Larian Banner: Baldur's Gate Patch 9
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
#947090 13/08/24 04:19 PM
Joined: Aug 2024
L
apprentice
OP Offline
apprentice
L
Joined: Aug 2024
Alright, I'm not really a "grognard" - I don't think the game went downhill when they got rid of THAC0 or anything, but I have played a long time on tabletop (since 1st ed.) and on PC (Eye of the Beholder on my 486) and seem to have been swept up by the fandom. It happens. It's been a funny old first playthrough - not blind because I'd watched Devora Wilde among others - and apparently I'm Mister Average for starting as a Paladin, odd because I've not played one in D&D before, ever. I'm also Mister Average for romancing Shadowheart. Call me old fashioned, but I do like a girl without flame emitting holes in her shoulders and I can't look at the cover of the Fiend Folio and think, "Potential romantic partner." Because of this prior experience, I started on Balanced rather than the easiest Explorer.
I never recruited Astarion, because as a Paladin I felt I couldn't hang out with a vampire.
I never recruited Wyll - didn't want another squishy spellcaster. Also, we didn't have such things as Warlocks back in the day.
I never met the owlbear and it's cub. It seemed too dangerous at low level.
Mayrina died because the Hag teleported her into the middle of our group and then fireballed everyone immediately. Tsk!
I lost Jaheira and only realised when she had become a little pouch the following day.
All the important fights seem to involve retreat to a defensible position, after ungrouping Gale lest he get instantly shot/stamped to death. I was quite pround, after a dummy run, of killing off Enver Gortash in two rounds. This was balanced by my utter incompetence at rescuing the gnomes in the submersible. I kept getting everyone lost and I had to save scum several times.
Zevlor died in the final courtyard battle (Nooooo!) before I decided the best option was for Gale to sacrifice himself at the end.
So when it came for the final campfire reunion, there was hardly anyone there: Gale dead, Karlach dead (sob!) just Halsin and sort of virtual Lae'zel alongside myself and Shadowheart.
I will playthrough again, probably with clones of some of my old D&D characters, or as near as I can get.

Joined: May 2023
B
veteran
Offline
veteran
B
Joined: May 2023
Thank you for the chuckles :), about the girls in particular.
Having missed everything between BG2 and BG3 EA is also had much re-learning to do. I agree that THAC0 missing is unlammented. Same as -3 AC being better AC than 5 AC.

Last edited by Buba68; 13/08/24 04:30 PM.
Joined: Feb 2024
member
Offline
member
Joined: Feb 2024
Congrats on your playthrough! It was a chap from my old AD&D group from almost 25 ago who invited me to play Baldur's Gate 3. I played neither BG 1 or 2, because I didn't have a proper gaming PC back then, and I tried to avoid any spoilers for BG3 to keep suspense and sense of wonder. My current group never switched to 3e or later D&D versions, not because of ThAC0 or BAB semantics, but because there is no compatibility for existing campaigns, like when TSR went from 1e > 2e. The combat systems lack finesse and realism compared to 2e Player's Option, although we did adapt the F/R/W saves. There were major changes to the campaign world that not only suffered from poor writing, but also lacked any attempt of an explanation beyond "Vecna destroyed the multiverse", e.g. the Forgotten Realms suddenly had the Greyhawk/standard elf subtypes instead of sun, moon and green elves, etc. Also, about half of the spellbook was recategorised as transmutations because the new owners apparently didn't understand the schools of magic. Those were just too many construction sites to justify buying into 3rd edition. You can criticise the TSR editions for being way more restrictive and less rewarding to players. Derived from tabletop wargames and heavily inspired by the Lord of the Rings, magic is rare, and even a simple healing potion is hard to come by. TSR's stance was that this is necessary to balance the game. One often heard line of criticism with later editions is lack of balance in higher levels. Luckily, video games, series, and movies showed us a better way. We therefore kept the 2nd Edition rules and FR-campaign setting but expanded and modified them a lot. Magic becoming more readily available and people coming to terms with things like flying ships and public teleport areas in cities actually served as a nice campaign background. We've advanced the campaign timeline from 1367 to 1375 in our parallel-universe Abeir-Toril.

After enjoying the movie Honor Among Thieves, it was due time to give 5e a chance. It was also a good opportunity to catch up on githyanki/illithid matters, since I always liked the scenario, but never had a good use for it in my own campaigns. One really nice experience early on in BG3 was that it actually felt like it's 120 years later. There are way more tieflings, half-orcs are more accepted, githyanki don't get attacked on sight in a human settlement and all the high fantasy and steampunk aspects also felt like progress and natural development instead of a break of continuity.

Joined: Aug 2024
L
apprentice
OP Offline
apprentice
L
Joined: Aug 2024
Thank you! I thought I would like 3rd ed. when it came out, but actually running it was a complete pain in the neck because of all the finnicky rules for various things which needed the books to be referred to so often. Ignoring the Edition Which Shall Not Be Named, 5th ran much more smoothly, although combats can be too long if the DM's not careful. It's interesting that people have taken BG3 variant rules and started adding them to their tabletop games.

Joined: Feb 2024
member
Offline
member
Joined: Feb 2024
We were so positively hyped before 3e launched. Also playing Shadowrun 3 and Star Wars D6, we had really hoped for an (A)D&D that caught up on some things more recent games did better while keeping the old strengths. Since I'm converting my Tav to 2e, I will definitely have to convert some of the Larian spells as well to keep the feel.

Joined: May 2023
B
veteran
Offline
veteran
B
Joined: May 2023
5e does seem simpler and faster. But I'd homerule it to hell and back for Old School flavour - no Warlocks, Wizards get metamagic from Sorcerers back, clarify whether Paladins are LG knights in shining armour OR Eldritch Knights but with Divine and not Arcane spells etc.

Hmm - or maybe I'd play somewhat homeruled Warhammer RPG 2ed ...

Last edited by Buba68; 16/08/24 02:27 PM.
Joined: Feb 2024
member
Offline
member
Joined: Feb 2024
Oh, 2e actually had Warlocks. They were called Shamans back then, but the idea of mortals getting their spells from powerful entities that weren't gods goes back to 1e at least. In my campaign, paladins are paladins in the classic sense, but I did allow "Champions of [portfolio]" which one of my players found in a 3e/d20 book. They are rather rare, but could be like the hero of a small local area, champion of a faith, or crusaders trying to bring their civilisation over a wilderness area or wipe it from it. The powers differ from portfolio to portfolio.


Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5