Arcanum vs Baldur's Gate 2 (including ToB)?

*Sighs*

Once again you argue semantics and avoid the question.

My misunderstanding - I thought an NPC was a character who was not created by the player, but could be controlled.
Please enlighten me, what is the correct term for Virgil et al?

 

I totally agree with Saint I just would like to add something else:

BG had a substandard plot to it, all it was is go here and do this. I felt like an idiot just clicking and not having to think in the whole bloody game. You had very little choices in the damn game. At least in Arcanum you needed to think about how you’re going to handle things, because of how many choices in front of you. You also had to get the info and had to figure out from clues you were handed in the game.

 

BG...heh. To paraphrase roshy...

Int 3: Hail, good merchant!
Int 18: Hail, good merchant!

That's some spiffy stat representation there. Oh yes, there are....hrrmm...SEVERAL incidences where your stats play a part in dialog options, but otherwise, it's kill anything that gets in the way. Heck, your subquests almost always involve killing something at the end. Thieves, bards, fighters and mages all...they complete BG 2 in the same manner. Lets not bother debating that alignment thing, mmm? Help slavers, get deed from displaced lord, betray silver dragon to detriment of self for lousy armor, blah blah. So you can choose to be evil. How innovative. It's a ROLE PLAYING game, yeah? I make the decisions, I EXPECT the chance to make some. Like being a pacifist. Big fat hope trying that in BG.
Oh yes, the bit at the end WAS interesting, hrrmm...only because it actually let you make some decisions. Breath of fresh air and all that. :razz:

Nearly every damned subquest in Arcanum has several ways to go about doing it, with different outcomes.
Different characters demand different playing styles. Different WAYS to complete quests, not just differences in combat and equipment.
Arcanum...Charisma isn't just a tool for buying items. There's beauty, which governs npc reactions...yes, I know Chr has reaction modifiers, too. It just doesn't SHOW. Hah.
Thieves in arcanum can actually do more than pickpocket from ribald, get multiple ring of the rams, and get free backstabs.

Example of diversity of choices...Try sneaking into a store at night. Try lockpicking the door open, or hell, just dynamite the damned thing and wait for the storekeeper to open it. Maybe a dose of acid would work, for the intrepid tech-thief...cast invisibility and waltz in as a mage...or maybe we can just pickpocket the key from the unsuspecting owner? This isn't even a subquest activity!

The pickpocket tool in BG is pathetic. Heck, you can't even plant items, much less CHOOSE what to steal. And aimed shots? Can I decide to cripple my enemy? I can't? Damn!

The character system is complex? God forbid we do some thinking for once! Can you say the same for BG 2? Fighters dual classed to clerics. Fighters duel classed to mages. Dual classed fighters, it's the only way to play! Ranger/Cleric combo for that nifty all-sphere goodness! If you aren't doing any of that, you're probably a sorcerer!
Bards, play skalds! Inquisitors for paladins!
Yeah...point out the bits in the manual that you're having problems with...I'm pretty sure I can help.

Yes, I've completed BG 2. Several times. Memory might be a bit rusty because I haven't touched it for a long time, but I know what I'm talking about. I completed Icewind dale once, and god, that was awful. The combat in BG 2 surpasses that pile of junk.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: sgc_meltdown on 2001-08-30 07:14 ]</font>

 

Saint.

I will reply, but I don't have the time now. I would suggest that you try re-reading my actual post and also the post that stated you argue semantics and not the point.

I will leave by saying I did read your post. I did know about right clicking on portraits, I did not oversimplify anything, and I will respond when I have the time.

~JK~

 

In BG2, ok, maybe it was less complicated, but it was just downright fun. I prefer games like BG2 coz u got DiabloII at one end (pure point, click, kill) and u got ARcanum at the other end (virtually impossible side quests, annoying 'smart' AI - i remember one time when Virgil took a nap when he tried to heal my tech guy.) In the middle, u have BG2, bit of point and click, kill and a few easier quests.
In addition, have u actually TRIED to have a thief/tech? U cant spread the few character points that far. Oh and being a tech with a gun in addition to anything else is impossible. I think that the character points come to slowly and the level cap is too low. Is there a level cap remover patch avaliable?
Also, in Arcanum, to complete a quest, e.g. the Dwarf mage guy, u get given a quest and have nowhere to start (apart from the wife who was no help). to complete an investigation in Caladon, i had to go into every damn house! and i still didnt complete it. (any help on theat quest would be appreciated.) BG2 is superior because the Arcanum turn-based system is crap compared toi auto-pause. Oh and why does everyone have such a big problem about complete control over NPCs? I think its a great idea.

 

JK,

Until you can actually argue anything, rather than making the bullshit claims that I'm not reading what you're saying, or that I'm arguing semantics, I'd suggest you keep still.

kiewts,

My wife actually plays a thief character in Arcanum. That's all she practically plays. Whatever variant she choses, there's always a bit of thief in it.

I'm more of a "smash the door open" kind of guy. :smile:

 

Sagacious. You WEREN'T supposed to spread them out THAT far. Stop grasping when you plan your character...
With a bit of common sense, you'll also KNOW that when I say TECH THIEF, I don't mean a thief with a damned doctorate in three disciplines and with maxed prowling, backstab, lockpicks, add combat skills, max followers.
I mean a thief with a high tech affinity, using tech to aid him.

Here's a template I rigged up in the site character planner:

Human
Str 12
Dex 20
Chr 12
Int 13
Per 18

Maxed Firearms, Lockpicks, Dodge, 3 points in persuasion and prowling
Now that I've spent points into lockpicks I don't need the chemistry tree. If you're fussy and want to me to prove things, YES, you can throw those pick lock points away and get into the chem tree.
Herbology -> Fatigue Restorer
Mechnical -> Eye Gear

You'll be a great thief, being a master of firearms shouldn't give you any problems, and you'll get expert level persuasion, meaning a healthy amount of followers. Plus your tech level is 70 with this...techy enough for you?

Impossible this, impossible that. PLAN, dammit. 'Oh I want this and everything else not enough points lalalalala'. You really need to be led by the hand, eh?

See my above comment. GAH, what'd expect?! The murderer to fall into your arms with a written confession? Think, people.
Before you do anything, try getting at the vase behind the wife...I'm sure you're a smart fellow and can figure out what to do.

Which one? And if it's the quest I'm thinking about, you only need to go into the house with the guards posted outside. Not 'Every damn house'. Sigh.

Afterthought: Remember, arcanum isn't using a CLASS system, it's using a points system. If you keep thinking 'I'm going to make a tech thief, there's no reason why I can't make the one with all the skills I want'...then I have NEWS for you, sir...that's because you've grown overambitious after being pampered by ad&d's stunted rules system...short-sighted. You see, your character isn't lumped into a static category now...you have COMPLETE freedom, but limited points...but most people still expect to be able to play a stereotyped 'class', and really well, too. Every character is unique, get it? No frigging reason why a thief HAS to learn backstab and pickpocket, and no reason why a mage healer can't learn necromancy. Not if you train towards that.

You have your points, gentlemen...and if you feel that you're not getting all the power you want, then try those auto-level schemes that herd you into a sense of complacency, or play another game...like baldur's gate. Would be a bit tricky to screw up a kensai, eh lads?

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: sgc_meltdown on 2001-08-31 06:23 ]</font>

 

Heh. I'm definitely siding with Arcanum on this one. And as many reasons as I can offer, I am going to only offer one (for the time being) and that is Character development.

Arcanum is like driving your own car. Not that hard once you know what you are doing. AD&D is public transport. Easier, but you don't get too many options of what to do.

1. Lots of levels. I like this system much more than the whole. "7 levels. that's what you get. 7. No more. OK, good buy our expansion pack. Now you can go higher." It's poor, and Arcanum gives the player a feeling that they are evolving.

2. Classless. You can specialise, and your character reflects that, but there is none of the whole "Don't even think about wielding that armour. Sure it fits you, but you can't wear it. See on the tag just below 'Dry Clean Only?' it says No Mages Allowed."

3. Magic system. You can actually survive as a low level mage. It kinda sucks when your only two spells you can memorise will kill one pansy little wandering monster, and it's in a group of about 6. And if you survive that, you sleep to regain your spells and the 80% chance of monsters while sleeping fucks you in the ass again. Repeatedly.

4. Balance. I dunno how they did it, but the Arcanum character system seems fairly balanced (although a gunslinger gets a harder time than mages from what I hear)

 

Arcanum may have more levels, but by the time i finished the dark elf city as a mage i was already lev 50. At least with BG2 u dont hit the exp cap so darn early.

 

One more thing, the way NPCs progress in Arcanum is bloody annoying. I wanted Magnus to get that bloody goggled helmet and i couldnt wait until he was level 40 to get it!
In BG2, u can select what weapon proficiency u can have in NPCs which is better i think. If Arcanum had the same tech things and magick, with an AD&D rules, the game would be miles better than BG2

 

I still don't have the full version so some things might've changed since the demo (though I doubt it). If they're changed correct me.

I like quests to be challenging and the ones in BG2 didn't require thinking to accomplish. Usually it was talk, run, fight, fetch, talk. I like BG but I'd like it there were some quests where you were actually looking for clues and had to get the answer thinking by yourself.

Always wanted to play a little longer after hitting exp cap and being really powerful than just the final fight and some short episode before it. I don't know how it works in Arcanum however, as my char always seemed a little to weak esp when I attempted bridge fight (yes I know fighting isn't necessary but I felt it to be just to kill those bandits). Hence I wouldn't like to hit exp cap and still be too weak while going thru the rest of the game. And if you don't place your very few points perfectly right you're screwed for the rest of the game.

True, you never know when, if at all, they'll make next step in developing some tech discipline or spell group. This may lead to player deciding to develop this faster by himself and repeating the same skills as the NPC has. I agree that NPCs are NON player characters but I just don't like them to be stupid or unpredictable at best. In real life I could ask them: Hey are you gonna learn this or not?. And when? Perhaps even convince them to do it now.

I also hate the fact that you can't just choose Virgil or Sogg and have him pick up some equip but you must pick it up yourself until you have no more room in your backpack, open up their inventory, move things there, close inventory, pick up more equip, open inv, transport, close……… BOOORIIING. Just lots of needles clicking.


Another thing. How many lockpicks do you need to pick a lock when you're not a thief? Two. One for yourself to have the option of picking a lock 'enabled' and one in NPCs inventory to let him take over as his skills are higher. Stupid.

I think I'll like Arcanum more especially because of lots of subqests that I hear about though I hate seeing simple things overlooked in the game making process. Arcanum win swith story and Infinity Engine games with technical side.


Three questions about full version.
1) When you scroll in the map screen does it still 'jump' bit by bit?
2) Are parts of town in the outskirts covered in black on the map screen even though you explored the area?
3) I once gathered some info on the ISO version. Hence what version does the full game say it is (without patches if there are any already out) and is the World Editor included?

 

Actually, NPCs in Arcanum will loot the stuff on the ground on their own, wether they're in a party or not.

A funny story about this, I was playing multiplayer with a guy, and I dropped a chainmail for him behind a shop. The dwarven shopkeeper hopped out a window, walked around the back of that shop, and snagged that chainmail.

NPCs do interact with one another in Arcanum as well. I've seen Virgil heal other NPCs on a number of occations.

 

here we go again

There are advantages and disadvantages to both. While it would be nice for a wizard to be able to pick a lock at times, with the class restrictions you know at level 20 you are gonna be a really powerful wizard and will just have to be sure to have a thief in your party. The "free" system allows a lot of custimization but can cause inexperiences players to get confused and spread their point out too much causind them to never become a powerful anything. Both systems are good but have their flaws.

By the way, if you like PnP role playing and the "free" character system, I recommend playing GURPS. I read somewhere it was the original system that fallout was going to use but didnt due to some kind of copyright dissagreement.

The orders menu in Arcanum is just way too limited. You really can only tell them to stay close, stay further away, attack, back off, wait, or walk to a specific point. The back off command is useless since after telling Virgil to back off in several different battles in hopes he would retreat and not die, all he did was stand right where he was but stop fighting. What's the point in that. As far as the scripts in BG2 go, I never used them. What was nice is that you could put your people in a specific formation and controll their exact actions. Here's a combat situation in BG2 you can never do in Arcanum:

With a 6 man party consisting of 3 fighter types (one is your main character), a theif, a cleric, and a mage, you fight 8 Ogres including an Ogre Shaman in a dungeon room. First of all you already had your party in a formation that put fighters up front to protect the weaker characters. As the Ogres rush and the Shaman begins casting spells, you pause combat to give the following commands: 1) all 3 fighters rush to meet the oncomming Ogre fighters 2)you have your cleric stay in place away from the main fight and cast a specific protection spell 3) you have your thief switch weapons (which you cant do in arcanum) from his dagger to his bow and move him left to target the shaman without the obstruction of the fighters in the middle 4) you have your mage also stand away from the fight and begin having him cast his haste spell to speed up your party. After unpausing the battle, things are going as you directed and the spells are eventually cast. during the spell castings one of the fighters takes a lot of damage and is badly wounded. You pause again to give new commands. 1) First you need to heal the injured fighter so you have your cleric cast a healing spell. 2) your mage is out of spells (from a previous battle) so you have him move to the right and attack the shaman with his sling. 3) your fighters contunue and your thief has been effective against the shaman (interrupting spells as well as damage) so you let them continue. You unpause the battle and see what happens. While waiting for the healing spell to go off your injured fighter takes more damage so you pause again to have him retreat. You cant go straigt back beacuse of obsticles in your way so decide to go left incase any Ogres who might follow if you went right might stop at your mage who most likely wouldnt survive it. You unpasue again and keep an eye on the injured fighter to make sure he stays away from danger until he is healed. Fortunatelly the healing spell goes off fine and you have the fighter go back into the frey along with the cleric who is out of effective battle spells. eventually a few Ogres are toppeled as well as the Shaman who goes down under the fire from the thief and mage who turn their attention to the remaining Ogres. The battle ends shortly after with all partly members alive but a bit beat up. before you continue through the depths you have your cleric cast her remaining healing spells on the most damages members while your thief loots the bodies and picks the lock of the only chest in the room. Way beyond the "click charachter A then monster B", that you described.

Now, in this situation I was able to do a lot of specific moves and strategies with my party while my main character hacked away with the othr fighters. In arcanum, all characters do their own thing (which is usually rush forward) with absolutely no strategy at all. It would also be nice to give commands like 'heal this other party member', or 'try picking this lock'. A lot more options need to be added to arcanums order menu.

That makes sense due to the tech vs magic arcanum uses. Virgil still can heal tech party members (like Magnus) but I have notices a lower sucess rate. It would still be nice for him to attempt to heal Magnus when he's the only one injures and virgil has a full fatigue bar.

Again, I like both games. Both are very good RPGs and both have flaws. My whole point is that any RPG fan who is unsure of buying either game and is reading this post should know that either one would be a good purchase. But if you only have enough for one, get BG2 and hopfully, by the time you finish, you'll have the money to get Arcanum.

 

yeah I sorta agree but let's not take anything away from arcanum. Baldurs gate had alot of errors like the ones you wrote about. I played all of the baldurs. With one character. There are less foulups but there are there. for example, I have -14 thaco and 10 attacks per round, I should kill a dragon with a mere spit, but no, it takes more than that over 50% of my attacks go astray, and I always check my moster manual to get the stats of the monsters. It's just unfairly made harder. and some bosses in TOB are just nearly impossible to kill it leaves you trying for hours the same 1 minute moment. Also BG is much smaller in possibities. But I like it more since I'm into AD&D more than other things

 

Might as well throw my two cents in....

I played and beat BG and IWD, and started on BG2. I ended up giving BG2 to my cousin 'cause I got bored of it. The biggest problem I see in those games is that they're's pretty much nothing new being introduced, besides the sub-classes in BG2. Of course, some people might like playing a "tried-and-true" style of game, but for me, the combat got old, and the story wasn't really good enough to keep me interested. I also got really frustrated with BG2 in the fact that right off the bat, your party gets all these awesome weapons, and it pretty much takes these weapons to do any damage to even some early monsters. I dunno... being able to get a +5 holy avenger before you've even played more than a few chapters can be a bit disappointing in some ways.

However, I do like the fact you can easily pause combat, and make choices on who should cast what at whom.... I like the pace the BG series' comabt flows. I haven't tried the turn-based system for Arcanum yet, but the real-time system goes a bit fast for me.

In my opinion, in terms of story, there is no comparison between BG and Arcanum. As its already been mentioned, in BG, you get the same responses from pretty much everybody, regardless of intelligence and such; also, BG usually only gives you two options: kick ass, or smart off to the enemy, then kick ass. There's been several instances in Arcanum where I've avoided running errands and quests because I was able to talk my way threw situations... Arcanum has been the only game I've played where one can take a "dipomatic" aproach to problems.

I haven't beaten Arcanum yet, but from what I've played so far, I find it to be far better than the BG series in most every way...

 

The reason why GURPS was pulled from Fallout's development was because there was a possibility for children to be killed in the game (in it's planning). This was, simply, Not Kosher to those in charge of GURPS' side of things, and thusly Interplay's Fallout team did a home-brew RPG system that turned out remarkably well.

Now, as far as BG1/2, IWD, and PS:T. Of that list, PS:T is the ONLY one I can stand to play. Even then, the combat is a bit cheesy. Point, click, yawn at it's finest. Compared to turn-based games like Fallout and JA2 (Jagged Alliance 2), BG just seemed like a giant step back. Hell, comparatively Gold and Silver Box was more fun to play. Those you can plot out moves precisely if you do want control, etc. but overall it seemed a bit better than just watching in dullness as you just select and assign things to kill. I've had times in BG where I would tell my mage to fireball a group of gnolls and for some reason the schmuck would walk up to point-blank and cast the sucker. And yes, that was with the AI turned off. Just for S&G's, I made a scripting that blew the hell out of the default ones made. Then all I had to do was walk to the enemies and the rest of my party would act halfway intelligently while I worry about Number One. Like according to the definition of Player Character and Non-Player Character.

It seems not too many have been through true AD&D gaming sessions to even begin to grasp the meanings set forth by the P&P version. Player Characters are characters you control directly and is the term used to define any character not under your direct control. Non-Player Characters are exactly that. Direct reference, page 150 of the '95 edition AD&D Player's Handbook:

Been meaning that since...old D&D, incidentally. Since the role of the DM is obviously the computer (or rather, the programmers), I think it's easy to see who is a real NPC. Party in BG != NPCs. The line gets muddled by them choosing to come into the party or out, but that's a device some DMs use for an added party experience for some players or "session players" in which a person would be there for the night of play and that was it.

Now, that aside, back to my original point.

The only reason why I do like PS:T is because it's more than a cheap hack and slash with a thin veneer of a story laid over it. Constantly you are making decisions as if you were in an actual environment, much like Arcanum and Fallout. In IWD and BG, things were too limited to "Civilian and Monster". Clearly definable who was who, and you didn't mess with the townsfolk at all or that would be Bad (unless it was the laughable 'assassin' you run into every Inn in BG1). Not quite the same in Fallout or PS:T. Hell, I'm playing again through PS:T and on a whim of what a guy said (Quentin), I killed him and put his name in the dead-book. Nobody really cared, and it was quite comical. I've not done that before, but it seemed darkly comical. Same goes for Fallout for the majority. And, same goes pretty much for Arcanum.

Arcanum vs. BG is rather unfair. A more worthy competition would be Arcanum vs. PS:T, but even then the combat is the main drawback to PS:T - otherwise it would be a neck and neck decision. BG suffers too much of a character stat suspension of belief as meltdown has pointed out one of my old quotes. It didn't matter if you were brilliant or dumb as a brick, the only thing where stats mattered in Baldur's Gate (1 and 2) was in a cheap Monty Haul approach to the AD&D universe. Stats only, and little effect elsewise. For a good laugh, play a really low-intelligence character in Arcanum. In the demo, the reactions are PRICELESS.

Now, the fun thing about targeted shots and hits, particularly with Fallout, is lining up your shot and anticipating what kind of damage you do. Or pick them off in several other ways. Cripple legs or arms...and being able to more accurately judge the timing of your attacks...turn-based has it, hands down.

Prov is right, playing PS:T, the combat feels like I'm a crack-rat hitting the bar for another dose unless I have the autopause set to "I blinked" mode.

 

I've mentioned this before, but i'll say it again. In RPGs, u have two schools: Diablo II school and Arcanum school. BG2 is in the middle. Which is why it is very popular.
Personally, i preferred PS:T to BG2 bcz it leant slightly more to the Arcanum school but it had the AD&D rules.

 

Oh and one more thing... in BG2 with expansion Thorne of Bhaal, u can custom the AI so there is slightly more action.
And what does everyone have against fighting? So what if u cant talk your way out of something. In RPGs, u need a) the magick items the guy has and b) the exp. In ToB, practically all the guys (apart from your fellow bhaalspawn) u can talk yourself out of it neway.

 

Aha. My response rrives.

NOTE: This is a long post. Sorry about that.
*****************************************************************

Saint.

I’m going to try to lay this out so that it is not open to misinterpretation once again. If you are still inclined to litter your responses with insinuations, assumptions and snide remarks which have little bearing on what is being said then go ahead and do so.

My post has little to do with the original thread (sorry kiewts), and is really just about your points and the idea that you continually take them out of context so they can suit your argument. It must be said that your ability to see both sides of the coin is somewhat limited, since your assumptions do date to games several years older than BG2.

This simple fact does lead to a few discrepancies. You argue against the plot of a game you have never played. How exactly are you able to perform this? This is clear why you simply avoided my actual point referring to the origianl context of the word plot. Let’s analyse the first time it was used:

“1)Story - I havent gotten into the story of Arcanum enough yet so cant make a fair comparison. I played both BG1 and 2 and have to say it presented one of the best stories I have see in a game.� (FenderAxe)

Now only FenderAxe can correct me, but it seems to me that the point is about the story of the game. In BG this is the saga of Bhaal, in Arcanum it is the story of Nasrudin. To incorporate all the subquests would take a long time, if you play BG2 and wish to make this analysis, go ahead. Your counter-argument, though, actually has little bearing on what he said:

“In Arcanum, the story is up to you. It's an open ended RPG. There are several paths you can take to reach the end of the game.

I'd say that's better.� (Saint P)

In honesty I see very little relevance between your point and fenderaxe’s. That is not to say it is irrelevant point. Arcanum IS much more open-ended than Baldur’s Gate 2, but by pure logic could you not then make the conclusion that Ultima Online has the best plotline of any game since it allows you to do even more than Arcanum does. This statement is obviously wrong, UO has no plot at all, but by deliberately failing to make the differential between ‘plot’ and ‘gameplay’ this is the kind of logical progression that can be drawn. Plot is plot, not gameplay. Again it should be pointed out that unless you actually play BG2, you have no authority to comment on any part of it’s story-line. I did not over-simplify the point, I merely placed it into actual context.

Briefly on the manual.. I shall only point out the gypsies for identifying items. I am irritated that you decided to go on about the level 5 spell when I think anyone could understand that it is the gypsies who have been causing problems. Going back to the original point made by Fender, I think he’s pretty much completely accurate, no index, no contents page and too little statistical analyisis on skill levels. I think it’s fair to say that the BG2 manual does have all these things properly organised. I will however withdraw my precious statement about the succintness in the manual, almost all of the information you need is present in there. In most cases manuals are not written by the developers anyway, and so it is not a fair thing to really compare games on, in any case I think we’ll all have seen far worse and unhelpful manuals (anachranox anyone?).


In terms of character generation you ask why your wizard can’t pick pockets in an Adnd system. In fact he can, but it requires a much great sacrifice that in Arcanum. To have a pick-pocketing wizard you can dual-class or play a multi-class character, to do this requires a sacrifice to your magical ability, which is representative of the fact that you are thinking more about theiving. Or you can play as a bard who will have perfectly good pick-pocketing and mage throwing abilities. This has both advantages and disadvatages over arcanum, on the one hand you have a big decision which is which can affect the whole way you play the game, on the other hand you can be stuffed when you find a dungeon which has traps you cant disarm.

This brings into play an earlier point you made, your statement about party size and charisma. Where exactly are you getting this information from? To this I make the following quote:

“You can only have a certain number of henchmen based on Charisma in AD&D.� (saint P)

I own the player’s guide, DM guide and other AD&D manuals. You are utterly and completely wrong on this one, unless you refer to ancient first edition rules which I do not have, but also BG2 is based on Second edition anyway. If you are referring to ‘followers’ then that is not based upon charisma, it is based upon the owenership of a stronghold, reputation and the treatment of those followers. Also if you read the players guide (which I assume you have, since you have commented on AD&D, and you need it to play AD&D) the follower numbers originally are calculated with a dice roll.

If you are speaking about the party members let us clarify. Those party members basically represent the people that other humans would play if you were playing table-top AD&D. When was the last time you and a group of friends sat down to play, but then discovered that someone couldn’t since nobody had rolled high enough on their charisma roll? That would suck, wouldn’t it? You get all geared up for a game then can't play!

If there were any such rule in place then the DM guide is pretty blunt on the fact that any and all rules are actually used at the DM’s discretion, since Black Isle are the DM’s, it would be up to them. So even if there was such a ruling (point it out if you have it, I accept the guides are large so I might have missed it) it can be ignored because of the DM.

On Virgil. You make a simple deduction but again argue a different point. Also you ignore that Virgil won’t heal Sogg either, choosing only to talk about magnus. In fact you have glazed over this point on several occasions. I’m not sure, but I think you should take into account the whole paragraph, not just the sentence that includes the word magnus.

Ahh then we get onto the wonderful world of combat, where we both accuse the other of not reading. This should be fun. You seem to revolve your entire argument on right-clicking on character portraits to tell them what to do in a combat situation. Making a small point this is exactly the same as the BG system. In BG you select a character and he attacks the monster, in Arcanum you right-click the character and he attacks the monster. The same ends through different methods, to argue one is better is as fruitless as arguing which end of the egg should be eaten first.

Really you mistook the use of the combat control in the argument. The second I mentioned the word control you leapt to the conclusion that I did not know how to ask my characters to attack another creature. I was quite surprised by this rather strange leap of faith since it had no correlation to what I had said.

“On the subject of combat control. Fenderaxe was talking about total control, the choice of whether or not you wish to have scripts at all.� (JK)

Your quoted response only took into account the first half of this sentence, and the argument you put forward is astounding.

“I gathered that, which is why I pointed out that you can right click on their portraits to issue them orders. You can control them via the orders menu. In fact, I've said this twice now in this thread before mentioning it here.� (Saint P)

Am I honestly the only one here who was bemused by this response? It seems that this response was little more than an attempt to foster the impression that I am a hypocrite, since you then accuse me of not reading your statements. Not only is this conjecture wrong, but it is poorly reasoned. If I had complained about not being able to tell magnus to attack another creature, then I would be being foolish, however I was not and so this response served little purpose than to bewilder me in an attempt to grasp the way you arrived at this statement.

Then you argue (quite correctly I might add) that giving up control of youer character to the computer means you have less control. This is a well-reasoned and unarguable statement. Sadly the magnificence of it was slightly tarnished since it was (yet again) a response made to a point I had not touched upon.

When discussing control in the above quote the point made is that BG2 gives you the choice of whether or not to use scripts while Arcanum does not, therefore BG2 gives you more choices and so more control. It must be pointed out that even if you are running scripts in BG2 you can still override the computer AI. You can tell a thief to pick a lock, or tell a mage to cast a spell, in arcanum the only overriding feature is that of attack and distance.

Now I see the response you would come up with, that wonderful idea of them being NPC’s. Now I’m going to look at BG for a second here, at points during the game the characters who join you say they serve under you and will obey you. If you expand your imagination a tad you could quite easily imagine that when you select a mage and cast a spell it is because the main character might have asked them to do so, and they do it because he is in charge. This circumvents your argument that the game gives you total control over NPC’s. Now if you could do the same process by talking to a mage and asking him to cast a spell you would be a bit closer to how you role-play on a table-top and I guess you wouldn’t have a problem with that. On a computer it wold take longer, would be fiddly and be a hindrance to the smoothness of the game. It is like I said earlier, same ends through different means, I’m sure BI could have instituted this method, but it would seem like a lot of wasted effort. Same ends, different means.

Now I never made this reasoning so I could enjoy the game, I merely present them since they are a reasonable theory of why you have total control over your characters. If that is unrealistic or an impossibility I invite you to challenge it. I quite like it, since it requires imagination, and that is what role-playing is all about.

Now I think you can all accept that this has taken a while to write, I checked in on the forums to see if this argument has progressed and saw that I make “bullshit� claims and can’t argue. I see no reason for this outburst, and I think that dragging any debate down to the lowest denominator is something that only children should do. My post was simply confirming that I would reply, it was not a reply in itself and put forward no based arguments, only suggestions. If you are that easily wound up by a small post I dread to think what happens by the time you get through all of this.

On one final note. I accept that many people have put forward very good reasons as to why one is better than the other and almost all are put forward in a logical manner. BG has its faults, as does Arcanum. I appreciate that some might get irritated by this post. There’s a lot of writing and I know how easy it is to skim-read posts and take it in the wrong way or to miss a vital point (which is one reason why social interaction will never be eliminated, despite what technophobes say). Any discrepancies in my posts that are fair will be noted and withdrawn if they are incorrect, I do not claim to know everything.

And one final thanks to Saint, who has given my life a bit of purpose for the last couple of days.

Cheers all;

~JK~

“Humility is a dish best served to other people�

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: ~JK~ on 2001-09-01 19:59 ]</font>

 

JK

Good post, well-reasoned, well laid out, well 'ard.

I've just downloaded the second patch booted 'er up and headed off to Tarant. As I have said I haven't played enough to make a true judgement on the character development and plot.

I stick to my reservations on the combat side, and I grow more disatisfied with the manual as I try to get to grips with the complexities, some of which are not covered in enough detail, or at all.

On the plus side, I love the graphics, the World Editor and look forward to endless Mods. I also applaud the efforts Troika have put in to getting the patch and the patch for the patch out.

Both Troika and Blck Isle have impressed me with their commitment to their fans and their willingness to take and respond to criticism. Long may both continue to produce games of the quality of Arcanum and BG - and long may we continue to have friendly discussions over the relative merits of all of them.

Sh*t, did that sound pompous or what, somebody for god's sake shoot me - with an LGR.