@Sordak : I am going to assume your comments are aimed at me, but it is difficult to be sure as you did not choose to say,
Originally Posted by Sordak
why do people who havent played OS think that it has infinity engine encounters. it doesnt, theres no trash encounters.
You must have some superpower that let's you know who has played which games to make such a comment...
Games made with the Infinity Engine had a variety of simple to complex encounters, some I liked, some I didn't. The quality of the encounters was more dependent on the game designers than the engine, per se. Particularly, low level encounters in 2e rules of BG1 would tend towards the simple, and I agree that the designers could have done a better job. However, these are now very old games, made at a time when video games were less polished in many ways, and when the market did not sustain heavy investment in game production, so I do not judge them by comparison to modern games.
I have played D:OS, and have mentioned such in other comments. More accurately, I have completed the first map based around the town ( I forget the name ), and moved on to the second map with the forest ( I forget the name ). As you can probably tell from my lack of detailed recall, the game did not make a hugely positive impression on me ( although it may just be approaching senility ). The engine seems to have good basic rendering and media handling, the camera handling through the environment was also good ( although I dislike fixed orientation axonometric projections ), and the rigid and deformable modelling was all to a good, modern standard. The rest, unfortunately, was not especially memorable, or sophisticated. Lacking any real motivation from the story, the repetitive and very slow combat means I have lost interest for the moment.
I have no doubt I will eventually finish it at some point. I do not think it is a bad game, particularly if its design choices mesh with your personal preferences, and like the Infinity Engine games, I will not judge it against high-budget AAA games. It was made with a limited budget, to cater for a particular market segment, and seems to have done well; that segment probably just does not include me.
Originally Posted by Sordak
also a little fix on the initiative thing. wrong, the character with the higher initiative WOULD attack since he can charge on top of a movement, thats why the charge action exists
I do not know which rule set you are used to using; presumably 3.5, or you have house rules ( D&D has always encouraged you to use and ignore whatever best suits your group ). However, for the purposes of the discussion with @Brent2410, and because we are discussing a game that will implement 5e rules, I assumed that standard 5e would be the correct choice. I do not play PnP any more, but the 5e rules are freely available from WotC, and it would appear that the charge action has been removed.
My comment did specify 5e rules, and did note that a double-distance move was possible ( the "Dash" action ). Were a charge action to still be available, it would certainly add another option to the scenario.