Comparing PoE to BG is unfair

[Amentep]

Kleb had a certain kick to her, I'll give you that...

[Sabin Stargem]

Having your character be a wrong choice by design isn't going to endear anyone but the masochistic.   I don't want to play a game, make progress, only to hit a wall that says "Ha Ha!  You suck for wanting to use a sword!   Start over with a mage!"   That is not my idea of fun.

Further, someone who fights for a living would presumably use the best tools and techniques for the job - including magic.  Be it through gear or technique, eschewing magic in a setting that has magic is unrealistic.   Applications of magic would be dependent on the role.  A swordsman would use magic that can be cast during melee without impeding their flow, though limited in scope.   Archers may very much like to see in the dark, a fell wind guiding their arrows into the opposition's vitals.  Rogues blending into the scenery, backstabbing a foe...whose screams never reach her comrades, due to a veil of silence.

 

As far as I am concerned, all classes should be fun to play.  Any limitation of a class should be a very careful and deliberate decision.

[Volourn]

"I don't want to play a game, make progress, only to hit a wall that says "Ha Ha!  You suck for wanting to use a sword!   Start over with a mage!"   That is not my idea of fun."

 

What game does this? None I've played.

 

 

 

"As far as I am concerned, all classes should be fun to play.  Any limitation of a class should be a very careful and deliberate decision."

 

All DnD classes ARE fun to play.

 

 

"Further, someone who fights for a living would presumably use the best tools and techniques for the job - including magic.  Be it through gear or technique, eschewing magic in a setting that has magic is unrealistic.   Applications of magic would be dependent on the role.  A swordsman would use magic that can be cast during melee without impeding their flow, though limited in scope.   Archers may very much like to see in the dark, a fell wind guiding their arrows into the opposition's vitals.  Rogues blending into the scenery, backstabbing a foe...whose screams never reach her comrades, due to a veil of silence."

 

If everyone uses it it is no longer magic. What you describe is a bunch of magic users using magic in different ways.

 

 

You must enjoy boring where everyone is the same. LMAO

[Sabin Stargem]

 

What you describe is a bunch of magic users using magic in different ways.

 

 

You must enjoy boring where everyone is the same. LMAO

 

 

...Yeah, that argument makes sense. 

 

Someone with a good grasp of math can go into engineering, coding, physics, and many other occupations.  Why would a magic user become a purebred wizard by default?  What value does that offer to players?

[Captain Shrek]

Welcome to D&D, where there are more magic users than not. 

[Stun]

Having your character be a wrong choice by design isn't going to endear anyone but the masochistic.   I don't want to play a game, make progress, only to hit a wall that says "Ha Ha!  You suck for wanting to use a sword!   Start over with a mage!"   That is not my idea of fun.

Josh? Josh Sawyer, is that you? <sigh> Ok, Here's a profound news flash for those who claim they've played the IE games but probably f*cking never have, otherwise they'd never spout such absurdity.

 

Absorb this and let it sink in, already: The IE games did not screw over non-casters. They did not even come close. Even Planescape: Torment, with its wacko, Story-first, Wisdom-for-fighters-or-GTFO design, didn't do this.

 

At all. So why bring it up? Oh wait, let me guess why. Because Spell casters in Bg2 were (according to the 2015 hyperbole) 20,000,000,000,000,000 more powerful than every other class, and therefore, if you roll up a fighter with a sword you're...screwed. Right? Right! Because it's only Nostalgia, not fact, that BG2 gives fighters Vorpal Blades; Helmets that let them duplicate themselves; Rings that let them improved Haste themselves, and make themselves invisible, and regenerate their health; Armor that makes them hard to hit; Items that let them summon monsters; Items that let them charm monsters; Items that let them heal themselves; Items that let them Absorb Magic and reflect beholder rays; Items that let them see magically invisible creatures; weapons that let them stun their enemies, hold their enemies, sleep their enemies, poison their enemies etc.

 

It must just be our Nostalgic imaginations, and not fact, that BG2 gives Fighters Better saving throws than Mages, better Armor classes than mages, better Thac0's than mages, More hitpoints than mages; less weapon and armor restrictions than mages.

 

My Vanilla Fighter ended BG2 Overpowered. He did not encounter any "walls" he couldn't blast right through. Didn't yours?

Edited May 1, 2015 by Stun

[Gromnir]

your vanilla thief were underpowered though. sooo...

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Stun]

Say what? My vanilla thief was so overpowered, that by about halfway through the game, combat became optional. Literally. His traps annihilated whatever he didn't feel like fighting.

Edited May 1, 2015 by Stun

[Gromnir]

Say what? My vanilla thief was so overpowered, that by about halfway through the game, combat became optional. Literally. His traps annihilated whatever he didn't feel like fighting.

sure.  keep telling yourself that story.  a fighter/thief or thief/mage could get same trap skill as the vanilla and not be as useful as deliberate fart in combat.  

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Inviolable]

BG2 was one of the best games I've played, just last year an enhanced version came out and proved to be very popular.PoE tried to mirror some aspects of BG2, such as combat mechanics, but after buying the game and playing, there were more misses than hits. I applaud the effort but I hope to see better changes to come. Although BG2 was great, I hope to play a different game that is better.

 

1) Too complicated combat mechanics, in BG2 it was all kept simple with hits/misses/resistances/saving throws. In PoE they overdid it by adding way too many comb es. Simplify it so that the formulas are kept minimal and simple, nobody likes to play maths when they play a game.

 

2) Story in PoE is uninspiring. Playing as a god's child was awesome in BG2, the story was immense, complicated with many characters and organisations being involved. PoE dark and mysterious atmosphere is great but it's just not as exciting. The Forgotten Realm's legacy has always been a hit, and definitely it played a party in making BG2 such a success. PoE could too but they tried to put too many things into one.

 

3) Party members interaction was really interesting in BG2, more so because they actually felt REAL. My good party of Imoen, Jaheira, Minsc,they all made a good mark in my memory. I particularly love my evil party comprising of Vicionia, Edwin, Kagain, they were really powerful and their evil sayings made me grin.  PoE tried to copy that but the characters so far have been really dull. There were times when I played PoE and nearly fell asleep!

 

4) Items are really boring as well. BG2 had so many remarkable items, Celestial Fury, Foebane, Flail of the Ages, Ring Of Gaxx,Crom Faeyr... not so in PoE.

[Stun]

The fact that you can make Thief-fighter or Thief-Mage Hybrids and be even more deadly does not make vanilla thieves "sucky", or "screwed", or underpowered. Nor does it lend any validity to the previously spouted claim that non-spell casters are the 'wrong choice'. Does it.

Edited May 1, 2015 by Stun

[scrotiemcb]

The debate between Stun and Gromnir made me realize that sometimes it's not about whether comparing BG to PoE is fair or not. Sometimes it's about whether BG discussion is relevant to PoE at all.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

The items in BG2 were powerful enough most classes could get through the game. Granted, Fighter/Mage or Fighter>Mage is going to be generally more useful than a plain Fighter but plain Fighter can still wreck the opposition.

 

As to class balance in PoE...hahahahahahahaha. In its current state classes are very unbalanced. Chanters get to throw out their best invocations maybe once an encounter while Ciphers can toss out powers reliably, Paladins are useless and can not fill any role very well, and Rogues beat Rangers hands down. That's not even touching how some talents and optional abilities are trap options.

[Gromnir]

The fact that you can make Thief-fighter or Thief-Mage Hybrids and be even more deadly does not make vanilla thieves "sucky", or "screwed", or underpowered. Nor does it lend any validity to the previously spouted claim that non-spell casters are the 'wrong choice'. Does it.

it makes them UNDERpowered.  take fewer thief levels makes MORE powerful.  a thief/Mage is far more efficacious than a vanilla thief.  can get all the thief trap skills w/o having to take more than a few thief levels. focusing on relative power, it doesn't make any sense to play a vanilla thief in bg2.   that makes the thief, by comparison UNDERpowered.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Gromnir]

The debate between Stun and Gromnir made me realize that sometimes it's not about whether comparing BG to PoE is fair or not. Sometimes it's about whether BG discussion is relevant to PoE at all.

we already said that it ain't.  

 

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

edit: better clip

Edited May 1, 2015 by Gromnir

[Stun]

 

The fact that you can make Thief-fighter or Thief-Mage Hybrids and be even more deadly does not make vanilla thieves "sucky", or "screwed", or underpowered. Nor does it lend any validity to the previously spouted claim that non-spell casters are the 'wrong choice'. Does it.

it makes them Underpowered Unbalanced.

 

Fixed.

 

You can't call something underpowered in a game designed to be breakable by any class.

 

But to more directly address the point: If someone asks the question: Why should I choose a vanilla thief when I could simply choose a multi-class thief? I'll answer that question by pointing them to the EXP tables. Vanilla thieves gain levels faster than multi-class thieves. A lot faster. Which means they get more traps sooner. And more relevantly, They'll get their HLAs sooner. Nothing in this game (not even a mage) trumps a thief who gets UAI by the time he gets to the underdark.

Edited May 1, 2015 by Stun

[scrotiemcb]

 

 

The debate between Stun and Gromnir made me realize that sometimes it's not about whether comparing BG to PoE is fair or not. Sometimes it's about whether BG discussion is relevant to PoE at all.

we already said that it ain't.

Okay. I just wouldn't want any derails to occur accidentally.

[Gromnir]

you can start bg2 with your multi-class thief having maxed traps skill, so...

 

perhaps you are confusing with ToB high level skills.

 

regardless, the multi-class thief will actually be useful in combat with either spells or weapons.  so, coming up with some kinda bass ackwards rationale as to how the vanilla thief is anything other than UNDERpowered is simply stun being stun... again. compared to kit for thieves, dual-class or multi-class, the vanilla thief is a clear dog.  

"Okay. I just wouldn't want any derails to occur accidentally. "

 

pointing out that bg2 or bg comparisons to poe is irrelevant, unfair and stoopid is one o' the most over-exposed topics o' discussion on these boards.  as soon as the kickstarter were announced, the discussion o' how much obsidian needed to adhere to the ie game formula were debated.  as soon as the beta were released, the knuckleheads started in on the "spiritual successor" nonsense as some kinda imagined proof that obsidian had failed to meet kickstarter promises.

 

in a board filled with redundant, pointless and moot topics, this is one o' the most glaring examples o' a nerdling Heart of Darkness.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited May 1, 2015 by Gromnir

[Stun]

In the real world, a class that can break the game cannot rationally be described as underpowered. But in Gromnirea, that's just what underpowered means: Game Breaking.

[Cronstintein]

I find the argument that you can't compare PoE to BG2 because the latter is higher level to be ... misguided, let's say. 

 

The power levels chosen in PoE for a "level 1" was completely arbitrary!  They could have easily made a level 1 PoE character equivalent to a lv7 in BG2.  (and in some ways do, the HPs are much higher than BG1, notice)

 

As someone who played BG2 before I ever tried BG1, with zero DnD experience, I had NO problem starting with those mid-level characters.  In fact, I think it's great.  Lv1 dnd characters kinda suck.  They die to 1 or 2 lucky hits and have no interesting skills to speak of.  That's one of the big reasons I prefer the sequel. 

 

I only wish the PoE designers felt the same way.

Edited May 1, 2015 by Cronstintein

[Gromnir]

in the real world, if there is no reason for a rational person to play the vanilla class given its relative power to everything else, that is pretty much the freaking definition o' UNDERpowered.   wanna use ToB to bootstrap thief into some kinda late-game usefulness?  HA!  unless you got roleplay reasons for choosing to roll a vanilla thief, there is no rational or reasonable explanation for choosing the vanilla thief over every freaking other option.  UNDERpowered.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[scrotiemcb]

 

 

 

The debate between Stun and Gromnir made me realize that sometimes it's not about whether comparing BG to PoE is fair or not. Sometimes it's about whether BG discussion is relevant to PoE at all.

we already said that it ain't.

Okay. I just wouldn't want any derails to occur accidentally.

Apparently I forgot about Poe's Law again.

[Stun]

in the real world, if there is no reason for a rational person to play the vanilla class

I gave one. In fact, I gave one and cited undisputable numbers to support it.

 

Again Gromnir, we cannot have a debate when one side can't read.

[Gromnir]

 

in the real world, if there is no reason for a rational person to play the vanilla class

I gave one. In fact, I gave one and cited undisputable numbers to support it.

 

Again Gromnir, we cannot have a debate when one side can't read.

 

...

 

is amazing how you walk into this kinda thing.  

 

because you cannot read, you missed how we identified your error.  am realizing that it is difficult for you to keep track o' all such foibles, but...

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Stun]

because you cannot read, you missed how we identified your error.

You neither identified any errors, nor did I make any, nor did I even bother citing all the advantages of a single class thief over a multi-class one.

 

But advantages are beside the point anyway, and you know it. You cannot call a class underpowered when it can break the game. At BEST you can use superlatives/comparisons and just describe it as "less powerful", or "more powerful" than another class (which is all you've been trying to do here....)

Edited May 1, 2015 by Stun