:( Sad that obsidian is making this game isometric...

[IndiraLightfoot]

Soulburner: Playing pen-and-paper RPGs can be a blast, and you really should try it! 

But you'll need a good group of friends, a place to be with a big table and space for throwing dice and plenty of time, stuff that makes it hard to pull off in adulthood.

 

I bet that if people who haven't played IE classics just bit the bullet and got over the initial resistance all the systems and rules put up, plenty would be surprised how good the RPG-aspect is in several of those games. 

[teknoman2]

Soulburner: Playing pen-and-paper RPGs can be a blast, and you really should try it! 

But you'll need a good group of friends, a place to be with a big table and space for throwing dice and plenty of time, stuff that makes it hard to pull off in adulthood.

 

I bet that if people who haven't played IE classics just bit the bullet and got over the initial resistance all the systems and rules put up, plenty would be surprised how good the RPG-aspect is in several of those games. 

not to mention that visualy they are still respectable, unlike that time's 3D games

[Skie Nightfall]

Isn't the game being isometric is one of the points?? lol

[okkoko]

strange i always imagined that the isomatrix engine was 3d seen from atop cam i liked arcanum course what you could do in that game seemed a lot i remember how i fund this portal that keep spawning monsters so i keep t killing them monster got to lvl 26 by it before i had to kill a lot to lvl up well suddenly the game go slower and slower and lag lag lag

 

but to put it simpel a isomatrix vs 3d like bg2 vs nwn 2 well the detail of paper-doll was the only real difference els bg 2 did pretty good cheat my brain to think it was 3d

[Karkarov]

Well, for one thing, the forced perspective fully supports the tactical nature of combat, as everything is always designed with the same camera angle in mind. There's never even the potential for you to have the camera in a bad spot and simply miss what's going on in some kind of ambush or something.

Yeah I have been replaying Baldur's Gate lately and sorry but, it's combat is anything but tactical until very late game.  So far 90% of my fights have boiled down to select all, click a mob, wait for it to die, click next mob, rinse wash repeat.  The fights that do require some planning have also hilariously come down to luck.  I had one fight against this two mage, ogre, and two fighter group.  Had it won, my party was up, all but one mage dead.  Then as we engage the final mage he casts something and my main character failed a save apparently, one shot kill game over.  So much for tactics, one bad save paired with the mage scoring his best possible damage, and I lose.

[Malekith]

 

Well, for one thing, the forced perspective fully supports the tactical nature of combat, as everything is always designed with the same camera angle in mind. There's never even the potential for you to have the camera in a bad spot and simply miss what's going on in some kind of ambush or something.

Yeah I have been replaying Baldur's Gate lately and sorry but, it's combat is anything but tactical until very late game.  So far 90% of my fights have boiled down to select all, click a mob, wait for it to die, click next mob, rinse wash repeat.  The fights that do require some planning have also hilariously come down to luck.  I had one fight against this two mage, ogre, and two fighter group.  Had it won, my party was up, all but one mage dead.  Then as we engage the final mage he casts something and my main character failed a save apparently, one shot kill game over.  So much for tactics, one bad save paired with the mage scoring his best possible damage, and I lose.

 

To be fair that has nothing to do with the perspective but with AD&D mechanics.

[Tsuga C]

To be fair that has nothing to do with the perspective but with AD&D mechanics.

And, had it been his mage that miraculously saved the day with a "Hail Mary" spell, he'd likely have been pleased as punch.

[Lephys]

Yeah I have been replaying Baldur's Gate lately and sorry but, it's combat is anything but tactical until very late game.  So far 90% of my fights have boiled down to select all, click a mob, wait for it to die, click next mob, rinse wash repeat.  The fights that do require some planning have also hilariously come down to luck.  I had one fight against this two mage, ogre, and two fighter group.  Had it won, my party was up, all but one mage dead.  Then as we engage the final mage he casts something and my main character failed a save apparently, one shot kill game over.  So much for tactics, one bad save paired with the mage scoring his best possible damage, and I lose.

I do not disagree. Well, except that I wouldn't say it was devoid of tactical aspects. Just that it was much more primitive in that regard.

 

But, my point was merely that the typical fixed perspective of the isometric games supports tactical combat, and not to comment on the specific level of tactics involved in any specific game designed using said perspective.

 

So, while 3D games are pretty great, too, I think there'd still be some value in actually fixing the camera into at least a mock isometric perspective for the sake of tactically managing 6 people on a battlefield of countless more. Case and point: Dragon Age. Granted, I played it on console (didn't have a very good PC at the time), so the camera/view controls could've been much better on PC. But, controlling everything from a very close 3rd-person perspective was FAR less efficient than the same party control would've been had the game been an isometric game.

[okkoko]

well in truth it all comes down to combats simplicity yet complexity the moment you start the game it will be an adventure

[Karkarov]

 

To be fair that has nothing to do with the perspective but with AD&D mechanics.

And, had it been his mage that miraculously saved the day with a "Hail Mary" spell, he'd likely have been pleased as punch.

 

No because they wouldn't have been saving the day, at the point that happened it was 6 guys versus one mage and I appeared to have the fight in the bag.

 

That out of the way I realize part of that is the D&D mechanics, I am just simply laying out that Baldur's Gate (and other infinity engine games) are not as "tactical" as people seem to remember them being.  Most of BG2 tactics specifically just boiled down to "counter the mage".

[Mr. Magniloquent]

 

 

To be fair that has nothing to do with the perspective but with AD&D mechanics.

And, had it been his mage that miraculously saved the day with a "Hail Mary" spell, he'd likely have been pleased as punch.

 

No because they wouldn't have been saving the day, at the point that happened it was 6 guys versus one mage and I appeared to have the fight in the bag.

 

That out of the way I realize part of that is the D&D mechanics, I am just simply laying out that Baldur's Gate (and other infinity engine games) are not as "tactical" as people seem to remember them being.  Most of BG2 tactics specifically just boiled down to "counter the mage".

 

 

Install Sword Coast Strategems I & II.

 

Completely. Different. Game.

 

While spellcasters will become significantly more difficult, it stems from superior AI rather than cheese. The mods increase general AI to the same effect, making enemy fighters and regular monsters much more effective. Dragons get a significant boost as well, and are no longer speed bumps. Djinn/Efreeti & Demons/Devils become an absolute terror--especially with the aTweaks PnP tweakpack.

 

The BG series was the best of its day, with nostalgia doing a fair share of heavy lifting today. The BG Saga modded....well, it outclasses just about every modern AAA RPG out there.

[teknoman2]

 

 

To be fair that has nothing to do with the perspective but with AD&D mechanics.

And, had it been his mage that miraculously saved the day with a "Hail Mary" spell, he'd likely have been pleased as punch.

 

No because they wouldn't have been saving the day, at the point that happened it was 6 guys versus one mage and I appeared to have the fight in the bag.

 

That out of the way I realize part of that is the D&D mechanics, I am just simply laying out that Baldur's Gate (and other infinity engine games) are not as "tactical" as people seem to remember them being.  Most of BG2 tactics specifically just boiled down to "counter the mage".

 

i always said that DnD based games are at least 90% luck.

[rustypup]

 

 I am just simply laying out that Baldur's Gate (and other infinity engine games) are not as "tactical" as people seem to remember them being. 

i always said that DnD based games are at least 90% luck.

 

Sounds more as if Karkarov was playing at run-and-gun instead of buffing the tanks... which is where the whole 'tactics' thing comes in...  Casters used as offensive units against casters is begging to be buried in a hail of fail...  

 

Back on-topic: One of my primary deciding factors was the isometric field of battle. Because battling camera angles while you're battling critters is more frustrating than entertaining..  

 

OP still sounds like a bridge-dweller's commentary. 

[cleric Nemir]

[Karkarov]

 

 

 I am just simply laying out that Baldur's Gate (and other infinity engine games) are not as "tactical" as people seem to remember them being. 

i always said that DnD based games are at least 90% luck.

 

Sounds more as if Karkarov was playing at run-and-gun instead of buffing the tanks... which is where the whole 'tactics' thing comes in...  Casters used as offensive units against casters is begging to be buried in a hail of fail...  

 

Sounds to me like you aren't familiar with D&D rules.  My team was level 4-5, what do you propose I "buff" with?  The fight in my example was won, had the mage even done something as simple as targeted someone else I would have had it in the bag.  I only got a game over because he targeted my main character, my character failed his save, and the mage scored something like 25-30 damage.  My main dude was only down like 5 hp when he died.

 

Also this is D&D 2nd Ed rules, aka, Baldur's Gate.  There is no "tanking" if a mob wants to hit someone other than the Fighter, they can.  I can't force them to attack one person unless the fight goes down in a tight passage, which they rarely do.

 

Also buffing isn't "tactical" it is common freaking sense.  Tactics is using your tank skills in pe to lock an opposing fighter in melee with your fighter so your mage can stand just outside of melee and hit him with spells.  Or using your rogue to hide in shadows then stealth behind the mage and backstab him.  Using a freezing spell on a enemy highly resist to physical attacks so it is frozen and no vulnerable to physical damage is tactics.

Edited November 9, 2013 by Karkarov

[Stun]

 

Well, for one thing, the forced perspective fully supports the tactical nature of combat, as everything is always designed with the same camera angle in mind. There's never even the potential for you to have the camera in a bad spot and simply miss what's going on in some kind of ambush or something.

Yeah I have been replaying Baldur's Gate lately and sorry but, it's combat is anything but tactical until very late game.  So far 90% of my fights have boiled down to select all, click a mob, wait for it to die, click next mob, rinse wash repeat.  The fights that do require some planning have also hilariously come down to luck.  I had one fight against this two mage, ogre, and two fighter group.  Had it won, my party was up, all but one mage dead.  Then as we engage the final mage he casts something and my main character failed a save apparently, one shot kill game over.  So much for tactics, one bad save paired with the mage scoring his best possible damage, and I lose.

 

Begging your pardon, but I see tactical written all over this description of yours. Everyone knows that Step 1 of any battle plan in BG (or any of the IE games) is to kill or disable all spell casters first.

 

You didn't do that, so you paid the price.

 

 

Sounds to me like you aren't familiar with D&D rules. My team was level 4-5, what do you propose I "buff" with?

Hm.... BG1? Level 4-5 party? Lets see.

 

The following buffs could have helped you tremendously against the 2 mage, 1 Ogre, 2 fighter party that took you out.

 

1) Invisibility (enemies can't target invisible characters)

2) Haste (Haste is completely unnerfed in BG1, making it the most powerful Spell in the whole game. It doubles your entire party's # of attacks...for an extended period of time. Had you hasted your party, then employed focus fire tactics, that fight would have not lasted more than 20 seconds)

3) Monster Summoning 1 (the value of this spell is not in what it summons, but the quanity of what it summons. An enemy surrounded by gibberlings will waste all its attention, attacks and AI on the gibberlings, leaving your whole party to do whatever it wants in complete safety, for several rounds.

4) Sanctuary (The level 1 cleric spell. Forces enemies to ignore your cleric....even if he walks right in front of them to heal your fighter, or your mage. or to recast any expired buffs)

5) Potions. (BG1 dispenses them without limits. Magic Blocking, Magic shielding, Invunerability, Heroism, Giant strength, Invisibilty, Speed etc. The majority of these will improve your saving throws to the point where you won't fail any. And a couple will enhance your fighting skills so as to tip the balance of the fight in your favor)

6) Mirror image. (doesn't just protect your mage from melee and ranged physical attacks, it will also protect him from AOE spells.)

7) Shield (have your mage put one of these up and you can shrug off enemy magic missiles.)

8.) Chant, Prayer, Protection from Evil 10' Radius, Luck (boost your entire party's saves) And... they stack.

Edited November 10, 2013 by Stun

[teknoman2]

all that is nice and good, but what do you do if the enemy mage decides out of all these, to target your main character with a spell and your character rolls 1 as saving throw? it is quite easy for one bad dice roll to send to hell your entire strategy that would offer you a flawless victory otherwise

[Stun]

Get your main character's saves into the negatives? (there's no Auto-fail-on-1 in the BG games) And there are lots and lots of ways to do this in Both of the BG's.

 

Alternatively, there's the ham-fisted approach: Attack the mage. In BG1 this was super easy. There's nothing any mage can do in BG1 against a volley of arrows and magic missiles combined with a melee assault from a party of attackers. Nothing at all. In BG2, Mages are infinitely tougher, and disrupting their spell casting is a game unto itself. Thankfully, BG2 gives your party an infinitely vast variety of tools to neutralize "bad luck".

 

But I digress! This all shamelessly assumes tactical combat, which we're told doesn't exist in Baldurs Gate.

Edited November 10, 2013 by Stun

[PrimeJunta]

Karkarov's right. AD&D blows like a hurricane. Do everything right and you'll still get one-shotted frequently from sheer bad luck.

 

Also, any game that has "Save frequently and in different slots" in the instructions is fundamentally broken.

[Hassat Hunter]

So in order to add strategy we need to remove "bad luck"? No more rolls? No more variable damage? No more dealing with defense and attack rolls (you might miss, bad luck!)

Strategy would be everything fully static?

 

Well, screw strategy then... I don't want my game to be *that* boring...

[teknoman2]

i dont say remove rolls and stuff, but if i manage through tactics to get my party of 6 to beat 10 enemy fighters, 5 thieves, 2 priests, 4 rangers and 3 barbarians in a single fight without taking any serious damage, and the last member of the enemies, a mage, casts disintegrate and kills my main character because of a bad roll and so all my tactics go to waste. so it is important for a "tactical" game to not have 1 shot kill skills and spells, otherwise a bad roll can send everything to hell

Edited November 10, 2013 by teknoman2

[Hassat Hunter]

Then, as stated before, ahum

KILL THE MAGE FIRST

As for how mages with one-shot spells overloaded can work, look at Kangaxx.
Could you not circumvent the one-shotting? Yes, you could... even there.

[Fearabbit]

KILL THE MAGE FIRST

 

Doesn't make any sense. A one-shot kill can occur whether you killed 8 other enemies before or not. It has the same probability.

If the mage was casting a powerful spell that took a couple of turns to charge, yeah, then it makes sense to kill him first. And if you know that a mage is capable of killing you in one hit, it makes sense to kill him first in order to lower the probability of that happening.

 

BUT if you just killed 8 enemies and now you're standing there, barely injured, going against one mage - that's exactly the same as if you didn't kill the 8 enemies before in terms of "how high are the chances of getting one-shotted by that mage".

 

As for strategy/tactics (what's the difference again?), I would like a game that didn't have these generally accepted perfect ways of fighting. Like "of course you have to take out the mage first, and you have to buff your fighters with your casters, and Haste is overpowered so use that as often as possible"...

I don't know if that means that I want a non-tactical game. I do want to think about my fights, and if I have a checklist of things I have to do to win a fight, well, that's not really the case then, is it? If a combat system is so balanced, however, that every action in itself is just as acceptable as the next one, and your choices are purely based on circumstantial priorities, that sounds more like tactics to me.

Edited November 10, 2013 by Fearabbit

[teknoman2]

Then, as stated before, ahum

KILL THE MAGE FIRST

As for how mages with one-shot spells overloaded can work, look at Kangaxx.

Could you not circumvent the one-shotting? Yes, you could... even there.

indeed i could. but that would leave me exposed to other threats.

in the kangaxx case you die the first time, then you learn what he does, then you decide on a countermeasure and finaly you play the battle again knowing that at that particular moment you need to do this to avoid his spells.

in a random battle against a group of enemies you cant know what the enemy wizard will use, when and on who until he does. at that point you no longer have the ability to counter it and just hope it doesnt work or reload if it does. and next time you will prepare a counter, hoping that the person who can counter becomes the target

[BruceVC]

 

 

Well, for one thing, the forced perspective fully supports the tactical nature of combat, as everything is always designed with the same camera angle in mind. There's never even the potential for you to have the camera in a bad spot and simply miss what's going on in some kind of ambush or something.

Yeah I have been replaying Baldur's Gate lately and sorry but, it's combat is anything but tactical until very late game.  So far 90% of my fights have boiled down to select all, click a mob, wait for it to die, click next mob, rinse wash repeat.  The fights that do require some planning have also hilariously come down to luck.  I had one fight against this two mage, ogre, and two fighter group.  Had it won, my party was up, all but one mage dead.  Then as we engage the final mage he casts something and my main character failed a save apparently, one shot kill game over.  So much for tactics, one bad save paired with the mage scoring his best possible damage, and I lose.

 

Begging your pardon, but I see tactical written all over this description of yours. Everyone knows that Step 1 of any battle plan in BG (or any of the IE games) is to kill or disable all spell casters first.

 

You didn't do that, so you paid the price.

 

 

Sounds to me like you aren't familiar with D&D rules. My team was level 4-5, what do you propose I "buff" with?

Hm.... BG1? Level 4-5 party? Lets see.

 

The following buffs could have helped you tremendously against the 2 mage, 1 Ogre, 2 fighter party that took you out.

 

1) Invisibility (enemies can't target invisible characters)

2) Haste (Haste is completely unnerfed in BG1, making it the most powerful Spell in the whole game. It doubles your entire party's # of attacks...for an extended period of time. Had you hasted your party, then employed focus fire tactics, that fight would have not lasted more than 20 seconds)

3) Monster Summoning 1 (the value of this spell is not in what it summons, but the quanity of what it summons. An enemy surrounded by gibberlings will waste all its attention, attacks and AI on the gibberlings, leaving your whole party to do whatever it wants in complete safety, for several rounds.

4) Sanctuary (The level 1 cleric spell. Forces enemies to ignore your cleric....even if he walks right in front of them to heal your fighter, or your mage. or to recast any expired buffs)

5) Potions. (BG1 dispenses them without limits. Magic Blocking, Magic shielding, Invunerability, Heroism, Giant strength, Invisibilty, Speed etc. The majority of these will improve your saving throws to the point where you won't fail any. And a couple will enhance your fighting skills so as to tip the balance of the fight in your favor)

6) Mirror image. (doesn't just protect your mage from melee and ranged physical attacks, it will also protect him from AOE spells.)

7) Shield (have your mage put one of these up and you can shrug off enemy magic missiles.)

8.) Chant, Prayer, Protection from Evil 10' Radius, Luck (boost your entire party's saves) And... they stack.

 

 

 

I agree 100 % and your suggestions are all valid strategical decisions you can make to effect combat. I am currently playing IWD for the first time and there are loads of spells you can  cast, like animal summoning and Skull Trap, to change combat. Anyone who truly thinks that the older IWD games are just about luck don't understand the AD&D rules