just started IWD - my 2 cents

Remove all ads!

ive been playing IWDII for 2 days now and i played BGII before and i noticed that they no longer have the scimitar or katana image, the scenary looks alot better but, im upset about the gameplay. This feels like a hack n slash, theres no depth, storyline is great but i miss the party banters, romance, character development. However creating a whole party is pretty fun but that was also optional in BG series, infact i think one of the loading screen tips even explained how to do it. This pretty much feels more like a mod to BG2, (a very well scripted one). well ive just hit chapter 2 and i do enjoy it, but i liked how BG2 made their partys more alive. IMO it kinda feels like a downgrade because the story is so linear considering the other crpgs black isle has put out.

[ June 16, 2006, 23:44: Message edited by: Taluntain ]

 

Good one, BTA. But I think people just need to realise that IWD2 and BG2 are different gaming experiences. BG2 was one of those games where the creators had loads of great ideas and seemed to have the time and resources to implement a range of plot and quest possibilities, plus all of the NPC material. I personally enjoy IWD2 because of the character creation options, but I agree that it does lack some of the entertainment value of Bg2.

 

My friend, even BG and IWD series look so much alike, they are entirely different concepts. Look at this topic for some ideas.

http://www.sorcerers.net/ubb/ultimatebb.php?/topic/4/1283.html

Don't think IWD is an downgrade to BG, IWD2 was the very first IE game I had, and I had enjoyed it immensely. Just use your imagination, let your PCs have personalities, characteristics, etc. IWD can be even more rich than BG if you put a lot effort to RPing your characters, that is your game, and you can enjoy it by yourself.

I remember. My very first IWD 2 game, I created PCs named after my friends and me as the party leader. I created them in classes and races as I saw fit. (like, that big fella, hmm aha, Half-orc barbarian, like that.) Ofcourse, party was very weak as I had no idea about 3E and IE games, it was so hard even when I played on very easy. (party:cleric, necromancer, illusionist, paladin, ranger, and barbarian) Then I was talking to my friends, I described what their PCs were doing in my game, like 'Oh you just killed Guthma, a fierce and massive bugbear chief,' or 'You died when the orcs blasted the keg but we were able to revive you'. At first they thought I was mad, but then they wondered the game and started playing too.

I created more creative, balanced and powerful parties then, I was able to finish HoF mod twice, with increasing succes (which meant less reloads). Unfourtunately then my friend's kitty cat used my IWD2 CD as a chew tool, so I can not play IWD2 now.

But then I discovered BG2+ToB+zilions of mods, and IWD+HoW+ToTLM.

 

I'm also a newcomer to IWD2, after years of playing BGI/II and IWD.

I gotta say I was really curious about the 3E rules implemented and the new interface (which at first I thought was a heresy, but then you get used to it).

First I tried out a 4-character party (something I always wanted to do in IWD but never got around to, and frankly, I don't feel like replaying it right now, I miss BG2 already). Of course I forgot about 3E dynamic XP awarding system (which I was reminded of right here, but went for a smaller party anyway).

Few SPOILERS:
I got to the part where you have to save the bridge and it was near impossible to leave it intact without a full party. Before that the game was not so hard and I didn't really miss the extra members (for the record, I had a Paladin, a Battleguard of Tempus, a Rogue and a vanilla Wizard). But this part got me so irritated I restarted it, this time adding a Ranger and a backup spellcaster (alternating levels between wizard and silverstar of Selune).

It's been fun, but now I've been obsessing about using only four members in my party. I don't know if the game will be impossible to beat that way or something. But guess what? I'm restarting. This time with the perfect party... but not quite. At least the prologue is funny, specially talking to Aldon (is that his name?)

About the whole comparison to BG2: I really miss NPC interaction as well, but I think IWD was never meant to be like BG. They're different approachs to the same kind of game, one that it's more immersed on roleplaying, other that's more like a classical campaign, with a story worth telling, but after all, more focused on dungeon crawling. Some people like it better that way, but we don't hear them complaining about how BG2 NPCs won't shut up... do we? I don't know.

 

It's certainly not impossible to beat with four party members, given that people have managed to beat it solo. I hardly ever have six party members because I find they get in the way of each other.

Have fun coming up with your favourite party!

 

Thanks. Maybe I just wasn't trying hard enough. What seems so cool about 4 people is that you have to rely a lot more on their individual strengths.

But guess I could use a challenge. IWD seemed to get a bit too easy towards the end. Of course I played Luremaster before most of Heart of Winter, so I had a really hard time during the former but not quite during the expansion content. I had a LOT more trouble beating Firkraag then the final boss of HoW, and as far as I know, she should wipe the floor with Firkraag if they should fight each other.

Well, you get my point

 

What I like doing in any IWD2 games I've played over the past year or so is to take the time to truly develop personalities and histories for each character. And I create my own custom portrait edits for each of my characters.

I put a LOT of effort into my parties, sometimes spending as much as a week or more to develop them.

 

crucis: same here. I don't know if most people think it's silly, but stuff like names, soundsets and portraits really matter to me. I put as much effort into it as I would put into a PnP campaign.

I like the soundsets from HoW (the female ones are great, and has anyone noticed that HOW_MALE3's voice is done by Mark Hammil?) but portraits are complicated. The female ones are great (you got a lot of options and some of those chicks are so good looking that they look real). But the male ones really don't inspire me. Usually they're too freakish, or dark (literally dark, as opposed to bright).

I tend to bring into the game characters I created for my old, underdeveloped and unfinished DnD campaign. And I tend to stick with how their abilities would be, even if it means a slightly harder game. Things like giving my human female wizard a high CHA when I could boost up her DEX just because I know she's way more charismatic than agile.

(It's either that or getting inspired by something else. My last IWD party had a Paladin named Conner, who used... well, the Sean Connery BG-style portrait from that Portrait Portal site)

Of course this tends to take away many hours that could've been spent actually PLAYING the game (or working on a mod). But I'd rather lose a few hours of my free time planning a party that will entertain me than playing and then getting bored midway because I found out I don't really like my party.

 

My characters are always based on characters from books or TV etc. One of my best parties was my Buffy the Vampire Slayer party, which was kind of handy given that there are Buffy portraits and sounds available right here on SP.

 

@Harbourboy
I often use names from buffy on my characters since they have a lot of good ones like Dawn, Faith Willow etc. In my first party I had some of them inspired by the serie (4 of them), but now I only use the names.

 

Buffy party. Now that is a cool idea!

Buffy-Paladin? Sounds odd but OK?
Willow-Wizard (She studies books right?)
Xander-(I am not sure. Rogue seems as good as any)
Oz-If this was BG2 party, he would be a Shapeshifter, a true werewolf. COOL!

 

IWD2 is a DnD version of Diablo...more or less. Approach it as such.

 

Rather of Diablo 2, but they are still very different.

In the earlier DnD games (IWD, BG2) your character advancement was nearly set in stone.
The 3E rules used in IWD2 are an answer to the superior flexibility in character development Diablo2 offers compared to the older DnD games.

Asides from that the Diablo series have more in common with the BG series than with IWD2.

Greeding for XP is far less important in IWD2 than in the BG or Diablo series.

The standard advice when having problems fighting a monster in the BG or Diablo series is:
Go somewhere else, kill a few thousand weaker creatures for experience and equipment and return later when you are stronger.

Killing low level monsters to get your high character levels even higher is pointless in IWD2 because of the dynamic XP calculation.

 

What I meant by my earlier comment was that IWD2 and Diablo are action driven games, rather than story driven games...

 

The mainstream IE games (IWD1+2, BG1+2) are rather strategy driven since you can always pause the game and develop your strategy to defeat your enemies, like Warcraft3 without the complex building and real time pressure.

The only story driven RPG I know is Planescape Torment. (And maybe the old Realms of Arcania games.)