It's about the journey, not the destination, Baldur's Gate

[Obscuraphile]

So, over the course of my life I must have spent over four or five hundred hours in Baldur's Gate. From my pre-teen years watching my father play the original version as our form of family bonding time, to taking the reigns myself and making character after character that were all kinds of mechanically pathetic because I didn't understand the rules of AD&D, to getting back into the game with the release of the Enhanced Edition, I have spent the better part of two decades periodically going back to this game.

Despite all of this, most of my time was spent in the early chapters of the game, before you even get to the titular city. When I was young this was because my characters would just barely have enough oomph to get out of candle keep and make it to the Friendly Arm. My runs would usually peter out about the time I reached the Naskel mines, which meant time to reroll a new character. When I got older it was more of an issue of attention span and/or trying to be a completionist. Either I would get started on a run and the damn familiarity I had with the first 3 or 4 hours of the game would get to me and I would get bored, or I would obsess about getting every detail exactly right, picking up all the easter eggs, and clearing out all of the map segments so that would ruin my experience because I was just monotonously following a walkthrough.

Anyways, the point is I had never actually finished the game before. Hundreds of hours spent and years gone by, I had never gotten to break up Sarvok's coronation and chase him down to the broken temple for a final climactic battle, until this afternoon. I finally did it. And I feel... disappointed. Yeah, I got revenge on the ******* I watched kill my foster father over and over. I ended the iron crisis and cleared my name of suspicion for causing it. I defied the fragment of a dark god within my soul. But I'm just left going... that's the end? It doesn't even feel like a cliffhanger for part 2

Now, of course, I realize that there are two more games to go, and I'm going to get to them. I'm also not at all saying that I didn't thoroughly enjoy this playthrough, where I finally got through the entire thing, but I just feel incredibly let down. The final fight with Sarvok is challenging yes but it doesn't feel like it actually ties up... well hardly anything. If this is how the other games end as well, I'm not sure I want to play them. I've heard all my life about how amazing this series of games is and right up until this afternoon I would have agreed 100%, but now I'm wondering if there isn't a bunch of childhood nostalgia fouling my memories.

Have I missed something? Did I stop in the middle of the story on a downbeat and just need to push on to Siege of Dragonspear and BG 2? Am I in for the same disappointment if I continue forward?

[Seppl]

A great deal of player attraction in the BG games comes from the mechanical challenge of overcoming difficult encounters, seeing exotic locations, and the inter-party banter (much more so in the later installments). The main plot suffers a bit from the need to have a motivation for all kinds of main characters. Your no-care druid or stupid-evil assassin need to have as good a motivation to go after the BBEG as your worldsaving paladin. That often leaves the main villains a bit unsatisfactory, because the game can not call you out on your achievements because it does not know what your character was trying to do. You are supposed to tell that part of the story to yourself in your head.

The later installments try to remedy this problem somewhat, sometimes to great success, sometimes failing miserably. SoA has several excellent sequences where your character has two mutually exclusive choices how progress the main plot, but at the heavy cost that you will probably miss a lot of content on your first playthrough. ToB tries to literally quiz you on your motivations (which is a bit awkward) and can finally give you the ending you deserve (which is excellent). On the other hand, ToB tries to avoid the problem of missed content by heavy, heavy railroading. Which is really bad because there are many instances where my characters would have just walked away but you are forced to walk into obvious traps or help people who are obviously working against you.

All in all, I would recommend you to play the other parts because you seemed to like the early, free exploration parts of BG. The later installments focus a lot on a similar experience but with much better, streamlined design. They really learned a lot about dungeon design between the two parts. Also, the locales are getting more exciting than just map after map of temperate forest landscape.

PS: A similar style game that focuses much more on the main villain plot and a lot less on mechanical encounters is the always excellent Planescape: Torment, which cannot be recommended enough.

[The Glyphstone]

Part of the disconnect might also be because BG1 wasn't written to have a sequel initially. It sold well enough to earn one, but this wasn't the day where studios budget in advance for game trilogies and massive story arcs. There is basically no connective flow between BG1 and BG2 (unless Siege of Dragonspear fixes that, I haven't played it).

[Obscuraphile]

Part of the disconnect might also be because BG1 wasn't written to have a sequel initially. It sold well enough to earn one, but this wasn't the day where studios budget in advance for game trilogies and massive story arcs. There is basically no connective flow between BG1 and BG2 (unless Siege of Dragonspear fixes that, I haven't played it).

Wow, if that was really just the end I would be... pissed.

[LibraryOgre]

I felt the end of the first game was a reasonable end. You don't know how many Bhaalspawn there are, and so by killing Sarevok, you might have finished it... you might be the only one who survived everything, and you killed everyone involved in killing you father, and saved the Sword Coast from the domination of the Iron Throne. It's a fitting end to the story.

BG2 ups the stakes a lot, as is appropriate with a high-level sequel.

[The Glyphstone]

Wow, if that was really just the end I would be... pissed.

It's the end of BG1's story, yeah. BG2 has a new villain completely disconnected from the first game, it's set in a completely new region and city, and while you can import your BG1 character into BG2, you can also just create it from scratch and except for one specific magical item it makes no difference.

[Seppl]

Wow, if that was really just the end I would be... pissed.
They did not want to close the door for a sequel. Therefore no epilogue. Just ending the current story and introducing a potential hook for a sequel. Good thing they did, because SoA really is a most excellent game.

SoA will end in a similar way (and they do not even follow up on the SoA hook in ToB) but ToB will have a most definite ending with full epilogue for all characters.

I kind of felt the same as you about the endings to BG and SoA but I thought the gameplay more than made up for those weaknesses. I did play those games back when they were released, when they were really outstanding over other games, though. Maybe when seen today, the endings are more disappointing because the other non-story stuff is just a really old game.

[LibraryOgre]

They did not want to close the door for a sequel. Therefore no epilogue. Just ending the current story and introducing a potential hook for a sequel. Good thing they did, because SoA really is a most excellent game.

SoA will end in a similar way (and they do not even follow up on the SoA hook in ToB) but ToB will have a most definite ending with full epilogue for all characters.

I kind of felt the same as you about the endings to BG and SoA but I thought the gameplay more than made up for those weaknesses. I did play those games back when they were released, when they were really outstanding over other games, though. Maybe when seen today, the endings are more disappointing because the other non-story stuff is just a really old game.

I played SoA and ToB so close together that I can't even remember SoA's hook.

[Obscuraphile]

I felt the end of the first game was a reasonable end. You don't know how many Bhaalspawn there are, and so by killing Sarevok, you might have finished it... you might be the only one who survived everything, and you killed everyone involved in killing you father, and saved the Sword Coast from the domination of the Iron Throne. It's a fitting end to the story.

BG2 ups the stakes a lot, as is appropriate with a high-level sequel.

Well that's kinda the thing. Of course I've got personal beef with Sarevok and I want to spoil his plans for setting the region on fire, but the larger story of the Bhaalspawn seems to just go unaddressed. And I had always read the prophesy as Bhaal spawned a literal "score of mortal progeny," is that not the case?


It's the end of BG1's story, yeah. BG2 has a new villain completely disconnected from the first game, it's set in a completely new region and city, and while you can import your BG1 character into BG2, you can also just create it from scratch and except for one specific magical item it makes no difference.

Das golden pantaloons?


They did not want to close the door for a sequel. Therefore no epilogue. Just ending the current story and introducing a potential hook for a sequel. Good thing they did, because SoA really is a most excellent game.

SoA will end in a similar way (and they do not even follow up on the SoA hook in ToB) but ToB will have a most definite ending with full epilogue for all characters.

I kind of felt the same as you about the endings to BG and SoA but I thought the gameplay more than made up for those weaknesses. I did play those games back when they were released, when they were really outstanding over other games, though. Maybe when seen today, the endings are more disappointing because the other non-story stuff is just a really old game.

Glad to hear that about ToB. I guess expectations for games have just changed over the years.

[Seppl]

Mild spoilers: The bhaalspawn thing will once again take a backseat in SoA, just acting as a plot device. In ToB, as the title suggests, it will be the centerpiece of the plot and all questions and expectations you might have will be thoroughly addressed.

PS: Yes, the pantaloons. You can of course add them via console command if you start a new character for SoA.

[GloatingSwine]

Iirc there are actually a couple of things scattered around the first dungeon of BG2 if they’re in an imported characters inventory.

They’re quickly out levelled though.

[LibraryOgre]

Well that's kinda the thing. Of course I've got personal beef with Sarevok and I want to spoil his plans for setting the region on fire, but the larger story of the Bhaalspawn seems to just go unaddressed. And I had always read the prophesy as Bhaal spawned a literal "score of mortal progeny," is that not the case?


Well, keep in mind that Sarevok had been doing the Highlander thing for a while, now... he'd been going around killing other Bhaalspawn for his purposes. ToB goes into this a LOT MORE, and makes it clear that there were a lot of them, but even if there were only a literal score of Bhaalspawn, there's a built in dodge of "Sarevok killed them all." The Bhaalspawn thing is WHY he is interested in you, with it being adjacent to his "kill all the Bhaalspawn" personal goal.

[Obscuraphile]

Okay, well at least there's that. It kinda feels like I've watched a season of TV where the episodes were great but the through plot got left out of the season finale.

[Aotrs Commander]

BG 1 suffers badly, I think, from being The First. While it was grand at the time - rather than D&D (or even later AD&D) - it as since just been vastly mechanically surpassed by its descendants - and plot-wise, it was never that strong. It's one I don't think I've been back to since... Oooooh, ye gods, it might have been since BG2 came out, actually. (Though I think I did play through BG1 at least twice - with my own party, rather than using the NPCs, not that in BG1 it mattered much - and almost all the way through the first time but aborted because of bugs (this was before we had the internet to easily patch it).) And one of the quite a few things they learned was to make the endings a bit less... "Game over, you win!!!"

...

Well, except for NWN2. (And Mass Effect,3, but that's a whole other rant.)

ToB, at least, has a more satisifactory ending (for example, you get an epilogue for your companions) - though it's been quite a while since I actually finished BG2 vanilla, actually (my last playthrough a few years ago petered out) - though honestly, aside from the aforementioned Planescape Tormet (which I still regard as being the best RPG of all time), I don't really remember much of the ending to IWD 1 or 2 either, for that matter.

(Actually pants endings is a bit endemic to a lot of games and not just RPGs - not even just to story-based games, a lot of 4X don't even try - and has been for decades.)

[GloatingSwine]

(Actually pants endings is a bit endemic to a lot of games and not just RPGs - not even just to story-based games, a lot of 4X don't even try - and has been for decades.)

Most games lack a sense of denouement.

Consider the classical narrative structure:

https://rlv.zcache.com/narrative_structure_plot_diagram_poster_classroom-rb9864cf9206049e6bc05e543e5d99dcb_i5g_8byvr_540.jp g

Now consider where player involvement and especially mechanical challenge fits into that. The point of peak mechanical challenge for the narrative of a game should be the final boss*, and narratively that's the climax.

That means that the player's peak involvement ends with two elements of the narrative to go. The "ending" of the game needs to encompass the falling action and denouement.

And very few game endings get all of that right.

There needs to be some mechanical involvement to keep the player present but it needs to be among the lightest in the game because the player is on adrenaline comedown after the final boss**, and then there needs to be something that ties off the end of the narrative so the player knows where everyone stands at the very end and can reasonably predict how their actions in the plot have mattered.

So yeah, if a game just sort of stops instead of ending then its ending will feel unsatisfying.

* The "final boss" doesn't really need to be an actual boss, but probably should be in most games because then it's someone the player can form a strong emotional reaction to which helps connect them to the narrative. But it really should be the peak mechanical challenge in the narrative. Optional non-narrative challenges can be harder, but having the toughest mechanical challenge in the narrative not be the climax of the narrative is an error.

** The duel with Sephiroth at the end of FF7 is a good example of this. All you do is chop his smug face a lot with Omnislash so it's a declining mechanical challenge after you beat him for reals in the proper boss fight, but it still happens in a context where the player is involved before the ending cutscene picks up and completes the falling action and resolution. Shouldn't have done that "500 years later" bit though, should have showed where the actual characters we cared about ended up not silly old Red XIII. Then we might have been spared Advent Children too...

[Yora]

Despite all of this, most of my time was spent in the early chapters of the game, before you even get to the titular city. When I was young this was because my characters would just barely have enough oomph to get out of candle keep and make it to the Friendly Arm. My runs would usually peter out about the time I reached the Naskel mines, which meant time to reroll a new character. When I got older it was more of an issue of attention span and/or trying to be a completionist. Either I would get started on a run and the damn familiarity I had with the first 3 or 4 hours of the game would get to me and I would get bored, or I would obsess about getting every detail exactly right, picking up all the easter eggs, and clearing out all of the map segments so that would ruin my experience because I was just monotonously following a walkthrough.

I am going through another playthrough right now, and I have always played the game like this. I just got to the bandit camp after clearing all the optional wilderness areas, and had the strange realization that this is exactly the point where I most often lost interest in the game and stopped playing. I have just finished the parts that I have possibly played 10 times through now, many of them even more than that, and now getting to the parts that I only played three or four times, well over 10 years ago. And I still feel kind of meh about the game just now.
Interestingly, I made the same experience in the playthroughs of BG2 after I had completed my first one. Most ended just around the time when I got the optional side mostly done and was about to get to the part that I remember being the best and that are also the ones that I have played the least.

Fortunately I know BG2 to be a much better and much less tedious game. And I finally want to get to ToB for a second time. :smallbiggrin:

[Spore]

The final fight with Sarvok is challenging yes but it doesn't feel like it actually ties up... well hardly anything.

Storytelling as part of a video game wasn't so much a thing in the late 90s and early 2000s. People were blown away by Deus Ex which as a book would have been a mediocre scifi thriller. Similar things happen to games like Baldur's Gate or even Halo. It is a playable story that cannot be summarized on a cereal carton without missing anything important. But with today's standards - just imagine the breadth of backgrounds a Witcher saga game offers - it is just a "fun little game" with a not so deep story.

But I am not one to exalt it. Baldur's Gate's second deciding factor was that it brought a game system relatively unharmed to the computer and to a broader audience. Without D&D, my first DM and me would have never started D&D 3.0. Look at Pathfinder: Kingmaker for a contemporary comparable game. It is less than Baldur's Gate is, if you ignore technological standards for a sec, and it still impacts people.

Also Baldur's Gate is for the main character a hero's journey. At the start you are confronted with the unsurmountable Sarevok, which you eventually beat, but not only by duelling him and winning (duel being very loosely used here) but by unmaking his scheme. But the final combat is boring imho, it just a test of strength and bit of tactics. I felt the smartest defeating the wizard in the Cloakwood mines. Because head on he was impossible but with a bit of trickery he was killable. Sarevok is no gameplay challenge (that is a problem of the very simple fighter class in those game), you just click him harder than he does you.

[Winthur]

Storytelling as part of a video game wasn't so much a thing in the late 90s and early 2000s
Except for Betrayal at Krondor from 1993 that was an RPG based on a book universe and even kept a storytelling convention where the interface itself would feel and look like a book. Or Ultima 7 completely getting rid of any pretention of its tactical top-down turn-based RPG roots and pretty much entirely focusing on storytelling. Or even stuff like Starcraft or Age of Empires already having decided back then that they're going to make a continuous campaign storyline instead of having two "mirror" campaigns with a different ending depending on faction. Or the way Thief gave multiple guards and other entities a personality that could either be used as an emergent gameplay hint or simply a bit of flavor showing insight into the world, and it also had those stylish cutscenes between missions. Or how System Shock let you piece together the story from the stuff you found littering the floors of the environment. And then, Planescape: Torment was also made in '99, solidifying the Westerner superiority in the visual novel jRPG genres, being entirely remembered and praised for its story and storytelling.


People were blown away by Deus Ex which as a book would have been a mediocre scifi thriller.
Because the premise of Deus Ex is literally "what if all the conspiracy theories were actually true?" and was entirely rendered memorable through, again, emergent gameplay. The very first mission is open, the world is extremely reactive, you keep reading what's going on through newspapers and history books scattered throughout levels, and the presented world is entirely fascinating. Of course the plot isn't fantastic - and the entirety of it is pretty much spoiled in the intro - but it is very well told, and the gameplay allows you to immerse yourself within the universe.

In my opinion, to say that Baldur's Gate was among the first, revolutionary sparks of actual storytelling is misinformed. Baldur's Gate was made to provide a video game glance at a world many nerds knew and loved. Why else would there be all of those winks at the audience in regard to Elminster and Drizzt?
The idea was to make a video game campaign centered in this one particular bit of the Sword Coast, where you get to meet all of those people, deal with local fauna and flora, and ultimately, while your ultimate destiny is an interesting plot point, you still save the locale you've been thrust into by getting rid of the Iron Throne and putting a halt to their operations, killing their figurehead.
You will find that a lot of the stuff that's going on in the game is actually in the background. People talk about Waterdeep and Neverwinter, there's the whole Amn vs Baldur's Gate conflict looming on the horizon. It's not overt storytelling, it's not particularly cinematic. Instead, you wander the wilderness and bump into Drizzt.
Baldur's Gate is credited with the revitalization of the cRPG genre, but I think that video games have been exploring ways of telling stories for a long time by then, and not just in RPGs. Baldur's Gate wasn't the first to break the idea of a Wizardry-style excuse plot for dungeon crawling; just look at the Gold Box games.

Look at Legacy of Kain. Legacy of Kain's plot is entirely bullcrap, and makes no sense whatsoever. It's still a series of Zelda clones widely cited for having an "engrossing storyline". It's not really the quality of the writing itself, and there certainly is no tying of loose ends with that one. It gets praised because the actor performances cause orgasms to this day, elevating a flowery script and a fairly interesting (but not really groundbreaking) premise into more than what it is. Amy Hennig, credited with writing and designing these games, is still a household name in the industry, because the story is simply well-told. You can tell they invested a ton of time into inventing Nosgoth, even if the plot itself would probably make a run-of-the-mill fantasy novel.


Sarevok is no gameplay challenge (that is a problem of the very simple fighter class in those game), you just click him harder than he does you.
While getting pelted by explosive arrows and dealing with his own court mage, as well as a pet ogre, and sidestepping traps that spawn Battle Horrors. Original Sarevok was also, AFAIR, immune to magic damage. Looks like someone had fun with the line of sight mechanics. :smallwink:

[danzibr]

I had a similar experience recently. I only beat the game once, many years ago. Did the EE recently, and had to force myself through the later content. Dunno if I’ve changed or what.

[GloatingSwine]

While getting pelted by explosive arrows and dealing with his own court mage, as well as a pet ogre, and sidestepping traps that spawn Battle Horrors. Original Sarevok was also, AFAIR, immune to magic damage. Looks like someone had fun with the line of sight mechanics. :smallwink:

Well it was that or abuse the summoning mechanics to make him wade through a river of squirrels whilst you shot him.

[Obscuraphile]

Well it was that or abuse the summoning mechanics to make him wade through a river of squirrels whilst you shot him.

This is why we can't have nice things.

[Yora]

Look at Legacy of Kain. Legacy of Kain's plot is entirely bullcrap, and makes no sense whatsoever. It's still a series of Zelda clones widely cited for having an "engrossing storyline". It's not really the quality of the writing itself, and there certainly is no tying of loose ends with that one. It gets praised because the actor performances cause orgasms to this day, elevating a flowery script and a fairly interesting (but not really groundbreaking) premise into more than what it is. Amy Hennig, credited with writing and designing these games, is still a household name in the industry, because the story is simply well-told. You can tell they invested a ton of time into inventing Nosgoth, even if the plot itself would probably make a run-of-the-mill fantasy novel.

Legacy of Kain is a prime example why plot is overrated when it comes to storytelling. Having a great plot helps, but it's still optional.

[Spore]

Look at Legacy of Kain. Legacy of Kain's plot is entirely bullcrap, and makes no sense whatsoever. It's still a series of Zelda clones widely cited for having an "engrossing storyline". It's not really the quality of the writing itself, and there certainly is no tying of loose ends with that one.

That is just your opinion. I loved LoK's writing.

The games are not replayable because typically the gameplay is terrible imho.

[Winthur]

That is just your opinion. I loved LoK's writing.
I did too, until I realized that the games will never be tied up in any way and that the entire plot is unfinished, and, due to time travelling shenanigans, is insanely difficult to follow. Since then, I have come to accept the good writing of LoK lies in its grandiose speeches delivered by amazing actors. The plot structure is nothing to write about, and you advance the plot in a linear way - but the care put into dressing the whole thing up a bit is what makes LoK's writing this memorable, in my opinion. The cast of characters especially benefits from the voice acting.

Obligatory. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAds4kH7QDE)

[Spore]

I did too, until I realized that the games will never be tied up in any way and that the entire plot is unfinished, and, due to time travelling shenanigans, is insanely difficult to follow. Since then, I have come to accept the good writing of LoK lies in its grandiose speeches delivered by amazing actors. The plot structure is nothing to write about, and you advance the plot in a linear way - but the care put into dressing the whole thing up a bit is what makes LoK's writing this memorable, in my opinion. The cast of characters especially benefits from the voice acting.

Obligatory. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAds4kH7QDE)

Entirely true (even though I played the German version first but Eidos apparently hired the best German VAs for the game as well), but I feel the story would have been better if they didn't write Raziel's character arc (or character loop :smallamused: ) into a corner.

Because honestly simply becoming a spirit sword with no agency is the very anti thesis of an interesting plot twist.

Yes, I realize the thing is called Legacy of Kain but still. Also I would really enjoy a proper continuation where Kain kicks ass in the Hylden dimension with Soul Reaver.

[Winthur]

I played the German version first but Eidos apparently hired the best German VAs for the game as well

You were lucky, we had Russian pirates recording amateur voiceover work and selling the game at the bazaar like that. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIZOJHhue1w)

"Kain!" = "The king!"
"Raziel, the abyss has been unkind" = "Abyss...!"
Soul Reaver = The Kidnapper of Souls

[Calemyr]

The ending of BG1 was meant to be a "Sacrosanct Excrement!" moment. It was a surprise enough to discover you're the spawn of Bhaal. It was even more so to discover the man who'd turned your life on its head was another Bhaalspawn and as a result your half-brother. And in an epic final confrontation you defeat him in combat in a temple to your shared father. It's over. This struggle to steal the mantle of a dead god is finally finished. I mean, look at his statue crumbl... oh... there are more than two of them... uh... a lot more than two... I... uh... okay... you know that whole "epic struggle" thing? Yeah... in context it's a little more like a tiny drop in a very big bucket...

Shadows of Amn takes it further... Not focusing on the actual Bhaalspawn gambit, but the consequences of being one. Being hated for no reason beyond your lineage, being forced to fight and kill, having corruption at the core of your being, and having your unique heritage being targeted as an exploitable resource by beings far more powerful than you. It's more personal than epic.

Throne of Bhaal goes into the epic and addresses the Bhaalspawn gambit by taking the most powerful Bhaalspawn and pitting themselves against each other and resolving the conflict once and for all.

Siege of Dragonspear does bridge the gap between 1 and 2, and it actually does it quite well, but SoD is 5% bridging the gap and 95% a new campaign.

The first dungeon is you and your BG1 end party (with Safana taking the place of Imoen if you kept her around), wiping out the last vestiges of Sarevok's supporters in Baldur's Gate. Your party is suffering adventure fatigue and are all taking about going off on their own once final nail is driven into Sarevok's coffin. Imoen is officially suffering Dual Class Blues, studying to be a mage under one of the dukes, so she accompanies you but doesn't participate in the battles. After you clear the dungeon, everyone goes off on their own, leaving you and Imoen to chill in a penthouse in Baldur's Gate's palace. And listen to rumors of Caelar Argent, "The Shining Lady", a crusader making trouble in the north, but that's not a problem of theirs. Until it is.

An assassin bearing the crest of the Shining Lady attacks the duo one night, wounding and poisoning Imoen in the process. So, yeah: it's on now. You're tasked to go kick the Shining Lady's chrome plated butt, recruiting some former allies(but not all of them) before heading off to war. All the while, both you and Caelar are being tested by a mysterious hooded man voiced by David Warner, who seems to be trying to determine which of the two has a stronger divine spark. Congrats, my friend. You win. Aren't you lucky?

After saving the day yet again, you are forced to fight Skie Silvershield (You know that bratty thief nobody ever used? She's got her own separate plot thread in this game.) and either kill her or watch her get killed in front of you. Oh, and the murder weapon: The Soultaker Dagger from Durlag's Tower, which has conveniently vanished, so no bringing her back to life. Naturally her father goes ballistic and has you imprisoned. You are tried and, depending on your actions over the game, either found guilty and sentenced to execution or found not guilty and sentenced to exile. Either way, the party you gathered stops by your cell to say goodbye before going off on their merry way. All but Imoen, that is.

While you've been sitting in a 5x5 with a cot and a pot, Imoen has been scrounging Baldur's Gate for anyone who might still owe you a favor. She finds Minsc, Dynaheir, Jaheira, and Khalid. As you escape your cell (either with help or against the guards depending on your behavior), you meet up with them and flee town. As you make your way through a nearby forest, though, you discover too late that the area is filled with a poison gas and the party passes out one by one. The end.

Ah, crap, I did say I wanted to do an LP write-up of SoD, didn't I. I really should do that sometime...

[GloatingSwine]

The connection between BG1 and BG2 required a good deal of effort to patch over because BG2 doesn't really make any effort itself to do so.

You wake up in a glass jar and that's your life now, and basically everything you did in the first game is ignored and not referenced including anything that might have gotten you there. (even basic explanations like "a high level wizard did it" are left without anything else to flesh them out.

The way SoD did it pretty much holds up. Its own narrative is pretty reasonable too. The only presentational issue I had was:

The Shining Lady worked out reasonably well as a good aligned but fanatical to the point of being a problem antagonist, but it was rather undermined by her chief minion being so evil anyone capable of casting Detect Obvious should have clocked it.

Having her inner circle presenting as fanatics first, anything else a distant second would have been better. It still makes them The Problem without undermining their whole point.

[Khay]

For what it's worth: The plot of Baldur's Gate is not referenced in Shadows of Amn at all. It does receive something of a resolution in Throne of Bhaal if you

recruit Sarevok into your party and complete his redemption quest

but even that's more about the personal storylines of the Bhaalspawn and less about the fate of the Sword Coast itself.

[Yora]

Which I think is a good thing. It's after all meant to be a second game, not Baldur's Gate, Part 2. These are not like books, they need to be able to stand on their own.

[Spore]

Which I think is a good thing. It's after all meant to be a second game, not Baldur's Gate, Part 2. These are not like books, they need to be able to stand on their own.

What do you think the 2 in the game title stands for if not "Part 2"? Compare it to the connection of Star Wars Ep 4 and Ep 5. Same characters, reintroduced, but almost no references to the past plot (except for a carbon copy of the galactic threat, like if Irenicus created _another_ ressource crisis).

Also if I remember vaguely the PC talks about their past in Candlekeep (not exactly the happenings of the first game but very much part of it) and of Gorion dying (at least in the Aerie romance). And aren't there troop movements in Amn because of the instabilities the Iron Crisis caused? Can't exactly pinpoint them to any of the three main line games though.

Yes, I like that BG 2 is not "reference haven" since I really hate that in a game. But they are there.

[GloatingSwine]

BG1 and 2 are supposed to be causally linked events in the life of an individual.

A little more connective tissue in the second wouldn’t have gone amiss.

[Obscuraphile]

BG1 and 2 are supposed to be causally linked events in the life of an individual.

A little more connective tissue in the second wouldn’t have gone amiss.

From what I've seen so far, regardless of what they are supposed to be, they're really not. There doesn't even appear to be any reference to something the character did that landed them in the events of game 2. Just Mr. Powerful Wizard wants to run some super creepy experiments on you.

[Avaris]

From what I've seen so far, regardless of what they are supposed to be, they're really not. There doesn't even appear to be any reference to something the character did that landed them in the events of game 2. Just Mr. Powerful Wizard wants to run some super creepy experiments on you.

It'll come: part of the point of BG2 is that the protagonist doesn't know the villain's plan at first, it's just a powerful wizard who is messing with you. But then it all comes down to the overarching plot that drives the Bhaalspawn Saga.

Arguably, BG1 is about finding out who you are, BG2 is about finding out what people will do to you because of it, then Throne of Bhaal is about seizing your own destiny from it.

[LibraryOgre]

I'd say BG2 doesn't reference BG1 because it's not coded to remember it. The only references are when you meet people from your past and say "Wait, aren't you dead? Didn't I kill you last time?"

Did you beat Durlag's Tower? Did you ever meet Drizzt? Did you kill a certain NPC in the Cloud Peak Mountains? The game doesn't bother to carry that information forward, so the easiest route is to just assume "Things happened" and not talk about them anymore.

[Obscuraphile]

So why didn't they just drop the pretenses and transplant you into a new bhaalspawn?

[Avaris]

So why didn't they just drop the pretenses and transplant you into a new bhaalspawn?

Part of the appeal is being able to take a character from level 1 in Candlekeep all the way to the end. The game was written so that people could have that experience, but also so that people who hadn’t played BG1 could play BG2 without feeling they’d missed out. It’s a difficult balance though.

[Spore]

It'll come: part of the point of BG2 is that the protagonist doesn't know the villain's plan at first, it's just a powerful wizard who is messing with you.

While I agree it is painfully obvious from the starting monologue Irenicus wants to "unlock" your divine essence: "You have much untapped power." "Do you even realize your potential?"

[Kish]

The end of the game Baldur's Gate is: You defeated Sarevok, avenged Gorion, and saved the Sword Coast from war...and there are still hundreds of your siblings out there, and by virtue of your birth you're in the center of a scheme by Bhaal which you know nothing about.

The further games ultimately resolve the story of Bhaal's children, but with numerous retcons, ranging from "actually Sarevok knew exactly what he was doing" to "your mother wasn't a former lover of Gorion's who Bhaal raped." Don't go into them expecting a satisfying resolution to the story that you started in Baldur's Gate. If you just want a resolution to the "children of Bhaal" story, you'll find it in Throne of Bhaal.

[Obscuraphile]

The end of the game Baldur's Gate is: You defeated Sarevok, avenged Gorion, and saved the Sword Coast from war...and there are still hundreds of your siblings out there, and by virtue of your birth you're in the center of a scheme by Bhaal which you know nothing about.

The further games ultimately resolve the story of Bhaal's children, but with numerous retcons, ranging from "actually Sarevok knew exactly what he was doing" to "your mother wasn't a former lover of Gorion's who Bhaal raped." Don't go into them expecting a satisfying resolution to the story that you started in Baldur's Gate. If you just want a resolution to the "children of Bhaal" story, you'll find it in Throne of Bhaal.

I guess I just felt like Saverok was an important side plot, could be a product of how much time I spent in Candlekeep listening to the five callers. Made me think the story was about bhaal rather than the character.

[Kish]

Oh, that I can tell you--all the games are about the PC. About the PC as a Child of Bhaal, but that's not all you are, and Bhaal isn't actually a character in them.

[Spore]

I guess I just felt like Saverok was an important side plot, could be a product of how much time I spent in Candlekeep listening to the five callers. Made me think the story was about bhaal rather than the character.


Oh, that I can tell you--all the games are about the PC. About the PC as a Child of Bhaal, but that's not all you are, and Bhaal isn't actually a character in them.

Yes and no. Up until ToB, Bhaal is just an enigmatic entity. A lingering darkness in the back (and sometimes front) of your brain. He is detached like any other god in your pantheon. For the first two games, "Child of Bhaal" may just be a name for the children of very close priests or 'victims' of his cult. With ToB, it is made clear that he very much wandered the planet and physically made children. Like a mortal would do.

There was place for 'leitmotifs' for the several characters, but one of the main points of the series is imho, that destiny may not hold all the hands and that your conviction and personality very well decides who you become. Just take the non-PC Bhaalspawn.

Imoen, like being a retcon child, is spritely, and gets dragged down by the reveal of her being a bhaalspawn heavily. But she doesn't want to burden anyone else.

Sarevok is ambitious but obedient to his darker self and gives into the mordlust.

Balthazar felt the only good idea was to murder, collect the essence and then martyr himself. A thing which, with classical writing, often if not always ends with the martyr being corrupted by power.

The final boss betrays her father by trying to rip the portfolio of murder from him and become a deity herself.

And the PC's fate is decided by you. Is he having a girl or man at his/her side to share the burden? Does she give into the tendencies or not? But to me, it is a story about the individual's choice to act in reaction to fate. A god of murder(hobos) was just the best plot imaginable for adventurers. :)

[Honest Tiefling]

Part of the appeal is being able to take a character from level 1 in Candlekeep all the way to the end. The game was written so that people could have that experience, but also so that people who hadn’t played BG1 could play BG2 without feeling they’d missed out. It’s a difficult balance though.

I actually played a bit of BG2 before ever encountering BG1. I can say that while I do agree that the connection between the first game and the second is shaky, that I never felt confused by the game for not having played the first.

Well, until I hit on Jaheira, that was strange.


Siege of Dragonspear does bridge the gap between 1 and 2, and it actually does it quite well, but SoD is 5% bridging the gap and 95% a new campaign.

I got the EE version of the games, played them and Dragonspear. I'd say that the ending of Dragonspear is worse than 1, but it does do a good job bridging the gap between 1 and 2. I liked the plot with Skie, and the explanation given for Imoen's new magical powers. The reason given for the canonical party is also quite good, given what they had to work with.

[LibraryOgre]

I decided to plow on, a bit, with BGEE again, playing the gnome cleric/thief I want to romance Aerie with. However, I ALSO decided that I've played BG enough to cheat. So I gave myself 150,000 XP, and am walking through the early game, using the built in Explore cheats to not have to walk over the entire map in my usual determined "clear the black". I'm tempted by giving myself great stats, but I'm contenting myself with the really good stats I have.

[Calemyr]

I decided to plow on, a bit, with BGEE again, playing the gnome cleric/thief I want to romance Aerie with. However, I ALSO decided that I've played BG enough to cheat. So I gave myself 150,000 XP, and am walking through the early game, using the built in Explore cheats to not have to walk over the entire map in my usual determined "clear the black". I'm tempted by giving myself great stats, but I'm contenting myself with the really good stats I have.

For my part, I'm an unapologetic cheater in the BG series. I always use CTRL+SHIFT+8 to start with max stats, mainly because rolling until I get something even remotely decent (especially with multiple ability dependent classes) is unnecessarily tedious. It's not like perfect stats makes the game a cake walk, anyways. The other two cheats I use are CTRL+J to jump around maps I've been through before (because travelling the same spaces again and again is tedious) and CTRL+R to heal/rez characters (though mainly just in the beginning when the game is really stacked against you and the only other alternative is to rest after every fight or two to get your one healing spell back). Oh, and mods. Lots and lots of mods, my eternal drug of choice. My reasoning is that it's the story and characters that keep dragging me back rather than the gameplay, so I cut out what tedium I can.

[Obscuraphile]

My reasoning is that it's the story and characters that keep dragging me back rather than the gameplay, so I cut out what tedium I can.

Yeah, I get that the new devs were trying to maintain the classic feel when they did the EE, and they would have had purists up in arms with any changes, but it feels like they kept some of the more obnoxious limitations of the old infinity engine in the update. I still long for a game with combat like Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil, and without all the bugs please.

[Kish]

I, perhaps ironically to your thesis, find the Enhanced Edition changed far too much, and am glad I can still play the original.

There doesn't even appear to be any reference to something the character did that landed them in the events of game 2. Just Mr. Powerful Wizard wants to run some super creepy experiments on you.
I can clarify this one thing, though I can't make you find it satisfying.

What you did, was develop a high enough profile through defeating Sarevok to reach the top of Mr. Powerful Wizard's list of "people who are probably half god" and go from there to one of only two names on his list of "people who are definitely half god."

[GloatingSwine]

For my part, I'm an unapologetic cheater in the BG series. I always use CTRL+SHIFT+8 to start with max stats, mainly because rolling until I get something even remotely decent (especially with multiple ability dependent classes) is unnecessarily tedious.

I don't go that far, but I do use EEKeeper to give myself a decent roll. Usually a 90 or so total stats which is rollable but annoying.

[Kaptin Keen]

Have I missed something?

Yes or no.

This is the story**: God knows he's about to die, but he's not having any. He seeds the world with shards of himself, planning to rebirth himself that way.

While you're happily dusting books or whatever in Candlekeep, all the other shards are duking it out, Highlander style, until the last one standing get's the dubious pleasure of being the egg from which Bhaal shall hatch and be reborn. Shedding you and all you were, your hopes and dreams, like so much broken chalk.

Then, finally, you're all that stands between Sarevok and being screwed over in the most fundamental manner (only he fails to realize this), and you get to fight him, win, and ... viola, not just be an egg for Bhaal.*

If that's not good enough for you, then - no, you didn't miss anything. But if you deem that, on reflection, to be a fittingly epic storyline, then yes, you must have missed something along the way =)

* Other stuff happens along the way.
** I don't need to spoiler this, right? We all know?

[Obscuraphile]

Yeah, I'm getting there, but that certainly isn't present at the close of game 1. Or at least doesn't seem to be if you ask me. I'm gathering that it's waaaay over at the end of ToB.

[LibraryOgre]

Yeah, I get that the new devs were trying to maintain the classic feel when they did the EE, and they would have had purists up in arms with any changes, but it feels like they kept some of the more obnoxious limitations of the old infinity engine in the update. I still long for a game with combat like Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil, and without all the bugs please.

Not me. That game is glacial, even with the Circle of 8 mods to clean up the bugs.

[Obscuraphile]

Not me. That game is glacial, even with the Circle of 8 mods to clean up the bugs.

Ehh, it's a lot faster than real D&D. I really wish the new PF: Kingmaker game had been closer to the table top, with a proper turn based system rather than the real time hybrid we got...

[Honest Tiefling]

What do you think the 2 in the game title stands for if not "Part 2"? Compare it to the connection of Star Wars Ep 4 and Ep 5. Same characters, reintroduced, but almost no references to the past plot (except for a carbon copy of the galactic threat, like if Irenicus created _another_ ressource crisis)

Probably late to the party, but the age of the Baldur's Gate series might be one reason that Baldur's Gate II was designed to stand on it's own. Today, I can get the entire series on competing digital platforms, some of dubious legal status. Back in the day, it was entirely possible to stumble upon the game in a store without being able to find the prequel.

Also, if you know the pen and paper setting, the plot makes a tiny bit more sense. Bhaal DID wander the earthly realms, because every other god did. Bane came back in a similar gambit to Bhaal, but using one more powerful spawn than many little spawns. True, that didn't happen until third edition, but Baldur's Gate II was released less than a year before the book that revived Bane. Throne of Bhaal was in the same month, I think.

[Kaptin Keen]

Yeah, I'm getting there, but that certainly isn't present at the close of game 1. Or at least doesn't seem to be if you ask me. I'm gathering that it's waaaay over at the end of ToB.

I've never played the others. For all that I've let people tell me BG2 is even better, I just got annoyed and quit. I think there was a cave, and some dark elves, and they one-shot my entire party no matter what I did, and I was just like ... 'screw all you guys, I got better stuff to do and better games to play!'

And I did.

[Winthur]

I've never played the others. For all that I've let people tell me BG2 is even better, I just got annoyed and quit. I think there was a cave, and some dark elves, and they one-shot my entire party no matter what I did, and I was just like ... 'screw all you guys, I got better stuff to do and better games to play!'

And I did.

Either your memory is very, very foggy or you managed to get halfway through the game before calling it quits, because dark elves don't happen too fast.

[Spore]

Either your memory is very, very foggy or you managed to get halfway through the game before calling it quits, because dark elves don't happen too fast.

The only thing I know that is remotely similar is Centeol's lair in BG 1. Though it is not dark elves but - thematically related spiders along with a bloated half spider woman in Cloakwood. Her cave is entirely optional, and the encounter is deadly for anyone unprepared. Afaik it is the first serious encounter with poison ingame, as well as practically requiring a freedom of movement effect. It can become extremely frustrating.

Can we keep this as a thread about Infinity Engine games? I found it weird that a P&P forum like this does not have a dedicated BG thread. I am restarting BG: EE as a Half-Orc Cleric of Talos (CE). I intend to romance Dorn. Still unsure about my party, current plan:

Kagain, Montaron and Xzar, Edwin, MC and Dorn. I need a thief but Xzar is not the best. I don't want to kill Xzar as I feel their quest in BG 2 will feel odd if I basically leave his corpse to rot in the wilderness. Maybe I switch to Imoen (she is good but she is not leaving due to reputation and it is entirely in character for a meek good character to support her brother in this time). Then the last slot would be Baeloth or Neera.

[Obscuraphile]

I've never really dug into the evil characters in a full game but I did love the Black Pits and Baeloth in particular.

[Kaptin Keen]

Either your memory is very, very foggy or you managed to get halfway through the game before calling it quits, because dark elves don't happen too fast.

I'm quite sure it was dark elves. I have no idea how far I'd gotten in the game, it was a long time ago.

[Spore]

I've never really dug into the evil characters in a full game but I did love the Black Pits and Baeloth in particular.

Most of them are weird. No sane person would adventure with Montaron gor example as he threatens murder first at his coworker and then at you.

[LibraryOgre]

Either your memory is very, very foggy or you managed to get halfway through the game before calling it quits, because dark elves don't happen too fast.

IIRC, there are a couple dark elves in the catacombs beneath the graveyard in Aktahkalkasoklasaka <sp>

[Winthur]

Kagain, Montaron and Xzar, Edwin, MC and Dorn. I need a thief but Xzar is not the best. I don't want to kill Xzar as I feel their quest in BG 2 will feel odd if I basically leave his corpse to rot in the wilderness. Maybe I switch to Imoen (she is good but she is not leaving due to reputation and it is entirely in character for a meek good character to support her brother in this time). Then the last slot would be Baeloth or Neera.
Considering that Montaron already is a terrific thief (solid statline, multiclass with Fighter, Halfling is a strong race, can be a plate frontliner, sneaky stabber, archer or whatever do you need), I am not sure why are you fixated on the idea of dual-classing Xzar.

Another good candidate is Shar-Teel, who is overall a great NPC and can be dualled into Thief in a much stronger capacity than Xzar, too.

[Obscuraphile]

Aktahkalkasoklasaka <sp>

No, you nailed it :smallbiggrin:

[Spore]

Considering that Montaron already is a terrific thief (solid statline, multiclass with Fighter, Halfling is a strong race, can be a plate frontliner, sneaky stabber, archer or whatever do you need), I am not sure why are you fixated on the idea of dual-classing Xzar.

Another good candidate is Shar-Teel, who is overall a great NPC and can be dualled into Thief in a much stronger capacity than Xzar, too.

I dont see how you misconstrued that I want to multiclass Xzar. I wanted to kill him to get Montaron on his own but then he is alive in the 2. game. I know resurrection is a thing in FR but why would the Zhentarim ress a agent, however important he may be, if they can't even get a hold of his body because it is mangled by wild life and thus have to pay for a true ressurection.

[Driderman]

I dont see how you misconstrued that I want to multiclass Xzar. I wanted to kill him to get Montaron on his own but then he is alive in the 2. game. I know resurrection is a thing in FR but why would the Zhentarim ress a agent, however important he may be, if they can't even get a hold of his body because it is mangled by wild life and thus have to pay for a true ressurection.

To be fair I too, at first, thought you wanted to use Xzar as your thief. Which would be useless. On the other hand you never get tired of his amazing, calming voice-acting, no sirree :smallamused:

[Obscuraphile]

Considering that Montaron already is a terrific thief (solid statline, multiclass with Fighter, Halfling is a strong race, can be a plate frontliner, sneaky stabber, archer or whatever do you need), I am not sure why are you fixated on the idea of dual-classing Xzar.

Another good candidate is Shar-Teel, who is overall a great NPC and can be dualled into Thief in a much stronger capacity than Xzar, too.

To be fair I too, at first, thought you wanted to use Xzar as your thief. Which would be useless. On the other hand you never get tired of his amazing, calming voice-acting, no sirree :smallamused:

Umm, I read it clearly as he wants Montaron but to get him he's stuck with Xzar, who is suboptimal.

Edit: Also, it's Xzar that is self aware and complains about being clicked on right?


I dont see how you misconstrued that I want to multiclass Xzar. I wanted to kill him to get Montaron on his own but then he is alive in the 2. game. I know resurrection is a thing in FR but why would the Zhentarim ress a agent, however important he may be, if they can't even get a hold of his body because it is mangled by wild life and thus have to pay for a true ressurection.

Kill him in a town, or tell yourself that you did?

[Kish]

Multiple companions complain about being clicked on if you click them enough to get their rare lines (12 times without telling them to move in between, in BG1; randomly in BG1EE). Xzar yells "Stop poking me!" as a non-rare line.

IIRC, there are a couple dark elves in the catacombs beneath the graveyard in Aktahkalkasoklasaka <sp>
1/2 drow, Pai'na. If anyone in the history of the Baldur's Gate franchise has had trouble with her and her spiders, I can't imagine how they got through enough of the game to reach her first. All the other drow are in the Underdark and cannot be fought any earlier than Chapter Five, except Viconia, who won't attack you (even if you beg).

[Aotrs Commander]

Xzar yells "Stop poking me!" as a non-rare line.

Fun fact - the first time I was playing that, I thought it was Imoen shouting that.

...

Immey was Best Companion (yes, even when accounting for Minsk and Mazzy). Really didn't much much motivation to go gunning for Irenicus. Sod what he did to me, went went after Imoen, who is like the Jubilee of Baldur's Gate.

[LibraryOgre]

Can you still use the old "Dismiss Xzar while he's in a house and he won't be able to find you to take Montarron with him" trick?

Like, take him to one of the random houses in Beregost, leave him there, and then dismiss him and continue on your merry way?

[Spore]

Can you still use the old "Dismiss Xzar while he's in a house and he won't be able to find you to take Montarron with him" trick?

That helps! Thanks. I can imagine Xzar being lost for the entirety of the Iron Crisis following prophetic leads until Montaron picks him up again. :smallbiggrin:

[Winthur]

But Xzar is a perfectly fine NPC, though...
Solid statline overall. Is a good mage. His Horror and Skull Trap hit at better saves. Very thematic. Makes a cool casting duo with Edwin. Dunno where the notion he's underwhelming comes from. :smalltongue:

[Spore]

But Xzar is a perfectly fine NPC, though...
Solid statline overall. Is a good mage. His Horror and Skull Trap hit at better saves. Very thematic. Makes a cool casting duo with Edwin. Dunno where the notion he's underwhelming comes from. :smalltongue:

Mostly the problem that he is frail and that mages are not really that useful up until Lv 5 and 3rd level spells. Because of that I usually tolerate a single arcane caster in the party if the MC is not one him- or herself.

[GloatingSwine]

Can you still use the old "Dismiss Xzar while he's in a house and he won't be able to find you to take Montarron with him" trick?

Depends if you dismiss him by walking his 4HP ass into a bear. (Don't worry about the Zhentarim getting him back, they're resourceful, they'll cope).


But Xzar is a perfectly fine NPC, though...

He's fine, but if you want an evil wizard you want the one with the extra extra spell slot and 50% more hitpoints.

[Winthur]

He's fine, but if you want an evil wizard you want the one with the extra extra spell slot and 50% more hitpoints.

You can have two evil wizards.
And as for their usefulness, well, I have plenty of use out of my wizards from level 1 simply by spamming Sleep and Blind. Then Web. Then they finally get Haste and truly earn their bearings.

[GloatingSwine]

You can have two evil wizards.


I dunno. I'm not so attached to evil wizards that I want two of them.

Especially when one of them is quite irritating.

[Aotrs Commander]

Given that, unless I am wrong, the BG1 NPCs have virtually no interaction like the later games, you cna just make up your own.

(But fair cop, I never used any of the NPCs in BG-1, every time I made a whole party of six, so I might be wrong, especially if the EE has done somethined extra in that regard.)

[Obscuraphile]

Well I'm pretty sure that individuals have the potential to leave if your reputation doesn't match their outlook. I know Jaheira was always pissed that I was a goody two shoes and she wanted to be neutral. But I think you can still have opposed characters resort to fighting each other in BG1, was never really a problem in my groups however. I don't believe there is a large amount of scripted dialog before hand the way there is in BG2

[Spore]

I won't dump my reputation for companions, so I decided to go neutral-ish to evil. Dorn will be my pet project, furthermore I will invite characters I like or who are powerful enough to support my new character, an opportunistic Halfling F/T archer.

Basically the premise is that my character sees the incredibly evil (but sexy) half-orc and declare he can deal with his abusive personality. So my new group idea is:

Dorn (CE) - my hubby
Branwen (N) - because we need a cleric that doesn't judge as harshly
MC F/T (CN)
Xan (LN) - Khay's LP led me to believe he is actually one of the stronger choices
Faldorn (N) - 5th level druid spells, baby!

Currently thinking if I use Edwin, Eldoth Kron, Garrick or even Coran as my 6th, or if I use a 6th member at all.

[Obscuraphile]

Currently thinking if I use Edwin, Eldoth Kron, Garrick or even Coran as my 6th, or if I use a 6th member at all.

You could custom a sixth. F/M/C on the menu?

[Winthur]

Basically the premise is that my character sees the incredibly evil (but sexy) half-orc and declare he can deal with his abusive personality. So my new group idea is:
Dorn (CE) - my hubby
Branwen (N) - because we need a cleric that doesn't judge as harshly
MC F/T (CN)
Xan (LN) - Khay's LP led me to believe he is actually one of the stronger choices
Faldorn (N) - 5th level druid spells, baby!

Currently thinking if I use Edwin, Eldoth Kron, Garrick or even Coran as my 6th, or if I use a 6th member at all.
Of all the choices you presented, I'd go with Edwin. Eldoth generally fits an "evil" party, but he also insists on bringing Skie along and he's just an insufferable character told by everyone he stinks, even if bards aren't as bad as they're usually painted (though vanilla Bard Song is worthless and so bard utility is found mostly in support blasting and being "the wand bitch"). Coran is obviously amazing. You could also take Shar-Teel or Kagain, neither are really utter psychos, both are extremely useful NPCs (and you seem to lack a pure Fighter, which is a very welcome niche to fulfill) and Shar-Teel has an interesting interaction in the final act of the game that few people actually seem to know about.

[GloatingSwine]

Eldoth generally fits an "evil" party, but he also insists on bringing Skie along and he's just an insufferable character told by everyone he stinks, even if bards aren't as bad as they're usually painted (though vanilla Bard Song is worthless and so bard utility is found mostly in support blasting and being "the wand bitch").

That's kinda what makes people say bards are bad...

They get no significant spell slot advantage over a Mage/Thief multi or dual class, maybe one point per level more HP, one point better THAC0, only get the thief skill that never matters, and Bard Song is bad and stops you taking any other actions.

Also both of the NPC bards are kinda bad. At least Garrick has 16 dex so you can park him out of melee. (I use him as an XP sink if I want to use a character that recruits late, so that I don't level an undersize party too fast)

[Winthur]

That's kinda what makes people say bards are bad...

They get no significant spell slot advantage over a Mage/Thief multi or dual class, maybe one point per level more HP, one point better THAC0, only get the thief skill that never matters, and Bard Song is bad and stops you taking any other actions.

The point of a Bard is that you advance further and faster than a Mage, so your blast spells (that scale with level) will be stronger than a Mage at the same XP level (or a multi Mage/Thief, doubly so). Also, you get access to wands, armor, Long Bows (which are a big deal in BG1), Rogue rather than Wizard THAC0. All on top of being able to do swell support spellcasting. As a result, Bard is a solid class - but only if you look beyond the crappiness of the bard song.

Same problem with Cernd - terrific NPC due to how busted the BG2 Druid's toolbox is, but opinions overly fixate on the weakness of his Druid kit (Shapeshifter) and his low stat total. No, Jaheira isn't explicitly superior because of her massive problems with jumping the 14->15 level hoop.

Bards like a Tier 2-3 class.

[Spore]

I still have difficult feelings about employing a Con 9 Fighter to be honest.

[Winthur]

I still have difficult feelings about employing a Con 9 Fighter to be honest.
Consider that her low Con means that she starts with -1 HP under Minsc, a follower considered to be top notch in BG1. She actually will have more HP than multiclass fighters and even darlings like Kivan, who starts at level 2 with 16 HP (!) and his Con 14 is actually completely equal to Con 9 in terms of what HP it actually gives. Shar-Teel might be the secondary choice for a frontliner, but she makes up for it completely by being excellent at potentially excellent at fighting at range (EE ruins this a wee bit with her haphazard default proficiencies, but she can still be a good dagger thrower), and given a few levels any fighter will be able to take at least some punishment. She will ultimately receive full benefits from the d10 hit die throughout levelling, unlike her multiclassing compatriots.

The truth is, for most stats, the difference between 8 and 14 is window dressing or tertiary characteristics like carry weight.. Look up the stat progression charts; Shar-Teel merely doesn't receive any Constitution modifier to HP, and she's not alone in that regard - among Warriors, neither do Kivan, Coran, Rasaad, or Dorn Il-Khan.

Shar-Teel has the exact same HP progression as a character who has been considered an overpowered frontline tank on EE's release by many, yet she's considered a poor frontliner in spite of having more Dex than Dorn and being more capable of falling back onto using a shield (since she uses one-handers), and also a poor Fighter overall in spite of excellent Strength, Dexterity and actually having weapon proficiencies in ranged weapons. Shar-Teel will even ultimately outdamage Dorn because she can actually achieve greater weapon mastery than the half-orc, too, on top of being better suited for dual-wielding.

Men are pathetic.

[LibraryOgre]

I won't dump my reputation for companions, so I decided to go neutral-ish to evil. Dorn will be my pet project, furthermore I will invite characters I like or who are powerful enough to support my new character, an opportunistic Halfling F/T archer.

Basically the premise is that my character sees the incredibly evil (but sexy) half-orc and declare he can deal with his abusive personality. So my new group idea is:

Dorn (CE) - my hubby
Branwen (N) - because we need a cleric that doesn't judge as harshly
MC F/T (CN)
Xan (LN) - Khay's LP led me to believe he is actually one of the stronger choices
Faldorn (N) - 5th level druid spells, baby!

Currently thinking if I use Edwin, Eldoth Kron, Garrick or even Coran as my 6th, or if I use a 6th member at all.

Not Vicona as a cleric?

BTW, does BG:SOD or BG2 ever tell you what happened to Branwen? She's one of my favorites.

[Kish]

In BG1, bard song completely negates fear, which among other things renders all those mages who lead off with Horror nearly harmless.

(I'm never talking about the Enhanced Edition unless I specifically say I am.)

[Aotrs Commander]

The point of a Bard is that you advance further and faster than a Mage, so your blast spells (that scale with level) will be stronger than a Mage at the same XP level (or a multi Mage/Thief, doubly so). Also, you get access to wands, armor, Long Bows (which are a big deal in BG1), Rogue rather than Wizard THAC0. All on top of being able to do swell support spellcasting. As a result, Bard is a solid class - but only if you look beyond the crappiness of the bard song.

Same problem with Cernd - terrific NPC due to how busted the BG2 Druid's toolbox is, but opinions overly fixate on the weakness of his Druid kit (Shapeshifter) and his low stat total. No, Jaheira isn't explicitly superior because of her massive problems with jumping the 14->15 level hoop.

Bards like a Tier 2-3 class.

Yeah, AD&D bards were pretty good, and were more of a default rogue/wizard than the singing-support they were in 3.0. I have fond memories of my AD&D bard - or bard, I should say since, Quilmara Hellmoth was both tabletop and made the transition to BG one, where she served as an archer and blaster quite adequately.

I miss my bard with Magic Missile and Acid Arrow and Fireball and Skulltrap.

I don't recall ever using bard song in either of her incarnations. Because it was, y'know, complete crap in AD&D, pretty much.

Actually (and you'll have to forgive me, since I dropped AD&D like hot coals the second 3.0 came out and tus haven't looked at in nearly twenty years (and I last played BG 1 before BG 2 came out, I think) - did bards even HAVE bard song other than a paffy version of countersong in regular non-computer AD&D?)

[LibraryOgre]

Yeah, AD&D bards were pretty good, and were more of a default rogue/wizard than the singing-support they were in 3.0. I have fond memories of my AD&D bard - or bard, I should say since, Quilmara Hellmoth was both tabletop and made the transition to BG one, where she served as an archer and blaster quite adequately.

I miss my bard with Magic Missile and Acid Arrow and Fireball and Skulltrap.

I don't recall ever using bard song in either of her incarnations. Because it was, y'know, complete crap in AD&D, pretty much.

Actually (and you'll have to forgive me, since I dropped AD&D like hot coals the second 3.0 came out and tus haven't looked at in nearly twenty years (and I last played BG 1 before BG 2 came out, I think) - did bards even HAVE bard song other than a paffy version of countersong in regular non-computer AD&D?)

2e bards had three kinds of Bard Song. They had the Countersong (i.e. block sound-based attacks), they had "Influence Reactions" (moving people's reactions in the way they wanted... towards friendly, or hostile to a person), and they have the combat bonus song. The least useful was the combat bonus song, since it required a significant investment of singing time, on people who were not in combat, to receive small, short, combat bonuses... 3 rounds of singing, about a foe who is known, to get +1 to hit OR +1 to save OR +2 to morale for 1/round/level of the bard.

[Aotrs Commander]

2e bards had three kinds of Bard Song. They had the Countersong (i.e. block sound-based attacks), they had "Influence Reactions" (moving people's reactions in the way they wanted... towards friendly, or hostile to a person), and they have the combat bonus song. The least useful was the combat bonus song, since it required a significant investment of singing time, on people who were not in combat, to receive small, short, combat bonuses... 3 rounds of singing, about a foe who is known, to get +1 to hit OR +1 to save OR +2 to morale for 1/round/level of the bard.

Well that explains why I spent all my time with Quilmara zapping stuff with offensive spells, as it was more useful...!


(I don't even think I have my AD&D PHB to hand, since a mate of mine wanted to borrow it a while back, so I couldn't even check myself!)

[Ebon_Drake]

Not Vicona as a cleric?

BTW, does BG:SOD or BG2 ever tell you what happened to Branwen? She's one of my favorites.

Branwen has a cameo in the BG2 tutorial (which nobody ever plays), but IIRC doesn't turn up in the game proper. I don't think she gets mentioned either, or if she does then it's either very brief or very vague. Given the fates of some of the other BG1 companions in BG2, that's arguably a blessing for her.

It is possible to use save import trickery to get her into your party in TOB. I'm not sure if you can do it in EE, but certainly in the original release you can start the SOA tutorial, save the game, then import that party into TOB. You can also use that to get Xan in your TOB party, as well as two copies of Imoen, Jaheira and Minsc. I don't think it's a good idea to do that though and it may break the game.


I dont see how you misconstrued that I want to multiclass Xzar. I wanted to kill him to get Montaron on his own but then he is alive in the 2. game. I know resurrection is a thing in FR but why would the Zhentarim ress a agent, however important he may be, if they can't even get a hold of his body because it is mangled by wild life and thus have to pay for a true ressurection.
If I remember rightly, the first conversations with Xzar and a few of the other returning characters in BG2 can start with you saying "hey, weren't you dead?" to which they'll respond "eh, I got better" so you could just treat that as canon.

[Spore]

Not Vicona as a cleric?

I simply do not like her. She has a cool backstory with nuances, but damn it, drow are just so stereotypically evil it is not funny anymore. With every command I give her I am constantly reminded how utterly ridiculous drow society is and how improbably it would be for a race such as them to survive.

[Winthur]

I simply do not like her. She has a cool backstory with nuances, but damn it, drow are just so stereotypically evil it is not funny anymore. With every command I give her I am constantly reminded how utterly ridiculous drow society is and how improbably it would be for a race such as them to survive.

Well, Viconia's one of the more "reasonable" evil NPCs. Even Kivan's interactions with her that lead to a fight make it hard to figure out who is Good and who is Evil. Considering her possible alignment change as a result of a romance and some of the things you learned about her, like attempting to settle down in Beregost after BG1 but getting swindled out of the money, implied to have been raped and buried alive, she seems less cartoonishly evil rather than mostly eager to be left alone and not above maiming and murdering others for her own comfort or to fulfill her goals. Considering that people who are willing to kill her solely for her heritage are bigger jackasses than she could possibly aspire to be (Beshaba cultists and *shudder* the police), she seems like one of the most reasonable choices for a Belkar-style token evil teammate. She's not above redemption. Even if she finishes the game evil and hasn't romanced you, her epilogue has her become a hero of some renown.

Honestly, compare with Xzar, Tiax, or even Edwin.

[Obscuraphile]

Why are the later letters of the alphabet a good indication of evil in BG?

[Kish]

Because we're all doomed.

And Daveorn is less evil than Gorion. Angelo is the least evil of all.

[Morty]

In BG1, bard song completely negates fear, which among other things renders all those mages who lead off with Horror nearly harmless.

(I'm never talking about the Enhanced Edition unless I specifically say I am.)

For all my years of playing Baldur's Gate, this is the first time I hear of it. Go figure. I've often wondered what the bard song actually does.