Skip to content

Would you buy Icewind Dale II: Enhanced Edition?

11113151617

Comments

  • semiticgoddesssemiticgoddess Member Posts: 14,903
    edited February 2017
    Frankly I wouldn't even mind if we lost all the cool 3E stuff in IWD2. I currently have the original IWD2 from GOG, and I think it would be great to play IWD2 with standard 2E stuff.

    Come to think of it, it might be less work to just re-create the game using the EE 2.X engine (copying over all the areas and critters and dialog and scripting and so forth) than to try to revamp the 3E system and all of those feats and unique 3E effects. Like creating a giant quest mod.
    JuliusBorisovtherdreSmilingSword
  • rapsam2003rapsam2003 Member Posts: 1,636

    Frankly I wouldn't even mind if we lost all the cool 3E stuff in IWD2.

    I would. That Sneak Attack damage is much better than Backstab, imho. Plus, the fact that Tieflings, Aasimar, Elven subraces, etc., etc. were a thing in 3.X is much better than how AD&D2 did it, where you were just "Elf" or just "Halfling". And the emphasis on the player choosing.
    In AD&D2, if your DM wasn't kind, you were rolling for just about everything. Your build could suck completely, and you were stuck with it. Having 73 stat points and being the dumb wizard (because you literally don't have enough points for a decent wizard build) sucks terribly. In 3.X, stat rolling was standardized; everyone got the same amount of rolls. It's much more consistent. Yeah, in BG and IWD1, I can just keep rerolling stats, but it's more fun (imho) to just assign your points.
    ThacoBellVallmyrVarwulf
  • brusbrus Member Posts: 944
    edited February 2017
    Does IWD2 engine have 3D characters or 2D spritesheets like in BG2 ?
  • semiticgoddesssemiticgoddess Member Posts: 14,903
    @brus: IWD2 has 2D sprites, created from 3D models that have since been lost, just like the other Infinity Engine games. Moving IWD2 sprites like Isair and Madae into an EE engine would not be a major problem.
  • AstroBryGuyAstroBryGuy Member Posts: 3,437
    edited February 2017

    Frankly I wouldn't even mind if we lost all the cool 3E stuff in IWD2.

    I would. That Sneak Attack damage is much better than Backstab, imho. Plus, the fact that Tieflings, Aasimar, Elven subraces, etc., etc. were a thing in 3.X is much better than how AD&D2 did it, where you were just "Elf" or just "Halfling". And the emphasis on the player choosing.
    In AD&D2, if your DM wasn't kind, you were rolling for just about everything. Your build could suck completely, and you were stuck with it. Having 73 stat points and being the dumb wizard (because you literally don't have enough points for a decent wizard build) sucks terribly. In 3.X, stat rolling was standardized; everyone got the same amount of rolls. It's much more consistent. Yeah, in BG and IWD1, I can just keep rerolling stats, but it's more fun (imho) to just assign your points.
    You're confusing 2E/3E differences with the Infinity Engine's implementation of the rules.

    Subraces: Subraces aren't a 3E invention. Subraces for PCs were added to AD&D 1st Edition in Unearthed Arcana (1985). 2nd Edition included subraces in the "Complete Book of ..." series for various races in the early 1990s. Also, the 3E Player's Handbook doesn't mention subraces, they were an optional rule in the DMG. Bioware decided not to implement subraces in the Baldur's Gate games. Black Isle decided to implement the rule in IWD2. It's not a 2E vs. 3E thing.

    Sneak Attack: Ok, Backstab vs. Sneak Attack *is* a 2E vs 3E difference, but Beamdog has already implemented Sneak Attack rules for IWDEE, so remaking IWD2 under the current Infinity+ Engine could have Sneak Attack.

    Point Buy: In 3E, roll "4d6 drop lowest" is the default ability score generation method, not point buy. However, 8 optional attribute generation rules are presented in the DMG, including point buy (with various amounts of points for low- to high-powered campaigns) and the old "roll 3d6 six times, record scores in order" method. AD&D 2E gave 6 methods in the Player's Handbook with the "roll 3d6 six times, record in order" as Method I and "roll 4d6 drop lowest" as Method V (point buy for 2E didn't come until the Skills & Powers sourcebook). So, the main changes in rolling attributes from 2E to 3E were to make 2E's Method V into 3E's default (which many pen and paper players had already gravitated towards) and move the alternative methods to the DMG. Again, this is developer choice, not 2E vs. 3E rules. Black Isle decided to implement an optional point buy rule for IWD2.
    ThacoBelllolien
  • rapsam2003rapsam2003 Member Posts: 1,636
    edited February 2017
    @AstroBryGuy Actually, I'm aware of all of that. I do have all the Player Handbooks and the Dungeon Master's Guide for AD&D2 and 3.X.

    And what I'm referring to that very few players actually bothered to do rolls in 3.X, because point buy was a thing. (Don't believe me? Look up guides for 3.5 Classes, many of which still exist today.) Unless your DM or group forced you to do for some reason, which is insane. Players should have the freedom to control all aspects of their character creation, only bounded by what's sensible for the setting. (For instance, there are no Bariaur in the Forgotten Realms. Why should the DM let you make one, if that's the setting?)
    Another example of unnecessarily limiting things: in 2E, tiefling characters were basically roll 1d100 3 times. (Of course, a good DM probably just let you select the 3 features you wanted.) There's numerous other things that changed with 3.X because the player base as a whole started doing different things and wanted to actually play characters, not dice rolls. Really, there was a difference in perception between AD&D editions and 3rd Edition on.

    See, the way player base did things as a whole was basically what 3.X (note I keep using that term not, just 3E) became in practicality, and that's fairly reflected in IWD2. The IWD2 devs were smart enough to realize that rolling for stats was silly and annoying, just like a lot of players realized that.
  • AstroBryGuyAstroBryGuy Member Posts: 3,437
    So, 3E is better than 2E, because the IWD2 developers chose different optional rules than the BG1/BG2 developers. K.
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • rapsam2003rapsam2003 Member Posts: 1,636
    edited February 2017

    IWDEE already has Sneak Attack instead of backstab (in fact, it has an option for either one) so IWD2-in-the-IWDEE-engine would as well. :smiley:

    It's a toggleable option, yes. But original IWD didn't have it, that's what I mean. Why BGEE and BG2EE don't have it yet, I don't know.


    See, the way player base did things as a whole was basically what 3.X

    Eh, no. You /= everybody.
    Ok, well...as I said:

    (Don't believe me? Look up guides for 3.5 Classes, many of which still exist today.)

    ...

    I'm not a fan of 3.X, as a whole, but it actually made a lot more sense than AD&D2 did. There were a lot of things in AD&D2 that were unnecessarily complex, because it was "advanced D&D".

    semiticgoddess
  • AstroBryGuyAstroBryGuy Member Posts: 3,437
    edited February 2017

    @AstroBryGuy Actually, I'm aware of all of that. I do have all the Player Handbooks and the Dungeon Master's Guide for AD&D2 and 3.X.

    And what I'm referring to that very few players actually bothered to do rolls in 3.X, because point buy was a thing. (Don't believe me? Look up guides for 3.5 Classes, many of which still exist today.) Unless your DM or group forced you to do for some reason, which is insane. Players should have the freedom to control all aspects of their character creation, only bounded by what's sensible for the setting. (For instance, there are no Bariaur in the Forgotten Realms. Why should the DM let you make one, if that's the setting?)
    Another example of unnecessarily limiting things: in 2E, tiefling characters were basically roll 1d100 3 times. (Of course, a good DM probably just let you select the 3 features you wanted.) There's numerous other things that changed with 3.X because the player base as a whole started doing different things and wanted to actually play characters, not dice rolls. Really, there was a difference in perception between AD&D editions and 3rd Edition on.

    See, the way player base did things as a whole was basically what 3.X (note I keep using that term not, just 3E) became in practicality, and that's fairly reflected in IWD2. The IWD2 devs were smart enough to realize that rolling for stats was silly and annoying, just like a lot of players realized that.

    3E still used dice rolls as the standard for ability score generation. "roll 4d6 drop lowest" is the only method in the Player's Handbook. Point-buy is not the default. It is an optional rule in the DMG. Personally, I've never played a point-buy pen-and-paper campaign.

    And regarding subraces, you said:
    Plus, the fact that Tieflings, Aasimar, Elven subraces, etc., etc. were a thing in 3.X is much better than how AD&D2 did it, where you were just "Elf" or just "Halfling". And the emphasis on the player choosing.
    That's demonstrably false. Subraces are an optional rule in 1E, 2E, and 3E. In 3E, they are an optional rule in the DMG. AD&D (1E and 2E) also both had subraces as optional rules in supplement books. The difference between BG1/BG2 and IWD2 is that Bioware didn't implement an optional rule, Black Isle did.
  • AstroBryGuyAstroBryGuy Member Posts: 3,437

    IWDEE already has Sneak Attack instead of backstab (in fact, it has an option for either one) so IWD2-in-the-IWDEE-engine would as well. :smiley:

    It's a toggleable option, yes. But original IWD didn't have it, that's what I mean. Why BGEE and BG2EE don't have it yet, I don't know.
    Heart of Winter added the toggleable option for 3E Sneak Attacks. You had to use the config.exe program. It's under the Game tab.
  • rapsam2003rapsam2003 Member Posts: 1,636
    edited February 2017

    IWDEE already has Sneak Attack instead of backstab (in fact, it has an option for either one) so IWD2-in-the-IWDEE-engine would as well. :smiley:

    It's a toggleable option, yes. But original IWD didn't have it, that's what I mean. Why BGEE and BG2EE don't have it yet, I don't know.
    Heart of Winter added the toggleable option for 3E Sneak Attacks. You had to use the config.exe program. It's under the Game tab.
    Yes, but I was very specific with what I said. "Vanilla IWD", Icewind Dale without mods or expansions, did not have that option, as I said.

    And quit maintaining that I said "3E". (I used 3.X for a reason.) By 3.5E's release, much of the player base had started using many of the optional features and alternative rules, to the point where most folks knew about them without needing to see the DMG or the "extra option" in the PHB.
  • AstroBryGuyAstroBryGuy Member Posts: 3,437
    edited February 2017
    3E, 3.X - po-tay-to, po-tah-to. 3.5 was a minor edit; it's still 3rd Edition.

    And I was maintaining that you said 2E didn't have subraces, while 3.X did. Both editions have them, as an optional rule, one that started in 1E.
  • rapsam2003rapsam2003 Member Posts: 1,636
    edited February 2017

    3E, 3.X - po-tay-to, po-tah-to. 3.5 was a minor edit; it's still 3rd Edition.

    That's oversimplifying it, but if you say so. /rolleyes

    http://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/69772/what-are-the-major-differences-between-dd-3-0-and-dd-3-5
  • semiticgoddesssemiticgoddess Member Posts: 14,903
    @AstroBryGuy @rapsam2003: I think by now the issue has devolved into semantics. Let's stay on topic: this is about IWD2 specifically, not the different rulesets in PnP.
    ThacoBellJuliusBorisov
  • DJKajuruDJKajuru Member Posts: 3,300
    I must disagree with the idea of keeping it 2E. Why not simply make a mod, then?
    Besides, I want 3E multiclass combinations!

    Kamigoroshi
  • inethineth Member Posts: 707

    Frankly I wouldn't even mind if we lost all the cool 3E stuff in IWD2. I currently have the original IWD2 from GOG, and I think it would be great to play IWD2 with standard 2E stuff.

    Come to think of it, it might be less work to just re-create the game using the EE 2.X engine

    This! A thousand times this!
    Isn't this something the EET guys are/were planning?
  • KamigoroshiKamigoroshi Member Posts: 5,870
    DJKajuru said:

    I must disagree with the idea of keeping it 2E. Why not simply make a mod, then?
    Besides, I want 3E multiclass combinations!

    While I don't think modders can just "simply" recreate IWDII's campaign into IWD, (actually I'm quite sure this would pose to be an endless nightmare for all involved), I have to agree that the best course of action for a potential IWDII:EE would be to stick with its original 3rd edition ruleset.

    If anything, I'd actually wish for an EE to even further enhance its 3rd edition engine: like adding the Shaman as a base class. Or the implementation of the four Genasi subraces. Maybe even the inclusion of the Inugaakalikurit (aka arctic dwarves). You get the drift.

    But most of all I'm looking forward for said EE to actually fix the mind-boggling amount of bugs within this sequel... Improved Initiative feat, anyone? *ugh*
    ThacoBellsemiticgoddess
  • kozkoz Member Posts: 11
    I *loved* IWD2, really just the flexibility that 3rd edition enabled was a lot of fun to tinker with - either for pure powergamery goodness or to fully embrace the RP and have far more unique builds.

    In all honesty the creation / development process in IWD2 was a lot more fun than putting together various groups in all the other IE games.
    rapsam2003Varwulfformer_customerDJKajuru
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • DJKajuruDJKajuru Member Posts: 3,300
    I realise that making full conversion mods ain't *simple* and it takes quite an effort from you modders. Thank you for your collaboration throughout the years.
    P.S: I regret nothing.
  • Woolie_WoolWoolie_Wool Member Posts: 153
    edited February 2017
    I bought the original version of IWD2 on GoG but didn't play it for very long because I was completely put off by the vanilla UI and how it copes (or not) with the game running in 1920x1200. Planescape: Torment really deserves the EE treatment too.

    I did greatly enjoy creating my party with the wacky new races (so THAT'S where Caelar Argent came from...) and the much more flexible stat system (no more "you MUST have 18 STR on EVERY warrior to be competitive" nonsense).

    Also as a sword-and-board lover, the way switching weapons works in the vanilla Infinity games (and even in EE 1.3/1.4) infuriates me. You have to go into the menu and fiddle with your inventory just to switch between sword and bow if you're using a shield or dual wielding. It's horrible.
    semiticgoddess
  • rapsam2003rapsam2003 Member Posts: 1,636

    I did greatly enjoy creating my party with the wacky new races (so THAT'S where Caelar Argent came from...)

    Technically, Aasimar have been around since AD&D1, iirc.
  • DoodlerooDoodleroo Member Posts: 28
    Now that PSTEE seems to be a thing, I sincerely hope Beamdog will finish what they started and also make IWDIIEE a reality. Would be a pity if we ended up with four out of five IE games :(

    A pipe-dream would be being able to switch and maybe even alter rules on-the-fly in-game. On the other hand, thanks to all the modders we already have so many options for the 2E ruleset that everybody can pretty much customise the game to his own preferences by now.

    Being able to use existing mods makes an IWDIIEE based on 2E a very interesting proposition. And Beamdog would most certainly add additional features (such as sub-races) to the engine, which in turn could be used in the other IE games. Wouldn't that be great?
    Varwulf
  • AstroBryGuyAstroBryGuy Member Posts: 3,437
    edited March 2017
    Doodleroo said:

    Now that PSTEE seems to be a thing, I sincerely hope Beamdog will finish what they started and also make IWDIIEE a reality. Would be a pity if we ended up with four out of five IE games :(

    A pipe-dream would be being able to switch and maybe even alter rules on-the-fly in-game. On the other hand, thanks to all the modders we already have so many options for the 2E ruleset that everybody can pretty much customise the game to his own preferences by now.

    Being able to use existing mods makes an IWDIIEE based on 2E a very interesting proposition. And Beamdog would most certainly add additional features (such as sub-races) to the engine, which in turn could be used in the other IE games. Wouldn't that be great?

    Hopefully, we will see IWD2EE, but I doubt we'll ever get to switch from 2E to 3E (or vice-versa) rules "on-the-fly in-game". The changes to the rules are too extensive to swap rulesets in and out in the middle of gameplay. You can do little changes like 2E Backstab for 3E Sneak Attack, but converting everything wouldn't work.

    For example, what do you do with multiclass characters? Take a character with 100,000 XP in BGEE. As a fighter, she would be 7th level. Now consider a multiclass fighter/thief with the same 100,000 XP. She would now be a Fighter 6 / Thief 7. Do you translate the character directly to a 3E Fighter 6/Thief 7? If so, you just made a 13th level character. Should you keep the character's total levels at 7? If so, she would translate as Fighter 3/Thief 4. That might not please some players (and you'd have to automate translating and adjusting thief skill allocations).
    semiticgoddess
  • VarwulfVarwulf Member Posts: 564
    Doodleroo said:

    Now that PSTEE seems to be a thing, I sincerely hope Beamdog will finish what they started and also make IWDIIEE a reality. Would be a pity if we ended up with four out of five IE games :(

    A pipe-dream would be being able to switch and maybe even alter rules on-the-fly in-game. On the other hand, thanks to all the modders we already have so many options for the 2E ruleset that everybody can pretty much customise the game to his own preferences by now.

    Being able to use existing mods makes an IWDIIEE based on 2E a very interesting proposition. And Beamdog would most certainly add additional features (such as sub-races) to the engine, which in turn could be used in the other IE games. Wouldn't that be great?

    I share this sentiment pretty much to the letter, though despite my great desire to see this (or some of it) come to fruition, I do think some attention should be placed on syncing the patches between existing games and fixing a few minor issues with the remaining games first.

    That's my two coppers at least :)
  • k0st1xk0st1x Member Posts: 1
    can't find any beamdog's official position about future of iwd2:ee.
    is there any link to some information about it?
  • _Luke__Luke_ Member, Mobile Tester Posts: 1,535
    k0st1x said:

    can't find any beamdog's official position about future of iwd2:ee.
    is there any link to some information about it?

    No, there isn't. Their next move should be porting SoD over iOS & Android and updating the other IE games to the same version of PST:EE.
    After that, I'd love to see an enhanced edition of IW2.......
  • AtarbAtarb Member Posts: 15
    I'd buy a copy in a heartbeat. The GOG one is just such a POS.
    Cvijeta
Sign In or Register to comment.