Spider

I actually have to agree with Vol on this. There are plenty of bags in the game. 10 for sure, but I'm not sure about the closer to twenty part. By Act II, you should have something like 5 at least if you want to. Don't recall the prices of them though. The crappy ones aren't that expensive (a couple of thousand?) and while the good ones may cost a bit more, at the point of the game where those are readily available to buy, money isn't much of an issue anymore. (I'm pretty sure Deekin sells bags, possibly Sand and the other merchant in the merchant district)

Broadcast command usually worked fine for me. Characters not following properly was more an issue with faulty pathfinding than the command not working in my case. Stand your ground has worked flawlessly (if one understands that the person giving the command won't be affected by it if you start using another character)

I just have to ask, what is wrong with him using these modifications in Faerun? If it makes him a better GM (because he likes and appreciates the rules he's actually using) won't it make for a better game almost by default?

Unless they were vampires, in which case the Flamethrower really had their number. Of course after you get the flamethrower there aren't too many pure vampire bosses left to fight (the only one I think I used it on was the Tzmisce, and LaCroix but he hardly qualifies as a boss).

I have. You can bargain with him for a few decent items. Maybe more if you've got the appropriate skills. I only got the three items out of him though and they weren't spectacular.

Weird, I have no problems rotating the camera with the mouse. Since I never used the keyboard for camera controls, to me it works exactly like before (and yes, I am using free camera).

*sigh* I know that the spells Resurrection and Raise Dead are functionally different. I was talking about resurrection as in the effect when I said it was available from level 9. But the difference isn't really that big. Resurrection gives full HP and can be cast years after death as long as a fragment of the body exists, but otherwise it's pretty much the same. You're still brought back to life and you still lose a level. But even if there is a lot more to it that I am missing it doesn't change anything. Raise Dead is enough for me to make bringing-back-to-life casually available in the game system. This has still not been refuted by anyone.

What was I making up? From the players manual: "Raise Dead Conjuration (Healing) Level: Clr 5 Components: V, S, M, DF Casting Time: 1 minute Range: Touch Target: Dead creature touched Duration: Instantaneous Saving Throw: None; see text Spell Resistance: Yes (harmless) You restore life to a deceased creature. You can raise a creature that has been dead for no longer than one day per caster level. In addition, the subject

Resurrection (or raise dead) is available to any cleric of level 9 and above, is it not? To me, that's casual. Allowing the players to have access to such a spell at all even is casual in my eyes.

I've mentioned previously (but not in the post roshan quoted) that it's very likely that NWN2 is easy for me due to my fairly extensive experiences with D&D crpgs. Had NWN2 been the first D&D crpg I played, I would probably have found it more difficult than I did, but as it is I find it to be very easy. It's hard to be a developer and try and accommodate all levels of experience with these types of games.

I could be a bit confused yeah. I seemed to recall poison having one immediate effect and then replicating that effect a little bit later at the same time the poison icon goes away. But I'm not at all sure of this, I was just including the possibility that poison was worse than just the original effect so I wasn't trivializing it. If it's only the one time effect, then it's even less threatening.

Really? Man, do we have a different perspective of reality. Resurrection most certainly isn't part of most fantasy worlds in my view. Especially not in the sense that it's being used in D&D. Possibly as some sort of miraculous event like Jesus, but even then it's hardly present in a majority of fantasy worlds. Or did you mean that it's present in most fantasy rpgs? If we look at the pen and paper variety, again it's not exactly common. Of all fantasy RPGs I've played, only one has resurrection as casual as it is in D&D. And that's, well D&D. Granted, there are a lot of systems out there I haven't tried so it's possible that I've just missed them. If so, please enlighten me with examples. If we're restricting ourselves to crpgs exclusively then you may have a point. I'm not sure though. Most fantasy crpgs I've played have been set in the D&D world, but the ones that haven't had resurrection that I can recall. Nor have they been party based so the point is somewhat moot (the ones I can remember off the back of my hand are Oblivion, Gothic 3 and Lionheart). I guess if we include action crpgs like Diablo and Titan Quest I'll have to give up though, but then we're definitely straying.

Like I said, I have no respect for poison or disease and only a little for level drain. If poison does do more than con damage, then that is after an incubation period as well which typically incurs after a fight is over. And yes, disease is counted in rounds so that can actually come into play, but you also get a fortitude save so it may also do nothing. Most of the time, it has a marginal effect on any given fight at best (and no, I don't let my sick characters die just so they'll be rid of it). Lesser Restoration, the only spell needed to be cast in combat when under the effect of both disease and poison (will remove the bad effects and most likely the fight will be over before they appear again, if they do) is level 2, not three. Remove disease can be applied after a fight so it's only a rest away. Typically my level 3 list for Elanee is one or two Call Lightnings, a bunch of cure serious wounds and maybe something else. But it depends on whether or not I have Qara in the party. If Qara is present, Elanee doesn't need to be a nuker and becomes a crappy healer instead. Although she can be made into a decent tank. I've already conceded this point. The fights are easier when you don't need to worry about every single party member. And yes, a lot of our different perspectives comes from you wanting to protect everyone and me following the rules of the game. I still prefer a game that allows resurrection to have auto-res, but I do recognize that fights should be made tougher if that is the case. NWN2 only goes half way it seems, fights on the level of BG2 but with auto-res. While it should be something more like fights on the level of BG2 Tactics and auto-res. I still would prefer to have no resurrection at all though.

This is pretty much spot on I think. Even though I didn't go to such extremes as Roshan did, I'd never let a charmed character mow down the rest of the party. As for poisons and such. Disease doesn't to anything at once, it takes a little while for it to kick in. by that time any give battle is typically over. Poison does have an immediate effect, but all it does is lower your hitpoints some, so it's practically just damage. Level drain is more annoying, but it depends a bit on how far you're drained. One or two levels don't make that much difference in a single fight. Also I always keep at least one restoration spell memorized (especially since there is one at level 2 where there aren't that many useful spells, at least not once Bull's strength becomes obsolete).

So in a roundabout way we both actually agree that the best solution is to have no res at all?

Sorry about that. I didn't realize that part of it was from my edit. So I apologize for accusing you of quoting out of context. My bad. Just ignore that part. edit: I'm good at compartmentalizing. Seriously though, I can't divorce them if I am judging the game as a whole, but I'm not. I'm looking at what the mandatory parts of the game present and then there's the optional stuff. However, it is a terribly unfair comparison because the two games are quite different in their design. Which is why I am careful to point out that I think BG2 is the better game. And even if I were to include the optional bitsas story, I still think IWD wins out (although maybe with a slightly immer margin). Since we're only talking about quality of story here, the sheer mass of sidequests in BG2 doesn't come into play. And while some sidestories are brilliant, some are awful. In the end, I think it balances out. Again, the comparison is hardly fair to either game though.

I do't recall charm wearing f when the caster is dead. But I could be wrong on this. I agree that stoneskin was only a nuisance and nothing else though. There is Disintegrate in the game as well, although I'm not sure if any enemy ever use it. But I absolutely hate spells that kill without resurrection in the IE games so I'm fine with that one being nerfed. Worst of all was Imprisonment. I really hated that spell. I can live with no auto-resurrect (like I said it's only a preference), but if so let the characters that go down actually be resurrectable. Or remove resurrection completely from the game. (strange as it may sound, that last one is actually my favorite option, since I always felt resurrection as it works in D&D is a bit retarded)

As if you can't re-memorize spells at a whim. A little more effort than changing equipment, but not by much. No, there isn't one spell available that does the stuff that amulet does, but on the other hand I have absolutely no respect for either of the conditions. A simple cure whatever or restoration will get rid of them before they manage to do any harm (it's not like they have much effect on the actual combat you sustain them in). Besides, the amulet of health may be craftable at level 5, but you don't get any canary diamonds until you get to neverwinter which is a bit later iirc. Actually, I didn't think there were more than two tough fights. Maybe we can add the trio of reavers to that, but they were only tough if you didn't cast the words on them immediately. I found the rest of the end dungeon (and the final fight especially) to be fairly easy. Tedious, but easy. And this was with a character that only crafted two weapons for herself, one that was replaced with the shard sword at that time. On my second playthrough I only had to reload due to combat once (and that was me not paying attention, not the fight actually being tough). Again without much going on in the way of crafting. I did do a full complement for my main character in the end, but only once I reached level 18 which doesn't leave much to do in the game. The succubi were only a threat if they managed to charm anyone and since they firedthose off fairly early, stoneskin didn't matter other than making them take longer to kill. They fired off any charms they had before I would have killed them anyway (and their charms almost always failed. Maybe three to five successes in two games). In what D&D crpg will I have a hard time getting back to a temple if I win a fight, even with only one character? To me it's more a nuisance than anything else. Make the fights tougher, I'd actually welcome that, but I don't think party member death is the bes way to do it. Yes, take quotes out of context. I said I didn't play BG1 and 2 anymore for their stories and character interaction but because I enjoy the gameplay. First playthrough was different, and I did play NWN2 the first two times for those reasons (among others). I don't think crafting is broken, because I don't see it making the game that much easier. Because I don't see how it could be much easier than it is. Had the game been more difficult than it is and crafting would have brought it to the level it is now you would have a point. And I think autoresurrect is ok because it removes the annoyance of having to reload in spite of beating the fight in the first place. Forcing me to reload or run to a temple may add some difficulty, but it more adds tedium. Repeating for the sake of repeating. But I'll tell you what, just leave it in that party members have the same XP as the main character and I wouldn't care much. Truth be told, I'm not exactly invested in autores either. It's a preference, but nothing more. Again, make the fights tougher through other means, I don't mind reloading if I actually get beaten. But if I manage to squeeze out a kill vs a tough opponent I don't want to feel the need to reload all the same and do the fight again. With story I mean critical path. Sidequests are ministories in themselves and I can understand your reasoning. And I do think IWD has a better critical path story than BG2 does. I think BG2 is a better game due to all the sidequests and stuff, however. Keep in mind I never said I felt Sarevok was a good character. but he filled his role in the plot (as it was), did what he was supposed to do and didn't annoy me. Irenicus annoyed me. It really is as simple as that. I see people claiming that Irenicus is such a good villain and all (not you though) and I just don't get it. I think most everything about him was poorly made and never bought into his motivations. Me and jonny-boy simply didn't click. I even liked Bodhi better, and I wasn't particularly found of her either.

I'm not saying you can't do better weapons than what are available in the game. Obviously you can. I still don't think the crafting is overpowered because the game is easy enough to begin with. The effects of the amulet you talk about can el be replicated by spells and thus having that amulet can actually make you less powerful since you're wasting an equipment slot (you could have amulet of natural armor instead for example, which can be replicated with barkskin). There are only two fights in the game that even resemble a challenge (the dragons), and neither is helped all that much by having uber equipment. Sure, armor of fire resistance is nice versus the red dragon, but not as nice as energy immunity and so on. Crafting makes your party seem more powerful, but from my experience it far from breaks the game. The succubi you reference is actually a good example. Why on earth would I care if I can kill them slightly faster with my adamantine weapons, when there is absolutely no chance that I'm going to lose against them anyway? It's not like they're actually dangerous. Holy also requires the caster to be good, which rules out Zhjaeve iirc. I completely disagree. I don't think party members going down is much of a tactical consideration in a setting where you can just tow them to a temple and have them resurrected. The reason why I typically find that party member death in other D&D games = reload is because they fall behind on XP (something I hate) and because it's usually less time consuming to just re-do the fight than actually walking across maps to a temple and back. Besides, it's kind of a moot point once level nine is reached when raise dead becomes available (except it doesn't in NWN2 unless the main character is a cleric, but that's not the point here). Just a rest later and everyone is good as new. So basically they just took away the annoyances from party members going down. Now, in a setting where resurrect isn't quite so readily available, I find it more annoying. I would have disliked it more in the Kotors than in NWN2 if it wasn't for the KotORs being extremely streamlined to begin with. I have never called myself a true fan of anything, and definitely not BG. I haven't even disputed that BG2 does a lot of things better than BG does. I only said that I think that the parts of BG2 are better than it's hole while it's the other way around with BG1. Sarveok may have been clich

I thought that Irenicus was a much worse villain than Sarevok. To me he was always the weakest point of the game. He is as flat as yesterday's coke left sitting out all night. I never really cared about him. First playthrough I cared about finding Imoen and was obviously pissed at him for taking her, but never really cared about the character itself. But that's not the point really. I'm not denying that a lot of the things in BG2 are better. However, I do find that the everything-and-the-kitchen-sink approach that that game was used during it's design makes the individual parts be better than the whole. I think BG1 is tighter and has a more natural progression to it. And I think the atmosphere in that game is better. Like I said, I think they're both equally good (if we overlook the engine part) but for different reasons. All I can say is that playing through them now, BG1 is more consistent (except for the Firewine Bridge area, that one truly sucks) while BG2 has higher highs, but also deeper lows. Yeah, but if we're only looking at the hard stats they really don't make that much difference. The best you can get in the way of weapons is a Cold Iron +5 weapon with two types of elemental damage tacked on (or one plus holy, although then you need to be a cleric yourself I think, unless Elanee has Bless? Zhjaeve isn't good so she can't do it iirc). At level 20 that's not really very impressing, compared to what you can already find in the game. Sure it makes you a little better, but +3 or +5 to hit hardly matters when you never miss anyway. Like I said, your character gets more powerful, but it doesn't really make the game any easier (especially not the +3 stuff you can do at level 12 since there are plenty of weapons of that quality in the game that are as good or better than any +3 weapons you can make yourself). Computer games and PnP are not the same. In a lot of stuff that don't matter in crpgs are relevant and vice versa. So what works in one doesn't always translate well. I think that autores is fine simply because it decreases the amount of reloading I am forced to do and allows me to get on with the game. Granted I would have preferred somewhat tougher fights as a result.

Actually, that is one of the best arguments for the NWN2 system I've heard. The hole concept of reloading after winning a fight seems a bit bizarre if you ask me. As for crafting being broken, I think you're vastly exaggerating the importance of it all. While the weapons you make are better than most you find, the impact on game difficulty is marginal at best. First playthrough I only crafted weapons for my main character and nothing else and it wasn't significantly harder than the second time where I crafted more. Holy is hardly broken compared to elemental damage and personally I thought adamantine was worse for crafting purposes than cold iron or alchemical silver. An extra enchantment is worth more than the adamantine bits. In my opinion the crafting system is far from broken. Does it make your character more powerful? Yeah, a little (but seriously, another +2 to hit and maybe +1d6 damage for a level 20 character is almost insignificant). Does it make the game easier? Hardly. Oh, and another thing. Your BG to BG2 analogy is somewhat off. There are people who enjoy BG1 over BG2 not because the see it through rose colored glasses but because they prefer the vastness and illusion of freedom over the cram every area fulll aproach of BG2. The engine used in BG2 is vastly superior, but from a design perspective it's debatable which is the better game. I play both roughly once per year using the BG2 engine (tutu) and for me both are roughly the same in quality, but for different reasons.

Actually, the key to it all in my mind is that the fortress is nowhere to be found either. Ruins of a fortress is still something to be found, but apparently not even that is around. Or maybe they just mean it's hidden too deep in the swamp. She leaves you after meeting the Circle of the Mere, if you don't have enough influence. That's when my character killed her, not in the end fight. I can't recall if my third game was started pre or post 1.03. I'm not going to start another one just to see if she's got a tail, that's for sure. It's not like the lack thereof really bothered me in the first place.

What exactly did they change? Adding stuff is not changing if the previous functionality is intact. For me it works just like it's done since I installed the game, but I'm only using free camera. They did change the options screen though.

In the end they say that the temple comes crashing down around the party, not on them. They also say that the knight-captain and the fortress are nowhere to be found. Qara stays with you if Sand turns (and vice versa). So it's on or the other. The construct is turned by Bishop if your influence with Grobnar is low (ie, he falls for the stuff Bishop tells him in the cutscene and gives the command word to Bishop). I have another issue with the ending, by the way. If Elanee leaves your party after meeting with the circle, there is mention of a lone elven women that walks around in the mere. However I killed Elanee and still got that frame. Felt a bit odd to me. (on another note, I didn't get a tail for Neeshka with 1.03beta)

I think male models should have variable crotch sizes.