Okay, we have discussed, weapons, monsters, and storyline. Which rules should it play by? I think a combo of 1 and 2 should be the set of rules. NWN was based on D&D 3 rules and I was lost with alot of the spells and monsters and rules. But that is because when I played I played rules 1 and 2. But since BGI and II were based on earlier rules than BG III, I believe it should follow the same course.

It will be 3.5 rules, period. They need the D&D license for the game, and the D&D people will insist on it. Using a deprecated rule set draws sales and cross-promotion away from their current books out. They did, of course, create a new version for a reason after all. It's not gonna happen any other way. Sorry to disappoint.

It's already been said that it will be 3.5e... there's really no debate, as DR said. WoTC always insist on the game using the latest rules at the time the development starts.

Maybe they won't implement every spell there is, just like they didn't in their previous games. So you probably won't "get lost with alot of the spells and monsters and rules". And even if so there's always this forum ;)

IMO, the more spells the merrier. I would be happy if BG3 had even more than BG2...

I think there are a lot of "wasted" spells that don't see any use at all in the BG and IWD games. I say go for quality rather than quantity (as the old adage goes). Not too concerned with whatever edition rules they decide to use as long as it's well balanced and doesn't take away from absorbing gameplay.

Some of those 'wasted' spells come into their own when playing solo or with a small party that is missing certain key skills but are useless in a complete party (e.g. some of the mage buffs are pointless when they can hide behind tanks).

This does not apply to "Infravision" though which I have always found to be useless.

I hope they make lighting and racial vision modes count. I know they won't as nobody has done that yet, but I still hope. 3:rd edition rules do take blindfighting into account afterall, and I think it would add much to the game when you had to consider the element of surprise in using that night / darkvisioned elf / dwarf instead of the torch-wielding human to sneak in.

Yeah, the more the spells the merrier. I don't particually care if there are substandard spells implemented - If there are I wont memorise them simple as that. Spells help to add depth to the game - It greatly helps set a great rpg (BG, IWD, Planescape etc.) from an awful one (Dungeon seige, Diablo etc.)

Although it would be good to include cases when each spell comes into use - I admit I seldom used more than 50% of the BG II spells, especially some divinations like farsight or oracle, for example.
Still, I prefered the rule system BG II used over the 3rd edition in NWN and its expansions. I really hope it will come back, at least in some tweaks. (sigh)

Well the thing about spells are not that you always need them all - beacuse you never do need them all. Why they're all there, is because if you need them - maybe only once - then you can use them. Even though many spells tend to sometimes be very confusing, a lot of them can make things easier in a time of need.

Maybe I'm just being pissy, but I hate 3rd edition, maybe it's because I loved 2nd edition so much, I played it since I was 10, and I look at 3rd edition and it seems like a bastardization of everything I enjoyed. You are now required to take what were optional skills, the rolls are confusing and if you have the bad luck to have a bad score in some ability you are penalized for it drastically... *sighs* Aside from that, I do not know if I will be buying Baldurs Gate 3, Black Isle is dead, Interplay is dead, I haven't bought an RPG since ToB... I just think that the 3rd edition rules have made too many things that were Optional, Mandatory.. A very bad move in my opinion.. Sure, you don't HAVE to do it, but that doesn't mean you won't be forced to by a DM.

Oh one last rant before I go.. THE ART, arg, the characters are so damn pretty in the 3rd edition book I feel ugly next to the half-orc. -_- I just don't think thats how it should be, all of the art in the second edition (and first edition) books was very nice looking, the people in the pictures looked good, but they looked Normal; and that there is the difference, the new pictures look so.. anime-ized.. that it is disturbing to me, I enjoy the realistic pictures in the second edition books, they were the 'classic' sort of fantasy art and were very well done... Alright, I'm going to stop ranting now, pardon me..

BG was such a good game I didn't like the fact that they changed it in BG II, but out of loyalty I gave it a try and eventually got used to it. I tried neverwinter nights and hated it. I think they should stick with what ppl know and love. If I see a demo of BG III and it's not very similar to BG 1 or 2, I don't think I'll get it. I feel like I totally wasted my money on Neverwinter nights. seeing I have never played it more than a day or two. If ppl like DIABLO they will buy DIABLO not BG3 so why not just simply stick with a good thing and not screw it up. If BG was soooo sucessful that they want to make a third version, why not stick with what they know makes the customers happy? Ahh I'm rambling now so I'll shut up. :o

"I think they should stick with what ppl know and love."

and then these same people will say:
"we got one of the same.. no inovation no new ideas.."

I think nwn was the best thing since sliced bread
and it gave a huge boost to rpging worldwide.
Of course there were flaws but i can't think of
one thing that has none.

Let's just wait and see how dragon age will be.
I'm confident that it will be a game to remember.

I think it'll be 3rd, with little changes. Because of computer

I've heard many people say that the best it could be is true 2nd, but personally, I hope they tweak a lot of stuff for the computer. Remember, p&p rules were made to make the game simple on p&p. There are a lot of things that are different on a computer and things that worked well on one may not on the other.
Example: Limited Wish (or Wish) in BG2 were both little more than gags and really not useful at all, but in p&p, they can be increadible spells because you can tell the DM what you want.
Example: On the computer you could easily make area spells like fireball and lightning bolt be more effective in the center and less on the edges. This would be realistic and add a new (though small) element to the game, but they'd never do that in p&p because it'd be too complicated, too many calculations.
Example: They could make many skills, especially weapons (I know they aren't skills, but bear with me) upgraded through uses per level or the like instead of with skill points on the computer, but again p&p would find this far too complicated.
I hope they make this a good, open-minded mixture. As for spells, the more the merrier and if you get lost, that's what pause and the manual are for.

Like has been said, it will be a 3.5e game, because nowadays, that is what the P&P audience knows (not necessarily loves, but knows; I've had several people tell me that they play 3.5e, because that's all they can find, but they like 2e).

Ah, but with a name like Baldur's Gate, the game audience isn't necessarily going to be familiar with D&D. When I played BG1, I had never played a p&p rpg in my life, had no clue what the rules were, and knew little more about it than the class archetypes. The same is true of everyone I know that has played andy BG. On top of that, from what I know, neither BG1 nor BG2 followed any particular set of rules too closely. I could be wrong on that last part, however the principal is true that people come to a computer game expecting to learn the system. With a series like BG this is less true, but still applicable.

yes

By the time BG3 comes out, if it does at all, 3.5 might not be the latest edition anymore. I don't foresee any 4E in close future, but who knows if they aren't going to come up with a 3.75 and mess around a bit with class stats. I would really, really love to get a 2E BG3 (not like I'm not going to give Icewind Gate a go, either), but as it's been said, it won't be.

I dislike 3e because of the lack of weapons, lack of planescape, lack of xvarts, etc. etc. Skills are the PITS. I don't want to spend 30 minutes upgrading my character and choosing between skills that do nothing. The blackguard, for example, requires ranks in hide. WTF?? A lot of nice spells were nerfed, like faerie fire.

I think everyone dislikes new rules to start with. You become a novice again just like everyone else, having to read the descriptions of what everything does. Eventually you get to grips with it and I quite like NWN now, even though I hated it to start with. 3.5E still annoys me cause the descriptions of everything are so vague :mad:

Pfeh!! I thought Jan Jansen was an illusionist rather than a necromancer. I guess I was wrong.

I would like BGIII to use the 3.5E rules, because I play PnP on them.

My only experiences of the older rules come from BG and BG2.

I have played rpg"s for years and have seen 1st and second edition rules come and go now and cant stand 3rd edition. I love the BG series and will play it again and again until my copy disinegrates. I cant stand to play NWN the only reason I played it through until the end was because I spent the money on the game to begin with. I will buy BGIII if it comes out but im thinking it will not be anything like the other ones

Aye, will second that. Played NWN and expansion packs for about 4 months and then went back to BG. Cannot stand the game now. Might see if NWN2 is better. I played BG since I was 5 (!) and can't bear to see what they did to the best RPG setting for decades. 3rd edition in BG-type setting would just seem wierd to me.

3rd edition in BG-type setting would just seem wierd to me. I'm guessing that you haven't played Icewind Dale 2 then. 3rd edition rules in the Infinity game engine. Worked really, really well (whether the story was great is another issue, my point is that 3rd edition worked well IMHO).

3rd edition allows for so much more flexibility and balance than 2nd and D&D games using this system run really well.

And there is no point wondering if BGIII will be 3.5. If it's ever made it will use current rules sets. There is no question about it. Personally I think it's a good thing. To me 2nd edition seems old, dated and past its use by date.

Oh an btw, NWN2 is good, but if you don't like 3rd edition rules and didn't like the first game, I can't imagine that you'll like it much.

First of all, BG is dead. It is a legacy, and its glory days are long gone. To me, Baldur's Gate and all its predacessors were brillant works of art (ok fine, TotSC was merely "good", but still). The storyline has been concluded, and the trilogy came to a close years ago. After years of closure, how would all of you feel if you were to experience the same sort of letdown with BGIII that NWNII had to offer? I don't think my heart could take the hit, honesty. Let the series rest in peace, people! And to answer the question, I would honestly prefer the 3.5e rules for BGIII (must as I would hate to see such a game surface). For while 3.5e arguably created new balance issues, I personally feel that it solved more problems than it created. IWDII's 3e rules, while it was obviously not at the level BG/BGII was at in terms of plot, really helped to smooth things out IMO. AC was also made much simpler (and in a good way, too), and you no longer needed a calculator and a math major to figure out your f***ing chance to hit someone. Seriously, THAC0 and its ilk were a wee bit ridiculous. Saves were also much-improved, and were compressed into 3 broad categories, which was very useful when trying to find out whether or not you should be dead, especially in D&D. However, since using a computer tends to nullify most of the issues that I brought up, really the only reason that I would wish for BGIII to go 3e would be for the increased character customization--although IWDII didn't implement the skill factor very well, I really thought that it had the potential to supplement my character(s) more extensively. 2e was just a bit too "old school" for me, even if those were the glory days...sometimes it's time to move on.

At the rate BG3 development is going atm, it may end with D&D 4.0 rules, or higher!

If people think 3.5e is good, 3e better and 2e best (as most people in this thread pointed out), I figure 4e rules would suck. It'd be like playing Dungeon Siege where you had to place scrolls on your spell book to cast it and replace it with another scroll to cast another spell -sucks-.

Anyway, I enjoyed IWD2 just as I enjoyed BG and BG2, so I guess 2e or 3e would be great for BG3. Like all the others, I wish it would'nt be like NWN. I enjoyed NWN, SoU, HotU (somehow). But I also had issues with the game. If BG3 is a console port, then it'd be like NWN, hopefully not. There's just something about playing crpgs with chasecam that I don't like... *shivers*

[ November 24, 2006, 04:57: Message edited by: Half-elven Duergar ]

AC was also made much simpler (and in a good way, too), and you no longer needed a calculator and a math major to figure out your f***ing chance to hit someone. Seriously, THAC0 and its ilk were a wee bit ridiculous. Saves were also much-improved, and were compressed into 3 broad categories, which was very useful when trying to find out whether or not you should be dead, especially in D&D.I miss THAC0 :(

Really it wasn't any harder, all you had to do was subtract your target's AC from your THAC0 and it told you what to roll. The only difference is that now you add your hit bonus to your opponets AC. All they did was flip it around, but I got used to the 2nd edition style... and there are few things like saying THAC0 phonetically.

[ November 25, 2006, 00:58: Message edited by: ChickenIsGood ]

THAC0=funny word lol. I know it wasn't really any harder to compute, but it was pretty unintuitive IMO...

notice how supporters of 2e always talk more about how attached they are to the 2e rules instead of valid reasons why 2e is better than 3e

@ Ion
Not better, different. I like some features but can't stand the level up method of 3e. Unfortunately for the multi classing I like it's necessary not to have separate leveling up requirements for the classes.