-
Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.
"This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.
Icewind Dale The Icewind Dale Series Thread
- Thread starter Heresiarch
- Start date
McPlusle
Savant
- Joined
- May 11, 2017
- Messages
- 319
Shit, am I just really bad? I'm playing both 1 and 2 in my off time (both on Core Rules) and 1 completely kicks my ass while 2 is a joke. Maybe it's just that AD&D2 is just that more lethal.
IncendiaryDevice
Self-Ejected
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2014
- Messages
- 7,407
You folks confuse me greatly. By 1 and 2 do you mean IDW1 and IWD2 ? If so, then 2 doesn't have AD&D, it has 3rd ed, a completely different rule set.
Secondly, the first guy is already an expert in AD&D, hence he has less problems, obviously. I mean, he's formed the most min-max party possible for IWD aside from possibly including a sorcerer (and the never ending debate of sorcerers is not doubt no stranger to him). IWD is a commercial product designed to sell to people who've never played D&D before, of course it doesn't cater perfectly to "this invulnerable lich wizard fighter demon god of the 9th plane of hell is waaaay too easy, pls buff" type forum boaster, its designed with people like you in mind, who will have regular expectable challenges, ie: most normal regular people.
Regards the first guy, if you increase the difficulty setting of IWD all you do is increase the amount of XP you get, you don't actually make the game harder. IWD is designed to be played on core difficulty, if you're making a statement about difficulty then any statement about any difficulty other than core rules is pointlessly laughable. The only reason IWD even has a difficulty slider is because preens like the first guy obviously feel inadequate if they can't turn any electrical product up to 11.
If mr. preen would like to try the vanilla game, without Heart of Winter installed and take a party of:
Ranger
Barbarian
Thief
Druid
And then get back to us about difficulty. Instead of taking the perfect min/max available the game has to offer and then complaining the game is too easy. For some reason he needs a slider to make the game harder, instead of... using his own initiative.
McPlusle
Savant
- Joined
- May 11, 2017
- Messages
- 319
Gentle Player
Arcane
True in my experience. Playing on Insane actually made the game easier, outside of the first dungeon of course.
Piotrovitz
Savant
Dude, I'm no D&D expert in any way - I never played PnP, never finished BG1, finished BG2 couple of times on core without SCS, and that's it. Fuck, I barely play any party-based rpgs at all.
I don't give a shit about min-maxing in any game, I just picked a party for the first playthrough that follows the most common sense in the majority of cRPGs - couple of melees, priest, ranged thief and wiz. I know that cRPGs are getting more retarded and streamlined every year - did we reached a point where playing with core, oldschool party is considered powergaming?
I know the difficulty slider affects xp gain, but it doesn't seem to make thing proportionally easier, considering mobs do x2 dmg.
What I expected is to have reasonably hard/fun/rewarding difficulty, like on PotD in PoE.
Instead, you're telling me that I should gimp myself and make a party of six bards if I want to get any challenge.
Also, what's with the hostility man?
I'm just asking for an advice, and not boasting in any way.
Tigranes
Arcane
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2009
- Messages
- 10,350
Don't worry about him.
IWD1 is a bit odd in that the winning 'munchkin' strategy is essentially get a bunch of competent melee dudes, haste them and watch them chop everything up. Best bet is indeed to play with 'nonstandard' parties (e.g. no fighters/paladins, or whatever) on Core Rules and maybe throw in a few house rules like resting limitations.
Insane changes the difficulty curve, so that things are a lot harder to begin with, then actually get easier than Core after a while, except for a few enemies.
IWD1 is a bit odd in that the winning 'munchkin' strategy is essentially get a bunch of competent melee dudes, haste them and watch them chop everything up. Best bet is indeed to play with 'nonstandard' parties (e.g. no fighters/paladins, or whatever) on Core Rules and maybe throw in a few house rules like resting limitations.
Insane changes the difficulty curve, so that things are a lot harder to begin with, then actually get easier than Core after a while, except for a few enemies.
Average Manatee
Arcane
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2012
- Messages
- 15,269
Insane's damage change tends to be outweighed once you are a spell level ahead of where you should be for an area. D&D has always been more about not getting hit by damage rather than soaking it up with a massive HP pool. Less so for physical-heavy parties like your's though, it's parties of stuff like 5 fighter/mage/clerics and 1 fighter/mage/thief that are massively stronger in insane since they'll level almost as well as a single class character is "supposed" to level.
HoF is different though and relies a lot more on spells to disable enemies, and also since physicals power growth caps out in later levels you'll not make it up as easily through the even more inflated XP. I'd recommend it if you can stomach the ridiculous cheese you'll need to pull off to get through Easthaven.
HoF is different though and relies a lot more on spells to disable enemies, and also since physicals power growth caps out in later levels you'll not make it up as easily through the even more inflated XP. I'd recommend it if you can stomach the ridiculous cheese you'll need to pull off to get through Easthaven.
IncendiaryDevice
Self-Ejected
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2014
- Messages
- 7,407
Bull... shit. You have two multiclasses, one cleric/fighter and one thief/fighter, apart from D&D no other game or rule system has such a specific cheese system which is uniquely so relevant to specifically AD&D games. You've played BG2 at least twice have you? Well, if 200 hours of IE game training isn't making you an expert I have no idea how long one needs to train for to become an expert, and this is before we consider the uncompleted, but time spent not mentioned runs of BG1 and all those previous attempts to try IWD, most likely quit because you sucked at it, but now you've found out the way to cheese it you're crowing in revenge.
No normal player would pick a party like that, they'd start by having a pure cleric and pure thief for a start, and they likely wouldn't go for a second fighter with two fighter classes already in the party. They'd use that spare slot for something... interesting!
You even know what SCS is. Most regular people wouldn't have a clue what that is. Knowledge of SCS suggests you've read spoilers. Lots of spoilers.
You say you picked a common-sense party, but in your list of common-sense is the term "ranged", but, oh woe, you're party doesn't seem to have a Ranger in it. I could have sworn a normal person would pick a Ranger for their Ranged class. But, oh look, you didn't. Why was that I wonder. I guess you knew lots and lots about why you made that choice, right.
The party you chose is neither old school nor core. You picked an utterly boring and tedious party based on their ability to cheese the crap out of the game. And, no, increasing your hyperbole ratio here does not make your horseshit any more convincing, quite the opposite. Hey, look guys, we've made an RPG where you can be all these vast arrays of different characters! Imagine the crazy parties you can make! What? You've gone with 5 fighters and a wizard? You fucking dumb tosser! LMAO.
So you have played it before on core rules? Was that with five fighters and a wizard as well? If its really easy on 'insane', what the fuck stopped you completing it the other times?
If that isn't the most spasticated thing I've ever read. No, really, WTF? Welcome to RPGs I guess, hope you enjoy the ride. It wasn't at all because you died multiple times to the lizard queen and just gave up.
If you want to make a party of six bards, you can. That's the whole point of the game. That's what makes IWD unique in the world of modern RPGs. You can take whatever the fuck you want. People have completed the game with one bard, so six should be piss easy, right. I dunno if you read the instructions before the game started, but you were told you could take UP TO six characters into the game. IWD isn't about just beating the game, its not just about fulfilling some inane fantasy adventure fan-fiction, it's about trying out varieties of builds, of which the combinations are almost limitless.
BG2 and most modern party-based RPGs? Yeah, you can have millions of choices about your own character, but you've always gotta hear ol' Minsc yelling at his hamster, you always gotta put up with Jahira's shit strength stat, you've always gotta have cartoon villain Edwin patronise you for hours on end while he Magic Missiles like a machine gun, but, no, in Icewind Dale you can have a completely different party every single time you play. For the rest of your entire life. But, no, you wanna go with five fighters and a wizard, cos "that's what you do in RPGs" LMBFAO.
I guess I'm hostile because you don't even understand what IWD is. you're playing it as game its not designed to be and as a result you're getting frustrated at the game instead of your own lack of understanding. And as a result of this, the more you talk about the game, the more you expose you're bullshit. You're like a tourist complaining to their estate agent that their holiday in Norway was too cold, 1 star, would not travel there again, because, for some unknown reason, you never realised Norway was a fairly chilly place.
IWD's difficulty is not about number inflation. IWD's difficulty is about party choice. x2 damage means fuck all when the monster can't hit you're -10 AC anyway. People play IWD to experience D&D, which means playing on core rules, because if its not core rules, it's not D&D, duh.
So let's summarise:
You're running with the wold's most tedious and boring party in a game designed to build any crazy-fun party you want.
You're playing it for the 'plot', a game which is primarily designed for combat replayability where the 'plot' is the least interesting aspect of the game.
You're playing a D&D game but choosing no to play by D&D rules.
You're blaming the game for you not getting what the game is all about.
Do you get why I'm hostile yet?
What advice did you want again?
Oh, you want another non-D&D option do you.
Well, nothing is hard if you know what you're doing:
If you want hard, go with a weaker party. It's what the game is designed to do. It's what RPG'ing is designed to do. Dumbass.
Average Manatee
Arcane
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2012
- Messages
- 15,269
AD&D has been out for almost 30 years, we're raging over the fact that someone has figured out by now that pure-class thieves are shit? This isn't IGN, you're allowed to assume basic knowledge of gameplay mechanics. He may even have read the manual!
IncendiaryDevice
Self-Ejected
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2014
- Messages
- 7,407
Fuck off with your apologetic bullshit.
AD&D hasn't been in a game for over 15 years.
There's no "we're raging". There's no we're, and there's no raging, what are you, some tranny drama queen?
As for the rest of your horseshit, the guy quite clearly pretended to have very little knowledge of the game while replying to a completely different point.
Great attempt at drama creation. No, really, super creative, but you can still go fuck a chicken.
laclongquan
Arcane
On the issue of IWD2, powergaming builds bore the fuck out of me. No really. The 1st run I tried it and god it's boring.
The second time I get a little smarter and run non-optimal builds. I do sneak in a few cheese tactics but really, my party got holes so big any powergamer can point out half asleep.
It run longer too. I only abandon it in chapter 2.
Playing IWD2 practically demands you run nonoptimal. Sure, it's a game for combat and cheese. but run in that way is too boring.
You need to have something creative and flaws to get your party going~
Regarding IWD1+HoW, the game was reasonably difficult and fun for me on core rules, 6-member party, no dual-/multi-classing, and no severe min maxing. I would have the character's prime stat at 18, but the rest would be set up for roleplaying. At times it was rather difficult, at others it was just fine.
Last edited:
Piotrovitz
Savant
Whoah man, take it easy, pop some benzo or something. Seems like I enraged you to the point you had to dissect my every sentence to prove I don't understand the game.
I haven't been on any message boards for more than a decade and it seems nothing has changed.
Don't want to quote everything, so here you go shortly:
1. It doesn't take a D&D veteran to know that some pure classes are shit. Just by playing BG1 for few hours, you can already see the difference between T and F/T (Imoen/Montaron). Same with BG2 and F/C - just by having Anomen for a while you can see that it's actually better to have cleric who can buff AND fight.
2. 'No normal player would have party like that' - so you're suggesting that player with moderate experience in cRPGs would roll a party with four druids, bard and pure thief? Knowing it's a combat-heavy game? Having party of few melees, priest, ranged thief and mage is the most common sense thing you can do, assuming you played any cRPGs in the past.
3. 'I could have sworn a normal person would pick a Ranger for their Ranged class.' - again, after playing BG1 and grasping the fact that it's weapon pips that count the most, I would say that normal person would take pure fighter for their ranged class.
4. Knowing about SCS existence doesn't mean shit - I just looked for some mods before replaying BG2 some time ago and stumbled across it, but never bother to install it.
5. 'and all those previous attempts to try IWD, most likely quit because you sucked at it, but now you've found out the way to cheese it you're crowing in revenge' - dude, I quit it because first few dungeons are rather uninspiring and are throwing the same mobs over and over again, and with my short attention span, I couldn't take this shit. I rolled with less optimal party (pure ranger melee etc) and also had an easy time. What you're suggesting is that I couldn't make it further, went online to read powergaming guides, and then got back to make cheese party and complain the game is too easy. How could you came up with this shit? Are you sixteen or something? You sure you aren't projecting something?
6. 'You're playing it for the 'plot', a game which is primarily designed for combat replayability where the 'plot' is the least interesting aspect of the game.' - dude, I'm not playing it for the plot, but even in a combat heavy game, I would want to have at least some semblance of a plot, not 'go from dungeon to dungeon' diablo style shit. Fortunately, IWD takes off a bit after Dragon's Eye.
All I asked for, is whether HoF is reasonably hard (like PotD in PoE) and is doable without dozens of reloads. And it seemed to trigger you some kind of mental diarrhoea.
I haven't been on any message boards for more than a decade and it seems nothing has changed.
Don't want to quote everything, so here you go shortly:
1. It doesn't take a D&D veteran to know that some pure classes are shit. Just by playing BG1 for few hours, you can already see the difference between T and F/T (Imoen/Montaron). Same with BG2 and F/C - just by having Anomen for a while you can see that it's actually better to have cleric who can buff AND fight.
2. 'No normal player would have party like that' - so you're suggesting that player with moderate experience in cRPGs would roll a party with four druids, bard and pure thief? Knowing it's a combat-heavy game? Having party of few melees, priest, ranged thief and mage is the most common sense thing you can do, assuming you played any cRPGs in the past.
3. 'I could have sworn a normal person would pick a Ranger for their Ranged class.' - again, after playing BG1 and grasping the fact that it's weapon pips that count the most, I would say that normal person would take pure fighter for their ranged class.
4. Knowing about SCS existence doesn't mean shit - I just looked for some mods before replaying BG2 some time ago and stumbled across it, but never bother to install it.
5. 'and all those previous attempts to try IWD, most likely quit because you sucked at it, but now you've found out the way to cheese it you're crowing in revenge' - dude, I quit it because first few dungeons are rather uninspiring and are throwing the same mobs over and over again, and with my short attention span, I couldn't take this shit. I rolled with less optimal party (pure ranger melee etc) and also had an easy time. What you're suggesting is that I couldn't make it further, went online to read powergaming guides, and then got back to make cheese party and complain the game is too easy. How could you came up with this shit? Are you sixteen or something? You sure you aren't projecting something?
6. 'You're playing it for the 'plot', a game which is primarily designed for combat replayability where the 'plot' is the least interesting aspect of the game.' - dude, I'm not playing it for the plot, but even in a combat heavy game, I would want to have at least some semblance of a plot, not 'go from dungeon to dungeon' diablo style shit. Fortunately, IWD takes off a bit after Dragon's Eye.
All I asked for, is whether HoF is reasonably hard (like PotD in PoE) and is doable without dozens of reloads. And it seemed to trigger you some kind of mental diarrhoea.
The one who harps probably mistook you for a Zhentarim.
In IWD1 it's hard but not too hard, though if you've never played it that way you will have to reload at times I guess. There is one area (the burial island with all the undead and the wailing virgins) that's absolutely brutal tho. This is in the heart of winter expansion.
In IWD2 HoF is completely nuts, mobs are so OP, have such a high attack bonus that you can forget about melee and most likely will have to hide behind your own summons, who are just as OP as the enemies. The only viable melee chars there are mages with improved invis + mirror image.
Piotrovitz
Savant
Thanks man, this is the answer I was looking for.
IWD1 HoF sounds fun enough - having to use every possible spell/potion/wand and adapting different strategies to each fight is what I'm looking for.
IWD2 I'll probably skip, sounds too frustrating. Knowing myself, I'd probably uninstall it before finishing first chapter.
IWD1 HoF sounds fun enough - having to use every possible spell/potion/wand and adapting different strategies to each fight is what I'm looking for.
IWD2 I'll probably skip, sounds too frustrating. Knowing myself, I'd probably uninstall it before finishing first chapter.
Piotrovitz
Savant
Either this, or his romance with Viconia didn't worked out and he has to vent the frustration somewhere.
IncendiaryDevice
Self-Ejected
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2014
- Messages
- 7,407
Oh, I can do numbers too.
1. You don't play some classes because they are 'shit' but then are complaining about the game being too easy with non-shit classes. D&D and roleplaying is about build variety, did I not explain that to you before you completely ignored this and wrote the same exact shit you posted in the previous post?
2. No, you're right, a normal plyer wouldn't take four druids either, just like they wouldn't take five fighters, you spastic.
3. Oh right, you think Rangers are shit. Well, there you go then, back to point 1.
4. Sure, I guess you can make up anything you want about what you've spoiled yourself on over the years. You know, like you're having to spoil yourself on experimenting with HoF before you try it.
5. Bullshit, IWD does not throw the same mobs over and over again, you're such a bullshitter it's incredible. Not one single word out your mouth is either honest or credible. Pray tell, which particular mob keeps being thrown at you, let's have some actual fucking examples, hyperbole extraordinaire.
6. LOL.
& Oh wow, you want something that's hard but doesn't take dozens of reloads, oh... my... god... mr. fucking exact. How the fuck should we know what your version of not enough reloads and too many reloads is, Christ, your wife/girlfried/boyfriend/husband/goat must live in a world of pain every time your dinner comes 1 degree too hot or 1 degree too cold, or one calorie less or one calorie more than you're imagined idea of perfection.
If you want to adapt to different strategies, use more variety in your party than 5 fucking fighters and a wizard LMAO. You hypocritical dumb cunt. Oh, you just want to play a wizard and have AWESOME BUTTON wizard combat like in BG2, oh well, IWD has a level cap of only 10, and only about half the spells of BG2, with no time stop, no sequncers, but if you play a version that does have all that stuff, of course the game will be too easy, it was never balanced for that shit.
Ohhhh IWD2 sounds too hard for you does it? My oh my, I really am struggling to see any avenue for you that doesn't end in you claiming these games are 'shit' for some deranged and mentally retarded bullshit reason.
Romance options? LMAO
Last edited:
Brancaleone
Prophet
Yeah, I remember ending up constantly summoning high level undead and then spamming Malison + Wail of the Banshee. Oh, the fun of it.
Piotrovitz
Savant
Maybe I'm just used to games like Wiz or PoE, where each class has their use and you can build whatever team you want and still have fun.
In IWD it's like you have to cripple yourself by taking i.e pure thief in order to have some challenge on non-HoF difficulty.
Considering that everyone picking this game is aware that it's combat heavy, I don't find anything strange that generic player would take 4-5 melee classes.
What the fuck are you talking about? I'm not spoiling myself with anything, just asking whether HoF is fun-hard or frustrating-hard. Unless you're a basement-dweller who has free time 24/7 (are you?), it's pretty normal to ask few people whether game/difficulty is worth playing, instead of wasting time finding it's not.
goblins > yetis and shades > skeletons > veerbeegs > lizardmen > yuan ti
The only variance are the priests thrown here and there.
Are you able to understand written text? I didn't say it's too hard, I just don't want to deal with bullshit like hiding behide your summons, which scales with mobs. Nor reload dozen times until spell lands successfully.
Now serious questions:
1. Do you have Aspergers combined with some anger disorder?
2. Are you obsessed with IWD and spent years replaying it?
3. Do you live in your parent's basement?
If any of the answers are no, then I honestly don't know what's wrong with you and why are you going berserk over posts on internet forum.
Jazz_
Arcane
I think HOF difficulty depends a lot about your level, I started it after finishing the game (big mistake) and it was too easy, and I had a party of 5, not even a full party, in fact I stopped playing it halfway thru I believe, I'll probably finish it one day when I replay IWD and start HOF around the middle of the game or something.
I started IWD2 for the first time yesterday. Never played it before. I don't know if it's because Sawyer took over, but it looks like everything went downhill there. The worst UI, D&D 3rd ed feels convoluted (I'm not used to it I guess), Widescreen resolutions cause problems apparently, and one guide says there is a section which can only be passed if you play at 800x600. We'll see if it's true.
Tigranes
Arcane
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2009
- Messages
- 10,350
Widescreen was never properly supported by any vanilla IE game, so that's not really relevant. (Just use the widescreen mod.)
IWD2 is just a very different beast. I appreciate its existence because it provides a pretty good 3rd ed implementation, and adds some nice, unique moments to the whole IE oeuvre, e.g. the war drums. But it is in terms of overall quality the lesser brother to IWD1.
IWD2 is just a very different beast. I appreciate its existence because it provides a pretty good 3rd ed implementation, and adds some nice, unique moments to the whole IE oeuvre, e.g. the war drums. But it is in terms of overall quality the lesser brother to IWD1.
As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.