One of the things that really put me off in BG is the fact that ALL of the items(aside from mundanities) are fixed. If BG III were to randomise them a bit whereas the tougher the NPC/Monster you have to defeat, the more valuable the potential item(so killing kobolds will NEVER result in one dropping a +1 dagger, except in a scripted encounter, but killing the high priest of the "We just LOVE our HAMMERS!" cult may result in him dropping anything from a +2 warhammer to a +1 returning hammer or some such.
I am probably spoiled by games like Pirates of the Western Sea(freeware fantasy CRPG like BG with more primitive graphics but better in many respects) and Natuk(same developer) were the replay value is so high because of this feature. In POWS and Natuk items have a QUALITY(ranging from poor/rusted to Very fine which will affect the damage/protection/etc. values), an ORGIN(Elvish made items are lighter and grant minor bonueses to damage or armor value or whatever while dwarven items are heavier and orcish craftsmanship is the suck(-2 damage and armor). Holy items do more damge to undead and demons while Demonic items do more damage to everyone BUT demons.), an ENCHANTMENT(e.g. Quickness weapons allow for more attacks, Fireproof items(always 'worn' items such as armor and jewelry) grant bonuses to fire resistance etc. and otehr(skill) modifiers.
In BG III something like this could go a long way. In Tom's games(POWS, Nahlakh and Natuk) finding random itesm is almost like playing Magic:The Gathering in that you constantly stumble upon bizarre but effective 'combinations'! Shops are worth visiting throughout the game because you never know when you will happen upon a cloak of cloning or a Holy DragonSlaying crossbow which grants a bonus to your Hide skill when equipped!

Thunderhammer's Smithy should occasionally get new stock in you would think, even if it is nothing greater than a +2 sling of Cure Light Wounds(6 charges) or somesuch.

As far as I'm concerned, it makes infinitely more sense to have fixed items. If you see a mage using a cloak of reflection and you kill him, it makes sense you find a cloak of reflection his body, not a cloak of charming or something.

I agree on the shops though. It shouldn't be too hard to make them change stock every once in a while. Could be annoying though, if you're saving for an item and when you come to buy it, you see it's been replaced with something else...

I agree. One of the things I really enjoyed about Diablo was the fact that you never knew what you were going to get, so it gave you more incentive to keep going and really added to the replayability aspect. The fixed items in BG make it too easy to fall into a trap of playing your game in a certain order to get certain items that you know are there.

I agree that items dropped by an enemy should make sense for that enemy to have in the first place, but I think there should be some randomness in it. Although tougher enemies should drop better quality items than easier enemies.

I gotcha. The reason they are tougher can be in part due to their better items. I think that aside from treasures (ie, gold, gems, ect.), all items looted from the enemy should be items that the can use.

For example, you want to get the Bow of Marksmanship from that bandit leader, you better watch for the arrows that he is firing at you.

Agreed, RuneQuester is IMO spot on, randomizing is cool, but it has to be congruent with the characters (Of course *equipped* items shouldn't magically (no pun intended) change but getting the same shortsword+2 from the same kobold warlord again and again is dull... why not give the kobold a 'pool' from which a shortsword is randomly selected each game, which would also be what he is equipped with.
Just my 2 cts
:borg:

No, I don't mean that the NPC's 'dropped items' should be different than what he is using. In the case of set(named) NPCs they will ALWAYS have set items. I mean when you stumble upon a hypothetical random encounter were some evil mage is leading a band of ogres or somesuch or a chest that is not already slated to contain a specific item might have randomised contents depending on how inaccessible the treasure was(toughness of lock/trap, location, guardian etc.).

I don't mean like Drizzt has a +5 scimitar one time but when you reload he has a +2 spear or some nonsense.

As long as there are those fixed items as well, why not. But I definitely don't want to see the NWN / MMORPG / Diablo idea where your success is dependant on luck. Randomising would be good in giving some pleasant surprises and variation. But the logic of finding the items that enemy was using should still be there. As well as granting a player familiar with the game his advantage of knowing what stuff to find and where.

Also, shops should change stock, but only the less important stuff, adding some new good stuff every once in a while. It's a game, and I don't want to work for one hour hunting that something they used to sell from a hundred different merchants just because of some lousy luck. Wether realistic or not, it isn't fun.

Big Bald Ranger, what you describe with the "pool" is IWD's random treasure generation. I personally don't like it, because after getting that amazingly good axe early in the game on my first playthrough, I gave my warrior full proficiencies in axe in my 2nd game, and of course the axe was nowhere to be found, and he ended up using weapons he had NO proficiency in.

And I don't think randomization makes the game any more replayable. I've played BG2 several times, and it has zero randomization. I struggled to complete Diablo 2 just one time, and wouldn't even think of replaying it, even though everything is random.

Shops getting more items would be interesting. If the game revolves around one city (Baldur's Gate?), and say you return to it at every chapter (if there are chapters), you could find new items have appeared at several shops (more powerful items in later chapters of course), and some of the cheaper stuff you had bought out has been replenished.

the idea of random treasures in chest and somewhat on enemies sounds good, although I agree with what has already been said, if an enemy uses a specific magic item, I want to find that on him. and shops getting new items every ones in a while would be cool, but they shouldn't get more powerful items as the story progresses or as you level up, because that doesn't make sense, why should the shop get items specific designed for your current level? instead they should always have a wide range of items, so my lvl 1 party could either invest in scores of +1 weapons or one +5 weapon. that would make more sense

Big Bald Ranger, what you describe with the "pool" is IWD's random treasure generation. I personally don't like it, because after getting that amazingly good axe early in the game on my first playthrough, I gave my warrior full proficiencies in axe in my 2nd game, and of course the axe was nowhere to be found, and he ended up using weapons he had NO proficiency in.1)If the game is done right you should rarely if EVER get the "really good axe" early in the game.
2)You should NEVER plan your character developement around what MAY drop randomly(i.e. don't take proficiency in Axe because you hope a reaslly good axe will drop. Take it because you already have someone proficient in swords and/or axes are plentiful enough that the odds are better you will find a good one than say, a halberd or whatever).

And I don't think randomization makes the game any more replayable. I've played BG2 several times, and it has zero randomization. I struggled to complete Diablo 2 just one time, and wouldn't even think of replaying it, even though everything is random.This is completely wrong(no offense). First of all randomisation DOES absolutely add replay value to a RPG. That you(and I as well) do not have enthusiasm for Diablo says no more about the value of item randomisation than the fact that I dislike the Yankees means that Alex Rodiguez sucks.
I replay the BG games often as well but that is not because they lack randomization of items. It is because, even with all teh shortcomings adn lack of randomization the games are still fun. They would be infinitely MORE replayable with teh randomization I have described though. This would not change the fixed items aspect at all it would just add add variation to the mix.


@ Equester

the idea of random treasures in chest and somewhat on enemies sounds good, although I agree with what has already been said, if an enemy uses a specific magic item, I want to find that on him. and shops getting new items every ones in a while would be cool, but they shouldn't get more powerful items as the story progresses or as you level up, because that doesn't make sense, why should the shop get items specific designed for your current level? instead they should always have a wide range of items, so my lvl 1 party could either invest in scores of +1 weapons or one +5 weapon. that would make more sense SHops should NOT get better items as YOU progress. They should have their best stuff right from the get go. If the game is done right then a first level character will not be able to AFFORD them until much later :) .

RuneQuester, I think I didn't formulate my statement comparing Diablo 2 and BG2 properly. I took the 2 games as examples of one game I enjoy replaying even though things are fixed, and another I will not replay even though things are random (something that, as I understand, is supposed to enhance replayability). What I was trying to say is that, at least for me, replayability has nothing to do with how random or fixed things are in a game. Or, if you prefer, that randomness does not enhance replayability.

This of course is my very own personal opinion, and it works for me. You mileage may and probably does vary.

I know the "shop gets more powerful item" doesn't quite make sense realistically, but I see it as a slightly more elegant solution than having everything available at different prices. Again, take BG2 and Ribald. Assume we're following your logic: the stuff that appears in chapter 6 should be available as early as chapter 2, but expensive. The problem is that, perhaps only midway through this chapter, you'd have access to things like Staff of Rynn +4. This poses a huge balancing problem for the entire chapter (remember that the ONLY above-+3 available weapon is Carsomyr, and cheese put aside you're not likely to get very early on). How do you counter-balance this sudden increase in power the player has in chapter 4? By making enemies there more difficult? Perhaps not a good decision - what about those who rush to Spellhold? Depending on how the story evolves, I think it is possible to have more powerful items show up later in the game (not as you become more powerful, but as the story progresses) without it sounding too contrived.

Oh yes, and no offense taken whatsoever :) You're entitled to your opinion

I look at the relayability/randomness aspect much like RQ. Knowing that you are likely to get something good, but not knowing exactly what that is going to be, kind of makes it like Christmas - opening a package is just not as much fun if you know what's in it. Of course, this would require that the game is set up in such a way to guarantee sufficient drops of good items, and although less frequently, occasional drops of excellent items, to make it worthwhile. I wouldn't want to have to play for 2-3 hours before something decent comes along, and not even be assured that I have someone who can use the item.

As far as the Diablo/BG comparison goes, D1 was a good game made better by random drops (but I found D2 boring after awhile). BG2, on the other hand, is an excellent game which IMO could have been made even better with random drops.

Clearly this is a matter of opinion. As I happen to disagree with just about everything RuneQuester said.

It's like a good movie. Sometimes a movie is better the next time you watch it, because you're tuned to the right way of thinking. You prepare the right sort of attitude for each scene, and use your own imagination to boost the immersion of the movie.

LoTR: TTT was like this to me. It wasn't that amazing on the first run, but on the second time it was much better. And on third time, I practically cried with enthusiasm.

It may be that randomized items add to a game. I can't say because every game that has had that so far has sucked, but for other reasons. But I can say that I most definitely disagree on that "If the game is done right you should rarely if EVER get the 'really good axe' early in the game.". This is like the perk 'Gifted' in Fallouts. Or the powerarmor in that very same game, that you could get almost immediately after starting the game if you knew what to do. They are choices given to the player. And more freedom of choice only ever adds to an experience.

To me, not having the choice to go get that very good axe in the beginning is exactly what makes the game repeating itself, randomized items or no.

There must be content that is unchanging. There must be fluctuation not dependant on luck, available for the gamer who wishes to experience a different game. There must be that extra advantage available for those faithful that have played the game through 5 times before. To me, that's the most important part of replayability when it comes to items and power. The greatest factor of all, of course, is the plot, the characters and the musics.

The greatest factor of all, of course, is the plot, the characters and the musics. I think we can all agree on that (but I'd add battle gameplay to the list). :)

RuneQuester, I think I didn't formulate my statement comparing Diablo 2 and BG2 properly. I took the 2 games as examples of one game I enjoy replaying even though things are fixed, and another I will not replay even though things are random (something that, as I understand, is supposed to enhance replayability). What I was trying to say is that, at least for me, replayability has nothing to do with how random or fixed things are in a game. Or, if you prefer, that randomness does not enhance replayability.Gotcha. The only thing I disagree with you on here is the very last line. While randomness does NOT guarantee replayability itself(that was never my position), when done right it DOES contribute to replayability. it gives you something to talk about at boards such as these were tons of players have completed the same game a dozern times or more each. WHen all teh items are fixed as they are in BG/BG2 you can't exactly wow anyone here with some 'cool axe' you found after defeating enemy x. EVERYONE found that same axe years ago and nothing has changed.
But in a game with randomization, if your party kills Daevorn in the Cloackwood mines and in one of the chests is a vorpal sword +1 or a Dagger of invisibility, while potentially unbalancing(though not necessarily so) it would really add to the fun factor of replaying the game.

To really understand what I am getting at here you would have to have played Natuk or POWS(which most here probably won't as the graphics in thoise sharware/freeware classics are WAYYY behind the curve). Diablo, while entertaining and good in it's own right is not a terrific example of item randomization.


I know the "shop gets more powerful item" doesn't quite make sense realistically, but I see it as a slightly more elegant solution than having everything available at different prices. Again, take BG2 and Ribald. Assume we're following your logic: the stuff that appears in chapter 6 should be available as early as chapter 2, but expensive.No, not just "expensive". PROHIBITIVELY expensive! While the effect may be the same, it is less 'artificial' as a restriction. IF the good axe costs 10,000 gp(and especially if we do away with re-spawning monsters which is a dumb convention anyway IMO) the PCs will not be able to afford it until they are of a level appropriate to using such.


The problem is that, perhaps only midway through this chapter, you'd have access to things like Staff of Rynn +4. This poses a huge balancing problem for the entire chapter (remember that the ONLY above-+3 available weapon is Carsomyr, and cheese put aside you're not likely to get very early on). How do you counter-balance this sudden increase in power the player has in chapter 4?Again, there are a ton of ways but chiefly by making it prohibitely unaffordable. If it is a fixed item with potantial for unbalancing the game then perhaps the shopkeeper requires a monumental favor(quest) to be performed before he can sell the item to the PCs.

In any case this is a whole 'nother matter from the item randomising.


By making enemies there more difficult? Perhaps not a good decision - what about those who rush to Spellhold? Depending on how the story evolves, I think it is possible to have more powerful items show up later in the game (not as you become more powerful, but as the story progresses) without it sounding too contrived.Agreed. I am all for freedom and non-linear gameplay.

Oh yes, and no offense taken whatsoever You're entitled to your opinion :D


Clearly this is a matter of opinion. As I happen to disagree with just about everything RuneQuester said.Which, of course, disqualifies your opinion as invalid :D .

It's like a good movie. Sometimes a movie is better the next time you watch it, because you're tuned to the right way of thinking. You prepare the right sort of attitude for each scene, and use your own imagination to boost the immersion of the movie.

LoTR: TTT was like this to me. It wasn't that amazing on the first run, but on the second time it was much better. And on third time, I practically cried with enthusiasm.A bit of a false analogy though. A movie is a NON-interactive experience where the whole of your enjoyment comes from what you percieve and how you relate to it. The second and third time around you may percieve things you missed before, be in a different mood or otherwise relate differently.

Randomised items in RPGs are to crpgs what the "Free Parking" house rule is to Monopoly(the one where you pay fines and taxes to the center of the board and whoever lands on Free Parking gets all of the money thus far accumulated there).
It just adds something to teh game without taking anything away.

It may be that randomized items add to a game. I can't say because every game that has had that so far has sucked, but for other reasons.Not every game adn whichever ones MAY have "sucked" is again a matter of opinion. Natuk as well as many roguelikes would not be worth replaying if not for the item randomising. Not only do the random drops add a "coolness factor" but they often change the way you play the game from a tactical POV.


But I can say that I most definitely disagree on that "If the game is done right you should rarely if EVER get the 'really good axe' early in the game.". This is like the perk 'Gifted' in Fallouts. Or the powerarmor in that very same game, that you could get almost immediately after starting the game if you knew what to do. They are choices given to the player. And more freedom of choice only ever adds to an experience.I think you misunderstood me(or I did not express my self well). What I was saying is that, if an item would be unbalancing adn ruin the fun of the game in the hands of a low-level party then it probably should NOT be generally attainable by such parties. That is what I meant by "Rarely if EVER...". Depends on a lot of factors but generally you don't want a level one pickpocketing a beggar and getting a +5 Holy Avenger or somesuch. AN easter egg that is so well hidden that only vets will generally know about it anyway is one thing but otehrwise...

I think we agree on the non-linearity aspect. I do not enjoy being forced into a particular path through the game and that is one reason why I want randomised items.

To me, not having the choice to go get that very good axe in the beginning is exactly what makes the game repeating itself, randomized items or no.?
I didn't follow that.

There must be content that is unchanging. There must be fluctuation not dependant on luck, available for the gamer who wishes to experience a different game.Randomised items does not mean that the whole game becomes some excercise in lucky dice rolling or somesuch. The aquiring of such items would STILL be based on skill adn tactics and ingenuity. it's just that, wereas in a fixed game you will ALWAYS get the +2 dagger of backstabbing when you defeat the foozle, in a randomised game you can get some variation...a cloak which grants a +5% bonus to thief abilities or a cursed hlmet which improves STR by +2 while decreasing WIS by -4(would depend on the character who wore the helmet whether this was advantageous or something requiring a reload).

The way D&D handles items in general is kind of lame adn not conducive to variation/randomising but I stillf eel the game would benefit by this.


There must be that extra advantage available for those faithful that have played the game through 5 times before.That "advantage" would STILL be there! I don't see how adding random items to the mix would change that. You would STILL be able to go get the ANkeg Shell armor in Nashkell if you wanted. It's just that there would be a chacnce that Greywolf might have something just as worthwhile(or more so for your particular party). You would then have OPTIONS! For those of us who don't want to play the exact same game doing the exact same things again and again, we might choose to go take down GreyWolf or Mulhaney and see what we get.


To me, that's the most important part of replayability when it comes to items and power. The greatest factor of all, of course, is the plot, the characters and the musicsIf they can hire decent writers to craft a decent plot/story/characters or musicians to tack on a good score then good! I am all for it. But to me this is a secondary consideration. A good RPG does not necessarily need good story believe it or not(roguelikes are a good example) but bad game mechanics will bring down ANY RPG.

[ September 10, 2004, 19:35: Message edited by: RuneQuester ]

I think that what they did with Ribalds "special" items (the ones you can access in ch. 6 after paying 50gp) was a good way of prohibiting items in stores. However it should be a implimented differently (such as completing missions for a particually pretigious mercheants guild, which you can only acieve once you are considered powerfull enough.

Also with the randomisation there would have to be other aspects to be considered, for example, a mage would not be carrying around an uber heavy set of + whatever armour.

I like the idea of the Natuk items (I started the game, but didn't play it for long - due to the graphics) It would greatly vary the game and add new aspects to it.

To really understand what I am getting at here you would have to have played Natuk or POWS(which most here probably won't as the graphics in thoise sharware/freeware classics are WAYYY behind the curve). Diablo, while entertaining and good in it's own right is not a terrific example of item randomization. Dated graphics have never really bothered me (unless they're ugly, which IMO is a different thing entirely). So, I may give those games a try, once I get a bit more free time in Real Life :(

No, not just "expensive". PROHIBITIVELY expensive! While the effect may be the same, it is less 'artificial' as a restriction. That actually feels even more artificial to me. A +1 axe costs 500gp, but the +2 version 10,000 because it works (say) against vampires? The gap in price is simply too large. And, by the time you do have enough money to buy it, you would probably have found an even better weapon... thus making the shop more or less useless. One of the things I REALLY like about BG2: it's one of the few games where I end up buying so many items from shops (as opposed to, say, IWD)

I think we agree on the non-linearity aspect. I do not enjoy being forced into a particular path through the game and that is one reason why I want randomised items. Perfectly agreed. I don't enjoy linearity either, and it's the one thing I like about BG1 more than BG2. However, I simply don't feel that randomization makes things less linear. It simply makes things more... random.

There is something less than satisfactory about random items in the games I've played: the addition of skills in the item feels completely random (this strikes me as a great flaw in Diablo's item generator), and this combined with the lack of historical notes (like IE games') makes the items have no personality whatsoever. No Lilarcor, no Carsomyr, etc.

Now if the randomization were to apply only to the "generic" items (you get an axe +2 instead of a ring of protection +1, for example), then this creates a different kind of problem: the randomization is kind of useless, because the "excitement" factor is gone.

The way I see it placement of items in the game world is a very important aspect of game design, as much (if not more) than quest and monster placement. How to make players look forward to using the new items without making the old ones completely obsolete. In Diablo 2 I played the ENTIRE game (including the expansion) as a sorcererss, using one mace that I had found at the beginning of the game (halfway through act 1). To me, that is an example of VERY bad design. And if the game mechanics actually let you do this, then there's something wrong. With fixed items it's at least MUCH easier to avoid such a trap.

Actually, I wouldn't even mind a situation where there were fixed items, but the location varies. For example, in BG2, there's no particularly good reason that I can see why Celestial Fury has to be in the Guarded Compound; why not have it so that it could be anywhere else; one time in, say, the docks, another in Trademeet, etc.(heavily guarded, of course).

Or would this just end up being a frustration to those people who want a specific item, but don't know where to find it?

Yes that would.

That's just the kind of thing that would eradicate the use of any previous experience with the game.

I've played BG2 numerous times, for example, in a "fast game mode" meaning that I just go through the most essential quests getting the most essential items and then quickly wade through the game. If I had to do an unknown number of extra quests each time just to get what I want, then I'd have to use Shadowkeeper to begin with. Either way, that would reduce the replay value tremendously.

Foradasthar, things would be even worse if items were completely random, because then you might end up doing ALL quests without finding any of those items you're looking for (then again, if the game was random you probably wouldn't be looking for them in the first place). Still, you'd have to do many quests for no reason other than hoping you get a useful item. Not exactly my idea of "fast game mode".

Seems you read wrong somewhere Ziad. All this time I've made my stand against randomized items, and FOR fixed items and fixed positions for them.

Yes, I definitely did. My bad.

Sorry about that :)

There is no reason to randomise everything, that would be pointless. You always keep weapons armour and quest items fixed, if the items you take from a corpse are gonna be different for any reason whatsoeva, is that you are a higher level character, and the monster you defeated no longer has a simple bastard sword and composite long bow, but some +2 weapons, or slightly magical, but this is debatable. As for treasures such as gold and jewels etc. they can be randomised if needs be (not that it matters much).

Shops could be randomised, not in the way that they always have different goods, (that would be irratating) but each day of the week, the goods are circualted around so that in order to buy that certain long sword you've been saving up for, you have to be in a certain shop on a certain day of the week, this would create a feeling of shopping at a franchise and being slightly paranoid your being ripped off, but more interesting for those of you who really can't stand fixed items.

And then you'd have to run around each and every shop trying to find where that damned sword meant. A bit too frustrating and pointless for my taste. Not to mention it doesn't make much sense for the items to circle around (a franchise in the middle ages? don't think so)

Gold, jewels and minor treasures are already random in BG2. I really doubt any of us ever notices though.

I think I must still be expressing this idea wrongly or something because it seems some of you do not quite get what I am trying to get across.

Essential/historical/named items/artifacts (Corsymer, Hand of Vecna etc.) would NOT be randomised. You could play through the entire game exactly as you do BG1 & 2. If you do not care for random items, their inclusion would have NO real effect on the game.

What I am getting at is that NON-scripted encounters wherein a specific NPC is NOT to drop a specific treasure, the items the monster/npc DOES drop would maintain a certain fixed "value" based upon how tough an opponent the creature is, but the exact nature of the item in question would be variable. Say there is a dragon cave in location X, Y of area XXXX. This cave adn this encounter(with the dragon) can be totally ignored by the player. It is not part of the overall plot(a side quest maybe).
For players who(for whatever reason) DO want to seek out such encounters and manage to defeat said dragon, instead of always dropping a '+4 vorpal sword of cucumber slicing' or whatever the dragon MAY drop a '+3 Warhammer of Tomato-crushing' or a '+2 suit of Plate mail that protects against watermelon splatter'(These are just off the cuff examples. I have no fixation with Gallagher.) or whatever.

Such randomization would have NO detrimental effect on the game and WOULD add to replay value. For those who don't care to step outside the main plot and fixed items, you could replay the same game the same way to your heart's content!
For those of us who are less inclined to such, we might try replaying games with all sorts of differtent strategies adn tactics making use of the randomized features(e.g. "I started a new game and decided to head right for the bugbear cave instead of doing the celery quest first and managed to beat the bugbear chieftain(was an incredibly hard fight that I had to reload a few times) who dropped a +1 dagger...".

This is really hard to illustrate because I think most here have only played a few games like Diablo that had less atractive item randomization and the best games to really make use of the feature I am describing featured 2D top-down oldschool graphics(circa Ultima 5/6) and so will not likely entice anyone here.

As far as shops go, again this would not in any way affect 'fixed' items. If 'Bo Bo's magic emporeum ' is supposed to have the Claw of Kazgaroth after you defeat the brigands in chapter 2 then it will have said item! In the meantime it may have other random items within a fixed value/price range(not +1 sword in chapter 5 and a +6 vorpal in chapter 1 ). If the shop is readily accessible to first level characters in chapter one then the shop will not have items that will unbalance the game which the players can easily purchase/steal.

There would also be none of the "Search every shop for the item you need to beat chapter 3" crap.

I consider that items should not be COMPLETELY random, but where for example an Orc chieftain would normally drop a +1 spear, this could be randomized so it might be a normal spear or a javelin (if they put such things in) or a +2 spear. But it would be silly if you killed someone who had a katana and they dropped a mace, or a slime had armour on.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And I don't think randomization makes the game any more replayable. I've played BG2 several times, and it has zero randomization. I struggled to complete Diablo 2 just one time, and wouldn't even think of replaying it, even though everything is random.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Me too, but in BG2 people can just go to the places where they know there is a certain weapon and get it. When ( as above) people spend proficiencies on weapons they anticipate getting, then thats not a good thing at all.
However, WELL hidden eastereggs for experienced players would be OK IMHO.

[ September 16, 2004, 04:22: Message edited by: Yirimyah ]

Heh. RuneQuester, what you describe is very little different from what BG already is. As some people said here, it already randomizes items gained from normal battles. And check BG2 to see how many dragons there are that aren't tied to the plot. Perhaps Firkraag and that Shadow Dragon aren't exactly *tied* to the plot but they're an important part of it nevertheless. Firkraag is a part of the paladin stronghold quest and holds some little extra about Gorion, and carries one of the most powerful items in the game. While Shadow Dragon must be at least passed if not confronted for you to be able to raise your love-interest in Chapter 7.

But yes I do agree with that if the bandits and such sometimes actually drop something useful instead of the mundane +1 swords and a few unknown albeit worthless gems all the time, it would add to the game. But I have to say that just about all of the more powerful items must be fixed, and must be attainable from the same source every game. If I played to that dragon that had nothing to do with the plot and ran into the problem of getting a new kind of weapon, although a powerful one that I couldn't use, then what's the point?

Randomization as long as it doesn't interfere with the gameplay is good, no doubt about it. But it's a thin line. As randomization that does NOT interfere with the gameplay would have to be virtually nonexistant. Especially in the case of games such as BG where your party composition fully determines what you can and cannot use. The planning that non-first time players go through has to pay off.

The inherent problem with any sort of randomisation is that it's either pointless (ring of prot +1 or short sword +2 in Chapter 6, yay!) or it can create severe problems with game balance.

I'd say that one has to take another approach.

The big question is, how to ensure that *any* party gets at least *some* decent items they can use, in order to be able to have the means to tackle the increasing difficulty. A party full of fighters won't do much with Robe of Vecna, no matter how powerful this artefact is. Neither does a party without a Paladin do anything with the Holy Avenger.

So.. why not create some sort of a rating system for the party itself? Like, how many fighters, how many clerics, how many mages and so forth. Where has the party's fighters put their proficiency points in? Has the party's thief (if any) put any points into hide & stealth or just lockpicking?

Stuff that drops would then be adjusted by these ratings. A warrior-heavy party would find more plate mails and two-handed swords, whereas a mage-heavy party would see many robes, cloacks and daggers. *Not* exclusively, of course!

Killing the equivalent of Firkraag should *guarantee* a super-powerful drop. But it doesn't need to be set in stone that this drop has to be for the party's Paladin. It might as well be the ultimate find for the party's mage. Just as long as there's some sort of a bookkeeping system that ensures that killing the Shadow Dragon doesn't give something super-powerful to the *same* character!

How does this approach sound like?

Jukka, what you describe in your post sounds very much like the way items were randomly generated in Dungeon Hack, except that game was single-player. Using a similar algorithm for party items would work really well, IMO. I really liked in Dungeon Hack how (unlike Diablo 2, and even BG2) every single item I found was usable by the character I was running. Whether it was useful or not depended entirely on how I was playing the character, and that could be adjusted to the items I was finding, so it works both ways. Balancing such an approach in a party-based game sounds like a real challenge though.