What are you Playing Now? I name all the operations that go down in Taipei.

[Wormerine]

2 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

But I cant handle her constant moralizing and Viconia adds some interesting dialogue that I prefer outside the Romance arc in BG2 

You quickly switched from looking a way to get rid of Khalid to romance her, to killing her off to make space in the team without getting rid of her chubby.

[BruceVC]

11 minutes ago, Wormerine said:

You quickly switched from looking a way to get rid of Khalid to romance her, to killing her off to make space in the team without getting rid of her chubby.

I did, you right. Wormie what do I always say is the first reason I select companions?

The MOST important thing is combat effectiveness and then side quests and then dialogue and Romance

Khalid is too good in combat to drop 

[kanisatha]

1 minute ago, BruceVC said:

I did, you right. Wormie what do I always say is the first reason I select companions?

The MOST important thing is combat effectiveness and then side quests and then dialogue and Romance

Khalid is too good in combat to drop 

I prefer to lock up Khalid in one of those houses in Nashkel while keeping Jaheira in my party. I do the same thing to split up Minsc and his witch. Never liked the idea of killing off any of the BG1/2 companions even when I disliked them.

[BruceVC]

Just now, kanisatha said:

I prefer to lock up Khalid in one of those houses in Nashkel while keeping Jaheira in my party. I do the same thing to split up Minsc and his witch. Never liked the idea of killing off any of the BG1/2 companions even when I disliked them.

I also dont like the idea of killing NPC  but I didnt think I had a choice, I only found out afterwards that if you separate them on the map then you can add someone new 

[Wormerine]

28 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

Khalid is too good in combat to drop 

I always thought Khalid was seen as ****, as a fighter with 15 STR.

[BruceVC]

5 minutes ago, Wormerine said:

I always thought Khalid was seen as ****, as a fighter with 15 STR.

Wormie you have raised a good point, I checked now and he does have 15 STR but he seems effective?

Are you suggesting I sacrifice him to  the wild dogs as well ?

[BruceVC]

Just now, BruceVC said:

Wormie you have raised a good point, I checked now and he does have 15 STR but he seems effective?

Are you suggesting I sacrifice him to  the wild dogs as well ?

But he does have high HP and 17 Con?

[majestic]

1 hour ago, BruceVC said:

The MOST important thing is combat effectiveness and then side quests and then dialogue and Romance

Says the most important thing is combat effectiveness. Adds an 8 CON single class cleric to the party, drops the fighter/druid for it.

 

1 hour ago, Wormerine said:

I always thought Khalid was seen as ****, as a fighter with 15 STR.

To be fair to Khalid, all of the companions have sub-par stats, some are just less bad than others. One can easily made do with Khalid as tank, but there are better options. Still, I think the game (series) plays best if you play a tank main character. So, basically, something like a fighter/mage dual class. With the EE nedlessly mucking about with the original BG2's nerfed Grand Mastery, it does pay off more than before to not simply use a multi-class.

Lord knows what Beamdog thought there, but hey, it wouldn't be Beamdog otherwise. It does give your character a broader range of off-hands to use, which is nice, but it basically kills the multi classes in terms of effectiveness.

Edited July 30, 2022 by majestic
Edit: Jaheira is a fighter/druid, not a fighter/thief, what the hell? :p

[Bartimaeus]

Getting the first seven levels of a fighter-type class (or even a thief) and then dual-classing to either a mage or cleric so that you can get the single-class XP progression of the spellcasting class (as opposed to the much slower multi-class XP progression) while retaining the HP, THAC0, APR, proficiency, and item usabilities of the fighter-type class kind of beats everything else, IMO. Of course, it can be kind of painful for BG1 because you're starting to take on actually hard stuff right as you get to level 7...

[Wormerine]

1 hour ago, BruceVC said:

Wormie you have raised a good point, I checked now and he does have 15 STR but he seems effective?

Are you suggesting I sacrifice him to  the wild dogs as well ?

Generally I am in favour of letting go suboptimal employees rather then killing them.

1 hour ago, BruceVC said:

But he does have high HP and 17 Con?

Eh, everytime I play BG1 I end up running the cannonical party, so Khalid was always in my party. I stick tower shield on him, as he is as good at getting swing at, as any other. I just suspect he isn't an optimal choice, though I never personally cared for such thing, with BGs being mostly forgiving.

[majestic]

5 minutes ago, Bartimaeus said:

Getting the first seven levels of a fighter-type class (or even a thief) and then dual-classing to either a mage or cleric so that you can get the single-class XP progression of the spellcasting class (as opposed to the much slower multi-class XP progression) while retaining the HP, THAC0, APR, proficiency, and item usabilities of the fighter-type class kind of beats everything else, IMO. Of course, it can be kind of painful for BG1 because you're starting to take on actually hard stuff right as you get to level 7...

Not as clear cut as with the EE's proficiency table, which more or less necessitates a level 9 fighter dual class. I mean, if one wants to have a perfectly optimized character. If one doens't, then everything goes, really. The reason is getting to the attacks/round hard cap, basically - which was a level 13 warrior type dual class in the original BG2. Not counting any fixes or nerf-mods or whatever else one might have applied.

MCs have certain advantages when it comes to HLAs (one does get a HLA at every level up past the original BG2 XP cap, after all) - the most glaring one is the fine bug in the original BG2 where a fighter/thief MC could pick up Assassination as often as wanted. Which was pretty goofy fun. Fixed in some mods, probably fixed in the EE too. Never played BG2 EE long enough to find out.

 

[HoonDing]

Imagine playing Baulders Gate 1 when 2 retcons everything anyway.

Just play Icewind Dale 1 instead, man.

[kanisatha]

2 hours ago, BruceVC said:

But he does have high HP and 17 Con?

Which is what makes him an ok tank, but not so much a damage dealer. And that's why I cut him whenever I play a tank myself. But my typical PC is a fighter/rogue or a fighter/wizard.

41 minutes ago, Wormerine said:

Eh, everytime I play BG1 I end up running the cannonical party, so Khalid was always in my party.

I've played BG1 in particular sooooo many times but have yet to play it even once with the canonical party. Now you've got me hankering to give it another go with the canonical party.

[Bartimaeus]

28 minutes ago, majestic said:

Not as clear cut as with the EE's proficiency table, which more or less necessitates a level 9 fighter dual class. I mean, if one wants to have a perfectly optimized character. If one doens't, then everything goes, really. The reason is getting to the attacks/round hard cap, basically - which was a level 13 warrior type dual class in the original BG2. Not counting any fixes or nerf-mods or whatever else one might have applied.

MCs have certain advantages when it comes to HLAs (one does get a HLA at every level up past the original BG2 XP cap, after all) - the most glaring one is the fine bug in the original BG2 where a fighter/thief MC could pick up Assassination as often as wanted. Which was pretty goofy fun. Fixed in some mods, probably fixed in the EE too. Never played BG2 EE long enough to find out.

What did the EEs do? The only thing I can think of is restricting level 1 proficencies (i.e. so you can't put all 4 of a fighter's level 1 proficencies into one weapon type, which is a BG2 bug and wasn't allowed in BG1 in the first place AFAIK). Generally, I think 7 makes the most sense, since it's when you get the +1/2 APR from being a fighter. It's also not too high level and so it doesn't take too long to reactivate your class (which gets exponentially more annoying and burdensome the farther you go past level 7), you still get most of your fighter 1D10 HP dice and enough THAC0 progression, you can have two weapon types with 3 stars (or dual wielding with 3 stars + one weapon type with 3 stars). Going up to level 9 for grand mastery with one weapon type doesn't even give you anything but +2 damage in BG2, since grand mastery was completely broken in that game. EEs fixed it so you get the other 1/2 APR and extra THAC0 that you're supposed to get, but it means you're going to be gimped for almost all of BG2...

36 minutes ago, HoonDing said:

Imagine playing Baulders Gate 1 when 2 retcons everything anyway.

Just play Icewind Dale 1 instead, man.

Icewind Dale 1 is literally the only Infinity Engine game I haven't beat, . Haven't ever been able to suffer through it...would rather play PST probably ten more times rather than IWD once, I think.

[majestic]

33 minutes ago, Bartimaeus said:

EEs fixed it so you get the other 1/2 APR and extra THAC0 that you're supposed to get, but it means you're going to be gimped for almost all of BG2...

That half attack translates to a full attack under Improved Haste, which is a huge boost to damage which otherwise took going to level 13 in case of dual classing. It's also 28 more hit points - more with the book from BG1. Going from fighter 9 to mage 10 - which is the most XP you can take for a dual class at fighter 9, anyway - takes 500k experience, which is like a sixth of BG2's original experience cap. Not that much, especially with reduced party sizes to break the XP curve. If you're in the mood for Beamdog content (ugh) then it's pretty much a no-brainer with Siege of Dragonspear.

Fighter MCs can still get to the cap because they eventually reach level 13, but, well, you'd end up with less hit points and a slower overall progression.

Ultimately it doesn't really make any difference, Anomen proves that, but if you go for cheese, why not the expensive one.  

32 minutes ago, Bartimaeus said:

Icewind Dale 1 is literally the only Infinity Engine game I haven't beat, . Haven't ever been able to suffer through it...would rather play PST probably ten more times rather than IWD once, I think.

I got through IWD once. By making a paladin, two fighters and a bard, then dualling the two to thief and cleric at level 9. That gives plenty of staying power. Bit of an annoying beginning, but that's what you've got rest until healed for. The bard is good enough a mage for anything in IWD anyway. Cuts quickly through the horrendous amount of combat - that just leaves the annoying dungeon layouts. Can't do anything against those.

But hey, the great writing of the utterly uninteresting story your personality-free group of boring characters stumble into and the great music tides over everything, no? No?

Edited July 30, 2022 by majestic

[Sarex]

42 minutes ago, Bartimaeus said:

Icewind Dale 1 is literally the only Infinity Engine game I haven't beat, . Haven't ever been able to suffer through it...

Same, though I never tried to force myself to finish it. Have no clue why people like it, but then again I rate IWD2 as the second best IE game (after BG2).

[majestic]

4 minutes ago, Sarex said:

Same, though I never tried to force myself to finish it. Have no clue why people like it, but then again I rate IWD2 as the second best IE game (after BG2).

PS:T > BG2 > IWD2 > BG > a rock > rusty nails in your scrotum > slow, agonizing death by necrotizing fasciitis  > IWD.

Willing to die on that hill. Come at me.

[Hurlshort]

6 hours ago, Wormerine said:

Ok. So what’s up with this game? How does one buy into it? Is it for backers only? I feel I have been waiting for forever for some kind of Early Access to be released. I remember people gushing over Xen2 during Phoenix Point early builds, and now it’s 2 years after PP completion.

You should wishlist it on Steam, for sure. I backed it on kickstarter, so that got me a key to the alpha. The early access should be coming soon, although soon might mean 6-12 months. The game is very playable at this point and the last update seems to make it feature complete and playable form start to finish. The development of this game requires patience, but given how stable and deep the original Xenonauts was, I think they deserve it. As I said, I've already played the alpha enough to say they've got the tactical combat aspect and maps down pat.

[Bartimaeus]

20 minutes ago, majestic said:

That half attack translates to a full attack under Improved Haste, which is a huge boost to damage which otherwise took going to level 13 in case of dual classing. It's also 28 more hit points - more with the book from BG1. Going from fighter 9 to mage 10 - which is the most XP you can take for a dual class at fighter 9, anyway - takes 500k experience, which is like a sixth of BG2's original experience cap. Not that much, especially with reduced party sizes to break the XP curve. If you're in the mood for Beamdog content (ugh) then it's pretty much a no-brainer with Siege of Dragonspear.

 Not playing with a full party completely breaks the game balance of Baldur's Gate entirely due to AD&D's terrible level progression wherein all else being equal, a level 7 fighter will defeat a level 5 fighter probably 99% of the time. I usually play with 5 characters, but I use a mod that reduces all quest XP to half in order to compensate. Level 10 is...what, about the time you're ready to start the Bodhi/Shadow Thieves stuff before going to Spellhold? I'll power game a little, but I ain't power gaming THAT much and for that long, .

I'd probably place PST and BG2 equally, though for very different reasons. I don't know where I'd place BG1/IWD2; my first inclination was to place BG1 above it since I have much more fond feelings for the BG series than the IWD series, but every time I actually play BG1, I get like halfway through before I quit, so I guess I'm not too sure.

[Sarex]

29 minutes ago, majestic said:

PS:T > BG2 > IWD2 > BG > a rock > rusty nails in your scrotum > slow, agonizing death by necrotizing fasciitis  > IWD.

Willing to die on that hill. Come at me.

BG2 > IWD2 > BG > PS:T > IWD

Edited July 30, 2022 by Sarex

[Keyrock]

2 hours ago, Bartimaeus said:

Icewind Dale 1 is literally the only Infinity Engine game I haven't beat, . Haven't ever been able to suffer through it...would rather play PST probably ten more times rather than IWD once, I think.

IWD is brutal. It's like someone saw the horrific grind of Nashkel Mines and decided to make an entire game like that. What a psychopath!

Edit: This one goes out to the fellow Sierra On-Line fans we have here: IWD is the Codename: Iceman of Infinity Engine games.

Edited July 30, 2022 by Keyrock

[HoonDing]

BG2 > IWD > BG > a rock > rusty nails in your scrotum > slow, agonizing death by necrotizing fasciitis  > IWD2 > PS:T.

[Zoraptor]

To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to appreciate Icewind Dale. The game is extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of theoretical combat mechanics most of the gameplay will go over a typical player's head. There's also David Ogden Stiers' nihilistic narration, which is deftly woven into the plot progression - his character's philosophy draws heavily from literature, for instance. The fans understand this stuff; they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depths of the gameplay, to realize that it's not just combat- it says something deep about LIFE. As a consequence people who dislike Icewind Dale truly ARE idiots- of course they wouldn't appreciate, for instance, having giant skeletons that explode into snowballs which is itself a cryptic reference to the snowball fight in Witcher 3 The Wild Hunt I'm smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion as Black Isle's genius unfolds itself on their monitors. What fools... how I pity them. And yes by the way, I DO have a Yxunomei tattoo. And no, you cannot see it. It's for the ladies' eyes only- And even they have to demonstrate that they're within 5 IQ points of my own (preferably lower) beforehand.

(Funnily enough on pure gameplay I 100% agree with HoonDing on order, though I'd probably put the self mutilation before BG1 and have an entire lower category for SCS)

[Keyrock]

44 minutes ago, Zoraptor said:

To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to appreciate Icewind Dale. The game is extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of theoretical combat mechanics most of the gameplay will go over a typical player's head. There's also David Ogden Stiers' nihilistic narration, which is deftly woven into the plot progression - his character's philosophy draws heavily from literature, for instance. The fans understand this stuff; they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depths of the gameplay, to realize that it's not just combat- it says something deep about LIFE. As a consequence people who dislike Icewind Dale truly ARE idiots- of course they wouldn't appreciate, for instance, having giant skeletons that explode into snowballs which is itself a cryptic reference to the snowball fight in Witcher 3 The Wild Hunt I'm smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion as Black Isle's genius unfolds itself on their monitors. What fools... how I pity them. And yes by the way, I DO have a Yxunomei tattoo. And no, you cannot see it. It's for the ladies' eyes only- And even they have to demonstrate that they're within 5 IQ points of my own (preferably lower) beforehand.

(Funnily enough on pure gameplay I 100% agree with HoonDing on order, though I'd probably put the self mutilation before BG1 and have an entire lower category for SCS)

Bravo sir or madam, bravo. 

The funny thing is that IWD should be the type of game I absolutely love. I love deep tactical combat, this should be right up my alley. But there are limits to things and IWD went well past those limits of punishing anything and everything that's not the exact optimal play (plus luck of the dice). Hence my comparison to Codename: Iceman, which only Sierra On-Line fans would understand. The Jim Walls Police Quest games alienated some players with their rigid adherence to proper procedure, but they were overall well received. I, for one, LOVED them. Then Jim Walls put out Codename: Iceman. By all accounts, this should have been my favorite game ever. A Sierra p&c about secret agent espionage, it's like my wet dream. Unfortunately, Jim Walls took it too far. He pushed the adherence to EXTREMELY strict procedure and paying attention to the smallest of detail to a level even I had a hard time stomaching. This is coming from a guy who played and loved the La-Mulana (talk about having to pay attention to small details) games!

 

Edited July 31, 2022 by Keyrock

[Humanoid]

a rock > rusty nails in your scrotum > slow, agonizing death by necrotizing fasciitis  > IE games

I loved (most of) them once upon a time, but I cannot and will not ever play them again. Unless they're remade with smaller parties with turn-based mechanics.