bad design decisions

[wanderon]

 

[...]

 

I also pretty much never play a PC mage either 

 

But then I have to ask you exactly what you actually played, because even disregarding party members (for whatever reason), almost everyone has legit ways to deal with wizards and protection spells. Archers get Arrows of Dispelling, Paladins have Carsomyr, and Assassins simply go up and stab them in the face before they even become an issue.

 

The only "issue" with how spells/counterspelling worked in BG2 was that it could be hard to figure out which protections were up and what you needed to use to dispel it. But even so, just throwing what feels appropriate (which I do, because I can't be arsed to figure out exactly what does exactly what against what, even 10 years down the line) you can just sorta half-ass your way through the game when it comes to mages.

 

Honestly the vast majority of mages I simply swarm and beat on them until they die, this is true all the way up until they get Abi-Dalzim's Horrid Wilting. This isn't because I can't do better, but simply because it's the best solution. One day I'm really going to play the game as a Wizard Slayer/Thief just to see how hard I can wreck the opposition. I'm in Throne of Bhaal with my Assassin run at the moment, and Viconia has 110 Magic Resistance. I mean. C'mon.

 

 

I didn't say I could not get through them I said I found them annoying and that because I chose not to pre-buff most battles were more difficult as well - as for what I played almost every class in the game outside of mages sorcerers and Kensai altho I did solo a Female Gnome Thief/Illusionist about 2/3 of the way through (into the Underdark) before the battles just became too tedious.

[Sensuki]

Don't get me wrong, the breadth of the spells allowed some interesting fights, but generally the tactic was turtle summon, turtle horrid wilting / meteor swarm, turtle minute meteors.  I thought BG1 was actually more interesting because the spells were more unique and less rock, paper, scissors.

I didn't do any of that.

[Mr. Magniloquent]

 

BG2 mage duels were one of the best things about the game though. Best spell battles of any game.

I really hated them along with the whole pre-buffing regimen - perhaps because I could never get on board with them and still almost always play with very limited buffing which of course made such battles much more difficult/annoying for me 

 

I never understood this. With vanilla BG, most any wizard could simply be defeated by Breach + Auto-attack. If you were feeling lazy, smack them with a lvl2 Melf's Acid Arrow when they are casting a spell and watch every single spell fail for the next several rounds in addition to half of their meager  health. An archer on point with an elemental arrow. Any weapon with a additional damage type. Berserker Rage. Inquisitors. Death Spell/Death Fog for nearly all summons. Sequencered Skull Traps. Scouting/Scrying/Wizards Eye  + Backstab. Theif Detect Illusion ability (unlimited, nearly instantaneous, togglable True Sight). Improved invisibility.

 

The list goes on an on. If you couldn't defeat mages in vanilla BG, you didn't understand the game you were paying and/or were totally devoid of creativity.

[anameforobsidian]

 

Don't get me wrong, the breadth of the spells allowed some interesting fights, but generally the tactic was turtle summon, turtle horrid wilting / meteor swarm, turtle minute meteors.  I thought BG1 was actually more interesting because the spells were more unique and less rock, paper, scissors.

I didn't do any of that.

 

I was talking about the enemy AI.  The player has a ton of ways to defeat magic enemies, but they all come down to start = interrupt + dispel protections + murder.  BG2 rogues using potions of invisibility were a more interesting threat, if less dangerous.

Edited February 24, 2015 by anameforobsidian

[Sensuki]

Even in BG2s worst case scenarios, it's still better than spellcasting in Pillars of Eternity

[archangel979]

Actually prebuffing was less of an issue than in NWN2 for instance. You really didn't need much of it in bg2. Stoneskin on mage, bless and haste was most times all you needed. In some fights defensive harmony did well. IWD1 has more prebuffing because they had more very useful prebuffing spells and it felt stupid not to use them.

 

What Bg2 did well was offensive and buff removing spells. You had to read your spell descriptions and figure out how to use them. Anyone that didn't like that, might also not like PoE as in PoE all classes have lots of "spells" and have to read them and figure out how to use them.

Edited February 24, 2015 by archangel979

[Luckmann]

Actually prebuffing was less of an issue than in NWN2 for instance. You really didn't need much of it in bg2. Stoneskin on mage, bless and haste was most times all you needed. In some fights defensive harmony did well. IWD1 has more prebuffing because they had more very useful prebuffing spells and it felt stupid not to use them.

 

What Bg2 did well was offensive and buff removing spells. You had to read your spell descriptions and figure out how to use them. Anyone that didn't like that, might also not like PoE as in PoE all classes have lots of "spells" and have to read them and figure out how to use them.

 

Honestly, I never use Bless any more, and in my last playthroughs, I never end up using Defensive Harmony because the duration is too short and the benefit is meh. In BG2, you buff for specific encounters, like Chaotic Commands before meeting Illithids (which lasts forever on higher levels, to boot). Other than that, Stoneskin for wizards that can get it (12 hour duration, after all) and Protection from Evil 10' is all the relevant pre-buffing that should always be on.

 

People are vastly overstating the "issue" of pre-buffing in the IE games, and in PoE it shouldn't even be treated as a relevant argument.

[Gorbag]

 

 

Don't get me wrong, the breadth of the spells allowed some interesting fights, but generally the tactic was turtle summon, turtle horrid wilting / meteor swarm, turtle minute meteors.  I thought BG1 was actually more interesting because the spells were more unique and less rock, paper, scissors.

I didn't do any of that.

 

BG2 rogues using potions of invisibility were a more interesting threat, if less dangerous.

Not unless they have Non Detection cast on them / Cloak of Non Detection.

There's a certain "pshew" sound effect that gives away thieves hiding in shadows, and those who use potions display a "gulp" message. Not very obvious givaways, but they make you pay attention and stand on your toes. It's those little things in BG2 that can make veterans s**t bricks every time. Like a lich chanting "vita mortis caro". You know you are f'd unless you do something immediately.

[archangel979]

 

Actually prebuffing was less of an issue than in NWN2 for instance. You really didn't need much of it in bg2. Stoneskin on mage, bless and haste was most times all you needed. In some fights defensive harmony did well. IWD1 has more prebuffing because they had more very useful prebuffing spells and it felt stupid not to use them.

 

What Bg2 did well was offensive and buff removing spells. You had to read your spell descriptions and figure out how to use them. Anyone that didn't like that, might also not like PoE as in PoE all classes have lots of "spells" and have to read them and figure out how to use them.

 

Honestly, I never use Bless any more, and in my last playthroughs, I never end up using Defensive Harmony because the duration is too short and the benefit is meh. In BG2, you buff for specific encounters, like Chaotic Commands before meeting Illithids (which lasts forever on higher levels, to boot). Other than that, Stoneskin for wizards that can get it (12 hour duration, after all) and Protection from Evil 10' is all the relevant pre-buffing that should always be on.

 

People are vastly overstating the "issue" of pre-buffing in the IE games, and in PoE it shouldn't even be treated as a relevant argument.

 

True but it also depends on your party. If you got more physical members bless and defensive harmony is good. It also protects vs Intelligence drain in Illithid scenario because they need to hit you first. Also I avoid casting Haste and rather use spells like bless as haste make your party tired and I don't abuse rest.

But, for some fights massive prebuffing is not needed but only 1 spell that is most useful.

[Hassat Hunter]

Exactly, it involved reactive tactics. Unlike this game.

And by "reactive" you mean you needed to have the right spell equipped WAAAAY before the encounter.

I'm not sure you know what reactivity means.

 

By that definition The Witcher II is the most reactive game ever. As in, after you die, you reload, take your potion before the combat, win. Unlike, say, using potions during battle in TW1.

Bonus points on "reactivity" if between the point you can 'react' (lol) and the final battle there's an unskippable long cutscene. Yes, I'm looking at you Kraken.

[Ondb]

 

Exactly, it involved reactive tactics. Unlike this game.

And by "reactive" you mean you needed to have the right spell equipped WAAAAY before the encounter.

I'm not sure you know what reactivity means.

 

By that definition The Witcher II is the most reactive game ever. As in, after you die, you reload, take your potion before the combat, win. Unlike, say, using potions during battle in TW1.

Bonus points on "reactivity" if between the point you can 'react' (lol) and the final battle there's an unskippable long cutscene. Yes, I'm looking at you Kraken.

 

)

I think then you will be super disappointed in Witcher3. Not only you have to prepare potions before combat, but also skills.

You only have 8 skills slots in Witcher3 and you have to pick your preference from large list of skills.

 

Example:

1/ you have sword build

2/ you find monster with high resistance to silver sword

3/ You die

4/ You change for skills, drink different potions.

5/ Cast igni, kill monster

6/ Switch back to sword build

[Namutree]

The only pre-buffing that was bad in the IE games were the ones that lasted long enough that you could rest and still have them active. Making sure that doesn't happen is all PoE had to do to make pre-buffing just fine.

[Lephys]

Pre-buffing's fine. It's a thing you can have too much of or too little of, just like anything else. If they felt there was too much (which I agree with, on a certain level), then they could've just designed way fewer buffs to last that long. Honestly, though, in a cRPG, it's a bit silly to have buffs that last 6 hours and grant armor or damage or accuracy. They might as well just be auras, at that point. "For the next 73 encounters, you'll get to go beyond the stat choices you made at character creation PLUS your current level's worth of allocations PLUS your current gear already makes you." There's nothing tactical about that. It's never a better idea to forego buffs at that point.

 

So, yeah, agree with the "too much pre-buffing" view, from a tactical standpoint, but disagree with heavy-handed "ZERO PRE-BUFFING!" If a dish is over-seasoned, you don't remove all the seasoning.

[wanderon]

How much simpler adventuring can be with no prebuffs tho - ahhh sweet freedom to just gather your party and venture forth! 

[Lephys]

What if there are only three of you, though? Who ventures forth, then?

 

6_u

[wanderon]

What if there are only three of you, though? Who ventures forth, then?

 

6_u

 

The wall of course...

[Gorbag]

What if there are only three of you, though? Who ventures forth, then?

 

6_u

Nobody. And you don't have to gather your party in advance if nobody ventures forth.

Jeez, it's not like rocket science or anything 

[wanderon]

 

What if there are only three of you, though? Who ventures forth, then?

 

6_u

Nobody. And you don't have to gather your party in advance if nobody ventures forth.

Jeez, it's not like rocket science or anything 

 

 

Who ever heard of adventuring with no venturing?

Forth or otherwise...

[Hassat Hunter]

I think then you will be super disappointed in Witcher3.

No doubt about it. TW2 I pre-ordered to support them since I liked TW1, and it was very much a dissapointment.

Than they add open world to TW3?

 

Budget bin purchase detected... I have no faith in it at all.

[Sensuki]

And by "reactive" you mean you needed to have the right spell equipped WAAAAY before the encounter.

No.

 

I'm not sure you know what reactivity means.

I believe you do know, you're just being an ****.

[Supreme]

 

 

Lack of ammo is the biggest let down for me... I can't imagine any Infinite engine game without ammo and all kinds of stuff to throw (daggers) etc. 

 

Also, when I found out that there are magical wands with infinite ammo I was like WHAT ? Like in Mmorpg ?  Goddammit. 

It was so cool in IE games, that mages had to choose between staffs and something like slingshot. And now it will be only PEWPEWPEW, forever.

Well mages having unlimited simple spells through implements (wands, rods and staffs) is from D&D 4e (which is Sawyer's fav D&D). It is not about wands having infinite ammo but mages wielding them having it.

 

In 5e they scaled it back a bit and just given wizards infinite cantrips (0 level spells) that are simple attack spells which they can use without anything but their magical power.

 

 

Oh god, that explains so much, and that is absolutely horrifying. D&D 4e is the red-headed stephchild of PnP, the abortion that should never have lived, afterbirth that gestated and was born as a mutant into a world that it hated, and that hated it in turn.

 

How could ANYONE like 4e? oh wow, what have I done...

[illathid]

How could ANYONE like 4e? oh wow, what have I done...

Well there's me for one. I thought 4e did a good job of making a (generally) balanced mathematical system with varied and fun tactical combat. I've since moved on to more rules light systems (like FATE), but that's because it makes getting a game going with my hectic schedule much easier than with any d20 or d100 rules heavy system.

[Tamerlane]

All D&D is bad.

[illathid]

All D&D is bad.

Yeah, but it's like pizza. Even when it's bad it can be pretty fun.

[Lephys]

How could ANYONE like 4e? oh wow, what have I done...

I think it's a bit lawyer-y to simply say "That's Sawyer's favorite!". He's talked about it many times, in detail, and always mentions specific things he likes a lot in it, while either thinking other things are "meh" or disliking them.

 

What he likes and dislikes about it tells a lot more than "does he hate or like an entire ruleset revision?"