Baldur's Gate The Baldur's Gate Series Thread

[Average Manatee]

Well, apart from the fact that ive seen fighters with 27 hit points at level 9 and that statistics mean nothing against single rolls. The deviation varies with con modifiers, so its kind of useless.

You can choose your stats in BG2. If you make a fighter with 3 con then you're a fucking moron. This whole discussion proves you're pretty much just a moron.

Also how the fuck do you calculate hp against stone skin layers, mirrored images, total invulnerability against damage sources and other stuff that makes hp just another stat instead of the be all end all you are trying to make it be? For warriors and most enemies is a very important stat, but seeing as the opposition gets a bigger benefit than your own team from said boost, i really dont see how the party ends up with an advantage.

Because if you are invulnerable than it really doesn't matter what the enemy's HP is?

So monsters gain some completely random amount of HP, with many monsters that were intended to be much more difficult than usual (artifically boosted HP) get no bonus. Meanwhile you give yourself a flat +50% bonus to health just 'cause.

Also I'm quite certain the mod doesn't use the HD from the monster manuals but instead straight from the game. Otherwise that would probably only make the problem worse.

Nice try, but most difficult fights in the game are against a big bad plus mooks that get in your way, more hp for them makes the fight longer and more difficult than they originally are.

You aren't even addressing the point.

What's the primary difference between a roguelike and an RPG in this situation? The fact that a roguelike is slightly harder to savescum? I'd say that health variance has *exactly* the same effect.

Expendable characters for the most part, the challenge from a rogue like comes from having to make due with what youve got, adapting to whatever random shit the game presents you and dealing with it to survive.

Yes, and? I think you "have to do with what you've got" in an RPG as well. Oh wait, *you*, specifically, don't. You cheat to get more than you should have.

You know who else complains about games testing their patience? Newbs, and that's why they play on Easy so they don't have to face a challenge which takes up too much of their precious time. You're just doing the same thing except at the same time trying to justify it as not playing on easy through roundabout methods.

Ah, the: "You are a noob lololol" argument, how is the game remotely challenging if you have a good party composition and apropiate spells? hp isnt even accounted for in any strategy to beat any fight on the game, stop being fucking retarded.

>Be a noob
>lol you can't call me out for being a noob I win xD

Also Starcraft did have randomized hit chance for units on different levels (Removal of which was a huge negative in SC2). Furthermore WC3 had plenty of randomization. I wouldn't say it made it harder, but it certainly made the game *better*. Removing the randomization and painting over it with a mechanic that hugely favours the player over the enemy would certainly make both of the games worse.

Dude, we are talking HP, not to-hit, they are two different things. But yeah, in strategy games deterministic systems are needed, otherwise pure dumb luck can trump good planning.[/QUOTE]
Except HP is directly related to survivability in the same way to-hit is, and deterministic systems are absolutely not needed in strategy games.

Not only that, in strategy games units are usually plentiful and expendable, so it averages itself out, thousands upon thousands of throws will achieve a reliable average on losses. On a micro level some of those units will invariably lose because of bad luck if random chance is allowed. And because you are facing 1-10 dudes with your 1-6 dudes on BGII random shit has a much deeper and meaninful impact while being completely outside of the players control.

lolwut? Strategy games constantly have units in small numbers the same as BG2. And stop talking like you know statistics, we know you don't.

Last but not least, as levels go up you start facing monsters with higher HDs, while you are stuck with what youve got the benefits for them increase as you go along.

Completely nonsensical. Monsters get stronger from more levels but your party doesn't? Are you a complete retard?

 

[Lhynn]

You can choose your stats in BG2. If you make a fighter with 3 con then you're a fucking moron. This whole discussion proves you're pretty much just a moron.

3 CON? try 16. wasnt my character but still, if you get unlucky and dont know better you can end up with really low hp.

Because if you are invulnerable than it really doesn't matter what the enemy's HP is?

Invulnerability has limited charges and duration, now you are just being plain retarded for the fuck of it.

You aren't even addressing the point.

I am, the point is that A) mooks in dungeons are designed to wear your party down till you get to the big bad. and B) harder to kill mooks make for much more difficult fights even if the big bad has the same stats. Yes, it is that obvious, and dont even bring up abusing resting (now thats cheating), i like long adventuring days and only resting in towns.

Yes, and? I think you "have to do with what you've got" in an RPG as well. Oh wait, *you*, specifically, don't. You cheat to get more than you should have.

How can you be sure its more than i should have? maybe its exactly the same as what i should have. i am not adding anything extra, just maxing a variant. And im adding a lot extra to most enemies in the game that they couldnt possibly have otherwise. i dont see how that can be called "cheating".

>Be a noob
>lol you can't call me out for being a noob I win xD

Except HP is directly related to survivability in the same way to-hit is, and deterministic systems are absolutely not needed in strategy games.

It is related to survivavility, its not related in the same way, not even in a relatively similar way. Completely different mechanics that can exist independently from eachother. Get your shit together.
I agree, deterministic systems are only needed in strategy games if they want to be taken seriously, even damage ranges are disappearing.

lolwut? Strategy games constantly have units in small numbers the same as BG2. And stop talking like you know statistics, we know you don't.

Key word being constantly, as they are tested again and again and again the throws average out.
As for statistics, you can throw a coin 10 times and it says 5 out of those 10 will end up in tails, but this is not always the case.

Completely nonsensical. Monsters get stronger from more levels but your party doesn't? Are you a complete retard?

We are talking HP, PCs and NPCs get 3/2/1 point of hp past level 9/10, while monsters keep winning 8 points per level instead of 1d8 (or the average they have been asigned in game), Monsters get a bigger and bigger advantage over you with this mod on as the game progresses.

 

[BBMorti]

A fighter with 16 con starts with 12 Hit Points, if he rolls a 1 on all 8 level ups he will get 3 hit points (+2 hit points from Con bonus) making the minimum hit points possible at level 9, 36 hit points. That will of course never happen you lying fucking idiot. You spew so much shit that it makes me wonder if you can't see how much of a fool you look.

 

[Melcar]

Rolls on BG were pretty generous most of the time. Except for multi class characters. It was always a bitch with them.

 

[Lhynn]

Rolls on BG were pretty generous most of the time. Except for multi class characters. It was always a bitch with them.

Didnt multi-class gain a fraction of the hp? cant remember that system but i think they did.

 

[Melcar]

It was the sum of 1/2 of what each class would get. A F/T with 16 CON would at level up get 1-5 +1 hp for their Fighter side, and 1-3 +1 hp for their Thief side.

 

[Lhynn]

So much hate for making the point that increased hp on enemies balances out with maxed hp on party?
That higher HD creatures have a logically higher max HP because they keep winning d8 past level 9/10?
For pointing out that HP is not that important to the team because at the end of the day if you have 30 or 50 hp, but recieve 89 damage you are still dead, and that damage mitigation/avoidance skills play a larger role in beating hard fights on your side, than on the other side which usually doesnt counts with those same tools and only has their HP to rely on to survive?
Or maybe i forgot to say that getting hit for any amount of damage still interrupts spells, yet another reason why you dont want to get hit and why damage avoidance is so much more important for casters.

Those are all pretty reasonable arguments.
The number i gave was a typo, it was 37, and i was ready to call you a retarded cunt when i decided to double check my post and there it was.

 

[GarfunkeL]

Half of your bullshit is agreeing with Average Manatee and the other half is incomprehensible rant.

This is why you're a retard. You can't even keep your own argument straight in your own head, you fucking idiot.

 

[Lhynn]

Half of your bullshit is agreeing with Average Manatee and the other half is incomprehensible rant.

This is why you're a retard. You can't even keep your own argument straight in your own head, you fucking idiot.

Hes not completely wrong, just his assesment of how it affects the combat is.

 

[GarfunkeL]

That would depend whether you're talking about BG1 or BG2. In the former, HP is of significant importance, in the latter, not so much - because any meaningful encounter will kill you if you just rely on HP as a sponge, whereas in BG1 there are encounters where high HP will keep you alive without tactics. So utilizing full HP mod in BG1 is cheating, whereas in BG2 it's still cheating but it doesn't matter that much.

 

[Dreaad]

^ yar. Pretty big difference in game plan if ogre or magic missile can one shot your PC. Or if those death knights can 3 shot your warriors late game. HP cheat is HP cheat, there is no way and no point in trying to justify it. I also don't really see how enemies having more HP would actually increase the challenge, almost every challenging fight is handled with paralyzing/disabling threats, and most such control/defense spells last faaaar longer than any amount of increased HP an enemy might have. Basically you make fights longer and safer, so easier.

 

[Lhynn]

Well, my first couple of runs of BGI and II i wasnt even aware of the hp/level and i never had a problem with them, i trampled anything and everything with my mage, the challenge being in not getting hit. Not gonna say it was an easy game, but fights i lost, i simply lost, 20 extra hp wouldnt have helped.

In BGI it wasnt even an issue because almost everything died before it could even get close, in BGII because you have so many tools to soak up damage that as long as you have 40+ HP with your mages, 60+ with your ranged and 90+ with your warriors youd be fine. Problem was when the fights got long enough for my protective magic to run out or wear out, my summons to get killed, etc.

So yeah, im going to insist that extra hp for enemies more than makes up for the maxed HP on your team members in terms of challenge across the whole game.

I dont use maxed hp to make it easier anyway, i use it because stat rolls on level up is shitty.

 

[Melcar]

You need to play with everything TO THE MAX.

 

[Lhynn]

BG2 is the only really good Bioware game and event that one isn't that good. BW might not have many games that are individually overrated to the level of Arcanum/New Vegas/Dark/DeSouls (first BG comes pretty close though) on here, but I guess it wins easily when taking their whole portfolio into consideration. Obsidian, get to work, you're losing.

Havent you heard? this genre has no good games, only overrated shit and retards that think they enjoy them.

 

[octavius]

Which faggot is moving these messages between different threads?

 

[Jaesun]

There were FIVE PAGES that had absolutely nothing at all about the BGI EE or BGII EE thread, so they are moved here.

Have a nice day.

 

[octavius]

There were FIVE PAGES that had absolutely nothing at all about the BGI EE or BGII EE thread, so they are moved here.

Have a nice day.

Well, all messages were marked unread at my end, even though I had already read most of them. Then suddenly I get an error message when trying to go to next page. Oh well, not a big deal.

 

[DragoFireheart]

So ranged attacks (bows, slings, etc) were overpowered in BG1 because of the slower movement and everything having less HP, but this has been stated as not being the case in BG2.

But what about the Archer class? He has comparatively high damage with bows and can make great use of the Tuigan shortbow which can easily last him until he gets some other shortbow later on (Tasherons bow/Gesens bow) to help with enemy's resistant to low-enchantment arrows. It's also nice to have a competent ranged attacker that won't block the hallways when dealing with the obnoxious path finding in some dungeons.

 

[Zed]

Trent Oster ‏@TrentOster 9m9 minutes ago
Just finished up meetings with the Wizards of the Coast. My mind is blown with how awesome the future looks

Hmmm.

 

[Rake]

 

[hoverdog]

Trent Oster ‏@TrentOster 9m9 minutes ago
Just finished up meetings with the Wizards of the Coast. My mind is blown with how awesome the future looks

Hmmm.

 

[octavius]

Awesome for Trent?
Awesome for WotC?
Awesome for us?
Awesome for those that just want to press the Awesome Button?

 

[Sensuki]

 

[Athelas]

I guess their wonderful creative talent ability to rake in the cash from enhanced editions that are worse than the original games and cost twice as much must have really impressed WotC.

 

[Rake]

http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/inde...at-arent-being-made.81328/page-5#post-3554990
Baldur's Gate 3 using 5th Edition with story/characters writen by Trent Oster...

I should be more careful with my wishes