meeting with you are very understandable.
Also, mage is a bit like monk in that it starts out as a weak class and becomes godlike towards the end. Monk is the martial equivalent of mage, starting out weak and ending by punching the heads off of dragons, and having untouchable AC while you do. 2nd edition wasn't trying to create a smooth upward curve of ultra-balanced classes that would fare equally well whether against monsters or in PvP. For heaven's sake, the XP charts for the classes are all different, they clearly were emphasizing inconsistent power curves. A level 1 mage is not powerful. Even if you do manage to put a group of enemies to sleep, on a dungeon crawl you probably don't have enough to do that to everything in the dungeon and your team isn't going to put up with you going back to town to sleep (in fact, in a pnp game there may be additional time constraints due to your quest that prevent you from wasting a day to sleep).
The problem is exaggerated in the Baldur's Gate series since you don't have the original concerns of pen-and-paper roleplaying, but to some extent the designers always meant it to be this way. If your mage manages to survive to reach higher levels, you tap into the archetypal power of Merlin and you can move heaven and earth. That's a big "if" though with a d4 hit die and a maximum of +2 HP per level.
AD&D was always make believe with rules. Name a fantasy world where a dude with a sword is more powerful than a wizard. In your own head, is a guy who can literally create funnels of fire just because he wills it at risk from a meathead with a pointed stick?
SO QUIT IT! STOP IT! SKFDJSLKDJFJKSDFJK
If you want a "balanced" game, go to World of Warcraft or something.