Ranting time...

Remove all ads!

I don't know if I'm the only one who thinks so, but wouldn't this game be a whole lot better if it still used the original workings of Baldur's Gate and the first Icewind Dale? Like, I look at the feats, the skills, all the "goodness" in it, but I ask myself...why?

Problem one: Since when do Elves/Half-Elves not see in the dark? Did someone just reach down from their Pantheon, say "Oops, my bad," and slap the Infravision out of their eyes? And on top of that, who was it that decided that Infravision should be turned into Darkvision? Did evolution strike the Dale for the brief era during the Chimera Campaigns? I can see it now...a little Dwarfling going to his pappy and saying "Hey da, your eyes are glowing and mine aren't...does that make you an Elf?" How fast do you think he's gonna hit that floor, pointing something like that out, not knowing that the Elves already had theirs slapped out of them?

Problem two: While choosing your own classes from a whole list, picking from one and the other while playing is a nice thing to have, how useful is it really? Back in my day (which would be what...8 years ago? Geez, for 21 I'm old) choosing your class was a simple matter of choosing one outright, or deciding right there to multi-class him to the point that Half-Elves didn't have to worry that he couldn't be a Druid just because he chose the wrong Alignment. Of course...Mazzy wanted to be a Paladin, but of course, the Chimera Campaigns seemed to bring out necessity so that everyone could be one. Poor Mazzy...born in the wrong era. Might have saved herself some trouble with a Shade Lord and a psycho-maniacal black dragon that likes the taste of Gnome Burgers and Halfling McNuggets.

Now then, having adressed two main points (and probably injecting more sarcastic humour than a normal college student should this early in the semester) would it be stupid to ask if there is a mod out there somewhere, possibly over the rainbow, that brings Icewind Dale II back to its roots, back to a time where Paladins were Human and Elves were heatseeking missile launchers?

P.S. Feel free to add your own bits of sarcasticality (Yes, that's a word according to Euphemistic Licensing)on the subject. Feedback would be fine. But not dandy. Very hard to have both together...very hard indeed.

 

Welcome to the club pal! Like it or hate it, this is 3E rules! (sorta)

I heartily agree with you, 3E is just too spiffy for my tastes.

Why, it gives more freedom, but it lacks the originality of the good old 2E.

A duergar druid?
A half-orc paladin?
A halfling sorcerer?

My! They make no sense to me!

And those rules are just way too complex to be of any fun!

Do you know Mazzy's talk with Immy in BG2?

Immy says that 'Halflings could not be anything but thieves in the past (1E), but now they have more options. Maybe one day halflings can be real paladins as well in the future.' and Mazzy replies 'Well I really don't think that Gods will be so stupid to make a 3rd edition' or something like that! It was hillarious, I heard from a guy here.

But let's not make it a 'Let's BASH 3E!' thread or it will be locked eh?

Hmm, as for your question, there is NO mod to convert IWD2 to IWD concept and rules.

Shame, as there is a mod (abeit beta and buggy) which converts BG2 game into IWD2 rules and interface!

Blasphemy I say! But I guess there were SOME people who wanted to try it and had fun to a degree.

 

You would have to use weimers tools to convert iwd2 story into iwd1 engine. wich would most likelly never have worked, considering the many "puzzles" in iwd2 that i doubt any other engine could manage.

On the other side, if you make a "mod" that removes all feats and skills, you basically have 2E, the rest is not that different from 2E in itself.

If you want to nitpick you could also modify the BAB/Thac= tables slighty to just give everyone overall worse bab/thac0, but the change is minimal for most, a wizard might gain a +3 more bab in curent system than he would have etc at level 16 or something, rather trivial.

Or change it so that wizards could only use slings again *groan*

You do of corse realise that converting iwd2 into 2E rules again would be even more buggy and "hacked" than it already is ?

Regarding infravision, elves are suposed to have "Low-light-vision" that works as long as there is a little light, they can see about twise as far as a human can. Since elves where never suposed to live underground they dont need darkvision (wich is btw black/white only). Instead of that dumb army 1337 infravision googles they turned on at 18.00 every day.

 

Because the owners of the DnD system wanted BIS to use the 3e rules, not the old 2e rules. Simple as that.

Actually, this was one feature about the 2e rules that I HATED. IMHO, it was nothing more than racial discrimination within a game system. Now, I'm not really trying to be political, but it did offend me that I couldn't have an elven paladin, etc. Mazzy should have been a paladin. It was silly rules that prevented her.

I'll admit that I do miss the old style multiclassing a little bit because an old 2 class MC is much more powerful than a 50/50 multiclass in IWD2. That said, I do like the fact that in the 3ed MC rules, your character is not stuck with the class he chooses. I don't like this idea that you are forced to make a lifelong class choice at the start and you never have the chance to take another path (unless you're human that is, which is just another example of racial discrimination in the 2e rules).

No, not a stupid question. However, such a mod is an extensive effort that is vastly more complex than some of those mods to add an NPC to BG2.

Regarding Elves being "heatseeking missile launchers", you can do that in IWD2. Just build an elf with a max DEX, play a pure fighter, and take all of the Bow and missile feats. You'll still be quite the missile launcher, not quite to the level of a 2ed rules one who can take 5 points in any weapon, but some of the non-weapon feats are very useful in support of weapons (like Rapid Shot and Improved Critical).

 

Bah. This is just another 2e vs 3e debate. BG2 style multiclassing is way too restrictive. The very best thing about IWD2 is the freedom to create whatever character you want. Why should a character have to decide at level one that they are going to be a multi-classed fighter / wizard? How can they see into the future like that? Why should a halfling be restricted to being a Fighter / Thief?

In my eyes, what you see as Problem Two is in fact the reason why I like IWD2 so much and is the thing that frustrates me most about the BG games.

IWD2 rules rule.

 

But, MC spellcasters suck hard.

A cleric10/mage10 combo requires exactly same amount of XP as a mage20 or cleric 20. And a pure cleric or mage of level 20 will easily kick the MC one as he is too weak, not having high level spells.

In BG2 and 2E, it is different. A MC cleric/mage is never weaker than a pure cleric or mage of same XP, as CLASS levels are handled differently. In 3e character levels are spent for classes which sucks IMHO.

Don't take it personal.

 

Why?

 

On the contrary, the 3e multiclassing is more fair. in 2e, you are forced into multiclassing because you get a ridiculous amount of extra power for almost no cost. 3e is more balanced because you actually have a real sacrifice to make in order to take a level in another class. And don't get me started on BG dual-classing, which is just plain nonsensical.

Artechoke - my thoughts exactly.

Anyway, IWD2 is fun. BG2 is fun. They're both fun, even though they are different.

 

Hmmmmm, I got some very good points in this thread as to the goodness and badness, some of which I do agree, some of which I don't, but...that's how life goes right?

Ok, as much as I love the old rules, yes...I'll give this point its due credit simply because I got an Elf Wizard in one game right now who uses a Longsword and Bow. While it technically should remain as him only using a sling, yeah...I'll give you that one (even though the Arcane takes up all his/her time, not really letting him/her learn how to use a sword and bow). Spoiled as he is, yes, I'll give this point good credit.

While this is a fairly good point on the topic, there's also one thing to consider. Elves have a vast military background, and with a Pantheon of their own Gods, they don't need Paladins because they all believe in their Basic Pantheon, with maybe one or two over the rest (Such as Correlon Larathion, which might be spelled wrong). If anything, only Humans have a reason to be Paladins, because of their need to dominate everything.

And moving into the Dwarven area, if they have a natural resistance to magic, then how can they be Mages or Sorcerers? That right there should be a restriction. Same with a Gnome only being an Illusionist. That has been around for a long time, and still is from what I can tell. As for Half-Orcs being Wizards, Sorcerers, Clerics, Paladins...where do I begin? They suffer from a lower Intelligence rating, which should prevent him from learning to be a Mage and not letting him use his Sorcerous potential. They also suffer from a lack of Charisma, which is a bad thing for a Paladin, and even worse for a Cleric who needs to Turn Undead and intermingle with his congregation. It's not really racial discrimination if it's just taking those bonuses and restrictions and using them logically. I mean...we don't take someone with a high IQ and put him as a soldier in the army, we put him as a genius in Intelligence. Same for the other way around. Low IQ into Intelligence? Well...I'm sure that happened somewhere, but I'm sure it was probably accidental.

In the end, this is the truest thing. Both are quite entertaining in their own rights, even for someone who prefers the 2e rules. It does give me a headache on paper though.

 

This 2e thing slipped my mind. The removal of the silly 2e weapons limitations was one of the great things in 3e.

If you want your cleric to not draw blood with an edge weapon, then enforce the limitation YOURSELF.

All true, except that all those racial stat mods would certainly act as a limitation on those races selecting classes that would be limited by those stats.

If a person wants to play a Half-Orc Paladin even with -2 INT and -2 CHA, let'em and let'em deal with the consequences. And if you're in PnP and you're a DM, make the player come up with a darned good backstory to justify a half-orc paladin.

Uhhhh, no. Drow have a considerable magic resistancs and yet their favored class is Wizard (for males) or Cleric for females. And Deep Gnomes have a FC of Illusionist.

Having a natural resistance to magic doesn't automatically make one automatically unable to be a spellcaster.


Just because many members of a race prefer other classes and their racial stats seem to lean towards other classes does not mean that members of that race should be banned from those rare class choices.

Hey, most women are often not well-suited to certain professions. Does that mean that we should ban them all from those professions? hell no.

Let every race have the option to choose any race. But let the DM require their players to give a good reason/backstory why they want to choose a rare race/class combo.


As I've said before, I have to wonder if the real solution would have been a merging of 2e and 3e, wherein the best points of each were used. of course, the problem might be in determining exactly what the best points actually were.

 

While certain races are going to be rare in certain fields because of their natural limitations, a highly intelligent half-orc is probably going to be more interested in mental pursits then smashing things with a great axe.

A half-orc sorcerer or mage shouldn't be impossible just because an half-orc with 17 int is a rare thing. On strictly merit, a half-orc with 17 int should be able to learn magic just as well as a human with 17 int. What if this half-orc was raised in human society instead of being an outcast or being part of orcish soceity, should this half-orc be not be any more limited then a human with the same stat line?

 

That had occured to me too, but then I remembered how they're usually existing to begin with. Most Half-Orcs stem from the raping of a woman by an Orcish Raider. While the mother herself may forgive the child for its father's crimes, the rest of that town's society would be pretty wary of the kid, seeing him as nothing more than the product of its paternal line rather than its maternal, and keep it at arm's distance.

In terms of that child learning magic, that would depend on a Mage being in the area that thought they could A) trust that said Orcspawn wasn't going to use it on the townspeople, and B) go against the unfortunate snobbish mentality within most Mages about their Intelligence, believing that a Half-Orc didn't have an appropriate mind for it. Even if point A didn't apply due to an evil mage, point B would still dominate...Unless Elminster, Khelben, or similar took the child in themselves, but what are the odds that would happen?

 

@Ilmater's Suffering: Even if raised in an orc society, he could, let's say, have become a skilled rogue. Or even a warrior with lots of skills. Perhaps ranger or something. To be a sorcerers, he would also and primarily have to be charismatic.

@crucis: The blood thing is the old "ecclesia non sitit sanguinem", i.e. the church doesn't crave blood rule. Or rather, the D&D vision (misconception) of it. So no wonder 3E removed it.

@Koroth: Or you could construe paladins as defenders of the holy tradition each race has. Some form of paladinhood would fit into all races, as well as all races should be able to employ the human vision if raised among humans or functioning in a human society.

@Harbourboy, Silverstar: Non-human classes had level limits in PNP. They couldn't advance past a certain level, so they were capped, unlike humans. The overpowering difference in favour of non-humans was a cRPG novelty.

 

For one thing, I happen to believe that Paladins should be allowed to exist for any alignment. The limitation should be that the paladin should be required to have the exact alignment of his patron god. Thus, if your patron god happens to be Mask, then your alignment would be NE (IIRC).

Of course, I also happen to believe that "paladins" along these lines should also have abilities that match their patron god. Thus, a "paladin" of Mask might be more of a rogue-ish warrior-assassin than a plate-wearing tank.

Many "paladins" might still remain plate wearing tanks along the traditional lines, except with powers more befitting their alignment. But certain gods should have champions who do not fit the traditional paladin paradigm.

Oghma's champions might be more like some sort of warrior-bards. Mielikki's champions might actually seem more like paladin-ish rangers. And so on and so on.

This requirement that paladins be "LG" has always seemed rather lame.

 

While I would like to agree with that, it would be very rare to find an Elf who whought Humans had things right as compared to their ancient traditions. While some races would have to abide by the laws and customs of the city they are in, usually they're avoided because they are a different race (good example being that rascist dude against Elves in the northeastern part of Waukeen's Promenade in BGII).

I agree with you completely, though it's funny that you say this. About 20 minutes ago I got into a similar fight with one of my friends (mostly because he found this thread and read it). His stance was that in real life history, Paladins have always been "Crusaders for Good" and that they would follow the words of law and goodness well into death, and that any "heathens" who didn't believe in god would be "cleansed" (which left me with a face similar to wha... )

The one problem with his thoughts is that he's basing his thinking on a monotheistic form of thinking. With the Forgotten Realms, there are more than one god, and each one has his own ways of doing things. The standard Paladin has always been LG simply because it was based on real life history. What should be done is as Crucis mentioned, and allowed each of these Gods/Goddesses their own Paladins with their own preferred Alignment and abilities.

On a personal note: Why can't I ever type this much on an Essay?!

 

I like refering to them as "champions" rather than paladins to avoid the confusion with the paradogm of paladins. I think that each god's champions should have powers that are very much in line with that god or goddess' own sphere of influence.

That is, a champion of the god of thieves/rogues should be should be a champion of thieves and rogues, which might tend to make him very rogue-like. And a god of rangers and druids (Mielikki) would have champions who are very nature oriented.

A Champion of a LG god might have champions who are very much like the paradigm of current paladins. yet a champion of Talos might be very interested in storms and destruction.

All in all, most, if not all, champions should be outstanding warriors, just warriors who do battle in keeping with the nature of their patron god.


I don't know why I keep coming back to Mask, but I think that a champion of Mask should probably be a warrior-rogue. A d10 class, but who is allowed to gain some rogue-ish skills and feats as in-class skilsl and feats. It should probably be a class that benefits greatly from stats very much like traditional rogue builds. Indeed, perhaps it should only start with light armor, since anything heavier would inhibit his basic class skills, just like they would for a rogue. And a champion of Mask should probably be an outstanding sneak attacker. having said all this, it would be necessary to go back and be careful to not overpower the class. Perhaps, they're good at stealth, but not at the trap skills.

A key to being able to be verbose when writing essays or papers is to try to find topics that really, really interest you. Admittedly, if it's in a class and the essay question isn't giving you much room to maneuver, you just do your best.

But if it's some sort of term paper where you can choose your topic within the bounds of the general topic, do your best to find a topic that interests you. You'll find that it is far easier to write on topics that you enjoy.

In the 90's, I went back to school to get my Bachelor's Degree. The final class (20th Century history) I needed required a term paper. I selected a topic that I was very interested and already knowledgeable in. And I was able to write the paper almost from memory. Still, I did have to crack open some books, if only to get some quotable material and to generate footnotes, etc. But lucky enough for me, it was a topic where I actually owned plenty of books on the topic and I didn't even need to go to any library.

Anyways, I was able to write the paper soooo easily because it was a favorite topic of mine and I enjoyed doing it.

 

how did Elminster die in 2e?

Actually Elminster cannot exist in 2e. He was a fighter, then a theif, then cleric, then a mage. How did Elminster did all these? That's just impossible. How can a person accquire knowledge of 4 classes? There must be some machnism in 2e world that prevents cleric school from accepting students who is already a well establish fighter/thief. there must be.

For arguement's shake, let's set these aside and make Elminster a mage. And he is fighting some evil .... thingy. And those evil thingy are not stupid. They devised a plan. They took turn to fight Elminster. He is a mage afterall, he will exhaust his spells. Good for them, they did it. Just one final goblin left and Elminster is on is own without any spell. His staff is broken due to extensive spell casting for 3 days and 3 nights. He has to fight the goblin one on one. There is a sword on the ground, a sharp shiny +1000000 long sword. Elminster saw that. He picked it up. He can't! A long sword, right there, he wanted to put it in his hand, he can't! He just can't. Thus ends the tale of Elminster, died because he cannot pick up a long sword.

 

Elminster did heavy 'dual-classing'. In actual pen&paper AD&D, humans can dual class as many times as they want, provided that they have required stats.

So a human can really start as a fighter, dual into a thief, then a cleric, then finally a mage, and can become a great arch-mage still with minor skills of former classes.

Even more weird combos are possible, like Transmuter/Abjurer/Necromancer/Fighter/Cleric/Ranger/Druid etc.. If the PC has insane ability scores and is really undecided in his class. Humans can work in very different jobs, but will eventually master one.

Ofcourse, this was not implemented in BG2 for game balance and engine limitation reasons. Nobody sane creates characters like the one I detailed above in P&P, but it is possible via original ruleset.

So Elminster CAN really exist in 2E, I assure you he did, and is still there!

 

Just on a sidenote, Unearthed Arcana (3E book) gives some example "paladins" of various alignments. It was an interesting idea, but not one i would have adopted myself.

As earlier mentioned, the Paladin is more or less the equalent of a "knight" with divine blessing. See him more as a peasant's favorite, a Paladin is the ultimate idol and hero for the common man. Any person walking in that is a "paladin of Talos" forexample would surelly kill the imageof a paladin for the pesants in that town.

Sp i do absolutelly agree that each god should/could have their own "champions" but i think the paladin should remain "as is" more as a "defender of the weak" than a champion of any specific god. Its also a reason why Paladin is not limited to one god only. But typically only gods that are benevolent and just will be allowed to have paladins.

Then again, technically i think paladin should have been a prestige class in 3E, something to reach for.

edit: Looked up a book "Faiths and Pantheons" for Forgotten Realms 3E, and it lists tonns of variants to "champions" to various gods, like tempus, talos, shar, etc (didn't notice a Mask one though, pitty, i was curious. Mask is fun).

I also belive that "Faiths & Avatars", "Power & Phanteons" and "Demihuman Deities" would be the equalent in 2E. Havent read them in a few years unless im looking for a tad more background info for a specific religion.

[ February 03, 2006, 03:00: Message edited by: raptor ]

 

One thing I wondered is why they chose to call the physically strong race "half-orc" instead of just orc?? Half-orc seems to me like a quite odd type. How often do the orcs rape human women?? Can't be that often?
Why can't I play with a plain orc? They shouldn't be more different from human that dvarfs are!?!
I always think of my half-orcs as real orcs and see the "half"-part as just a bug in the game.