View Full Version : Missing Baldur's Gate 2 Mage Battles
Tue, 10th Sep '02, 2:09am
I got a question:
How many people adored BG 2 for all the great magic battles to break down the wizards shields and defenses? I found it became a real science for me and put a different slant on an otherwise melee based combat game.
[ September 10, 2002, 19:31: Message edited by: Taluntain ]
Tue, 10th Sep '02, 2:20am
Im thinking that unless you edit that, so it contains some relivence to IWDII, its going to be moved ....
So I dont get yelled at for posting something that has nothing to do with the topic :p :
I just wacked the mages with the SotM, worked for me when I soloed.
Tue, 10th Sep '02, 2:56am
I just think that they should have stuck to that formula and should have put it in IWD 2 rather than drilling us with tons of monsters which makes it just hack and slash. Hmmm?
Tue, 10th Sep '02, 3:10am
The thing is, this is IWD 2 not a continuation of BG, so you should be comparing it against the type of game IWD was not BG2.
Tue, 10th Sep '02, 3:20am
3e doesnt have many spells that you have to get rid of before you can even hit the person. It has plenty of spells that make the caster harder to hit, and/or makes the enemy's chances to hit even lower by affecting its Str or some other affect to hitting.
And the fact that IWDII was specifically said to be more hack'n'slash than BGII and mroe roleplay orientated than IWDI should have clued you in . . .
Tue, 10th Sep '02, 5:07pm
I haven't got IWD2 yet (I hate living in Finland, since all games come out about a month later here :( ), but I think I'm going to like it more than BG2, because one of the few things i hated in BG2 was the damn wizards and their spells (grr... protection from normal/magical weapons... :mad: )!
Tue, 10th Sep '02, 11:07pm
I never much cared for that 'rock,paper,scissors' style of mage dueling. "haha, I have one more spell trigger than you have breach/ruby ray combo. I win!"
And the AI for the spellcasters in IWD2 is so much better its not even funny.
Wed, 11th Sep '02, 11:34pm
No, but the enemy caster makes up the fact with lots and lots of dominate.
The game is not melee oriented. You can certainly play an all barbarian party, but a sorcerer by far is the most powerful class and easy to solo class in the game. Fire shield blue + red + mirror image + stoneskin kills far faster than any barbarian can hope to dish out. This is just one of the spell combos.
Thu, 12th Sep '02, 12:41am
but to get to that spell combo you must survive long enough to get to that high of a level . . .
Thu, 12th Sep '02, 2:22am
You havent played far if you think Soloing will be easy, have you?
I also havent encountered domination, but have had plenty of hold persons cast on me ... which really sucks cause taht leaves only my Cleric and Sorcerer avalible to fight ....
Thu, 12th Sep '02, 3:40am
Actually, if you solo a sorcerer, it is the only the start that's actually hard. There are few key spells that makes the game just easier and easier.
level 2. web
level 3. fireball, combined with web
level 4. Improved invsiblity
level 5. Animated dead and stone skin, (the game just do downhill from here, as summoned undead are stronger than any fighter of the same level)
the rest just really dosn't matter once you have animated dead, fireshields, and stoneskin.
Keep in mind, if you solo, you gain xp a lot faster, so it is very possible to gain level 5 spells early on in the game.
Thu, 12th Sep '02, 12:00pm
Well, Improved Invincibility is bugged into ludicrousness. Once you have that spell, there is only a couple bad guys who will actually fight you.
Even without that, though, the sorceror would be the easiest class to solo with. Remember, you are going to be substantially higher level than the areas intend since you will be getting 3 or 4x as much xp as a full party. A single apocalyptic Boneguard was a dangerous to my 14th lvl party. Having several of those running around grinding up the chapter 3 & 4 monsters for you would be sick.
[ September 12, 2002, 12:03: Message edited by: Vormaerin ]