Temple of Elemental Evil (Video Game) [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

Myrmex

2009-10-02, 04:32 AM

It's very buggy; I recommend the Circle of Eight patch. Fixes a lot of issues, adds more content, and ups the level cap from 10 to 20.

It was fun for a while, but it started getting very tedius. The radial menus system was a bit of a chore, and having to prepare spells was so, so painful. Just about managing anything was extraordinarly painful. Identify potions, for instance, and you know how often potion comes up on loot tables at levels 1 to 10.

It's worth 5 bucks, for sure. Just don't expect anything too amazing.

Also, stay away from fear effects. A monster fleeing across the map means you have to chase it, which takes FOREVER, thanks to the turn based system.

Avilan the Grey

2009-10-02, 04:56 AM

Never played it; It's supposed to be fairly close to the Module, but buggy as heck and having other problems as well (like squares instead of hexes, which means diagonal movement is much MUCH faster than straight X or Y.

Gundato

2009-10-02, 11:25 AM

I played it, and loved it. But my complaint was that it was too much like playing a good D&D module/adventure with a new GM.

The plot is very linear, for the most part. You have some freedom, but you really feel railroaded.
Sure, most of the CRPGs are linear as hell, but they don't FEEL linear. ToEE did.

It feels great to make a new tactic for a battle (web and fireball is obscene). But, because the battles are optimized for almost any party, that same tactic is going to work on maybe 95% of the enemies you fight.
Whereas with a better GM (or another CRPG, like BG), the battles can either be catered to your party (the GM knows what you guys can do, and what you can't. So he/she pushes you to try different tactics) or there can actually be battles that some parties just shouldn't try (A team of pure epic Fighters against pretty much any epic caster).

Jeivar

2009-10-02, 12:00 PM

Geez. I TRIED to play it a few years back, but the tedium, terrible voice acting (and I mean Resident Evil bad), boring plot, and frustrating combat drove me off.
Plus . . . there were a few moments where I just scratched my head at what exactly the devs were thinking. The one that really stands out was when my Paladin chatted with a barmaid, and I found that I had the option of flirting with her. She was a bit shy at first, but came around and warmed up to me. And this caused my Paladin to FALL.

WTF??!! If that dialogue was meant to be harassing and creepy it was in dire need of a beta-reader. And she was single, so it's not like I was suggesting an affair. Just . . . what?
I dunno. The Pally was female, so maybe some puritan on the dev team opposed to homosexuality, or maybe they got Paladins mixed up with neutered catholic monks.

Though to be fair, ToEE also provided one of my all-time favorite moments in gaming: Some punk teenager had stolen an object I needed to fetch, and he wanted me to do a little quest before he'd hand it over. I was in a hurry and irritated; I selected my Half-Orc Barbarian, set his attacks on "non-lethal" and CLOBBERED that little sh*t into unconsciousness and took the object from him.
Not a lot of games let you take the Gordian approach like that. :smallbiggrin:

Morty

2009-10-02, 01:10 PM

It could have been a great transition of 3.5 D&D to a computer game, but it's boggled down by bugs and incomprehensible storyline. While playing it, I felt like I was walking around smacking monsters for no real reason.
And an example of a bug in the game is that penalties to attributes stack. So two Rays of Enfeeblement cast on a single enemy can result in -12 to Str.
All in all, it's not a bad game, but could be a lot better, and perhaps it's more enjoyable if patched and if you pay a lot of attention to the storyline so you don't drop it somewhere.

Guancyto

2009-10-02, 03:10 PM

The one that really stands out was when my Paladin chatted with a barmaid, and I found that I had the option of flirting with her. She was a bit shy at first, but came around and warmed up to me. And this caused my Paladin to FALL.

Ohh, you missed some of the best parts of having a Paladin along.

Do some work for a nebbishy not-really-evil guy so he'll take you to the leader of the bad guys? Doesn't matter that it was sabotaging the much-more-evil enemies. YOU FALL. Play along with an assassination job offer so you can protect the target? FALL. Participate in a drinking contest? FALL.

I wasn't at all ashamed to cheat in more gold to pay for his continual Atonement spells, especially seeing as how it got exponentially more expensive every time.

I played the game a fair bit and really did enjoy some parts. It's definitely worth $5, but not more. And the Co8 mod is a must.

tribble

2009-10-02, 04:55 PM

Plus . . . there were a few moments where I just scratched my head at what exactly the devs were thinking. The one that really stands out was when my Paladin chatted with a barmaid, and I found that I had the option of flirting with her. She was a bit shy at first, but came around and warmed up to me. And this caused my Paladin to FALL.

WTF??!! If that dialogue was meant to be harassing and creepy it was in dire need of a beta-reader. And she was single, so it's not like I was suggesting an affair. Just . . . what?
I dunno. The Pally was female, so maybe some puritan on the dev team opposed to homosexuality, or maybe they got Paladins mixed up with neutered catholic monks.

well, paladins are supposed to be lawful; maybe you were teetering on the ethical edge of lawful enough and not lawful enough and the flirting pushed you over into "too chaotic"?

Gundato

2009-10-03, 08:58 AM

I dunno. The Pally was female, so maybe some puritan on the dev team opposed to homosexuality, or maybe they got Paladins mixed up with neutered catholic monks.

Uhm, probably not, considering that the cut content contained a brothel with homosexual workers.

But thanks for assuming that every (somewhat strict) application of the rules is fueled by bigotry. Hopefully you are just overly sensitive, and not projecting your own feelings on the actions of others (see what I just did there?).

One_Wolf

2009-10-03, 09:38 AM

I played this a long time ago. What I particularly enjoyed was the "ironman" mode. (I think that's what they called it) In that mode there was no saveing and loading old saved games. You could quit and it would save your progress, but you could only continue from there and no going back.

It made character death more meaningful. I know modes like this are generally unpopular in video games, especially since if all characters died you had to start over, but I really thought it made an otherwise ho-hum game way more exciting.

Starbuck_II

2009-10-03, 09:55 AM

Recently found the game (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Temple_of_Elemental_Evil_(video_game)) online for under $5. Years ago a friend mentioned that he had played it and liked it. And I'm a big fan of turn based rpg, and D&D in particular. Have you played it? Is it worth it? Discuss.

Where did you find it? I've always wanted to try it.

Avilan the Grey

2009-10-03, 10:23 AM

But thanks for assuming that every (somewhat strict) application of the rules is fueled by bigotry. Hopefully you are just overly sensitive, and not projecting your own feelings on the actions of others (see what I just did there?).

Actually I am entirely convinced that is the case. Why else would flirting be considered evil? Or chaotic?
(Paladins having sex is not a reason for them to fall. Single paladins, flirting with a person that is also single, and not underage, is not going to experience ANY alignment change at all. So the only reason this is in the game is because someone involved in making the game had personal reasons against this).

(Edit: Well I forgot about the other option: Extreme Stupidity. I know, I know. "Never contribute to malice that what can be explained by stupidity".)

Gundato

2009-10-03, 11:28 AM

Actually I am entirely convinced that is the case. Why else would flirting be considered evil? Or chaotic?
(Paladins having sex is not a reason for them to fall. Single paladins, flirting with a person that is also single, and not underage, is not going to experience ANY alignment change at all. So the only reason this is in the game is because someone involved in making the game had personal reasons against this).

Chaotic. As countless Paladin debates always seem to forget, you don't need evil: Just Chaos (or no Chaos, just Evil. or just flipping off the deity who likes you)

Now, it has been a few years since I played this game. But flirting is generally more associated with chaotic characters than Lawful Knights, who are "supposed to" use courtly love (which, to be fair, was the equivalent of humping a woman's leg. but whatever :p). And maybe in PnP you could have gotten away with it, but it is apparent that the devs perceived that as looking for a one-night stand.

As for alignment change: Please keep in mind that one of the biggest problems with this game was that it was too faithful to PnP. See, in the Pen and Paper game, your alignment is generally not listed as Lawful (95) Good (78). It is much more about what the GM thinks appropriate. It has the "problem" of allowing one action to make a Paladin fall, but it has the bonus of avoiding situations such as "Well, I'll make sure I am really good so that I can get away with setting that guy on fire and stealing his lute"

Again, it has NOTHING to do with bigotry (aside from that which people see in it). It is just a much harsher application of the rules, and an example of why people always complain that Paladins have sticks up their butts. The stereotypical Paladin kind of has a zero-tolerance policy for chaotic or evil acts. House-rules and GMs tend to downplay this, but house-rules and GMs are all about bending the rules to make things enjoyable.

Avilan the Grey

2009-10-03, 03:24 PM

Chaotic. As countless Paladin debates always seem to forget, you don't need evil: Just Chaos (or no Chaos, just Evil. or just flipping off the deity who likes you)

Now, it has been a few years since I played this game. But flirting is generally more associated with chaotic characters than Lawful Knights, who are "supposed to" use courtly love (which, to be fair, was the equivalent of humping a woman's leg. but whatever :p). And maybe in PnP you could have gotten away with it, but it is apparent that the devs perceived that as looking for a one-night stand.

Now please explain to me how lawful characters continue to exist, if the gene pool dies out every generation (or are all lawful characters entering arranged marriages?)?

It might not be bigotry, but it definitely is a confused mix up between D&D religion and IRL religion. I am not getting into a IRL religious debate (especially not on this forum, where it is not allowed) but I can say this much: IRL religion != Forgotten Realms religion.

Besides, I am getting tired of explaining that Lawful != Robotic. A lawful character can, without having his alignment affected drink with moderation.* He can flirt, as long as it's either harmless OR he is in serious pursuit of the other person.** He can have unmarried sex, as long as he is not sleeping around. And many other things.

The stereotypical Paladin kind of has a zero-tolerance policy for chaotic or evil acts. House-rules and GMs tend to downplay this, but house-rules and GMs are all about bending the rules to make things enjoyable.

There is a reason why stereotypical is not the same as correct, and it has nothing to do with house-ruling.

*The drinking contest is a more acceptable reason to Fall than the flirting. At least if it would have been the last straw, although the way this game is written there are apparently only a "first straw", which is also the last...

** This game seems to be more like the husband who blames his wife for cheating if she smiles at the guy behind the counter at Best Buy.

oyhr

2009-10-03, 03:31 PM

It made character death more meaningful. I know modes like this are generally unpopular in video games, especially since if all characters died you had to start over, but I really thought it made an otherwise ho-hum game way more exciting.

It's certainly popular enough to warrant it being in every roguelike game in existence.

Guancyto

2009-10-03, 03:46 PM

:smalleek:

I didn't mean to start another Paladin debate, I was just pointing out some extremely silly parts of the game for them.

Although now that we're on the subject... :smallamused:

Chaotic. As countless Paladin debates always seem to forget, you don't need evil: Just Chaos (or no Chaos, just Evil. or just flipping off the deity who likes you)

Let me say this as simply as possible: no. You don't fall for a Chaotic act, you fall for becoming nonlawful. The difference between them is like the difference between being playfully punched in the shoulder and being beaten to death.

Myrmex

2009-10-03, 03:59 PM

Geez. I TRIED to play it a few years back, but the tedium, terrible voice acting (and I mean Resident Evil bad), boring plot, and frustrating combat drove me off.
Plus . . . there were a few moments where I just scratched my head at what exactly the devs were thinking. The one that really stands out was when my Paladin chatted with a barmaid, and I found that I had the option of flirting with her. She was a bit shy at first, but came around and warmed up to me. And this caused my Paladin to FALL.

WTF??!! If that dialogue was meant to be harassing and creepy it was in dire need of a beta-reader. And she was single, so it's not like I was suggesting an affair. Just . . . what?
I dunno. The Pally was female, so maybe some puritan on the dev team opposed to homosexuality, or maybe they got Paladins mixed up with neutered catholic monks.

If you have a character in your party that gets into a drinking contest and have a paladin in the party, the paladin will also fall. Bizarrely, you can butcher the ENTIRE town of Nulb without any problem, since everyone there is either neutral or evil.

You can also marry a gay pirate in Nulb.

Gundato

2009-10-03, 04:27 PM

Now please explain to me how lawful characters continue to exist, if the gene pool dies out every generation (or are all lawful characters entering arranged marriages?)?
Because they get hitched? Contrary to popular belief, not all children come from drunken one-night stands :p
Plus, you know, Nurture DOES play into things a bit.
Again, it has been a few years, but I suspect it was more "Wanna get freaky tonight?" than "Oh madame, your beauty is worthy of song". Or, at least, that is what the devs intended.

It might not be bigotry, but it definitely is a confused mix up between D&D religion and IRL religion. I am not getting into a IRL religious debate (especially not on this forum, where it is not allowed) but I can say this much: IRL religion != Forgotten Realms religion.
No argument there. My only argument is people who feel the need to claim that they are bigots because a Paladin fell. I don't like people randomly screaming "So and so is a bigot because I don't like them"

Besides, I am getting tired of explaining that Lawful != Robotic. A lawful character can, without having his alignment affected drink with moderation.* He can flirt, as long as it's either harmless OR he is in serious pursuit of the other person.** He can have unmarried sex, as long as he is not sleeping around. And many other things.
I agree with everything except for that very last part. I would rephrase it as "He can have sex out of wedlock", since that has connotations of being in a relationship, rather than drunk.
And honestly, do you blame the devs for assuming that the player was unlikely to be interested in marriage with the local barmaid? Traditionally, it is the Chaotic characters who hit on barmaids.

There is a reason why stereotypical is not the same as correct, and it has nothing to do with house-ruling.
But the stereotype tends to catch on because it is popular. Unfortunately, the devs (it was Troika, right?) decided to go with that aspect of Paladin-y.

*The drinking contest is a more acceptable reason to Fall than the flirting. At least if it would have been the last straw, although the way this game is written there are apparently only a "first straw", which is also the last...
Again, just a very harsh application of the rules. Or, most other games have very relaxed applications (because it is no fun to be restricted by having a Paladin in the game). And honestly, I prefer the relaxed rules.

Let me say this as simply as possible: no. You don't fall for a Chaotic act, you fall for becoming nonlawful. The difference between them is like the difference between being playfully punched in the shoulder and being beaten to death.
Semantics. All that matters is the tolerance level. We are used to games (and GMs) who essentially follow the "Lawful (90), Good (80)" route. Where a single act is just "You gained 4 points toward being Chaotic". They followed the "Not Lawful? Get ready to get smacked down" route.
Although, if you thought I meant that one chaotic act should be enough, I apologize for not being clear enough. My primary argument is that so many people seem to think that a Paladin should get away with acting like Robin Hood or a Bard (but not THE Bard, since that guy was CN at best) because they aren't being evil.

oyhr

2009-10-03, 05:04 PM

Let me say this as simply as possible: no. You don't fall for a Chaotic act, you fall for becoming nonlawful. The difference between them is like the difference between being playfully punched in the shoulder and being beaten to death.

You would also fall for anything that would make your diety displeased with you, since that's where you are getting your powers from, after all. Gods can be pretty fickle.

Avilan the Grey

2009-10-03, 05:34 PM

Because they get hitched? Contrary to popular belief, not all children come from drunken one-night stands :p
Plus, you know, Nurture DOES play into things a bit.
Again, it has been a few years, but I suspect it was more "Wanna get freaky tonight?" than "Oh madame, your beauty is worthy of song". Or, at least, that is what the devs intended.

No argument there. My only argument is people who feel the need to claim that they are bigots because a Paladin fell. I don't like people randomly screaming "So and so is a bigot because I don't like them"

I agree with everything except for that very last part. I would rephrase it as "He can have sex out of wedlock", since that has connotations of being in a relationship, rather than drunk.
And honestly, do you blame the devs for assuming that the player was unlikely to be interested in marriage with the local barmaid? Traditionally, it is the Chaotic characters who hit on barmaids.

But the stereotype tends to catch on because it is popular. Unfortunately, the devs (it was Troika, right?) decided to go with that aspect of Paladin-y.

Again, just a very harsh application of the rules. Or, most other games have very relaxed applications (because it is no fun to be restricted by having a Paladin in the game). And honestly, I prefer the relaxed rules.

Well "Hey you wanna get freaky tonight" is not flirting. Personally I do not consider the alternative you gave flirting either. I find both of those equally cheesy pickup lines, which is not flirting...
So, okay, the Deity gets ticked off because the Paladin is behaving like a drunken oversexed idiot; I can see that. That's something different than flirting though.

As for barmaids as such.. what's wrong with that? I can definitely see a Paladin ending up together with a barmaid from one of the gazillion taverns he has visited during his quests. I do understand if the most easy relationship would be with another Paladin, since they would both understand the demands on the other (like Cop-Cop marriages IRL I guess) but I don't find it at all unlikely.
As I said it depends on WHY you flirt with the barmaid. Are you just wanting a chance to grab her butt, or are you actually liking her for who she really is?

You would also fall for anything that would make your diety displeased with you, since that's where you are getting your powers from, after all. Gods can be pretty fickle.

Yes. But it also works the other way around. I am not up-to-date on the different D&D Deities (in any setting), but if you are a Paladin of a Neutral Good goddess of love, hitting on barmaids might be a very accepted thing.
Unfortunately having different reactions depending on who your Paladin serve is a not too common thing in CRPGs.

Gundato

2009-10-03, 05:54 PM

Well "Hey you wanna get freaky tonight" is not flirting. Personally I do not consider the alternative you gave flirting either. I find both of those equally cheesy pickup lines, which is not flirting...
So, okay, the Deity gets ticked off because the Paladin is behaving like a drunken oversexed idiot; I can see that. That's something different than flirting though.

As for barmaids as such.. what's wrong with that? I can definitely see a Paladin ending up together with a barmaid from one of the gazillion taverns he has visited during his quests. I do understand if the most easy relationship would be with another Paladin, since they would both understand the demands on the other (like Cop-Cop marriages IRL I guess) but I don't find it at all unlikely.

Traditionally, barmaids (in stories where the main character isn't a barmaid who has had enough and decided to become an empowering female figure) are, uhm, "very classy ladies". At least, in fantasy games where it is common to buy source material with half-naked women with platemail thongs...

As I said it depends on WHY you flirt with the barmaid. Are you just wanting a chance to grab her butt, or are you actually liking her for who she really is?
Agreed. But can you blame the devs for assuming that the player was not a person of great virtue? And before you say "But Paladins are!", keep in mind that if we go by that logic, a Paladin can NEVER fall in a CRPG :p

Yes. But it also works the other way around. I am not up-to-date on the different D&D Deities (in any setting), but if you are a Paladin of a Neutral Good goddess of love, hitting on barmaids might be a very accepted thing.
Unfortunately having different reactions depending on who your Paladin serve is a not too common thing in CRPGs.
Aye, but a Lawful Good deity is unlikely to promote free love. And as of 3/3.5e, Paladins (without additional source material) are forced to be Lawful Good.

Matthew

2009-10-03, 06:01 PM

Third edition rules for paladins are stupid and badly implemented in the Temple of Elemental Evil. Pretty much enough said on that score.

I enjoyed playing it, but thought it was a poor second to Baldur's Gate [/end obligatory comparison]. I played it on Iron Man, which was fun until a Hill Giant killed a couple of party members and the damn game would not let us retreat off the map. Fortunately, a friend was concurrently playing a normal version, which led to a hilarious random encounter with an owl bear where we practically saved after every good outcome and reloaded after every bad to survive (and got sod all experience points to boot).

I played the demo years ago, which I thought was great fun. Playing the full game was not quite as good as the demo seemed, but we have not gotten very far yet. The henchman system seems absolutely borked, as it really kills any chance of reasonable treasure division, but otherwise we have been enjoying it.

Avilan the Grey

2009-10-03, 06:03 PM

Traditionally, barmaids (in stories where the main character isn't a barmaid who has had enough and decided to become an empowering female figure) are, uhm, "very classy ladies". At least, in fantasy games where it is common to buy source material with half-naked women with platemail thongs...

Agreed, in most games and art I have seen, the classic barmaid looks more like the stereotypical Helga or Carmen, while no matter how lawful good, the female adventurer's outfits tend to range from Clothes? What Clothes, via chainmail bikini / plate mail thong / heavy plated boobies to long robes / dresses that are designed show enough leg that they are cut all the way to the armpits...

oyhr

2009-10-03, 07:40 PM

I enjoyed playing it, but thought it was a poor second to Baldur's Gate [/end obligatory comparison]

You should really be comparing it to Icewind Dale 2 since they both use third edition.

Matthew

2009-10-03, 07:52 PM

You should really be comparing it to Icewind Dale 2 since they both use third edition.

Nah, never played Icewind Dale II; played the original, but that was pretty dull.

Starbuck_II

2009-10-03, 11:19 PM

From the Demo: I notice the game is only partly 3.5. Halfings use 3.0 weapon rules.
The halfling Pally use a longsword in 2 hands (can't use 1 handed).

I had to reload a few times. Those Random encounters are tough.

I'm glad to see Glitterdust, etc stay useful in the game. I read a few reviews and it listed the casters as damage dealers instead of controllers (like they are).

The demo is weird- fact that Cleric and Pally were leather, but Bard is in clothes. I can understand being poor, but why no armor for the Bard?

Demo seems pretty good (though a little hard).

Matthew

2009-10-04, 11:29 AM

From the Demo: I notice the game is only partly 3.5.

Yeah, it was published right on the cusp of the revision (2003), so some elements are out of synch.

Starbuck_II

2009-10-04, 01:31 PM

Seeing as Monk has 12 Wisdom and 18 Str. I'm considering at level 5 to multiclass him.

Fighter boosts hit, hps, and armor (since he has low AC).
Cleric similar but a tiny bit more spells.
Druid (I think he is LN so he is neutral): animal companion, spells, etc.

I'd lose Flurry in armor, but he really needs AC.

Any ideas?

Kish

2009-10-05, 09:37 AM

I'm glad to see Glitterdust, etc stay useful in the game. I read a few reviews and it listed the casters as damage dealers instead of controllers (like they are).
4ed-speak? ToEE far predated 4ed.

SirSigfried

2009-10-05, 10:19 AM

Which barmaid was this and where was the tavern?

If it was in Nulb, (the drinky tavern not the sleepy tavern) then the girl in question goes red on the Evil-o-Meter.

Starbuck_II

2009-10-05, 10:29 AM

4ed-speak? ToEE far predated 4ed.

Roles are in every game, but unstated prior to 4th.

Kish

2009-10-05, 10:32 AM

Roles are in every game, but unstated prior to 4th.
*shrug* If you expect people to have used 4ed terminology in things they said about pre-4ed games before 4ed came out, you should expect disappointment.

Person_Man

2009-10-05, 04:13 PM

Where did you find it? I've always wanted to try it.

Amazon sells the "jewel case" (cd only) for $5. Or you can buy it in the box for $15.

I ordered it yesterday. I'll definitely download the circle of eight mod, and I won't be playing with a Paladin on the first run though.

Questions for people who have played it:

Do they allow prestige classes?
What feats and spells are included? (Core only?)
I'm a completionist. If I need a specific feat or Skill in order to unlock a certain plot option, I'll take it. Knowing that, what would my best party be?
Does the limited nature of the game make traditionally weak options (Barbarian, Monk, Rogue) playable (or strong options, like Bard, weak)?

Jeivar

2009-10-05, 04:18 PM

Which barmaid was this and where was the tavern?

If it was in Nulb, (the drinky tavern not the sleepy tavern) then the girl in question goes red on the Evil-o-Meter.

Can't remember. Haven't played the damn thing in years.

Guancyto

2009-10-05, 04:42 PM

Amazon sells the "jewel case" (cd only) for $5. Or you can buy it in the box for $15.

I ordered it yesterday. I'll definitely download the circle of eight mod, and I won't be playing with a Paladin on the first run though.

Questions for people who have played it:

Do they allow prestige classes?
What feats and spells are included? (Core only?)
I'm a completionist. If I need a specific feat or Skill in order to unlock a certain plot option, I'll take it. Knowing that, what would my best party be?
Does the limited nature of the game make traditionally weak options (Barbarian, Monk, Rogue) playable (or strong options, like Bard, weak)?

Core only, no prestige classes. You need conversation skills, at least two male and one female party members to unlock everything.

It's been a while, so some of this may have been fixed:

-Rogues are extremely strong when dual-wielding because enemy AI is stupid (I don't think ever saw one take a 5-foot step or try to get out of a flank) and a lot of the big enemies are vulnerable to sneak attack.
-Barbarian is probably the best frontliner in Core; if you're going with a Good party you'll definitely want a Chaotic Good Barbarian for... reasons that may or may not have to do with a certain Holy Anarchic Brilliant Energy Bastard Sword +3 that gives a penalty-free Robilar's Gambit if the wielder is Chaotic good. Oh, and hits undead/constructs/things Brilliant Energy weapons shouldn't be able to.
-A Spiked Chain Fighter is good too; Whirlwind Attack is of the version that all your feats (Great Cleave et al) apply to it. When your fighter is wiping out six or seven credible enemies and twenty fodder a round, life is good.
-Bard is weak in core-only
-Monk is a Monk.
-Oh, despite the game being ridiculous about their behavior, Paladins are mechanically pretty good because Smite Evil applies to every attack instead of just one. And most of the things you fight will be Evil.
-Full casters are, as always, awesome. The game is tuned for blaster wizards and healbot clerics, you can get away with doing both if that's what you enjoy.

Circle of Eight mod is a must, it lets you pick your starting equipment, fixes bugs, adds new quests and is generally a bunch of goodness.

Triaxx

2009-10-05, 06:09 PM

This game? I love this game. It's as close to a perfect representation of the rules as can be reasonably expected. Playing without Co8 is just wrong. It seriously expands it, even including much of the cut content.

Person_Man

2009-10-06, 11:32 AM

Thanks for the advice guys. Further questions:

How is Wildshape handled?

Can Wizards specialize?

Is there any benefit (additional quests?) to picking non-human race?

Do I essentially need to run through the game twice - once to play all the Good options, and once to play the Evil options? Or can I play a Good party that makes Evil decisions, or vice verses (assuming there is no Paladin or Monk in my party).

Kish

2009-10-06, 11:41 AM

Do I essentially need to run through the game twice - once to play all the Good options, and once to play the Evil options? Or can I play a Good party that makes Evil decisions, or vice verses (assuming there is no Paladin or Monk in my party).
:smallconfused: You do realize monks can be good or evil, right?

Person_Man

2009-10-06, 11:52 AM

:smallconfused: You do realize monks can be good or evil, right?

*Chuckles* Yeah, I've been playing D&D for quite some time.

I'm sorry if I didn't explain myself properly. Monks must be Lawful. And I think ToEE doesn't let them party with Chaotic party members.

Based on my history with other similar games, I'm guessing that most dialog options fall into one of the five basic alignment polls - Good, Evil, Lawful, Chaotic or Neutral. If my goal is to see all/most of the plot lines in the game, I'm guessing that I'll have to run through twice. Once as a mostly Lawful Good party, and once as a mostly Chaotic Evil party.

But it'd be nice if I could play a Neutral party, with a mix of LG, CG, TN, LE, and CE members, so that I could hit all of the dialog options on one play through. But if I have a Monk or Paladin in my party, I can't.

Though since I've only read the manual and not played the game, any insight others might have on how alignment effects gameplay would be helpful.

Triaxx

2009-10-06, 11:59 AM

Wildshape is handled by the rules, but there is no Natural Spell without Co8.

They can, but unlike P&P it's not worth the effort, even with the full 20 levels. Batman still sucks.

If you like the bonuses, yes. Half-Orc Barbarians wielding Spiked Chains make great front liners and Dwarves with War Axes are similarly cool. No quests that I know of, though some are easier with specific races, such as Gnomes.

Myrmex

2009-10-06, 01:03 PM

Do they allow prestige classes?

No.

What feats and spells are included? (Core only?)

Core only, though there are far fewer spells.

I'm a completionist. If I need a specific feat or Skill in order to unlock a certain plot option, I'll take it. Knowing that, what would my best party be?

A party face, a trapmonkey, and preferably casters.

Does the limited nature of the game make traditionally weak options (Barbarian, Monk, Rogue) playable (or strong options, like Bard, weak)?

A rogue is necessary to bypass traps, monk sucks, barbarians are good in real D&D too, and are pretty awesome here.

Druids aren't so great. Polymorph/Wildshape turns your stats into enhancement bonuses, which don't stack with anything, and you can't use any items in animal form.

My best team was rogue, cleric, wizard, wizard, wizard. Cleric was a fullplate buff bot I used for tanking, and wizard, wizard, wizard used mostly BC spells. Rogue used TWF to kill things. You could probably play through the whole game with a rogue & a wizard that only cast glitterdust.

SoDs are exceptionally powerful, since opponents pretty much come straight out of the MM. However, you'll often fight many opponents at once, so single target effects aren't that great. Undead will also be a major problem at lower levels.

My caster heavy party was extremely tedious, though. I don't really recommend it. Cleric, cleric, spiked-chain fighter, barbarian, rogue would probably be what I would go with now. Clerics for healing, spiked chain for control, barbarian for tanking, and rogue for damage.

Becareful about who you let into your party, as they have a tendency to take items. One way to circumvent this (pre-Co8, anyway) was to give a bunch of items to the NPC in my party to take up space in their inventory to take up space. Co8 has a fix for that, though. You can now go into their inventory and take what you want.

There's a lot more content without a paladin in the party, since you can talk a hill giant into joining your party, visit the Nulb whorehouse, and play the various factions against each other.

Starbuck_II

2009-10-06, 01:29 PM

No.

A rogue is necessary to bypass traps, monk sucks, barbarians are good in real D&D too, and are pretty awesome here.

Str based Monks aren't bad in Moathouse.

Be careful about who you let into your party, as they have a tendency to take items. One way to circumvent this (pre-Co8, anyway) was to give a bunch of items to the NPC in my party to take up space in their inventory to take up space. Co8 has a fix for that, though. You can now go into their inventory and take what you want.

There's a lot more content without a paladin in the party, since you can talk a hill giant into joining your party, visit the Nulb whorehouse, and play the various factions against each other.

NPc : The drunk and the wizard don't take stuff that they don't mention when they join. Drunk wants gold (great fighter only wants 1/2 share) and Wizard wants all Wizard scrolls (so only get him if no Wiz in party).

Morty

2009-10-06, 01:50 PM

Myrmex

2009-10-06, 02:33 PM

A thing to note is that you're quite limited in what you can find or buy in ToEE. It's hard to even get a masterwork weapon to be enchanted in some cases, which is why my bow-using Ranger had trouble in my first playthrough.

If you use the Co8 patch, you start in a zone that sells MW versions of every weapon. You can later revisit the area. They also added another town where you can purchase a scroll of every spell.

Guancyto

2009-10-06, 03:01 PM

You can also buy them from the blacksmith in Hommlet if you've installed Co8. Otherwise yes, absurdly scarce.

My favorite party was a Spiked Chain Fighter, Barbarian, Rogue, Wizard, Cleric. Pick up Wondrous Item on the Cleric and Wizard and Arms/Armor in the Cleric (especially if you picked Good domain) and you'll have 90% of the crafting worth having, good frontliners and effective backup/buffing. Batman isn't GOD, but is still quite effective.

Also, you have to choose a Party Alignment when you start, which sucks determines your opening, and your party members can only be within one step of that. So if you chose TN you could get TN, NG, NE, LN and CN. If you chose LE you could only get LE, LN and NE.