Do you guys think Enhanced Edition is a valid way to experience Baldur's Gate?

Here's a grognard oriented guides

https://lilura1.blogspot.com/2017/09/Baldurs-Gate-2-Double-Class-Comparison-Fighter-Mage-Dual-Class-Berserker-and-Kensai-vs-Fighter-Illusionist-Mage-Multi-Class.html
https://lilura1.blogspot.com/2019/07/Baldurs-Gate-Baldurs-Gate-2-Weapon-Proficiency-Tables-True-Grandmastery-Nerfed-Grandmastery.html

You can watch multiple guides and then minmax based on those guides and make strong decisions for charname just like everyone else does. Are you dumb enough to think that someone has to do exactly everything done in a particular guide?

>resorting to semantics
I accept your concession.

Right, it's how sex works.

Takes, about 10-20 summonings, depending on rolls. He gibs about 80% of the summons (the ones he doesn't one-hit kills).

He’s pretty fricking tough. Last run I tried to duel him 1v1 in a fair fight and it’s pretty tough to do unless you get real lucky or abuse consumables. You pretty much need to get some kind of CC or debuff to land, if you don’t go the artillery method.

Anon, I'd suggest skipping SoD (too late) and all the other Beamdog fan fiction and just importing straight from BG1 into BG2.
>I felt bad for using a paralyze wand on him but it seems like there isn't really a good way to "fight fair" in these games.
Yeah, he's pretty OP with what you have to work with in BG1. Paralyze wand and/or fireball wand/potion artillery is probably the way to go. Personally I think summoning creatures is cheesy and I refuse to do it.

What is common is that people think skyrim is the best rpg ever made.

So is thinking skyrim is the best rpg ever made. So I guess we should play games like bg1 and 2 at all. Because by comparison it's audio and visuals are awful.

YWNBAW

Never in my life have I heard of someone citing performance as a roadblock for a 2D 25 year old game. EE actually still has tons of modern compatability issues and graphical errors, and it's still loaded with bugs.

Unironically it looks better.

Put on your glasses, moron. What the frick is that filter lol. look at the icons for gods sake, lmao

>There is no filter, moron

It’s like a troony claiming to be a heckin valid woman. Perhaps at a first glance with a certain camera angle it might almost pass, but on closer inspection It’s a man in drag and triggers disgust in a normal human because it’s inherently wrong and a mockery of God’s natural order.

why does it look more pixelated than the original game?

Anon, tell me how the encounter design in BG1 is better than BG3.

So you have nothing, got it.

How about you prove him wrong, you squirming homosexual.

4e was best suited for vidya adaptation, strange it never got one

>This is a 2e tard cope
It's true, though. The only core difference is segments.
>3.5e and 5e have better rulesets for video games
That's a different point altogether. I was talking about overall ruleset quality.
AD&D has more flexibility, since it still allows for mass-battle scenarios and is able to implement RTwP without butchering the rules too much.
5e has to be turn-based to be done well, and it struggles if it controls too many enemies. There's a reason BG3 only lets you control 4 party members and why its trash fights are awful.

It's because 2e is leagues simpler due to having more efficient initiative handling and not having action economy bloat.

Have you considered playing on a difficulty above easy?

Sure you are

Oh, you're the homosexual OP? That explains why you're brain-damaged.

If you want more intense battles you might want to try Icewind Dale, it's very combat-centric. BG1 is mostly focused on exploration.

Fine. Every reference to combat and encounter design has been removed, and the following is entirely party size agnostic:

BG3:
Better graphics
Better music
Higher production values (if you care about things like fully voiced dialogue and motion captured animations)
Turn based instead of RTWP (personally I prefer turn based but this is subjective)

Bg1/2
Better ruleset (3e > 2e > 5e)
Better writing (and its writing is only okay)
Better plot
Better characters (and bg1s character development is extremely limited)
Better UI and inventory (and its inventory management sucks)
Better itemization
100% less trannies, bestiality, incest (gotta install a mod for that), homosexuality and playersexuality, and degeneracy in general
More respect for the source material and the world as a whole
Doesn’t have Netflix-tier racial “diversity” for no reason

>without addressing any of the other points
You haven’t made any other points, you irredeemable homosexual, you simply stated that you’re not allowed to criticize the encounter design of the game if you played with a party size of 1.

I swear to God, you bg3 shills are the dumbest gorilla Black person morons on this cursed board.

>How is the ruleset better?
I personally dislike 5e because it's too simplified and dumbed down. I understand why they did this to an extent (cut down on math bloat, remove the magic item +1/+2/+3 treadmill, simplify balancing for the DM), but it often went too far in the wrong direction. There are some decent ideas that I like but are implemented poorly (e.g. concentration to cut down on the prebuff spam of 2nd/3rd ed games is a good idea, but it's inconsistently and arbitrarily applied). I hate the multiclass dip spam (though 3e and its derivatives are guilty of this, it spawned it). I don't like how the magic system renders the distinction between prepared casters and spontaneous casters pointless. I dislike how the stats are less organic and you're expected to take the "standard array" and how the feats are mediocre and compete with stat increases, leading to the optimal choice oftentimes being boosting your damage stat and taking zero feats. IMO this leads to samey cookiecutter characters, rather than the diversity of interesting and different builds that 3e provides. Also advantage and disadvantage are terrible solutions to the math bloat of 3e, since they're massive swings by squaring the probabilities, rather than the granularity of linear bonuses/penalties in 5% increments. I dislike the "bounded accuracy" concept and I think it makes the combat feel too random and swingy and RNG as a player, and removes much of the player agency to affect the results of combat. Finally, I think removing racial stat modifiers and the alignment system entirely is bad for the game, as imperfect as the alignment system is.

>inventory were annoying
Because you only had one character inventory.
>there was so much pointless clutter
Because you only had one character inventory.
>the economy was broken because magic items were so cheap
Because you were only equipping one character who's entire route to damage is smite and doesn't need gear.
>and money felt worthless since there was nothing good to buy
Because you were only equipping one character who's entire route to damage is smite and doesn't need gear.

I wonder what the issue is here?

Even the tooltips were a downgrade from Larian's previous game, where you could at least see that an item was worth 0 and weighed 150 lbs, so wasn't worth your time picking up. Here, the tooltip shows only the name, so you have to click on it, pick it up, go into inventory, right click, examine, look at the weight and value, then more clicks to drop it. Just a chore. Last 25% of the game I wasn't even looting anything from the world or enemies because there was no point.

Major beamdogtroony-vibes.
That homosexual used to "argue" exactly the same way you did.

Is this why he argues like a crude impersonation of a woman?

>Irrelevant because I played with carry weight off.
With each new post you sound more and more moronic
>You misunderstand.
I know exactly what's happening.
>The inventory interface was fricking annoying and a total downgrade from Larian's previous game, somehow.
Because DOS was made for people who don't like RPGs.
>There were no more tabs to sort through equipment, consumables, books and notes, quest items, etc, it was all dumped together in one pile.
Wow just like bg1 and 2. You have to organize it yourself.
>The merchant interface was annoying as frick and it took ten million clicks to sell ten millions forks and used panties.
You can shift left click to select as many items as you want at once. Were you really so moronic that you were clicking on forks one million times? Is this the kind of absolute subhuman complaining about bg3?

This is the problem with 99.99999% of bg3 critics. They are always complete morons. This is just justifying my opinion that anyone who got filtered by this game is a subhuman that isn't worth acknowledging.

Look, I've posted dozens of points as to where I thought BG3 was weak (and a few things I think BG3 did well) and my reasons as to why. If you want to actually discuss these games, there's plenty of fodder for you to actually respond like a human being and formulate an argument for why you think BG3 is a good game, and why you believe my criticisms are incorrect. Instead, all you're capable of is latching on to the most minor sub-points of sub-arguments and pretend like that's all I'm saying, you had an entire post where you pretended "you only disliked BG3 because you played solo paladin" and another post where you pretended "you only disliked BG3 because you're just not smart enough to understand its amazing and revolutionary inventory mechanics". You're embarrassing yourself.

>STILL literally capable of defending BG3 on any merits other than quibbling about minor points of the inventory system
I accept your concession.
>sort by type
Can't do this in the vendor interface. You could in DOS2, which is why the functionality downgrade is perplexing.
>a search function
Buggy and barely works, frequently doesn't.
>the ability to add an item as "wares"
More tedious clicking. Imagine picking up ten million pieces of clutter and then having to right click on them and then having to click on send to wares.
>It has a sell all junk button
It has a tedious "wares" section that requires multiple clicks for each and every of the ten million pieces of clutter in the game. Other games have junk items auto-tagged as "junk" and also let you mass-loot corpses after a battle with one or two clicks. Then you can press one button to sell all junk. Having to individually tag each and every piece of clutter in the game as "junk" with multiple clicks is absolutely moronic.

The point is that somehow, despite being a AAA game with a what, $120 million budget? hundreds of developers, and three years of public beta testing to find issues, the game somehow is missing basic functionality and QoL features that were not only in the developer's previous game, but also in older janky games made with a fraction of their budget, years ago. It's embarrassing. BG3's interface in general sucks, constantly fricking with the hotbar (e.g. the game deleting/rearranging your weapon ability icons every single time you switch weapons) was just tedious. DOS2 wasn't great but it was somehow better than BG3, in this regard.

Are you israeli? We've been discussing all aspects of BG3 and how they compare to the original games, Larian's previous games, and other recent titles in the CRPG genre, from the rulesets, the magic systems, the writing, the plot, the characters, the feats and stats systems, the itemization, and you've ignored all of that and you've backed yourself onto discussing literally nothing but the minutiae of the inventory system and the user interface. This is the hill you've chosen to die on, and you can't even discuss the game like a normal person, literally all you can do is go "nuh uh" and "no u" without even making a coherent argument.

Frick's sake, I just wanna talk about RPGs, why do you have to be such a homosexual? What is your malfunction?

>concedes he has absolutely nothing constructive to add to the discussion
I accept your concession, once again.

>still literally incapable of contributing to the discussion and autistically flailing and saying no u
I accept your concession.

>BG1's inventory was indeed clunky and annoying, but it also wasn't filled with ten million pieces of clutter. Loot was generally gold
No, BG1's loot itemization is largely useless amulets and gems worth like 5 gold, which you can't even appraise until you get to a vendor. Original BG1 did not even have a gem bag.

NTA but BG1 and 2 don't need an add to wares option because they don't let you pick up every last random fricking spoon off the ground.

It's really not comparable to BG3. In BG1 you can pick up basic equipment that isn't worth anything, like arrows and bullets, or is worth a paltry amount like basic helmets and leather armour. Those are the junk items. You probably won't bother after the early game though because the space and weight restraints mean it's not worth it since you'll probably have to drop them to carry more valuable stuff anyway.

Stuff that isn't adventuring gear or reasonably valuable like gems and israeliteellery just doesn't exist as an in-game item at all, you can't pick up forks or hairbrushes or other mundane household items even though they presumably exist in the world.

BG3 lets you pick up basically everything. If you came across a table laid out for eight people in BG3, every single knife, fork and plate would be an item you could pick up, they would all be worth 1-2 gold and the lack of any effective inventory limit means you would have no reason not to pick them up to sell, beyond the simple tedium it would involve.

>Some if the gems and israeliteelry are worth like 5 gold.
Yeah but they aren't scattered around absolutely everywhere, just occasional drops from enemies or in the odd treasure chest.
>You disabled weight, bg3 has inventory weight.
No I didn't, BG3 has inventory limits but they're extremely generous and you can warp to camp whenever you want, where there's a chest with infinite storage for you to dump everything in.
>the game discouraging you from picking up everything that isn't nailed down is a problem. This is a good mechanic and it's minor reason among a very large list of major reasons that the pathfinder games were hilariously dumb, because you were basically a human black hole that absorbed everything that could be picked up and it was embarassing.
What are you even talking about? The game doesn't discourage you from picking up everything that's not nailed down, it does the exact opposite by having them all be worth gold and making it possible to easily carry all of them. Sure they might only be individually worth small amounts, but it adds up when you put it all together. So either you have to tediously hoover up everything like a litter-picker to sell it at a vendor or leave most of it behind just because getting it all would be too annoying, but in doing so you're leaving a significant amount of free gold on the table.

>It tell you how much the item is worth when you pick it up
DOS2 had tooltips that showed the value and weight at a glance so you could avoid the useless shit. BG3 merely shows you the name, you have to click to pick it up then click on it some more to realize it was worthless and then click some more to drop it.

>Some if the gems and israeliteelry are worth like 5 gold.
Yeah but they aren't scattered around absolutely everywhere, just occasional drops from enemies or in the odd treasure chest.
>You disabled weight, bg3 has inventory weight.
No I didn't, BG3 has inventory limits but they're extremely generous and you can warp to camp whenever you want, where there's a chest with infinite storage for you to dump everything in.
>the game discouraging you from picking up everything that isn't nailed down is a problem. This is a good mechanic and it's minor reason among a very large list of major reasons that the pathfinder games were hilariously dumb, because you were basically a human black hole that absorbed everything that could be picked up and it was embarassing.
What are you even talking about? The game doesn't discourage you from picking up everything that's not nailed down, it does the exact opposite by having them all be worth gold and making it possible to easily carry all of them. Sure they might only be individually worth small amounts, but it adds up when you put it all together. So either you have to tediously hoover up everything like a litter-picker to sell it at a vendor or leave most of it behind just because getting it all would be too annoying, but in doing so you're leaving a significant amount of free gold on the table.

>So either you have to tediously hoover up everything like a litter-picker to sell it at a vendor or leave most of it behind just because getting it all would be too annoying, but in doing so you're leaving a significant amount of free gold on the table.
This is an excellent point. They packed the game with useless clutter that exists only to be sold, but it's pure tedium and busywork to go back and forth and sell ten million forks. And the game doesn't punish you at all for constant long rests and taking your time (indeed, some quests and conversations break if you don't rest frequently enough) and so there's zero opportunity cost to doing so, you're implicitly encouraged to leisurely hoover up everything and sell it. Game would've been significantly more fun with zero clutter at all, it's purely tedious busywork.

>Like think how dumb bg1's persuasion system is compared to bg3, it's an invisible random calculation based on a dump stat and an entirely made up global karma system.
Sure, BG1 is pretty bare bones by comparison. I do disagree that CHA is a dump stat (though mechanically for most classes you're correct), it's supposed to be important for some classes (e.g. sorc, bard, pal), it's a roleplaying stat. I'd still put it high as a paladin even if it weren't artificially bumped up to the minimum. The reputation system was a decent idea but a flawed implementation. It's the cumulative sum of your actions and roleplaying choices. Was a bit gamey (or snarky commentary?) that you could sidestep it with "donations" to the temple. But it's a good idea in theory, and there needs to be something in place to prevent memey metagame parties of minmaxing the best evil and the best good characters, all happily working together. The reaction rolls in BG1 are pretty gamey and not a great system, I agree with you there. I think hard check gates for stats/skills feel a lot better than random rolls. And on that note, BG3 had too many Goddamn dice rolls for every little thing, and their implementation of critical failure/critical success for rolls that aren't supposed to have them was idiotic. Sorely needed a take 10/ take 20 system for things outside of combat. Passive perception in general was supposed to be take 10, not rolling for every little whatever in a dungeon. It was just obnoxious.

That’s a fair point, anon. I got sick of them in the early access where they were all edgelords and the cope was “uhh we had to front load all the evil NPCs because it was the only way to get players to play test them, we totally have a bunch of likeable and good NPCs but they just come in later in the game, we promise” I just really dislike Larians origin character system and I personally prefer to roll my own generic characters instead. I intended to replay bg3 with a custom party but the game was too disappointing so I didn’t.

I’ve heard the characters were heavily rewritten after a negative reception in early access, but I already disliked them by that point.

>I don't think walking around whacking bears while obsessively clearing fog of war from the whole world map is the intended way to play the game
Yeah this is mind boggling to me as well, it's basically this:

It makes no sense lol, there's no reason to do this when the exp and gear is basically a pittance compared to all the broken shit you get from the main story. This discussion is so weird.

>You're supposed to have fun
Using spells and items to clear the the main quests is fun, walking around killing bears until your natural thac0 and spell levels are high enough to steamroll the game isn't. Shocking that this is the kind of moron crying about bg3, which has actual fun and rewarding maps to explore.

>killing one thousand bears to do something you can do with a single potion is le fun

>walking around killing bears until your natural thac0 and spell levels are high enough to steamroll the game isn't. Shocking that this is the kind of moron crying about bg3
The virgin BG3:
>so there's a SPELLJAMMER and it ABDUCTS YOU and they put a TADPOLE in your EYE and then there's DEVILS fighting GITHYANKI flying on RED DRAGONS and then you're level 1 and you KILL CAMBIONS and a MINDFLAYER through BARRELMANCY and then you have a MAGIC TADPOLE that makes you SPECIAL and gives you COOL POWERS and then your SPECIAL DREAM FRIEND tells you to EAT MORE TADPOLES because it's COOL and UNIQUE and then you have FULLY MOTION-CAPPED SEX with REAL WOMEN and REAL MEN and then you get FRICKED BY A BEAR and then there's MOTION-CAPPED LESBIAN SCISSORING and you can HAVE AN INCEST ORGY with a DROW BROTHER AND SISTER TOGETHER and then there's GIANT ROBOTS and then a heckin' ELDER BRAIN but it's not just a NORMAL ELDER BRAIN it's a heckin NETHERBRAIN because the CROWN OF KARSUS and BALDURAN TRIES TO RAPE YOU and it's JUST LIKE MY HECKIN' MARVEL MOVIES
The chad BG1:
You're level 1 and dumped in the woods. Go explore the world in a comfy DnD campaign.

>you're the Forgotten Realms equivalent of the Highlander
more that sarevok is the kurgan and there can be only one
>you immediately uncover a giant murder cult plotting to start a giant war
no, an unsavory merchant organization is being used to cause a weapon shortage in order to unknowingly start a war so that the big bad can install himself as ruler of the titular city

In my headcanon Winski Perorate was manipulated by the former priesthood of Bhaal/Amelissan to convince Sarevok that his plan would actually work, while the war would serve as a beacon for other Bhaalspawn to converge and murder eachother. Amelissan stil had a backup plan, because she did something similar in Tethyr.

>Bg1 plot is paced very slowly. YOUR SUPER WIZARD ADOPTIVE FATHER TELLS YOU TO ABANDON YOUR ENTIRE LIFE AND THEN IS KILLED IN A DUEL WITH THE GOD OF MURDER AND YOU THEN TEAM UP WITH YOUR ONIICHAN, A PEDOPHILIC NECROMANCER AND HIS PET HALFLING WITH DOWN SYNDROME THAT WORK FOR AN INTERNATIONAL CRIME SYNDICATE TO ENGAGE IN GANG WARFARE TO UNRAVEL A israeli CONSPIRACY
hmm yes at least I truly see

Back when I played it (not quite 25 years ago but getting close, frick), the way I saw the game was something like this:
>You are kicked in the world from someplace (kinda like Amberstar*) and wander around, kill little screeching things, wolfs and bears and generally everything that moves, steal stuff and find neat trinkets, what a life.
>assassins target you
nice, I'm special! Also neat trinkets!
>iron crisis
hmmm, interesting, there is something going on in the world, I kinda thought this is just open world morrowindlike (put anachronistically) where you just wander around killing stuff
Then it kind of snowballed from first hearing about iron throne that wants you dead, the tranzig shitter, bandit camp (which I really liked infiltrating as well as attacking back then), the mines and finding out there is a huge conspiracy as well as hunt for CHARNAME

*note that I was a player that mostly got english skills back then already, but usually played games without manuals or outside story knowledge (which gets quite extreme with stuff like Dungeon Master), so I was used to sometimes not quite knowing what I am actually supposed to do after character generation and "just wander around, get all items and see what is there to kill" felt like a completely normal RPG situation.

I think it's generally nice to narrate like this compared to extreme speed and drama every second - in games that is (books etc are a different thing). Something in between aint bad tho and might be optimal.

you may want to read the () stuff attention-span anon

after you get laid, kiddo

don't reply to yourself

How is intentionally avoiding exp minmaxxing?

don't we all?

Actually in the EEs it's still an extra half attack, 2 to-hit, and 3 damage. not a trivial loss by any means.

>It is though because F/I keeps leveling fighter so you get the same ApR and way lower thac0 and more than double the HLA
The issue is it takes forever for the F/M to become even equal to a dualed one. Since you don't get grandmastery, fighter-mage doesn't get the same APR of a dualed mage until level 13 which is at 2.5M xp at the end of SoA. Meanwhile a dualed is going to have the same apr (or more if he went to 13), higher hp, higher or equal thac0 because GM shoring up difference, higher caster level meaning longer buffs, more stoneskins, more mirror images, more damage, etc. fighter mage does become stronger, but not until ToB.

>referencing lilura
yikes

davaeorn accepts lilura's

i'm sure you don't

They don't though, which was explained to you several times in this thread, so you're going to be ignored now as you are clearly mentally ill.

>Fighter hlas do not sync very well with mages anyway.
Uh what, yes they do

You left out smite, which is not only insanely good, but also hilarious. GWW is only bad if you are DW. The way f/i werks is that it combines martial offense with mage defense, the "synergy" is combining the best of both worlds.

Comparing level 40 characters is kind of irrelevant. It's like pathfinder autists minmaxing level 20 munchkin builds

I did. I think you are misinterpretting what the table is saying. First of all, It's comparing a multi-class fighter-ILLUSIONIST (gnome exclusive and gets a bump of +1 spell per level) to a dualed fighter mage, but it's using the same 1M - 8M experience point benchmarks, which is kind of misleading because the mutli-classed mage can only get up to 4M xp in it's class, capping out at level 20 versus the dual class capping at 30. So the 8M data point looks like the two classes are about equal, but it hides the fact the multi is 10 caster levels behind.

Even then, the graph still shows the dual coming out ahead as early as 1/2M exp where the dual is at that point a level 9/10 dualed fighter-mage with grandmastery with an entire 1 extra APR over the multi-classed fighter mage who is also a 9-10 fightermage at that point.

>12 thac0
Once again ignoring grandmastery thac0 bonus and the fact you can dual at higher levels than 9
>some extra spells
And 10 caster levels, having more apr, damage, thac0, and hp for most of BG2. Also being able to use all school of magic and not having to play a gnome.

You dont seem to understand the games mechanics and just hate dualed mages because you associate them with minmaxing.

>Once again ignoring grandmastery thac0 bonus
Grand mastery gives you 12 thac0? Hmm I dunno about that.

Doesn’t getting most of the effects of Grandmastery, such as the extra 1 entire APR, come from modding the game in bg2? I know in classic bg2 and ToB that was the case, where weapon mastery doesn’t give the 2e AD&D full bonuses it should, though I don’t know if they changed that in EE off the top of my head.
The caster progression is likely more important though, as you can get your higher mage slots far more quickly with a dual class and while many spells don’t scale past level 20 I believe it still impacts things like resisting dispels.
It has been a while since I played so I might be wrong.

>links chart refuting the point he's trying to make
oh no no no.
also, if being forced to play a gnome wasn't bad enough, you also lose skull trap and horrid wiliting.

>capping out at level 20 versus the dual class capping at 30
No, it's 20/24 vs 9/30. All of this is accounted for. Read it again.

>20/24
interesting. The author of the page is wrong. She has it backwards. The cap for fighter mage is 20M/24F. 4M xp for wizard puts you at level 20.

https://baldursgate.fandom.com/wiki/Experience_Tables

>yes it is, here's proof
but you didn't post proof. you actually did the opposite and posted a table showing the dual class having better hp, apr, thac0, and damage by the beginning of SoA.
>but I need a 4th character to spam horrid wilting
the greater point im trying to make is that you are using the fighter illussionist as a representative for fighter-mage and leaving out all the restrictions it comes with when comparing it to a dual who has 0 restrictions

>12 thac0
Once again ignoring grandmastery thac0 bonus and the fact you can dual at higher levels than 9
>some extra spells
And 10 caster levels, having more apr, damage, thac0, and hp for most of BG2. Also being able to use all school of magic and not having to play a gnome.

You dont seem to understand the games mechanics and just hate dualed mages because you associate them with minmaxing.

No, it means it isn't a 12 point difference, but a 10 point difference, and that's only starting at level 21 which is all the way at the end of tob for a mutliclass. At the end of shadows of amn a multiclass fighter-mage is going to be around a level 14 fighter with 7 thac0 at 3m xp which means you only have a 3 thac0 lead over a dual with GM by the end of SoA.

Only on a shithole like /vrpg/ would some autistic homosexual have a mental breakdown over someone not playing human with his favorite dual class.

cope and projection.
I am the one simply stating facts without bias or emotion. Dualed fighters aren't even my favorite, that would be fighter-cleric multi. It's the fighter-mage fanboys that are deliberately ignoring or lying about basic game mechanics and claiming f/m is the best and linking to fan-blogs that don't even have the correct level caps for fighter/mage as evidence

[...]
[...]
Doesn’t getting most of the effects of Grandmastery, such as the extra 1 entire APR, come from modding the game in bg2? I know in classic bg2 and ToB that was the case, where weapon mastery doesn’t give the 2e AD&D full bonuses it should, though I don’t know if they changed that in EE off the top of my head.
The caster progression is likely more important though, as you can get your higher mage slots far more quickly with a dual class and while many spells don’t scale past level 20 I believe it still impacts things like resisting dispels.
It has been a while since I played so I might be wrong.

BG1 GM gave the correct GM APR of 1.5. BG2 nerfed it to only giving the single .5 from specialization. The EEs compromised and made GM give 1.
>The caster progression is likely more important though, as you can get your higher mage slots far more quickly
Yes. It takes ages for a multi to get their first level 9 spells. Just compare when edwin gets his best spells to jan. The extra caster levels for longer duration imp hastes, and 1 round/level buffs is also really nice.

It's the early access to HLAs that's the real kicker, anon.

a new player shouldn't be asking this. he's already corrupted himself with meta.

Nah, forgotten realms gnomes are pretty cool and they're not only the strongest race in bg 1 and 2, but arguably 3 as well.

This is what a god slayer looks like, cope.

Are you saying there's more to life than being really, really, really ridiculously good looking?

Gnomes are innately dexterous and clever, which makes them naturally good fighters. The difference is the gnome approaches martial combat through technique rather than raw power, the art of war so to speak.

>No, you read the dialogue then press space
You can't do this without missing content when the scenes are intended to be fully voiced and animated to make sense. The text is also only given in subtitle form so you can't speedread it like BG1/2 without constantly skipping ahead in the convo, giving the scenes an unnatural fast-forward and time-skipping effect from hitting space repeatedly.
In BG2 this isn't an issue because all the dialogue is just given in one big block of text that can speedread through without any awkwardness or missed content.
>By the way, BG2 has terrible writing
It's not great, but it's passable. BG3s writing is remarkably shit to the point it ruins any sense of immersion or investment in anything that's going on.

>No, you read the dialogue then press space
You can't do this without missing content when the scenes are intended to be fully voiced and animated to make sense. The text is also only given in subtitle form so you can't speedread it like BG1/2 without constantly skipping ahead in the convo, giving the scenes an unnatural fast-forward and time-skipping effect from hitting space repeatedly.
In BG2 this isn't an issue because all the dialogue is just given in one big block of text that can speedread through without any awkwardness or missed content.
>By the way, BG2 has terrible writing
It's not great, but it's passable. BG3s writing is remarkably shit to the point it ruins any sense of immersion or investment in anything that's going on.

One more thing. BG3s writing being utterly dogshit is also more worthy of condemnation since they decided to go with fully animated cutscene dialogue that makes the games shitty writing much more of a focus that takes up a huge portion of the games runtime.

I did.
I also know that BG2 has over twice the size of PS:T. Word count is not a useful metric regardless. A better metric would be time spent per dialogue. 90% of BG2 dialogue is a couple sentences that can be speed read in a few seconds without missing anything. The same cannot be said for BG3 unless you skip content.

It isn't because word count alone includes all possible dialogue text in the game. Dialogue no single charname would have full access to because much of it is dependent on alignment, class, companions, etc.
This is all tangential anyway. BG2 just a bigger game with more content than PS:T, and more content = more words.
The point remains that BG3 writing is shittier and takes up more of your time.

>It's okay when old games do it
No moron, kys

I didn't say that. In this case the old game did not do it. BG2 has better writing than BG3 while remaining less a main focus point.

>This is your extremely uninformed and subjective opinion.
no shit, moron.
>BG3 is much more combat focused than BG2
No
>It has much more creative
Subjective. I find BG3 status effects and enemy abilities much less creative than the ones in BG1/2
>longer
because it's turn based and forces you to watch every single trash mob take its turn one at a time. Playing BG3 i found around 50% of playtime isspent in cutscenes and dialogue, whereas bg1/2 it's probably more like 1-5%.
Playing through BG3 feels like you're stuck in traffic slogging through cutscene after cutscene of shitaly written dialogue waiting to get to the combat, but knowing that right after you're back to the slog.

>every single fight in BG2 can be auto attacked through easily
You're just lying here. I'll admit when I say how much I enjoy BG2 I'm assuming SCS is installed, but I think that's fair when comparing a 20 year old game to a modern day major release. But even in vanilla you can't just facetank autottack firkragg to death. Think I'll record some tests and posts some webms sometime.

Either way, BG3 can be autoattacked through as well, except Yo

you dont even have to prebuff.
Raphael gets perma ccd instantly to a level 1 hold spell. I killed Orin in one turn of paladin autos. That's without having to do any prep work. When people say you can auto things to death in BG1/2, they leave out the fact the one doing it has to have like 10 prebuffs on to do that and not die instantly.

>thinks theres only three people who post here
Are you sure you’re cut out for anonymous posting, anon?

Perhaps it is you who needs to get the trip, anon

That is pretty funny. Did you prompt that banter or was that random?

I always feel really bad for souls trapped in inanimate objects in RPGs, I always want to destroy it and set them free. I find soul-magic to be very unsettling and uncomfortable. Probably why I don’t like pillars of eternity

Tried that, she gets chopped down and fricked by his AOE spam

>IWD is a decent game
eh...