The original game would have never taken into account a fighter with no armor lol.
Not true, unarmored/lightly armored warriors were taken into account from day 1 of AD&D, it is why you get a full dex bonus to AC when unarmored or lightly armored and less Dex bonus from Heavy armor.
Of course it may not be as safe to be unarmored but that is why armor was invented. In all honesty I see most of the Asian/Oriental classes like Kensai just catering to the uber-powerful character group that wasnt satisfied with normal character development....they almost always are attempts to create superior character classes rather than balanced ones. But that i s just my take on that.
Are you sure that isn't a 3E thing? It wasn't applied to the BG games at least.
Quite Possibly, umm actually it was pen and paper, never tried the Kensai in BG... or were y ou talking about the Dex bonus to AC? That was 1e and 2e Pen and Paper, not sure of the Mechanics used in the BG game...
Maybe the Wizard Slayer just needs a special kind of favored enemy that grants them a bonus to THAC0 and/or damage against spellcasters. That would be significant enough to be useful throughout BG1 and BG2, without being any more powerful than a ranger's favored enemy, and still matches the flavor of the class.
@Tanthalas Going through the BG2 Original Manual it appears they penalized thieves skils for various weights of armor but gave the fighting classes a pass on it, there doesnt seem to be mention of the Max dex bonus for the armors.
The Dex/Armor thing was a 3E addition. It's why people like Korgan RELIED on gauntlets of dexterity because otherwise they just got smacked around like a wet noodle even in full plate. Honestly that change might have been one of my favorite from AD&D->3E.
On the topic of wizard slayers again. I recently saw a tweak last night that allowed them to provide their spell disruption effect on ranged weapons too. I hadn't realized it was that bad >< So pretty please Tanthalas ask your powers that be to give the Wizard Slayer some love.
Raise the magic resistance to 50% right from lvl 1 and dont let them dual/multi and it would have equal amount pros and cons
See I actually enjoyed gaining a little MR at a time. For me it was the lack of bracers/belt/boots that really did it in (if I remember they can still use helms).
I think HLAs are mostly the balance problem rather than the kits themselves. They simply negate certain classes advantages/disadvantages. I always install some mod that changes them.
@MilesBeyond well, keep in mind monks get way other benefits that wizard slayers don't. you can't just take one type of bonus and compare them in a vacuum.
I'm almost 90% sure Finger of Death does. I could be thinking of Death Spell, though. There are too many death spells at level 6 lol
The it dice ones tend to be better in my experience anyway. Throw them at low hit-point enemies like Mind Flayers or mages. It's the save or die ones that are a pain, because they tend to have such a high saving throw that they aren't reliable. Symbol: Kill, maybe, but there are better level 9 spells out there lol
@MilesBeyond well, keep in mind monks get way other benefits that wizard slayers don't. you can't just take one type of bonus and compare them in a vacuum.
That's true, but the point was that even when it comes to their speciality, anti-magic, they aren't the best. The Wizard Slayer should get better MR than the Monk, I think.
I have never played a kit myself, but I think it would be nice to have both Magic Resistance and Spell Reflection for the Wizard Slayer. He could have a chance to resist, then if that succeeds, he can have a chance to reflect the effect back at the caster. To make it even more powerful, it could apply to more than just spells- to things like psionics as well.
I think HLAs are mostly the balance problem rather than the kits themselves. They simply negate certain classes advantages/disadvantages. I always install some mod that changes them.
Oh yeah, don't even get me started on HLA's. What were they thinking???
I think my approach is to take BGEE a lot like a reboot than just a re-release. BG is old and never coming back, so I guess I'll just roll with the punches and start this with a (mostly) blank slate.
Flame Blade does not utilize weapon proficiency so it doesn't matter if you get small sword proficiency. Attacks are made independant of that boost.
You are 100% wrong about this. Roll a Cleric and a Druid, the latter with small sword proficiency. Equip both with a club or something. Cast Flame Blade. Your Druid will have a bigger boost to THAC0. This may have changed in BG2 engine, but this is not the case in BG1.
I'll be darned. Looked into it more and you're right.
Must have been IWD where this was different? Or maybe I'm just that familiar with 3E and beyond I forgot. You're right. I'm wrong. Muh bad.
Call Lightning is trash in Baldur's Gate because it's so incredibly situational.
Here, let me fix that for you: "Call Lightning is trash in Baldur's Gate 2 because it's so incredibly situational." Something like 90% of all fights you ever do are outdoors in BG1, and maybe about 30-40% of all hard fights. That's not situational in my book.The only fight I can think of in the entire game that is outdoors and is difficult enough to warrant Call Lightning as a legitimate advantage over a priest being able to summon skeletons is the one outside the Nashkel Mines. That's probably the third hardest battle in the game. Call Lightning is not going to be the reason you win it (probably). Most of the difficult encounters in the game are still inside/underground.
I wasn't going on your point about kits being over/underwhelming. Just saying default druids are kind of gimp compared to Clerics. Any of the Druid kits besides Shapeshifter, though, and I'm with you all the way. Totemic Druid is probably my favorite kit in the game because unkillable minions are totally broken.
The Ranger kits all need to be looked at because other than Archer they are nothing but disadvantages compared to even just the base class, at least through BG1's default level cap. Oh, and with Stalker vs. beastmaster. Yeah the extra HP from your familiar is nice but the fact you are so limited on weapons is the real killer. If they had access to decent clubs, my feelings about them would change immensely.
Personally I wouldn't mind seeing them add in a bunch of kits per class. I know they are at least adding Blackguard and that's cool.
Yeah, I still don't get all the love for Call Lightning. It'd be a great spell if there were more difficult outdoor encounters, but there aren't.
Hell, sandman mentions the encounter outside the Nashkel Mines as the only fight where it'd be really necessary, but by the time you're level 5, that fight's a breeze anyway.
Like I said, the bounty hunters outside the Cloakwood mines might possibly warrant it, but even then, Animate Dead may very well be better in that situation.
What other major outdoor fights are there? Call Lightning certainly isn't going to make hunting basilisks any easier. Hmmm, the outdoor Bandit Camp might possibly be a good one, but again, if you're level 5 for that, it shouldn't be too difficult either way.
Like, if anyone could provide examples of fights where Call Lightning actually gives the druid a substantial advantage, that would be cool. But again, the class just pales in comparison to everything else. Except maybe the Bard.
The kits should stay and remain playable throughout the game, including BG1. I agree that some of them need rebalancing. I'm not so worried, like some of the other members, about the overbalanced characters (I've never been guilty of choosing a character based on how much easier the first five experience levels are), but some of the kits either started out completely worthless or became completely worthless pretty early on. Everybody's given their own examples; I don't think I could name anything which hasn't already been mentioned. For those that are worried about an overpowered game experience, I don't see why simply using the base class for a time, or permanently, is so much of a problem. I can see why some of the gamers would want to add material, but I'm surprised to see so many people willing to take away some of the "perks" the community enjoyed even though those "perks" don't have to influence their gameplay at all.
I like the current option to either keep a character imported from BG1 as the base class or kit it. Keep that and there's no real problem. But yeah, some rebalancing of some of the lamer kits (Jester, Wizard Slayer) would be cool, even if the rebalancing is restricted somehow to the earlier levels.
This is a thread I started in the feature requests forums for Wizard Slayers. Let me know what y'all think. Personally I'd really like option 3 but I could at least settle with option 2.
lol, yeah. I asked about the Wizard Slayer too. They told me to join the forum and make my voice heard. It appears better men have done this before I got the chance...@DragonSpear
Go ahead and add your own thoughts to that thread @Silence. Honestly I've only played through as a Ranger and a Paladin so more thoughts and discussion is welcome. Plus I also know that I cheaped out on Inquisitor, Monk and Blackguard cause I had already spent over 2 hours writing that post.
Daigle confirmed the shapeshifter rebalance. He was too strong at low level so he got disminished. The thing is, they don't have to time to boost it back on the upper levels yet. But it's planned.
And one of the Dev confirmed they are working on the monk too, but was pretty much being ultra evasive on the subject
I was excited about the Assassin kit at first, but then I found it to be almost useless unless you played it 'til much later chapter.
The extra 2x backstab multiplier and poison coating weren't worth the hundred of points you could've spent for thieving skills throughout your adventure.
Hence it is an underpowered kit for either the beginning of BG1 or BG2.
I do wish that armor would limit dex bonus a la 3rd Ed ruleset, only because it makes so much sense. It could mess up the BG balance to do so, but I think it's worth a risk. Essentially, it makes STR and DEX based fighters different and gives reasons not to opt for "Full plate, packing steel". Also makes the Kensai seem more viable.
Would love to play a Kensai without double classing, but the thought of never getting below AC1 worries me. I mean, not even bracers? Ouch!
I was excited about the Assassin kit at first, but then I found it to be almost useless unless you played it 'til much later chapter.
The extra 2x backstab multiplier and poison coating weren't worth the hundred of points you could've spent for thieving skills throughout your adventure.
Hence it is an underpowered kit for either the beginning of BG1 or BG2.
Poison Weapon will totally wreck casters, which are some of the most dangerous enemies in the entire franchise. Don't count them out.
Late to this reply, but I noticed someone mention Assassins. Losing out on the thief skills really does suck, especially because as an Assassin you're probably going to want to spend most of your early game skill points on stealth so you can land back-stabs. It's the REASON you roll one.
But there's like 55 thousand bajillion other good thieves in BG1.
Yeah they won't backstab any harder than a regular thief for the duration of BG1. The thing that really sets them apart won't happen. However, their poison ability is incredible for fighting against casters and is usable I think at least once a day at level 1 (or at the very least, level 4.) Also, they get a raw +1 hit to Thac0 and Damage. Hard to argue with that.
If you ask me, the kits that are most "gimped" through BG1 are as follows: -Beast Master. The biggest reason you pick up this kit is for it's spell casting. You get a single solitary level 1 spell once you manage to hit the level cap. Insert sarcastic oohs and aahs here. You're limited to quarterstaves for melee because there are no magical clubs in BG1. You'll gain a minor boost to HP with your summon familiar and the extra stealth is nice, but you're so limited in what you can do with this guy.
Oddly enough I think it'd be just fine if there was at least a club +1 in the game. That's it. Maybe a club +2 if Trent and the gang are feeling generous.
-Kensai. Inability to use any ranged weapons except throwing axes and daggers bites. Throwing axes are expensive and cumbersome. Also, no armor obviously blows. The extra damage and thac0 and -speed factor are all great and all, but he'll need serious help in order to be viable for a hardcore style run.
Remember, friends. The ability to reload at will does not make a class viable!
-Monks as a class. When you can only reach level 8 at game's end? 1d10 damage for melee, 2 attacks a round, and 2 uses of stunning blow is all you're getting out of the class. You never reach the point your fists are considered magical weapons. You'll only get your base armor down to 5 (equivalence of equipping a regular Splint Mail I believe.) I'm okay with how weak they start out because that's half the appeal. However, the other half of the appeal is the ungodliness they eventually grow into. If they increase the cap just enough Monks could hit level 9, I'm okay with them as is.
I would mention shapeshifter but it's a bad kit in general, regardless of BG1 or 2. If it was implemented properly, it'd be totally overpowered. As is, it's completely and utterly terrible.
Kits that are a little TOO powerful for BG1: -Stalker. That extra 20% stealth is pretty nuts early game, and fighter thac0 with 2 proficiency points in the weapon of your choice rather than just one on backstab attempts and potential 18/XX adding even more thac0/damage is pretty absurd.
At least this one tapers out toward the end of BG1. It starts off pretty damn absurd, though.
-Archer. You basically can't miss at all once you hit level 6 and do absurd damage, all while being able to kite enemies around.
-Cavalier. Immunity to fear, check. Immunity to charm, check. Immunity to poison, check. Extra 20% resistance to fire? Check. Only downside is you can't use bows, slings and crossbows? Guess I'll just take proficiency points in axes/hammers/daggers. Not only are all of those things avoiding half the trials and tribulations of early game BG1, there's unnecessary bonuses you don't need for BG1 proper left in the wing.
-Inquisitor. Immune to hold and charm, check. Access to a spell in True Sight not available in BG1 proper, check. Downside of not being able to cast divine spells never coming into play because you can't reach when you'd gain them anyway due to the xp cap? Check. Dispel Magic at a higher caster level than you should be able to obtain and therefore have it always, always, always work 100% of the time against every caster you ever meet?
Check.
-Totemic Druid. Summonable creatures basically immune to damage for the first 3/4ths of the game. Don't think I really need to say more.
-Bounty Hunter. Traps you can throw? Traps in general break a lot of otherwise difficulty encounters in BG1, but the ability to huck them across the room and trigger against enemies out of line of sight is pretty stupid.
-Skald. Skald song at level 1 is a better buff than half the best equipment available in BG1.
Agree with analysis of Monk, Beastmaster, Shapeshifter, Cavalier, Inquisitor and Totemic Druid.
Bounty Hunter can no longer throw snares. Yes, they are still powered, but no more so than any other kit.
Skald gives the party an awesome buff! But the skald is also a 'dead slot'. You can only sing with the Skald, you can't actually fight with hm. So I'm on the fence about this one.
Kensai is just fine. It's real easy to get a good AC with spells and potions.
Stalker I don't feel is any more overpowered than a standard fighter-thief (and is less powerful than a half-orc fig-thief).
Archer isn't overpowered, but archery is. An archer actually receives at most a +2/+2, but this is made especially deadly because of the stupidly damaging arrows available.
Comments
Of course it may not be as safe to be unarmored but that is why armor was invented. In all honesty I see most of the Asian/Oriental classes like Kensai just catering to the uber-powerful character group that wasnt satisfied with normal character development....they almost always are attempts to create superior character classes rather than balanced ones. But that i s just my take on that.
Are you sure that isn't a 3E thing? It wasn't applied to the BG games at least.
or were y ou talking about the Dex bonus to AC? That was 1e and 2e Pen and Paper, not sure of the Mechanics used in the BG game...
Going through the BG2 Original Manual it appears they penalized thieves skils for various weights of armor but gave the fighting classes a pass on it, there doesnt seem to be mention of the Max dex bonus for the armors.
@Immagikman
The Dex/Armor thing was a 3E addition. It's why people like Korgan RELIED on gauntlets of dexterity because otherwise they just got smacked around like a wet noodle even in full plate. Honestly that change might have been one of my favorite from AD&D->3E.
On the topic of wizard slayers again. I recently saw a tweak last night that allowed them to provide their spell disruption effect on ranged weapons too. I hadn't realized it was that bad >< So pretty please Tanthalas ask your powers that be to give the Wizard Slayer some love.
The it dice ones tend to be better in my experience anyway. Throw them at low hit-point enemies like Mind Flayers or mages. It's the save or die ones that are a pain, because they tend to have such a high saving throw that they aren't reliable. Symbol: Kill, maybe, but there are better level 9 spells out there lol
I think my approach is to take BGEE a lot like a reboot than just a re-release. BG is old and never coming back, so I guess I'll just roll with the punches and start this with a (mostly) blank slate.
Must have been IWD where this was different? Or maybe I'm just that familiar with 3E and beyond I forgot. You're right. I'm wrong. Muh bad. Here, let me fix that for you: "Call Lightning is trash in Baldur's Gate 2 because it's so incredibly situational." Something like 90% of all fights you ever do are outdoors in BG1, and maybe about 30-40% of all hard fights. That's not situational in my book.The only fight I can think of in the entire game that is outdoors and is difficult enough to warrant Call Lightning as a legitimate advantage over a priest being able to summon skeletons is the one outside the Nashkel Mines. That's probably the third hardest battle in the game. Call Lightning is not going to be the reason you win it (probably). Most of the difficult encounters in the game are still inside/underground.
I wasn't going on your point about kits being over/underwhelming. Just saying default druids are kind of gimp compared to Clerics. Any of the Druid kits besides Shapeshifter, though, and I'm with you all the way. Totemic Druid is probably my favorite kit in the game because unkillable minions are totally broken.
The Ranger kits all need to be looked at because other than Archer they are nothing but disadvantages compared to even just the base class, at least through BG1's default level cap. Oh, and with Stalker vs. beastmaster. Yeah the extra HP from your familiar is nice but the fact you are so limited on weapons is the real killer. If they had access to decent clubs, my feelings about them would change immensely.
Personally I wouldn't mind seeing them add in a bunch of kits per class. I know they are at least adding Blackguard and that's cool.
Hell, sandman mentions the encounter outside the Nashkel Mines as the only fight where it'd be really necessary, but by the time you're level 5, that fight's a breeze anyway.
Like I said, the bounty hunters outside the Cloakwood mines might possibly warrant it, but even then, Animate Dead may very well be better in that situation.
What other major outdoor fights are there? Call Lightning certainly isn't going to make hunting basilisks any easier. Hmmm, the outdoor Bandit Camp might possibly be a good one, but again, if you're level 5 for that, it shouldn't be too difficult either way.
Like, if anyone could provide examples of fights where Call Lightning actually gives the druid a substantial advantage, that would be cool. But again, the class just pales in comparison to everything else. Except maybe the Bard.
I like the current option to either keep a character imported from BG1 as the base class or kit it. Keep that and there's no real problem. But yeah, some rebalancing of some of the lamer kits (Jester, Wizard Slayer) would be cool, even if the rebalancing is restricted somehow to the earlier levels.
This is a thread I started in the feature requests forums for Wizard Slayers. Let me know what y'all think. Personally I'd really like option 3 but I could at least settle with option 2.
And one of the Dev confirmed they are working on the monk too, but was pretty much being ultra evasive on the subject
I was excited about the Assassin kit at first, but then I found it to be almost useless unless you played it 'til much later chapter.
The extra 2x backstab multiplier and poison coating weren't worth the hundred of points you could've spent for thieving skills throughout your adventure.
Hence it is an underpowered kit for either the beginning of BG1 or BG2.
Would love to play a Kensai without double classing, but the thought of never getting below AC1 worries me. I mean, not even bracers? Ouch!
But there's like 55 thousand bajillion other good thieves in BG1.
Yeah they won't backstab any harder than a regular thief for the duration of BG1. The thing that really sets them apart won't happen. However, their poison ability is incredible for fighting against casters and is usable I think at least once a day at level 1 (or at the very least, level 4.) Also, they get a raw +1 hit to Thac0 and Damage. Hard to argue with that.
If you ask me, the kits that are most "gimped" through BG1 are as follows:
-Beast Master. The biggest reason you pick up this kit is for it's spell casting. You get a single solitary level 1 spell once you manage to hit the level cap. Insert sarcastic oohs and aahs here. You're limited to quarterstaves for melee because there are no magical clubs in BG1. You'll gain a minor boost to HP with your summon familiar and the extra stealth is nice, but you're so limited in what you can do with this guy.
Oddly enough I think it'd be just fine if there was at least a club +1 in the game. That's it. Maybe a club +2 if Trent and the gang are feeling generous.
-Kensai. Inability to use any ranged weapons except throwing axes and daggers bites. Throwing axes are expensive and cumbersome. Also, no armor obviously blows. The extra damage and thac0 and -speed factor are all great and all, but he'll need serious help in order to be viable for a hardcore style run.
Remember, friends. The ability to reload at will does not make a class viable!
-Monks as a class. When you can only reach level 8 at game's end? 1d10 damage for melee, 2 attacks a round, and 2 uses of stunning blow is all you're getting out of the class. You never reach the point your fists are considered magical weapons. You'll only get your base armor down to 5 (equivalence of equipping a regular Splint Mail I believe.) I'm okay with how weak they start out because that's half the appeal. However, the other half of the appeal is the ungodliness they eventually grow into. If they increase the cap just enough Monks could hit level 9, I'm okay with them as is.
I would mention shapeshifter but it's a bad kit in general, regardless of BG1 or 2. If it was implemented properly, it'd be totally overpowered. As is, it's completely and utterly terrible.
Kits that are a little TOO powerful for BG1:
-Stalker. That extra 20% stealth is pretty nuts early game, and fighter thac0 with 2 proficiency points in the weapon of your choice rather than just one on backstab attempts and potential 18/XX adding even more thac0/damage is pretty absurd.
At least this one tapers out toward the end of BG1. It starts off pretty damn absurd, though.
-Archer. You basically can't miss at all once you hit level 6 and do absurd damage, all while being able to kite enemies around.
-Cavalier. Immunity to fear, check. Immunity to charm, check. Immunity to poison, check. Extra 20% resistance to fire? Check. Only downside is you can't use bows, slings and crossbows? Guess I'll just take proficiency points in axes/hammers/daggers. Not only are all of those things avoiding half the trials and tribulations of early game BG1, there's unnecessary bonuses you don't need for BG1 proper left in the wing.
-Inquisitor. Immune to hold and charm, check. Access to a spell in True Sight not available in BG1 proper, check. Downside of not being able to cast divine spells never coming into play because you can't reach when you'd gain them anyway due to the xp cap? Check. Dispel Magic at a higher caster level than you should be able to obtain and therefore have it always, always, always work 100% of the time against every caster you ever meet?
Check.
-Totemic Druid. Summonable creatures basically immune to damage for the first 3/4ths of the game. Don't think I really need to say more.
-Bounty Hunter. Traps you can throw? Traps in general break a lot of otherwise difficulty encounters in BG1, but the ability to huck them across the room and trigger against enemies out of line of sight is pretty stupid.
-Skald. Skald song at level 1 is a better buff than half the best equipment available in BG1.
Bounty Hunter can no longer throw snares. Yes, they are still powered, but no more so than any other kit.
Skald gives the party an awesome buff! But the skald is also a 'dead slot'. You can only sing with the Skald, you can't actually fight with hm. So I'm on the fence about this one.
Kensai is just fine. It's real easy to get a good AC with spells and potions.
Stalker I don't feel is any more overpowered than a standard fighter-thief (and is less powerful than a half-orc fig-thief).
Archer isn't overpowered, but archery is. An archer actually receives at most a +2/+2, but this is made especially deadly because of the stupidly damaging arrows available.