Icewind Dale 2

Anyone played Icewind Gate?

Very curious about Icewind Dale 2 here. When I tried to play IWD1 on Wine … ages ago, it crawled horribly. I'm hoping IWD2 works fine on ReactOS or win2k.

I don't know if I should just wait and play it with GemRB when it's done. I wish they wouldn't bother actually duplicating the full revision of the engine, and just make run with 2e rules like all the other games it runs.

Other urls found in this thread:

gibberlings3.net/readmes/readme-iwd_in_bg2.html
shsforums.net/topic/34232-link-to-a-list-of-all-iwd2-mods-broken-links-repaired/#entry398247
twitter.com/AnonBabble

But it's not 2E

Honestly, 3E is overall better than 2E. This isn't to say 2E is terrible, per se. But the 3E systems for saves and AC and all that are far less retarded than 2E's saves and THAC0 and so on and so forth. Also, point-buy system for stats in 3E is actually LESS munchkin-y than the statrolls+allocation system in 2E games.

Of course, 3.5 is better than 3, but none of the Infinity Engine stuff used 3.5.

Infinity Engine was a very 2e series. There's other games for 3e, though they're hardly as well regarded as BG2.

And I don't know anyone liking 3e, but there is an impressive load of 2e materials around.

But for those wanting to play one of these games in 3e, you can always try some system to run the IWD2 executable, and as I said first thing, there is Icewind Gate if you want to play BG2 in 3e.

Never did much DnD pnp but I'll take 2 over 3 any day of the week.
It's still better than 3.5+

You guys have shit taste, please kill yourselves.

...

However, BG2, the really major game here, was 2.5e, 2e with some 3e classes and high level abilities, and various regular level 20 to 30 boosts left out.

Oh yeah, and then Beamdog decided to rerelease IWD1 and BG1 too AFAIK in 2.5e, and the original devs even pointed out that it's blatantly unbalanced that way.

No one's forcing you to play any particular one.

Well, except the assholes selling Encumbered Edition, and even having the originals taken down from GoG to facilitate this.

You're all wrong, 4e was the best edition.

I only played the original rule set and ad&d 2e years ago. What did 3e do to shit it up?

What year do you think this is? edition war threads were fun

Let's take a history lesson of the big parts (skipping some shit like the RC):

OD&D:
B/X:
> D&D is for children anyways
BECMI:
> she plays B/X
AD&D 1E:
AD&D 1.5E (post-UA):
AD&D 2E:
D&D 3E:
D&D 3.5E
> secretly less balanced
D&D 4E:
> fun

And apparently some people are still buying WotC products? Ask them about 5E.

It's almost as if there's no need to type out Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 2nd edition or even AD&D 2E when 2E works just as well. Especially since the topic is the adaptation of said system to a CRPG, you pretentious prat.

I wasn't mocking you for what you called them you faggot, I was mocking you for actually playing them. The only reason I did so was for the sake of historical specificity. In the end it's all fucking D&D, and even the cluster-fuck that is 4E can survive having things spliced into it from other editions. Especially critical hit charts.

Leave it to a 2Efag to sperg out.

Oh, fuck off. As if the regular wild fatguy wasn't autistic enough there's your kind of just stumbled on 1d4chan halfbaked lorekeepers with a chip on their shoulder and a mean inferiority complex to deal with.

(heil'd)
I still have my D&D rules cyclopedia in my room, which was a reprinting of the Original rules. Basically a DMG + Player Handbook + Monster Manual.
the Dungeon master Guide if AD&D 1e was the first D&D book I ever owned. It was left in an attic of a house we moved into. Me and my friends then went out and got the rule books for AD&D and spent about three summers playing. I was the DM for most the time unless we played with some of the Highschool nerds. We used to set our campaigns in Krynn from Dragonlance even though it was 2e rules. Then one summer I got laid, started smoking weed, stopped being a nerd, and never ever found other people to play D&D with ever again. Getting laid was a mistake tbh.
I played 2e, but I don't know what you are talking about.
never used it but does this mean all rolls are based on a d20? That is not essentially a bad idea. I once helped a friend of a forum write rules for a P&P game using three d6's so it was an 18 point system. Much easier all around to in my opinion to deal with things with less goofy dice to have to lug around.
Did they bring back Mystics? Mystics where dope. Also if I recal their where half-Orc modals for 2e. In fact my brother had a rule book for a 2e Celtic class.
Sounds like the board game DragonStrike. That shit was fun.

of AD&D 1e *

Or maybe - just maybe - I actually play the games, and can comment them as a result?

TBH my biggest beef with 3.5 is the bindings. The fact that my shitty Arduin book is holding up better than it is a joke. I don't take any of the old D&D books except 1E out of storage and just use PDFs for them, since they're pretty much ruined.


Campaign setting splat-books. Dragonlance, Forgotten Realms, Planescape, Spelljammer, Dark Sun, etc.

Things like hit dice, damage, and a lot of other stuff are still based on other dice. The d20 is the basis for attacks, skill checks, and a lot of other things though.

Mechanically, the main "flaw" in a d20 system is that it's always linear - though seeing as this is the case for most things in every edition, that's not necessarily a flaw of its use in D&D, but more a flaw in other games trying to use it just because D&D does. The 3d6 system, for instance, would have a curve - you're significantly more likely to roll 9-12 than 16-17 or 18. This allows you to set challenges in much more interesting ways, and tends to give a lot more flexibility. A good system cuts down on the math done in play by doing it all outside of the game.

Now that's all in abstraction. What about D&D? In that case, the d20 system takes its flaw from the scaling upwards of numbers, something which began in 2E (albeit at a much lesser degree) when the matrix system was deviated from. The Immortal's Handbook is essentially the problems of this system taken to their absolute illogical extreme, to the point of being completely unplayable. In-game, are just a little fucked by it.

Essentially, in earlier editions, monsters generally keep within that range of 0 to 10 for AC, and powerful ones have negative ACs. While monsters at higher levels will have more HD, it's only the "big bosses" that are continually harder to hit past a certain point, and even that is eventually surpassed at ultra-high levels. d20 keeps things scaled, in order to match player growth. A Fighter at 20th Level is about as likely to hit as at 1st Level (4E does this as well, but it's a little fucked).

House-rules can fix it, but even then, the comparatively poor scaling of damage vs hit points caused by the system for everyone that isn't a spell-caster just fucks things over.

4E is pretty much the only system that needs a board. Combat is a lot more tactical in terms of movement, and the game is "balanced" such that classes are generally on par with each other. The large amount of content in Dragon magazine and splatbooks (though not 2/3.5-tier) means that some options are definitely better than others, and "tiers" exist to some degree, but it's not too noticeable in practice.

If you have a group that's willing to learn all of the rules, the space to set it up, and the willingness for very slow play (or very fast players), it can be a fun fantasy battle simulator. If any system was to be adapted to a video game, it should be 4E. But if I'm going for an actual RPG, I would rather the OSR style every time, and the mechanics of 4E simply do not lend to that without very heavy adjustments.

wew Its been over 15 years sense I've played D&D I don't remember much. Anyway thanks for the response breaking things down for me.

It's not just about what it did, it sure as fuck doesn't help that it was released so shortly after 2e, with that accelerated pace continuing with subsequent editions, as if there ever was a big need for it.

Oh, not only did they release a seriously incompatible remake, requiring you to re-buy all materials, but many things that there used to be weren't even made again, like Dark Sun and Planescape.

It was still 2D at its core.
The new stuff was created because classic 2D didn't recommend playing beyond level 20 (which was the level cap for warriors in vanilla BG2).
BG2's expansion included a lot of crazy stuff in order to make more interesting leveling up beyond lv20 (like clerics mass ressurrecting, mages invoking dragon's breath, thieves using holy avengers and warriors turning themselves into hurricanes while doing 10 attacks per round).
The kits were also crazy, but they make sense because they traded one thing in favor of another one (i.e, kensais were overpowered but you can't use armor)

(Cont)
As for Icewind Dale 2 and it's 3rd Edition rules or 3.5, whatever…
… I just couldn't reconcile myself with mages using shields or clerics using swords.
Rangers are obsolete. If you want a ranger, just take a level 5 warrior and add 10 levels of wizard.
You want a paladin? Just level it up to level 3, then level up as a warrior.
You're fucking up if you do it otherwise.
You should probably only have charisma 3 in all your characters for maximun efficiency.

Fuck all that. Give me back my traditional rangers and paladins and specialist mages.
[spoilers]fuck bards so much[/spoilers]

4th edition had certainly better battles and was probably better overall.
Most kids today would prefer a million times playing WoW over pen&dice role-playing and that's the real problem.

Anyway

I only played it because it was the only Infinity game I was missing.
The best part of it were the references to the previous Icewind Dale game.
Some main quests were very well done, the one from Act 1 was very well developed.
The ending is very vanilla. IWD1's ending was very impressive from a narrative point of view.
Same goes for the music, I still believe the original Icewind Dale has the best videogame soundtrack of history.

IWD2 was 3e, not 3.5, so it's ambiguous which you're referring to.

IWD-HoW had some 3e content, but it did use 2e supplementary rules for up to level 30 benefits, BG2 denied you those, gave that crazy stuff instead.

But, since you feel the way you do, be sure to take a look at this! >"muwahahaha!"

So, that's due to lead us back to the prospect in the original post, like a quasi-backport from IWD2 to an older engine.

Going beyond intended D&D levels is also why a Druid's required experience for leveling is so weird in BG2. Druids level super fast, then slow down hard, then plateau. Both Druid and Fighter level 14 require 1,500,000 experience. Druid level 15 requries 3,000,000 total experience. Fighter level 15 requires 1,750,000 experience.
I don't know why they didn't ultimately change their progression once ToB was released.


Does that also port over all the NPC audible dialogue? I see Irenicus is named "Mage", so I'm not optimistic.

Could there be any point to this?
gibberlings3.net/readmes/readme-iwd_in_bg2.html
After all, IWD-EE automatically does exactly that AFAIK.


i doesn't look all that bad, apparently stuff tends to transfer quite intactly. Doesn't Irenicus simply show as "mage" initially because you don't actually know who he is?

Joinable NPC are probably unfinished though…
shsforums.net/topic/34232-link-to-a-list-of-all-iwd2-mods-broken-links-repaired/#entry398247

That part is a cutscene that hides the UI, so I don't remember. I'd have to start the game and then scroll up the chat box to see if he's named. I won't be able to do that until I get home hours from now.

...

Well, I stand corrected.

Such a thing makes games expandable in an orderly way, and worth working on in terms of paltform accessibility extension.

I just realized the reason why I never played Neverwinter Nights was because I never liked the 3rd edition.

most of the good custom modules (the only reason people played NWN, honestly) buried the 3e mechanics under whatever mechanics they added.
When our group ran NWN games, it was using it like Roll20 only combat was semi-automated, and I tweaked the hell out of everything to the point that it didn't really play like 3e anyway. And a lot of people played persistent worlds (the NWN community name for MUDs) where everything was tweaked so much that the spells and stats had the same names but didn't work like vanilla at all.

for me it was the shitty graphics, I can't stand 3d that bad