Nevertheless, dropping the chance to miss feels like a more fundamental change than either of the above, and not one I feel good about. It just requires rebalancing and changing so much else in the game line on-hit abilities like vorpal hits. Hell, imagine the green slimes from BG 1 with auto hit.
I suspect Swen has an issue with save-or-die mechanic, not the small randomness with expected result. Those slimes are perfect example of this problem - if they hit, you die. That's not how good combat design should work, and that's exactly why first chapters of BG1 were so bad compared to endgame and BG2 - your victory should depend on your skill and tactics, not on random chance.
Nevertheless, dropping the chance to miss feels like a more fundamental change than either of the above, and not one I feel good about. It just requires rebalancing and changing so much else in the game line on-hit abilities like vorpal hits. Hell, imagine the green slimes from BG 1 with auto hit.
I suspect Swen has an issue with save-or-die mechanic, not the small randomness with expected result. Those slimes are perfect example of this problem - if they hit, you die. That's not how good combat design should work, and that's exactly why first chapters of BG1 were so bad compared to endgame and BG2 - your victory should depend on your skill and tactics, not on random chance.
The idea of BG is not to be an tactical war game. Is to be "lets pretend that X exist and that i live in the world of X"
Have an chance to get OHKilled makes you fell like you are in a dangerous world. An guy with plate armor being hard to hit, unless you are very lucky and skilled, is something to make he an hard opponent without making him an hard oponent because he needs to be impaled 40 times into the head.
The finger of death, is present to make your char fell like an true master of life and death that can insta purge the life force from his enemies. If you wanna to play any D&D game and expect an """balanced""" experience, you are playing D&D wrong. D&D is about pretending to be an guy on another world.
Anyway, other thing that i wish to see on BG3 is fortress building similar to Crossroad keep management.
Instant death is part of D&D. The players are aware of it and take precautions against it. Your level 1 wizard is fragile, do not send him to the front of battle.
The fact is your character can miss an attack and die. He's not perfect. Even gods may miss an attack and as some Forgotten Realms gods have proved they can also die.
Nevertheless, dropping the chance to miss feels like a more fundamental change than either of the above, and not one I feel good about. It just requires rebalancing and changing so much else in the game line on-hit abilities like vorpal hits. Hell, imagine the green slimes from BG 1 with auto hit.
I suspect Swen has an issue with save-or-die mechanic, not the small randomness with expected result. Those slimes are perfect example of this problem - if they hit, you die. That's not how good combat design should work, and that's exactly why first chapters of BG1 were so bad compared to endgame and BG2 - your victory should depend on your skill and tactics, not on random chance.
I can understand people disliking the save or die mechanic - but those who do dislike it are less likely to be fans of Baldur's Gate. For people who played D&D in their introduction to gaming, the possibility of dying if you don't choose the right tactics was ever-present. There are so many ways to die, which can certainly be very off-putting if you're used to playing games where death is unlikely. However, the random factors in the game and the possibility of death is also a large part of the reason why some people have played the game for so many years (as opposed to playing it, saying "I enjoyed that, the graphics were really good" and then never playing it again).
I have no objection at all to Larian making a very different game, nor am I at all bothered about that being called BG3 - I feel no sense of ownership of the setting or the gameplay mechanics. I would, though, like to see a new game which maintains the same sort of combat balance as there is in D&D. I'm not rushing to judgment on whether that will happen. However, for the head of Larian to say that having misses in a video game is a problem, suggests that I am not going to be among his target group ...
Indeed. A lot of the challenge in D&D lies in controlling this kind of randomness, for which there were ample tools. If you fight someone wielding a Silver Blade without using powerful defensive magic, then yes, there should be a real chance of you being killed by single strike.
Low-level combat in BG 1 (which was admittedly tricky for a newcomer) could have been simply improved by adding a bleeding out mechanic instead of instant death if your hit points reduce to between 0 and -10, like the old Goldbox games had.
I don't really want to see attrition based gameplay, where you slowly whittle down the enemy's HP bar. Or where a powerful disabling spell is simply always blocked until you have taken down another bar.
Or look at the classic Krynn series of book, where Lord Soth could Power Word:Kill his enemies. I like that those abilities have a direct implementation in D&D than simply making it do 50000 hit points damage (to use D:OS 2 endgame numbers for HP).
EDIT: regarding the green slimes, the solution is rather simple. Don't melee them. Or - not good for a no reload - but still a very controlled risk: with decent armor they only hit on a 20 (@1 APR), with decent saves and 1-2 buffs you will have 75% probability of saving once hit, and you can easily kill them within one round. All in all I would guess the chance of getting chunked is only:
5% (getting hit) * 25% (failing saving throw) * 50% (not killing slime before slime attacks) = approximately 1/160 chance of getting killed with minimal precautions. And if it happens you can pick another NPC, whom you might not have used before.
Not sure the Stronghold/Castle idea would fit in here well. It needs to be pretty much a game focus to work nicely, only two games where I really liked it were NWN 2 and MM7. Not counting BG 2 here since the Strongholds mostly just gave a few class specific quests, but the management was extremely limited.
(...)
I have no objection at all to Larian making a very different game, nor am I at all bothered about that being called BG3 - I feel no sense of ownership of the setting or the gameplay mechanics.(...).
On Might & Magic VI/VII/VIII, there are enemies that not only can OHK you but can eradicate you. And erradication is far worse than death and much more hard and costly to ressurect, since not only the charname is dead, but also had his body disintegrated.... According to Larien, M&M VI doesn't work. Ahh Diablo 1/2 has misses, so doesn't work too...
Even Dungeons & Dragons online, an mmo has OHK spells like Finger of Death, Wail of Banshee and even petrification. This spells due the fact that enemies has inflated HP and have high DC isn't hard is arguably better than on pnp. I have if i remember correctly 28 CHA. At lv 14.
But for those who are wondering how petrification works on DDO, is differently than PnP but :
And i like it. I got OHKilled by Beholders with Disintegrate( i know, isn't technically OHK, is just an massive damage output that will OHK even an barbarian with 20 CON ) but the first time was in a "boss" in lv 10 dungeon, after an relative long puzzle, he casted phantaslmal killer against me. And guess what. Is my fault. I an invading an place with a lot of undead. Of course some one will have an similar type of magic. I had an will and fort save and failed on both. Just like enemies that i cast this spell has the same "chances"
And yes, DDO is a fun game, with fun dungeons but could be better if has less mmoish mechanics like cooldowns, an spellpower multiplying your spell damage, only one summon and more D&D like mechanics. 20 seconds cooldown on tentacles and the ultra limited range are awful mechanics, but is not an bad game. IMO if NWN is a 9.5/10, DDO is a 7.5/10
On Might & Magic VI/VII/VIII, there are enemies that not only can OHK you but can eradicate you. And erradication is far worse than death and much more hard and costly to ressurect, since not only the charname is dead, but also had his body disintegrated.... According to Larien, M&M VI doesn't work. Ahh Diablo 1/2 has misses, so doesn't work too...
I trust you realize that by the time you run into instant death in MM you are usually more than capable of fixing it on the spot? Same with Diablo, you don't miss-or-lose, you need many hits to kill a monster and having percentage of misses doesn't make it as random as dying to level 1 goblin's lucky arrow shot is.
Diablo trash thankfully dies very quickly, there is just a lot of it. And while dying to a single random arrow might be frustrating (though you are ignoring the inbuilt bad luck protection of BG; it is at least TWO random arrows) I think something is just missing if you can't go it to the enemy. E.g. Kirijutsu in Wizardry 6/7 allowed for random melee instant kills and that game worked.
On Might & Magic VI/VII/VIII, there are enemies that not only can OHK you but can eradicate you. And erradication is far worse than death and much more hard and costly to ressurect, since not only the charname is dead, but also had his body disintegrated.... According to Larien, M&M VI doesn't work. Ahh Diablo 1/2 has misses, so doesn't work too...
I trust you realize that by the time you run into instant death in MM you are usually more than capable of fixing it on the spot? Same with Diablo, you don't miss-or-lose, you need many hits to kill a monster and having percentage of misses doesn't make it as random as dying to level 1 goblin's lucky arrow shot is.
If low level NPC is weak and die quickly, low level PC needs to be weak and die quickly. About Diablo, i lost my first hardcore necros to souls with conviction aura. You still can die easily on D2 to some mobs. And on M&M VII, i did an "caster only" run and traps can OHK my party most of the time, mainly on starting areas. That is a downside with not having anyone to disarm the trap and everyone being fragile.
Some people see it as an problem, but an trap making the fight impossible to win and taking 20 turns for me to die with very slow paced animations, as an problem. I don't knwo why...
2) Stay true to D&D and Forgotten Realms lore. The lore is WAY more important to me than the rules. I am a Forgotten Realms lore junkie. I own and have read almost all of the FR novels and FR 3.5e sourcebooks. A corollary to this point: spread the game around to other parts of the Realms beyond Baldur's Gate/Sword Coast. The setting has so many very interesting places in it. Let's go visit them already!
That and almost only that.
Also as someone already said, make it sequel, with actual child of Gorion (resurrected or whatever) or remove 3 from title. After all BG story is not about city, but about bhaalspawn from Candlekeep.
If low level NPC is weak and die quickly, low level PC needs to be weak and die quickly. About Diablo, i lost my first hardcore necros to souls with conviction aura. You still can die easily on D2 to some mobs. And on M&M VII, i did an "caster only" run and traps can OHK my party most of the time, mainly on starting areas. That is a downside with not having anyone to disarm the trap and everyone being fragile.
Hardcore and caster only are challenges, something you have to willingly opt for. Low level DnD... not so much.
If low level NPC is weak and die quickly, low level PC needs to be weak and die quickly. About Diablo, i lost my first hardcore necros to souls with conviction aura. You still can die easily on D2 to some mobs. And on M&M VII, i did an "caster only" run and traps can OHK my party most of the time, mainly on starting areas. That is a downside with not having anyone to disarm the trap and everyone being fragile.
Hardcore and caster only are challenges, something you have to willingly opt for. Low level DnD... not so much.
Make the PC start at lv 4 or 5. On nwn2 if i remember correctly, you start at lv 3. Problem solved and not an single rule altered. The DM can determine in what level you start. So, if the DM wanna, he can make you start on a epic level and on nwn, if you create an char only to play hotu, you will start at lv 15.
"but they still missing 80% of attacks", make armor on enemies less frequent. Don't give plate armor to road bandits. Most of "this is too frustrating" is much more an problem of those who write the campaign than of the DnD rules... The leveling system has an very large "spectrum" of power.. Lv 1 means that you are very close to be just an common peasant. Lv 20, you are close to godhood. If you try to "balance" it and make low lv chars more strong and high level chars weaker, then you are removing one of the "core" elements...
I hope they will tie up some loos ends. Like the Sky / Soultaker storyline.
It's just my hope and it's probably futile. But one can always hope and pray to Helm.
They better not touch it. That's Beamdog's story, and I'm not done pestering them about finishing it.
@Rohen "
Also as someone already said, make it sequel, with actual child of Gorion (resurrected or whatever) or remove 3 from title. After all BG story is not about city, but about bhaalspawn from Candlekeep."
I'd be okay if we controlled a descendant of Gorion's Ward. There are only 4 romance options in the base game, 1 of which is certainly not still alive. So the branching choices could pretty easily and elegantly be covered by some dialogue options (KotOR2 did this EXTREMELY well).
2) Stay true to D&D and Forgotten Realms lore. The lore is WAY more important to me than the rules. I am a Forgotten Realms lore junkie. I own and have read almost all of the FR novels and FR 3.5e sourcebooks. A corollary to this point: spread the game around to other parts of the Realms beyond Baldur's Gate/Sword Coast. The setting has so many very interesting places in it. Let's go visit them already!
That and almost only that.
Also as someone already said, make it sequel, with actual child of Gorion (resurrected or whatever) or remove 3 from title. After all BG story is not about city, but about bhaalspawn from Candlekeep.
Absolutely not. Prolonging that story by force would only ruin it.
But they can reference the history and characters to give us that feeling that we still play the same series. Some non-humans from the BG1/2 cast can still be alive and make an appearance as NPCs.
These are likely just pipe dreams, but since I've been in a very druid-y mood lately, that's where my thoughts are right now.
1) Animal companions for druids and rangers! They should have been in first and second editions, including BG1 and BG2, and any game 3rd edition and later has no excuse not to have them.
2) Combat effective shapeshift forms for druids! I'm talking bear and cat forms from World of Warcraft effective, not some bear with AC 5 , or a panther with 2 damage per claw attack. And animal shift forms should have magical attacks in their claws and bites at higher levels. We druids are magical beings who can shapeshift, not actual animals. If you're going to have kits and feats that allow monstrous forms, then for heaven's sake make them more effective than just fighting in melee with good armor and weapons.
3) Creative shapeshift forms with utility. Already in 1st edition AD&D, shapeshifting was one of the main incentives to play a druid, and it was limited only by the player's imagination. Let us have bird form where we can fly over walls or obstacles, or fly overhead to scout out enemies on maps, or find locations for the party. Let us have snake form with spell-interrupting poison, or constrictor form that can paralyze one enemy, either non-lethally or with suffocation damage per round. Let us have rat form to crawl under doors or through pipes or small openings, or in between the bars of prison cells, or to spy on enemy conversations.
4) This one isn't for druids, but - Teleportation for high level wizards! Seriously, this was one of the main incentives to play a wizard in traditional D&D. And it's one of the main things that makes a party want to have a wizard. It was supposedly engine limitations that made it impossible in BG 1 &2, but that's not a thing any more, right? And while we're at it, could we please have utility spells that make a difference back? Light spells that you really need or else you stumble around in dungeons not being able to see two feet in front of you? The Might and Magic games already had that. What about Unseen Servant? Remember that? Telekinesis, please? You're all about environmental interactivity, right Larian? So let wizards float those keys over to the cell, levitate MacGuffins across the lava, trigger the traps from a safe distance. Create food and water, especially if it can provide a small buff, even if you don't implement any required food mechanic (PoE1 got that right).
That's all I can think of for now, but if this thread gets popular, I may be back with more later.
Probably that will take into account in that shiny new PnP adventure that WotC is working for autuum. It would be SO MUCH LESS confusing if this very direct sequel of BGII would be called BGIII rather than the actuall BGIII video game. As Larian's work is intended as a sequel of WotC's PnP module, thus, strickly speaking, making it actually BGIV.
BelgarathMTH Teleport like on pnp is almost impossible to implement. But an system like mark/recall from morrowind or Lloyd's beacon from M&M VI can work pretty well. And i strongly agree about shapeshifting.
Not sure the Stronghold/Castle idea would fit in here well. It needs to be pretty much a game focus to work nicely, only two games where I really liked it were NWN 2 and MM7. Not counting BG 2 here since the Strongholds mostly just gave a few class specific quests, but the management was extremely limited.
I would be very disappointed if they make stronghold management central to the gameplay. That was the downfall of both PoE1 and P:Km for me. At least in P:Km there was an option to turn down its importance, or even turn it off completely, but that felt like turning off half the game.
Not sure the Stronghold/Castle idea would fit in here well. It needs to be pretty much a game focus to work nicely, only two games where I really liked it were NWN 2 and MM7. Not counting BG 2 here since the Strongholds mostly just gave a few class specific quests, but the management was extremely limited.
I would be very disappointed if they make stronghold management central to the gameplay. That was the downfall of both PoE1 and P:Km for me. At least in P:Km there was an option to turn down its importance, or even turn it off completely, but that felt like turning off half the game.
IS not half of the game, is just another layer that you particularly don't like and stronghold management is good, but IMO should be optional. Aka you can ignore if you like with almost no consequence.
Probably that will take into account in that shiny new PnP adventure that WotC is working for autuum. It would be SO MUCH LESS confusing if this very direct sequel of BGII would be called BGIII rather than the actuall BGIII video game. As Larian's work is intended as a sequel of WotC's PnP module, thus, strickly speaking, making it actually BGIV.
Baldur's Gate: Return of the Illithari
I still hold out hope for an adjustment in the title.
i'd rather not have a time limit placed on me just for the sake of a time limit.
Right. It’s better to have Saravok’s confirmation to becoming a Grand Duke on hold for a month and a half as Gorion’s Wars travels the country side attempting to gain that critical experience, as opposed to if you do not make it back to Baldur’s Gate in time to stop the ceremony you need to confront Saravok in a completely different way as he plans his war.
The world is alive and shouldn’t wait for the player.
Nevertheless, dropping the chance to miss feels like a more fundamental change than either of the above, and not one I feel good about. It just requires rebalancing and changing so much else in the game line on-hit abilities like vorpal hits. Hell, imagine the green slimes from BG 1 with auto hit.
I suspect Swen has an issue with save-or-die mechanic, not the small randomness with expected result. Those slimes are perfect example of this problem - if they hit, you die. That's not how good combat design should work, and that's exactly why first chapters of BG1 were so bad compared to endgame and BG2 - your victory should depend on your skill and tactics, not on random chance.
I can understand people disliking the save or die mechanic - but those who do dislike it are less likely to be fans of Baldur's Gate. For people who played D&D in their introduction to gaming, the possibility of dying if you don't choose the right tactics was ever-present. There are so many ways to die, which can certainly be very off-putting if you're used to playing games where death is unlikely. However, the random factors in the game and the possibility of death is also a large part of the reason why some people have played the game for so many years (as opposed to playing it, saying "I enjoyed that, the graphics were really good" and then never playing it again).
I have no objection at all to Larian making a very different game, nor am I at all bothered about that being called BG3 - I feel no sense of ownership of the setting or the gameplay mechanics. I would, though, like to see a new game which maintains the same sort of combat balance as there is in D&D. I'm not rushing to judgment on whether that will happen. However, for the head of Larian to say that having misses in a video game is a problem, suggests that I am not going to be among his target group ...
Modern gaming taste, imo, has thankfully evolved beyond this. I think the problem with this system is that it highly rewarded save-scumming style of play in the IE games. And that stuff takes players out of the RP immersion.
It also meant that you often weren't engaging in the combat in a way that was intended per DnD rules and in ways that broke immersion. As I've said in another thread, RTS-style kiting was a supremely dominant tactic especially in early parts of BG. But it's not at all how the original tabletop system was supposed to work. And, without using kiting, the early parts of BG didn't offer you much of a toolset to beat bad dice rolls, and just one roll could give you a game over.
Also, reducing miss frequency doesn't guarantee an easier game. Since it's a mechanic that works both ways. If anything, more frequent hits is arguably harder, since the enemies only have to kill you once. You have to kill them every time. Imagine fighting wolves and gibberlings that never missed!
@deltago "Right. It’s better to have Saravok’s confirmation to becoming a Grand Duke on hold for a month and a half as Gorion’s Wars travels the country side attempting to gain that critical experience, as opposed to if you do not make it back to Baldur’s Gate in time to stop the ceremony you need to confront Saravok in a completely different way as he plans his war."
You're right. Having the game wait for the player IS better. Don't put a time limit on my playtime.
I want to see the statue of the beloved ranger... and also see it suddenly disappear from the plaza (who knows where it went, if you know what I mean :P )
Comments
The idea of BG is not to be an tactical war game. Is to be "lets pretend that X exist and that i live in the world of X"
Have an chance to get OHKilled makes you fell like you are in a dangerous world. An guy with plate armor being hard to hit, unless you are very lucky and skilled, is something to make he an hard opponent without making him an hard oponent because he needs to be impaled 40 times into the head.
The finger of death, is present to make your char fell like an true master of life and death that can insta purge the life force from his enemies. If you wanna to play any D&D game and expect an """balanced""" experience, you are playing D&D wrong. D&D is about pretending to be an guy on another world.
Anyway, other thing that i wish to see on BG3 is fortress building similar to Crossroad keep management.
The fact is your character can miss an attack and die. He's not perfect. Even gods may miss an attack and as some Forgotten Realms gods have proved they can also die.
I can understand people disliking the save or die mechanic - but those who do dislike it are less likely to be fans of Baldur's Gate. For people who played D&D in their introduction to gaming, the possibility of dying if you don't choose the right tactics was ever-present. There are so many ways to die, which can certainly be very off-putting if you're used to playing games where death is unlikely. However, the random factors in the game and the possibility of death is also a large part of the reason why some people have played the game for so many years (as opposed to playing it, saying "I enjoyed that, the graphics were really good" and then never playing it again).
I have no objection at all to Larian making a very different game, nor am I at all bothered about that being called BG3 - I feel no sense of ownership of the setting or the gameplay mechanics. I would, though, like to see a new game which maintains the same sort of combat balance as there is in D&D. I'm not rushing to judgment on whether that will happen. However, for the head of Larian to say that having misses in a video game is a problem, suggests that I am not going to be among his target group ...
Low-level combat in BG 1 (which was admittedly tricky for a newcomer) could have been simply improved by adding a bleeding out mechanic instead of instant death if your hit points reduce to between 0 and -10, like the old Goldbox games had.
I don't really want to see attrition based gameplay, where you slowly whittle down the enemy's HP bar. Or where a powerful disabling spell is simply always blocked until you have taken down another bar.
Or look at the classic Krynn series of book, where Lord Soth could Power Word:Kill his enemies. I like that those abilities have a direct implementation in D&D than simply making it do 50000 hit points damage (to use D:OS 2 endgame numbers for HP).
EDIT: regarding the green slimes, the solution is rather simple. Don't melee them. Or - not good for a no reload - but still a very controlled risk: with decent armor they only hit on a 20 (@1 APR), with decent saves and 1-2 buffs you will have 75% probability of saving once hit, and you can easily kill them within one round. All in all I would guess the chance of getting chunked is only:
5% (getting hit) * 25% (failing saving throw) * 50% (not killing slime before slime attacks) = approximately 1/160 chance of getting killed with minimal precautions. And if it happens you can pick another NPC, whom you might not have used before.
On Might & Magic VI/VII/VIII, there are enemies that not only can OHK you but can eradicate you. And erradication is far worse than death and much more hard and costly to ressurect, since not only the charname is dead, but also had his body disintegrated.... According to Larien, M&M VI doesn't work. Ahh Diablo 1/2 has misses, so doesn't work too...
Even Dungeons & Dragons online, an mmo has OHK spells like Finger of Death, Wail of Banshee and even petrification. This spells due the fact that enemies has inflated HP and have high DC isn't hard is arguably better than on pnp. I have if i remember correctly 28 CHA. At lv 14.
But for those who are wondering how petrification works on DDO, is differently than PnP but :
And i like it. I got OHKilled by Beholders with Disintegrate( i know, isn't technically OHK, is just an massive damage output that will OHK even an barbarian with 20 CON ) but the first time was in a "boss" in lv 10 dungeon, after an relative long puzzle, he casted phantaslmal killer against me. And guess what. Is my fault. I an invading an place with a lot of undead. Of course some one will have an similar type of magic. I had an will and fort save and failed on both. Just like enemies that i cast this spell has the same "chances"
And yes, DDO is a fun game, with fun dungeons but could be better if has less mmoish mechanics like cooldowns, an spellpower multiplying your spell damage, only one summon and more D&D like mechanics. 20 seconds cooldown on tentacles and the ultra limited range are awful mechanics, but is not an bad game. IMO if NWN is a 9.5/10, DDO is a 7.5/10
Pathfinder too, but on pathfinder, the spell in question deals massive damage. 10/ caster level on a failed save.
Yes, unfortunately, but no need to make it even worse
If low level NPC is weak and die quickly, low level PC needs to be weak and die quickly. About Diablo, i lost my first hardcore necros to souls with conviction aura. You still can die easily on D2 to some mobs. And on M&M VII, i did an "caster only" run and traps can OHK my party most of the time, mainly on starting areas. That is a downside with not having anyone to disarm the trap and everyone being fragile.
Some people see it as an problem, but an trap making the fight impossible to win and taking 20 turns for me to die with very slow paced animations, as an problem. I don't knwo why...
That and almost only that.
Also as someone already said, make it sequel, with actual child of Gorion (resurrected or whatever) or remove 3 from title. After all BG story is not about city, but about bhaalspawn from Candlekeep.
Make the PC start at lv 4 or 5. On nwn2 if i remember correctly, you start at lv 3. Problem solved and not an single rule altered. The DM can determine in what level you start. So, if the DM wanna, he can make you start on a epic level and on nwn, if you create an char only to play hotu, you will start at lv 15.
"but they still missing 80% of attacks", make armor on enemies less frequent. Don't give plate armor to road bandits. Most of "this is too frustrating" is much more an problem of those who write the campaign than of the DnD rules... The leveling system has an very large "spectrum" of power.. Lv 1 means that you are very close to be just an common peasant. Lv 20, you are close to godhood. If you try to "balance" it and make low lv chars more strong and high level chars weaker, then you are removing one of the "core" elements...
Why do that when there are much easier solutions?
They better not touch it. That's Beamdog's story, and I'm not done pestering them about finishing it.
@Rohen "
Also as someone already said, make it sequel, with actual child of Gorion (resurrected or whatever) or remove 3 from title. After all BG story is not about city, but about bhaalspawn from Candlekeep."
I'd be okay if we controlled a descendant of Gorion's Ward. There are only 4 romance options in the base game, 1 of which is certainly not still alive. So the branching choices could pretty easily and elegantly be covered by some dialogue options (KotOR2 did this EXTREMELY well).
Absolutely not. Prolonging that story by force would only ruin it.
But they can reference the history and characters to give us that feeling that we still play the same series. Some non-humans from the BG1/2 cast can still be alive and make an appearance as NPCs.
1) Animal companions for druids and rangers! They should have been in first and second editions, including BG1 and BG2, and any game 3rd edition and later has no excuse not to have them.
2) Combat effective shapeshift forms for druids! I'm talking bear and cat forms from World of Warcraft effective, not some bear with AC 5 , or a panther with 2 damage per claw attack. And animal shift forms should have magical attacks in their claws and bites at higher levels. We druids are magical beings who can shapeshift, not actual animals. If you're going to have kits and feats that allow monstrous forms, then for heaven's sake make them more effective than just fighting in melee with good armor and weapons.
3) Creative shapeshift forms with utility. Already in 1st edition AD&D, shapeshifting was one of the main incentives to play a druid, and it was limited only by the player's imagination. Let us have bird form where we can fly over walls or obstacles, or fly overhead to scout out enemies on maps, or find locations for the party. Let us have snake form with spell-interrupting poison, or constrictor form that can paralyze one enemy, either non-lethally or with suffocation damage per round. Let us have rat form to crawl under doors or through pipes or small openings, or in between the bars of prison cells, or to spy on enemy conversations.
4) This one isn't for druids, but - Teleportation for high level wizards! Seriously, this was one of the main incentives to play a wizard in traditional D&D. And it's one of the main things that makes a party want to have a wizard. It was supposedly engine limitations that made it impossible in BG 1 &2, but that's not a thing any more, right? And while we're at it, could we please have utility spells that make a difference back? Light spells that you really need or else you stumble around in dungeons not being able to see two feet in front of you? The Might and Magic games already had that. What about Unseen Servant? Remember that? Telekinesis, please? You're all about environmental interactivity, right Larian? So let wizards float those keys over to the cell, levitate MacGuffins across the lava, trigger the traps from a safe distance. Create food and water, especially if it can provide a small buff, even if you don't implement any required food mechanic (PoE1 got that right).
That's all I can think of for now, but if this thread gets popular, I may be back with more later.
I would be very disappointed if they make stronghold management central to the gameplay. That was the downfall of both PoE1 and P:Km for me. At least in P:Km there was an option to turn down its importance, or even turn it off completely, but that felt like turning off half the game.
IS not half of the game, is just another layer that you particularly don't like and stronghold management is good, but IMO should be optional. Aka you can ignore if you like with almost no consequence.
Baldur's Gate: Return of the Illithari
I still hold out hope for an adjustment in the title.
Right. It’s better to have Saravok’s confirmation to becoming a Grand Duke on hold for a month and a half as Gorion’s Wars travels the country side attempting to gain that critical experience, as opposed to if you do not make it back to Baldur’s Gate in time to stop the ceremony you need to confront Saravok in a completely different way as he plans his war.
The world is alive and shouldn’t wait for the player.
Modern gaming taste, imo, has thankfully evolved beyond this. I think the problem with this system is that it highly rewarded save-scumming style of play in the IE games. And that stuff takes players out of the RP immersion.
It also meant that you often weren't engaging in the combat in a way that was intended per DnD rules and in ways that broke immersion. As I've said in another thread, RTS-style kiting was a supremely dominant tactic especially in early parts of BG. But it's not at all how the original tabletop system was supposed to work. And, without using kiting, the early parts of BG didn't offer you much of a toolset to beat bad dice rolls, and just one roll could give you a game over.
Also, reducing miss frequency doesn't guarantee an easier game. Since it's a mechanic that works both ways. If anything, more frequent hits is arguably harder, since the enemies only have to kill you once. You have to kill them every time. Imagine fighting wolves and gibberlings that never missed!
You're right. Having the game wait for the player IS better. Don't put a time limit on my playtime.