Which did you enjoy more, Poe or Poe2?

I played both BG I and II and liked them. But I didn't play them that often. I think they are inferior games compared to PoE and Deadfire - but at their time they were very awesome. This may have something to do with the fact that I never played P&P D&D - so there was no nostalgia or bias or whatever. I only know D&D rules by CRPGs.

 

 

BG and BG2 are actually 2nd edition AD&D, not D&D. To the vast majority of people (and indeed, all sensible folks) they're pretty much the same, but historically there's an interesting development there. Just to let you know.

But Cpt. Hairsplitter sir, I meant the whole D&D franchise including AD&D and whatnot.

Since I never played any of those thingies I cannot really know the differences between AD&D, BD&D and CD&D, can I?

 

I only know that all the big IE games had some D&D (as an umbrella term) in it.

My experiences with AD&D, even the one convention/competition I went to where you all played the same campaign in a process of elimination to see who could finish it, is that if your character got above level 10, you were on your way to god status.  I always remember playing the lower levels, never the higher ones like in BG2 ... funny I was just doing some internet searching and in the 1st edition AD&D rules had class level limits on whether you were playing a dwarf, elf, etc and some classes were off limits to dwarves, elves, etc.  Some class level limits were like 11 and 9 depending on your heritage - and makes me think that the original AD&D rules never intended characters to get much higher than that ... but just a thought - blame the CRPG games for creating level bloat!!!

 

On another note, I wonder if something as simple as a title card in the beginning that read like "and Eothas ever so slowly step by agonizing step moved away from your wounded, sinking boat, you are sure that you could have caught him if the storm hadn't driven your boat into the rocks, but as he got further and sank under the waves you realized that finding him would be near impossible until he surfaced again, and at the rate he was moving it could take months before he reached another Andra vein - or maybe weeks"  lol that would have made the whole chasing Eothas thing more of a "Waiting for Eothas" thing, and made any feeling of immediacy pretty mote.

Edited April 17 by bringingyouthefuture

My experiences with AD&D, even the one convention/competition I went to where you all played the same campaign in a process of elimination to see who could finish it, is that if your character got above level 10, you were on your way to god status.  I always remember playing the lower levels, never the higher ones like in BG2 ... funny I was just doing some internet searching and in the 1st edition AD&D rules had class level limits on whether you were playing a dwarf, elf, etc and some classes were off limits to dwarves, elves, etc.  Some class level limits were like 11 and 9 depending on your heritage - and makes me think that the original AD&D rules never intended characters to get much higher than that ... but just a thought - blame the CRPG games for creating level bloat!!!

 

 

we never had a legit character get to bg2 kinda levels in pnp, and we had started playing in the late 70s. that said, from the 1980 ad&d rogue's gallery supplement, numerous characters actual played by original d&d developers were included in the final pages.  particular noteworthy were the following: 

 

bigby (gary gygax)-- level 13 mage

erac's cousin (ernie gygax character)-- level 7/14 dual-class mage/fighter

mordenkainen (gary)-- level 16 mage

tenser (ernie)-- level 14 mage

robilar (rob kuntz)-- level 15 fighter

 

robilar, btw, would eventual reach level 19 'ccording a q&a from an old oerth journal.  would solo all thirteen levels o' the original castle greyhawk. am not certain what levels gary's characters would eventual reach, but am betting he had at least mordenkainen keep pace with robilar. 

 

so while bioware were kinda making up high level gameplay for bg2 based on what they assumed were s'posed to happen at such levels, the original d&d munchkins did manage to reach such rarified levels. bloat were there before the biowarians and other crpg developers got ahold o' the rules. 'course is anybody's guess what a session involving gygax dming kuntz's robilar through castle greyhawk were like. well, you could ask rob kuntz as he is alive as far as we know, but am not recalling biowarians claim they did so.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

ps erol otus (d&d artist for the rogue's gallery and other works) included his own character. were a ng, high dex fighter. level 12. had a number o' unique magic items.

 

david cook and jeff r. leason had their characters die and were reincarnated as 'posed to resurrected.  ended up with centaur and lizardman characters respectively.

 

lawrence schick played an elven multiclass fighter/mage (7/11) who exceeded typical level limits based on his 16 str by means o' wish spells.

some background in case one wasn't aware - BG2/bioware was completely aware of the level caps, but deliberately chose to ignore them and other AD&D characteristics for BG2 so they could make more high level gameplay but it created some weird artifacts in the game, like:

 

- humans are described as having an advantage of getting to any level, though that's irrelevant

- druids have a progression that suddenly stop at level 14 - iirc, in AD&D they had some special RP-related advancement rules (something something grand druid and challenging), but also it was supposed to be less of a downside when most other characters aren't getting to level 19-23 anyway

- the hit die +health system making less sense when everyone eventually is mostly levels of just the +health

- general multiclass balancing

 

i'm not completely confident I have the details right, outside of BG/BG2/IWD i only really started getting into pnp with 3rd ed, which overhauled and standardized progression.

Edited April 17 by thelee

Yes, in 2nd edition AD&D you need to challenge the previous archdruid in order to get to level 15. Wacky, but there you go. Implementing this into BG2 wasn't the brightest idea, in my view.

That is some cool history thanks for the info, pretty fascinating.  Also wasn't being too serious about the level bloat comment, level doesn't matter as long as the game is well implemented around those levels.

 

hehe and @Gromnir what level did your D&D character get too?  I had a 12th level thief at one point, but it was the same as Lawrence Schick, I think I somehow got a wish from the DM and got a rod of lightning that saved us in some key encounters where we should of been wiped out.

Coming back even more, it just seems like Deadfire still isn't polished, even after all the DLC's and all the patches. I think a big part to blame is the ever-increasing number of options on the game. Instead of creating a base product with perhaps a few difficulty tweaks, Obsidian seems interested in designing three or four different games with Deadfire.

 

Resting bonuses unpredictably disappear. Party order gets reshuffled. The "push" system in combat creates unpredictable results and undermines the tactical intent of things like engagement. Per rest items do not always recharge on rest. And just so many other little things seems to go wrong or are unpredictable in Deadfire versus its predecessor.

 

And yeah, I'll defend vancian casting systems and their strategic depth forever. They've been a part of CRPGs from at least 1988 to today. And are parts of titles considered not just some of the greatest RPG's but some of greatest games. I'm not saying an RPG *has* to have them. But I think a large party-based, open-world, 100+ hour RPG greatly benefits from maintaining a strong strategic layer in its system.

Edited April 18 by cokane

That is some cool history thanks for the info, pretty fascinating.  Also wasn't being too serious about the level bloat comment, level doesn't matter as long as the game is well implemented around those levels.

 

hehe and @Gromnir what level did your D&D character get too?  I had a 12th level thief at one point, but it was the same as Lawrence Schick, I think I somehow got a wish from the DM and got a rod of lightning that saved us in some key encounters where we should of been wiped out.

 

technical, our highest level d&d (old white box) character were a 6th level dwarf, which were representing a multiyear investment and were max possible for a dwarf. were embarrassing proud o' the character. however, for ad&d we managed to legit advance two human clerics to level 9 (the great mystery & trithereon respective.)  again, am talking 'bout literal years o' regular gaming sessions to achieve level 9.

 

we did have a level 13 cleric (homebrew campaign-specific pantheon) but were a character for a campaign which started at level 5-- our dm hated levels 1-4. also, for the campaign we reached level 13, would kinda be a stretch to call it ad&d as while we had d&d classes, there were so many house rules as to make it almost unrecognizable as d&d. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

I couldn't get into the first POE due to the obnoxiously bloated writing and limited character customization. I've enjoyed POE2 so much (130 hours for just my first playthrough on veteran!) that I'm willing to try POE again. I keep hearing the story is amazing and want to give it another chance. I know i totally ruined the story for myself by playing 2 first, but what are you gonna do.

I couldn't get into the first POE due to the obnoxiously bloated writing and limited character customization

Only speak for yourself. I think both is not correct. The last one in an extreme fashion.

Obnoxiously bloated writing? That's a baffling comment. How is it obnoxiously bloated? I would really like you to clarfiy this, because it would be extremely interesting to better understand where you're coming from.

 

I've been working on the field of let's say extremely high quality literary writing for 20+ years, and I would argue that as far as style and content are concerned, PoE lies within the realm of really quite good genre stuff (so if it were a book, it would be far above pulp), and in parts, the writing is downright excellent for a computer game. It has to be said that some of the most typical generic faults are there, the phenomenon of too many adjectives in particular, but to say it's obnoxiously bloated doesn't ring true at all for me.

I do think the original's writing suffers from being a bit too inscrutable on your first playthrough. This is especially a problem with the main plot, which relies on withholding critical information from the player for a very, very long time. So I can see it being off-putting. That being said, imo, the writing held up fantastically on subsequent playthroughs. The dialogue options are numerous and the emergent story-telling strongly rewards "role-playing" the dialogue and plot segments.

 

If you're giving it a second chance, my advice is to turn off indicators in the dialogue such as stat or reputation checks, and to playthrough with some kind of consistent character attributes (Paladin and Priest classes help motivate this). The responsiveness in the writing creates a pretty immersive experience.

I agree about playing with stat and reputation checks off, my first play through in POE1 I had them on and it definitely took away from the story.  For that reason my first playthrough of Deadfire I have kept them off. Found it was fun to play and try to keep my character from gaining any reputation as honest, not an easy task.

Obnoxiously bloated writing? That's a baffling comment. How is it obnoxiously bloated? I would really like you to clarfiy this, because it would be extremely interesting to better understand where you're coming from.

 

I've been working on the field of let's say extremely high quality literary writing for 20+ years, and I would argue that as far as style and content are concerned, PoE lies within the realm of really quite good genre stuff (so if it were a book, it would be far above pulp), and in parts, the writing is downright excellent for a computer game. It has to be said that some of the most typical generic faults are there, the phenomenon of too many adjectives in particular, but to say it's obnoxiously bloated doesn't ring true at all for me.

 

yeah im sure it's great for a book. i read my share of fantasy novels, and appreciated them. but when i play video games, i expect a certain level of conciseness and simplicity so i can get to slaying the dragons and all that jazz. POE2 strikes a much better balance there. the lore and writing are much more "accessible". that is all i meant, not that the writing is poor quality per se. but as i said, I will probably give it another go because im enjoying 2 so much.

Edited April 19 by umie214

I agree about playing with stat and reputation checks off, my first play through in POE1 I had them on and it definitely took away from the story. 

 

Having the stat and reputation checks on feels like an inbuilt spoiler. I can definitely see how that could take away from the experience. I have always had them off, never even considered having them on.

 

To the extent that playing like this has a downside, it's that you may well miss the fact that a certain dialogue could lead elsewhere, if you had the skills/stats/whatever. But I'm fine with that.

I played the original Pillars of Eternity last year (spring 2018) and I enjoyed it very much. It is a good game but to be honest I expected a little bit more. I was intrigued by the story but it could have been better. For me PoE felt very similar to BG1. Played it once but no intention to replay it again.

 

Pillars 2 on the other hand, I do see myself playing that game multiple times. I only played up to the point where you reach Neketaka before the new academic year started. I very much enjoy the rtwp gameplay and love that all characters are voiced this time. (Also unlike many I dont have any problems whatsoever with the character of Xoti. She is a lovely addition to the game.) When I have some spare time, I will def take my time going through the game with Beast of Winter installed.

 

I agree about playing with stat and reputation checks off, my first play through in POE1 I had them on and it definitely took away from the story. 

 

Having the stat and reputation checks on feels like an inbuilt spoiler. I can definitely see how that could take away from the experience. I have always had them off, never even considered having them on.

 

To the extent that playing like this has a downside, it's that you may well miss the fact that a certain dialogue could lead elsewhere, if you had the skills/stats/whatever. But I'm fine with that.

 

agreed except where the 'clever' and 'cruel', etc options in responses are sometimes necessary to tell you the tone in which you're saying something. Although mostly clear, there were a few times the check didn't match my reading of the text.

 

I enjoyed both Poe I+II for different reasons. I preferred the setting in PoE (grim though it was at times) and the overall narrative (rushed though the ending seemed with the 'reveal'). The gameplay of Deadfire was generally better (though the move to per-rest meant I no longer needed to stretch myself in some dungeons) and the encounter design was improved. I'm neutral on multi-classing but the sub-classes added something for me.

For the topic: 

 

Story and overall atmosphere: PoE. Like, by miles

Characters: PoE

Combat: PoE2

World and exploration: PoE

Customization: PoE2

 

So which did I enjoy more? Not a definitive answer there. In terms of an RPG with atmosphere and story, it's PoE. But if enjoyment is combat and character customization and such it would be PoE2.

 

 

 

I agree about playing with stat and reputation checks off, my first play through in POE1 I had them on and it definitely took away from the story. 

 

Having the stat and reputation checks on feels like an inbuilt spoiler. I can definitely see how that could take away from the experience. I have always had them off, never even considered having them on.

 

To the extent that playing like this has a downside, it's that you may well miss the fact that a certain dialogue could lead elsewhere, if you had the skills/stats/whatever. But I'm fine with that.

 

agreed except where the 'clever' and 'cruel', etc options in responses are sometimes necessary to tell you the tone in which you're saying something. Although mostly clear, there were a few times the check didn't match my reading of the text.

 

I enjoyed both Poe I+II for different reasons. I preferred the setting in PoE (grim though it was at times) and the overall narrative (rushed though the ending seemed with the 'reveal'). The gameplay of Deadfire was generally better (though the move to per-rest meant I no longer needed to stretch myself in some dungeons) and the encounter design was improved. I'm neutral on multi-classing but the sub-classes added something for me.

 

This is somewhat mandatory for paladins and priests that follow their order. If you want to RP this and have no idea what option is what you will not be RPing propperly. I don't see it as spoiling anything. It's just a sign of what the tone is. Ultimately it is your choice what dialogue to pick.

You can definitely be a paladin without, you just need to roll with the punches ... or save reload, becomes kind of like a mini-game.

I just want to say I adore the writing (an amount) on the first game. The backdrop of 2 is richer for it.

I just finished Deadfire last night and my total time was 92 hours (i had FS and BoW) compared to 259 hours in PoE1 (WM1 & 2). Deadfire's main quest is simply too short. They should have started with the Watcher receiving an invitation from the huana queen to deadfire THEN Eothas destroying Caed Nua while they are away. I feel like I'm playing from the middle of a story though I can understand why Obsidian did this as one of the main complaint of PoE1 was that the plot felt bloated.

You miss Seeker, Slayer, Survivor. So you can't directly compare PoE + all expansions to Deadfire with one expasion missing.
Deadfire's main plot is indeed a lot shorter - but there are also a lot more sidequests and more exploration than in PoE.

I can't quite understand how a completionist gets less hours out of Deadfire than he/she gets out of PoE (with one playthrough).

Edited May 5 by Boeroer

259 hours for the first game + WM1+2 seems a little excessive. I'm always a very completionist type of guy as far as finishing all of the content is concerned and it took me 118 hours to finish the first game on normal/classic difficulty in expert mode. I took my sweet time with it, too, so I think that for most people it would probably be more in the 100 - 110 hour range.

OK, technically, I wasn't maybe *that* completionist since I did not read the souls of all of the golden backer NPCs. The only way I could see someone arriving at 250-ish hours is if you really read everything the game has to offer and never skip/skim a dialogue. Did the 259 hours maybe include a lot of restarts with different classes? Or was it a triple crown trial of iron PotD run or something like that?

I haven't properly finished Deadfire + DLCs yet. I've only sort of rushed through it for achievements for Berath's blessings for my proper full playthrough which will happen after TBM is out of beta and after the last remaining bugs have -hopefully- been cleaned up entirely. However, I believe I got an idea of the size and scope of the whole thing and I expect my full completionist playthrough with 100% map exploration etc. to at least match the 118 hours of PoE + WM1+2.

As long as steam is running and the game is not exited it will count it as playtime. Even if you to other software, your browser etc.

So if the source of gaming hours is Steam: it's not very reliable. If you suddenly realize you have to go shopping or left the stove on at you mum's place and rush off without exiting competely - it will count that as playtime.