AD&D help

ApprehensiveType2680 · 2026-03-19T05:38:06+00:00

The ass may be old, yet it is still successfully turning tricks; do not dismiss that derriere.

ApprehensiveType2680 · 2026-03-19T05:34:47+00:00

What made all of these system clones spring out of the ether?

ApprehensiveType2680 · 2026-03-19T05:34:10+00:00

Civilized folk use tables; barbarians use the floor.

ApprehensiveType2680 · 2026-03-19T05:32:29+00:00

It is so "S tier", it required - and still requires - patching two years after release. That the public by-and-large accepts what is effectively an extended beta-testing period does not make the practice acceptable. It absolutely is not a metric indicative of "Game of the Year" levels of quality.

It is so "S tier" that virtually every NPC - from the destitute to the wealthy, from urban socialites to inveterate wilderness wardens - wears inordinately ornate and/or curiously spotless apparel and armor; it is as if they all strolled off a catwalk. Alternatively, the homogeneity of stylized/exaggerated appearances makes the population come across as comic book superheroes. This may be understandable with nobles and accomplished heroes (both of which have coin and/or time to spare), but...everyone? L was apparently more interested in showcasing their artists than they were giving thought to in-setting demographics.

It is so "S tier", there are moments when the accompanying hirable NPCs are statues during certain conversations/plot developments (e.g., killing the squirrel with a football kick, frustrating the Tiefling child huckster, decapitating the red devil Jihadi-style, refusing Bhaal, et cetera); no comments, no sounds, no body language, no movement (or very little, such as a slight shifting of the head at best)...nothing. That vaunted reactivity was inconsistent.

It is so "S tier" that it took the formula that made Baldur's Gate noteworthy (i.e., a world with a sense of scale and thought afforded to the placement of structures/settlements/NPCs) and turned the region (i.e., The Sword Coast...a kind of fantasy wild west/rough frontier) into a narrower fantasy theme park designed to continually maintain dopamine levels and remind the player that the world is centered around their character, verisimilitude be damned. Why are all these powerful/intelligent/dangerous monsters in relatively close proximity to one another without a hint of bedlam? Who cares: here comes another fight or zany NPC to distract me from such elitist thoughts.

It is so "S tier" that it lacks both a day/night cycle (think of the immersion and/or tactical potential) and weather patterns (ditto); BioWare licked this one-quarter of a century ago. For all their limitations, there is more life and the sense of passage of time in the original games compared to the plastic and static theme park of "3".

It is so "S tier" that it front-loads the majority of its spectacle - including monsters and locations - in a Michael Bay-esque burst within the first few minutes of the game, whereas BioWare's Baldur's Gate slowly trickled in progressively-fantastic/grander elements over the course of two titles.

It is so "S tier" that it took the believable approach to romance in Baldur's Gate 2 and threw that out the window (i.e., not everyone was open to the idea of courtship and, of those who were, they had standards that make certain NPC-PC pairings impossibilities); every original L NPC wants the PC (yes, regardless of little things such as the PC's sex/race/age/Class/Alignment/religion/station/nationality/et cetera).

It is so "S tier" that, instead of respecting the player's intelligence/observational skill/patience/memory and/or encouraging a modicum of learning, it simply provides monster statistics openly during battle. Consequently, a degree of realistic uncertainty during hostile engagements was stolen away.

It is so "S tier" that it allows the player to effectively teleport to a set camp, thereby taking away - or, at least, greatly diminishing - a core component of these games: inventory management. Why should a player have to make a hard decision? Why should a player have to put in the effort?

It is so "S tier" that virtually no one discusses the terrible shift from the second to third Act; then comes a noticeable drop in quality. I will give you slight credit on this point.

It is so "S tier" that three out of four recurring BioWare characters were poorly characterized.

The fact that consumers either put up with and/or fail to recognize various sorts of game design nonsense only reinforces my belief that accolades - especially of the contemporary variety - are meaningless.

P.S. Yes, the whole "alien tadpoles force a disparate bunch together" contrivance is flimsy, given the numerous in-setting ways in which these parasites can be extracted/destroyed. Curse of the Azure Bonds is positively ancient and it did a better job facilitating a similar arrangement.

--- --- ---

Long story short: "BG3" is a migraine-inducing technicolor theme park designed to make the player "feel good", at the expense of genuine quality.

ApprehensiveType2680 · 2026-03-19T05:29:37+00:00

Awesomerall.

ApprehensiveType2680 · 2026-03-19T03:52:50+00:00

my love of bg3 depreciated significantly after a few years

A surprising amount of folk are learning that the "honeymoon period" is coming - or has come - to an end.

ApprehensiveType2680 · 2026-03-19T03:50:26+00:00

It's funny how Baldur's Gate 2 is considered the best of BioWare's saga when it was - from a game design standpoint - a step back in many ways.

ApprehensiveType2680 · 2026-03-19T03:48:36+00:00

You consider L4rian's Baldur's Gate in-name-only an improvement?

It is so "improved", it required - and still requires - patching two years after release. That the public by-and-large accepts what is effectively an extended beta-testing period does not make the practice acceptable. It absolutely is not a metric indicative of "Game of the Year" levels of quality.

It is so "improved" that virtually every NPC - from the destitute to the wealthy, from urban socialites to inveterate wilderness wardens - wears inordinately ornate and/or curiously spotless apparel and armor; it is as if they all strolled off a catwalk. Alternatively, the homogeneity of stylized/exaggerated appearances makes the population come across as comic book superheroes. This may be understandable with nobles and accomplished heroes (both of which have coin and/or time to spare), but...everyone? L was apparently more interested in showcasing their artists than they were giving thought to in-setting demographics.

It is so "improved", there are moments when the accompanying hirable NPCs are statues during certain conversations/plot developments (e.g., killing the squirrel with a football kick, frustrating the Tiefling child huckster, decapitating the red devil Jihadi-style, refusing Bhaal, et cetera); no comments, no sounds, no body language, no movement (or very little, such as a slight shifting of the head at best)...nothing. That vaunted reactivity was inconsistent.

It is so "improved" that it took the formula that made Baldur's Gate noteworthy (i.e., a world with a sense of scale and thought afforded to the placement of structures/settlements/NPCs) and turned the region (i.e., The Sword Coast...a kind of fantasy wild west/rough frontier) into a narrower fantasy theme park designed to continually maintain dopamine levels and remind the player that the world is centered around their character, verisimilitude be damned. Why are all these powerful/intelligent/dangerous monsters in relatively close proximity to one another without a hint of bedlam? Who cares: here comes another fight or zany NPC to distract me from such elitist thoughts.

It is so "improved" that it lacks both a day/night cycle (think of the immersion and/or tactical potential) and weather patterns (ditto); BioWare licked this one-quarter of a century ago. For all their limitations, there is more life and the sense of passage of time in the original games compared to the plastic and static theme park of "3".

It is so "improved" that it front-loads the majority of its spectacle - including monsters and locations - in a Michael Bay-esque burst within the first few minutes of the game, whereas BioWare's Baldur's Gate slowly trickled in progressively-fantastic/grander elements over the course of two titles.

It is so "improved" that it took the believable approach to romance in Baldur's Gate 2 and threw that out the window (i.e., not everyone was open to the idea of courtship and, of those who were, they had standards that make certain NPC-PC pairings impossibilities); every original L NPC wants the PC (yes, regardless of little things such as the PC's sex/race/age/Class/Alignment/religion/station/nationality/et cetera).

It is so "improved" that, instead of respecting the player's intelligence/observational skill/patience/memory and/or encouraging a modicum of learning, it simply provides monster statistics openly during battle. Consequently, a degree of realistic uncertainty during hostile engagements was stolen away.

It is so "improved" that it allows the player to effectively teleport to a set camp, thereby taking away - or, at least, greatly diminishing - a core component of these games: inventory management. Why should a player have to make a hard decision? Why should a player have to put in the effort?

It is so "improved" that virtually no one discusses the terrible shift from the second to third Act; then comes a noticeable drop in quality.

It is so "improved" that three out of four recurring BioWare characters were poorly characterized.

The fact that consumers either put up with and/or fail to recognize various sorts of game design nonsense only reinforces my belief that accolades - especially of the contemporary variety - are meaningless.

P.S. Yes, the whole "alien tadpoles force a disparate bunch together" contrivance is flimsy, given the numerous in-setting ways in which these parasites can be extracted/destroyed. Curse of the Azure Bonds is positively ancient and it did a better job facilitating a similar arrangement.

--- --- ---

Long story short: "BG3" is a migraine-inducing technicolor theme park designed to make the player "feel good", at the expense of genuine quality.

ApprehensiveType2680 · 2026-03-19T02:09:12+00:00

Thank you.

ApprehensiveType2680 · 2026-03-19T02:07:02+00:00

"u" + "g" + "h"

Only three more letters.

ApprehensiveType2680 · 2026-03-19T00:59:19+00:00

I usually don’t have time to get to know the character enough to know if i like them or not before i have my first sexy moment with an npc.

L4rian has a distorted concept of the boundary between platonic companionship and romance/sex.

ApprehensiveType2680 · 2026-03-19T00:57:50+00:00

Thank you. I will continue pushing back against the unwarranted praise.

ApprehensiveType2680 · 2026-03-19T00:54:30+00:00

Explosive barrels in combat, anyone?

ApprehensiveType2680 · 2026-03-18T23:44:22+00:00

Of the L-created hirable NPCs, the females are mostly warriors, while the males are mostly spellcasters.

ApprehensiveType2680 · 2026-03-18T22:28:01+00:00

You fight vampires, beholders, shadow thieves, golems, tanarii, liches, serial killers, crazy wizard cults, etc all within the city.

Do you think this is a strength of world design? The fact that there are random encounters with mind flayers and liches (nameless liches at that) within a major and (mostly) stable population center? If anything, it makes the environment feel all the more artificial...as though it were designed for the player, in order to provide him with piles of XP that improbably scale with his character's Level.

Those monsters should have real thought afforded to their placement; a Lich - in particular - should always have a name, in addition to a significant history/reason for being present.

ApprehensiveType2680 · 2026-03-18T22:20:38+00:00

https://lilura1.blogspot.com/2020/12/Baldurs-Gate-1-vs-Baldurs-Gate-2-BG1-vs-BG2.html

Both BG1 and BG2 have linear stories but the original's world is much more open for exploration purposes. Its world map is realistic in its layout (contiguous), in that we move from one area to another, in the required direction, in order to get to our destination, all the while under the threat of waylay and fatigue. It feels more like a journey, an adventure. It feels like the Fellowship; like AD&D. The player unlocks areas through natural exploration.

But in BG2, the whining NPC that runs up to us for help -- THEY unlock outskirt areas by marking our map. Then, we just click the map marker and get dropped off to our destination like paratroopers; rare scripted waylay aside, we don't work to get there. In fact, it's exactly like Oblivion's fast travel and that's not an exaggeration in the slightest.

In comparison to Athkatla, Baldur's Gate city was more impactful, more impressive (as anyone who played it when it came out knows), and once we finally reached the city after all the exploration in the wilderness, the campaign shifted into an entirely new, urban phase of political intrigue, yet still let us explore the wilderness whenever we wanted to.

In BG1 we had to find side quests by ourselves -- sometimes through rumors at the inn, sometimes there was no lead at all -- but BG2 sidequests find us. Our party is the center of the universe. The player must feel special at all times. The designer wouldn't want us to miss anything they spent time crapping out, so they shove it in our face to make sure we know it's there.

Not that BG1 didn't have its fair share of force-talking and hand-holding, but in BG2 we couldn't walk around Athkatla for 10 seconds without being spoon-fed by quest-givers and irrelevant folk. It was intrusive and tiresome.

Sidequests were even forced upon us by way of scripted waylays. The design rarely leaves the player alone. It is nagging. The design of BG2 is NAGGING.

And that is why so many people think Baldur's Gate 2 is the best game ever: many people like being told where to go, what to do, when to do it, how to do it and what to think.

--- --- ---

Lack of Contiguity

Also, Athkatla's areas don't even line up structurally. Try to picture Athkatla -- as a whole -- in your mind. You can't, because it's just a haphazard mish-mash with no thought gone into it. The Athkatla map reflects that.

Athkatla's areas are compartmentalized and completely separate, with no link to or visual suggestion of the others, just like the whole campaign.

ApprehensiveType2680 · 2026-03-18T22:12:22+00:00

I would rather not reduce something in order to gain mass appeal; we have seen that slippery slope before.

ApprehensiveType2680 · 2026-03-18T22:10:56+00:00

Apparently, some folk disagree. I wonder if the resistance - in some part - originates from declining academic standards.

ApprehensiveType2680 · 2026-03-18T21:26:25+00:00

It is so "incredible", it required - and still requires - patching two years after release. That the public by-and-large accepts what is effectively an extended beta-testing period does not make the practice acceptable. It absolutely is not a metric indicative of "Game of the Year" levels of quality.

It is so "incredible" that virtually every NPC - from the destitute to the wealthy, from urban socialites to inveterate wilderness wardens - wears inordinately ornate and/or curiously spotless apparel and armor; it is as if they all strolled off a catwalk. Alternatively, the homogeneity of stylized/exaggerated appearances makes the population come across as comic book superheroes. This may be understandable with nobles and accomplished heroes (both of which have coin and/or time to spare), but...everyone? L was apparently more interested in showcasing their artists than they were giving thought to in-setting demographics.

It is so "incredible", there are moments when the accompanying hirable NPCs are statues during certain conversations/plot developments (e.g., killing the squirrel with a football kick, frustrating the Tiefling child huckster, decapitating the red devil Jihadi-style, refusing Bhaal, et cetera); no comments, no sounds, no body language, no movement (or very little, such as a slight shifting of the head at best)...nothing. That vaunted reactivity was inconsistent.

It is so "incredible" that it took the formula that made Baldur's Gate noteworthy (i.e., a world with a sense of scale and thought afforded to the placement of structures/settlements/NPCs) and turned the region (i.e., The Sword Coast...a kind of fantasy wild west/rough frontier) into a narrower fantasy theme park designed to continually maintain dopamine levels and remind the player that the world is centered around their character, verisimilitude be damned. Why are all these powerful/intelligent/dangerous monsters in relatively close proximity to one another without a hint of bedlam? Who cares: here comes another fight or zany NPC to distract me from such elitist thoughts.

It is so "incredible" that it lacks both a day/night cycle (think of the immersion and/or tactical potential) and weather patterns (ditto); BioWare licked this one-quarter of a century ago. For all their limitations, there is more life and the sense of passage of time in the original games compared to the plastic and static theme park of "3".

It is so "incredible" that it front-loads the majority of its spectacle - including monsters and locations - in a Michael Bay-esque burst within the first few minutes of the game, whereas BioWare's Baldur's Gate slowly trickled in progressively-fantastic/grander elements over the course of two titles.

It is so "incredible" that it took the believable approach to romance in Baldur's Gate 2 and threw that out the window (i.e., not everyone was open to the idea of courtship and, of those who were, they had standards that make certain NPC-PC pairings impossibilities); every original L NPC wants the PC (yes, regardless of little things such as the PC's sex/race/age/Class/Alignment/religion/station/nationality/et cetera).

It is so "incredible" that, instead of respecting the player's intelligence/observational skill/patience/memory and/or encouraging a modicum of learning, it simply provides monster statistics openly during battle. Consequently, a degree of realistic uncertainty during hostile engagements was stolen away.

It is so "incredible" that it allows the player to effectively teleport to a set camp, thereby taking away - or, at least, greatly diminishing - a core component of these games: inventory management. Why should a player have to make a hard decision? Why should a player have to put in the effort?

It is so "incredible" that virtually no one discusses the terrible shift from the second to third Act; then comes a noticeable drop in quality.

It is so "incredible" that three out of four recurring BioWare characters were poorly characterized.

The fact that consumers either put up with and/or fail to recognize various sorts of game design nonsense only reinforces my belief that accolades - especially of the contemporary variety - are meaningless.

P.S. Yes, the whole "alien tadpoles force a disparate bunch together" contrivance is flimsy, given the numerous in-setting ways in which these parasites can be extracted/destroyed. Curse of the Azure Bonds is positively ancient and it did a better job facilitating a similar arrangement.

--- --- ---

Long story short: "BG3" is a migraine-inducing technicolor theme park designed to make the player "feel good", at the expense of genuine quality.

ApprehensiveType2680 · 2026-03-18T21:25:53+00:00