Welcome to Talking Time's third iteration! If you would like to register for an account, or have already registered but have not yet been confirmed, please read the following:
The CAPTCHA key's answer is "Percy"
Once you've completed the registration process please email us from the email you used for registration at percyreghelper@gmail.com and include the username you used for registration
Once you have completed these steps, Moderation Staff will be able to get your account approved.
Icewind Dale II did also adapt some 3E rules to an engine built for 2E rules so I can imagine having to learn a new ruleset was also a hurdle for people used to what was in the previous games...especially when it looks so much like said previous games.
I mean yeah, Neverwinter Nights went 3E as well, but between having a new engine geared towards custom content creation and the support for online play it's no wonder why people were more forgiving of that one in the long run.
I just played through BG! I think the key for pausing less is picking characters that work well with the AI scripts. Any character that just wants to attack is fine. Crowd control mages do okay but tend to cast Sleep on skeletons. Blasters are very finicky for reasons I don't understand. If only one character needs micro, you can select that character during battles.
Be aware that you will probably need to tweak the AI script, and you will definitely need to do it for characters of your own creation. The script can be found in "customize" under the face menu.
I'm currently playing through IWD with a fighter/cleric tanking for five sorcerers. The party takes a lot of naps, but they're extremely efficient otherwise.
I understand the dislike for THAC0 when playing without a computer, but what's the issue when you're not doing the math? (Yes, making "big number better" was a big improvement in 3e, but 2e has the same issue with AC as with THAC0, and far fewer people complain about that)
I understand the dislike for THAC0 when playing without a computer, but what's the issue when you're not doing the math? (Yes, making "big number better" was a big improvement in 3e, but 2e has the same issue with AC as with THAC0, and far fewer people complain about that)
I think people use THAC0 to stand in for the general confusion about figuring out what stats you want to be high and what stats you want to be low. I agree though it's mostly not a problem beyond the initial confusion of figuring that out.
That being said, there definitely are item descriptions should be reworked for clarity and consistency, because there are some pieces of equipment that describe themselves as granting for example a +2 bonus (which would be bad, because you want low numbers) when what they actually give is a -2 bonus (which is good). This is not actually a huge problem (at least in the EEs, never played the originals) because you can just equip it and see if it actually makes your stats better or worse. But it is kind of annoying.
Oh, for sure, the game can't even keep those straight.
Off the top of my head, I think every derived number on your character sheet is "small number better" outside of your damage bonus, which was... certainly a choice.
I just played through BG! I think the key for pausing less is picking characters that work well with the AI scripts. Any character that just wants to attack is fine. Crowd control mages do okay but tend to cast Sleep on skeletons. Blasters are very finicky for reasons I don't understand. If only one character needs micro, you can select that character during battles.
Be aware that you will probably need to tweak the AI script, and you will definitely need to do it for characters of your own creation. The script can be found in "customize" under the face menu.
Oh yea, the AI scripts! I never really tried relying on those much before, or at least not in ways that were deliberate. I'm sure I've enjoyed plenty of times my fighters would acquire a new target after defeating their most imminent gibberling. Stuff like this, or esp using the Guard/Defend command (F1, usually) has been really making all the difference. I can send my Thief scouting ahead for traps, and if they are caught I can bring the unwanted attention back to the party that will volley their cover fire as soon as anything hostile is in range. This sure ain't news, but bows are so so OP in BG1.
I've only had two real deaths - the first was out in the first or second field from Candlekeep. A wolf aggro'd, my Bard MC had a respectable AC of 1 so I let her fend it off while Imoen finished it off. Except it hit me once for 6 points of damage, ending the entire Saga; sorry, Gorion. The other is where I left off: I just left Nashkel mines, and there's this hilariously powerful group of bounty hunters between the mine and the north exit, which is the quickest path one would take back to Nashkel... and no matter what I do, my five-person party of level two- and threebies just cannot manage- what the heck is that encounter lmao. Anyway, we can always come back later, but w/o having any fancy spell scrolls or wands, I don't think it's in reach atm.
On the whole, however, it's felt great to play this again. And if I take stray hits, I drink a poition. And if I run out of potions, I buy more! I don't know why I was always so conservative with this stuff when I was younger - anything that got in-between me and an early Shadow Armor was a reload back then. It feels so much better to like, actually use these resources and not try to just play for the optimal outcome. I'm excited to start exploring soon, but def wanted to get through the Nashkel mines stuff first.
Doesn't your bard know cure light wounds? Don't be afraid to rest every few fights.
The cleric-and-five-sorcerers crew continues to steamroll Icewind Dale. We're in chapter five now, and I've hit a real snag: the AI loves using Cone of Cold with reckless abandon. We are our own worst enemy, especially since my -11 AC cleric isn't taking much damage from the enemy. I'm going to have to download a custom AI script if I don't want to micro.
Yes, MC learned the ability naturally once she arrived in Nashkel, and Jaheira has a couple instances memo'd herself. The potion drinking is re: mid-fight usage versus reloading and trying to play for a better outcome. Resting is great and we definitely do it, but I'm also trying to spread those out a bit when I can. If it was re: the wolf, we were level 1 and 6 was my max HP. I definitely should have gone for 14 CON haha.
Yeah, don't skimp on CON! I guess it's too late for that now
EE allows you to roll up as many characters as you want where the original only allowed your MC (supplemented by the very numerous NPC PCs). I mained a Fighter/Cleric, I think, and I added an Archer and a Sorcerer. The Archer was good because bows are good, but she wasn't much better than Imoen. The Sorcerer was amazing because Sorcerers are way overtuned in these games (they learn only a couple of spells per level, but they start with 2 level 1 charges to mage's 1 and quickly get 6 charges per spell level per day). Sorcerers are new to EE, and EE only adds one Sorcerer NPC. You can't miss her, and you'll have found her already if you're in Nashkel.
It's a little unfortunate that Khalid and Jaheira are so good (and co-dependent!), because it really discourages party experimentation. Who else are you running with?
Reflecting on the encounter I described earlier, I wonder if there was/is an opportunity for IE games to benefit from some kind of "/con" function? "/con" is the short command for Consider in Everquest, which could be used upon any target to provide a descriptive statement broken down into two parts: an assessment of friendliness/hostility ("Will this aggro me?") and relative strength ("And will I die?"). Neverwinter Nights also had a way to gauge strength via its "Examine" function, which opened up a whole sub-window for additional descriptive text for the NPC as well as an indicator of its level relative to your own, versatile but a little bit cumbersome.
Infinity Engine games already indicate whether units are openly hostile or not via the red vs. turquoise circles, but relative strength can't be checked. I wonder if we could overload some unused existing part of the interface to implement something like this? The 'Talk' command from the hotbar is probably seldom used in favor of just clicking on the target NPC - so maybe modding that to 'Check' could work? The game could then return a short statement to the dialogue box indicating the character's assessment of relative strength of the target to their own - most likely just a basic level check - and heck, in the spirit of things we could even have a roll involved adjusted by the character's perception. Probably an easy roll modified by Dex/Int/Wis? Or it could just, you know, work. Not too hung up on it.
I'm still considering a lot of this through the lens of "how can I create an experience where I reload less". Obviously, when I stumble into some encounter, give it a whirl, and get annihilated, I'll just know for now and later files when to avoid/engage. But for a first time through without "meta" knowledge, I think a Check command could help me make more informed decisions about which engagements I want to take, which group of NPCs I may think twice about before messing with, etc. In my previous example I'd scouted the group of non-hostile bounty hunters in advance with Imoen, but that wasn't nearly enough information for me to make an assessment about the risk of approaching them.
Giving this kind of information would be extremely helpful for having a pretty natural approach to scouting and engagements. But, always having it for free may also break some of the immersive qualities. I would argue it's worth it as it is, but additional ideas on implementing /con in IE below.
A character's familiarity with various subgroups of enemies may affect whether or not they get an accurate check or just fail to gleam info altogether. Most characters cannot differentiate between a Ghoul and a Ghast, nor compare them to oneself (failed check). A Cleric and a Paladin, however, should succeed here. Same goes for Rangers and animals, and then Bards' lore would be well-suited for any non-undead non-animal monster? I don't know, maybe the Ranger/Bard thing isn't a necessary stipulation. Anybody can see how big that bear is and that the gibberling in front of it can hardly stand. But on the other hand, not everybody knows that Winter Wolf breaths ice bolts. Perhaps everybody is subject to a general check unless an expertise function applies?
I think when it comes to demi-humans, I don't think it's too generous to assume that any character can make a general assessment of any other demi-human's relative strength. Don't think these should fail, though I would definitely consider having some kind of Perception mod in there as I mentioned before.
Anyway. I think /consider wouldn't be game breaking and the benefits would outweight the /con's. I think modding to use the interface would be an engine mod, but it could possibly be achieved via scripting if we instead made like "Rod of Checking" that was immediately available, infinite uses, w/e to just launch the dialogue script on User vs. Target. Basic functionality is at least predicated on any creature's level being available to check, though given that spells already pretty much do this ("only affects creatures of 5 hit dice or lower" etc), I think it's feasible in at least some form.
Yeah, don't skimp on CON! I guess it's too late for that now
EE allows you to roll up as many characters as you want where the original only allowed your MC (supplemented by the very numerous NPC PCs). I mained a Fighter/Cleric, I think, and I added an Archer and a Sorcerer. The Archer was good because bows are good, but she wasn't much better than Imoen. The Sorcerer was amazing because Sorcerers are way overtuned in these games (they learn only a couple of spells per level, but they start with 2 level 1 charges to mage's 1 and quickly get 6 charges per spell level per day). Sorcerers are new to EE, and EE only adds one Sorcerer NPC. You can't miss her, and you'll have found her already if you're in Nashkel.
It's a little unfortunate that Khalid and Jaheira are so good (and co-dependent!), because it really discourages party experimentation. Who else are you running with?
I'm enjoying using Khalid and Jaheira, I used to just roll with the MC back in the day when I was powergaming it a lot haha - so I'm not exactly burnt out on them, and I'll enjoy esp getting to know them better so that their story beats in the sequel have better impact. I'm not playing Enhanced Edition, nor am I doing any of the BG1-in-BG2 engine stuff ("Tutu mod" etc), though I did some slight modding upfront for the various fix packs, some light QoL stuffs, and content restorations.
Party is currently MC (Bard 3), Imoen (Thief 3), Khalid (Fighter 2), Jaheira (Fighter/Druid 2), Minsc (Ranger 2), Xan (Wiz... 1 or 2?). Besides the post-Nashkel mines encounter, I'm really not running into any issues. It's not bad to avoid the encounter, and I'm not affronted that there are sometimes things that will just Kick My Ass out there - that's part of the thrill of adventure and exploration: but I think my re-exploration of the series could benefit a lot from "/con" in lieu of prior knowledge of encounters.
Anyway, Minsc is obvi super strong but if/when I Viconia I may drop for her - he's just too easy to use all the time because of his strength and not necessarily my fave char but we'll see.
Re "/con": this is an explicit mechanic in 3e with the Knowledge skill. I don't know 2e well enough to say whether it had anything similar, but it would be great to have some way of examining an enemy, even if it's just name + status effects. I shouldn't have to trawl the combat logs to figure out what you just cast on yourself.
Of course, basically every modern CRPG has solved most of the problems Baldur's Gate had, but they solved them with the benefit of hindsight. The Pathfinder games in particular really feel like "Infinity Engine with a ton of QOL" -- very easy to see from where they drew their inspiration.
It's a little unfortunate that Khalid and Jaheira are so good (and co-dependent!), because it really discourages party experimentation. Who else are you running with?
I think you might be thinking of the Wild Mage. She has story/flavor that sounds a lot like a Sorcerer, but Wild Mage is treated as a Wizard kit and plays mostly like a Wizard in BG1&2, at least until very high levels with Improved Chaos Shield when they have a not unreasonable chance of casting any known spell using a level 1 spell slot, giving them a kind of best of both worlds of Wizard and Sorcerer situation with the risk of maybe getting a wild surge instead. (Technically they can always attempt to do this, but early on they're extremely likely to just Wild Surge, while later on it's more likely to succeed and more worth a relatively devalued and abundant level 1 spell slot to try.) She's very hard to miss, but the Sorcerer they added is male and definitely missable. (I didn't know he existed until I ran into him in the Siege of Dragonspear scenario Beamdog added between BG1&2, which is considerably more linear than the original games.)
In BG3 Wild Mage is a Sorcerer subclass, which makes more sense given the class flavor.
Yeah, that's the one. She was one of many characters I dismissed instantly, so I didn't get a good look at her. I spent a good third of the game with the nearby monk NPC instead, which was a mistake: the monk is awful. His quest line does give you a STR 18 belt, though, which is handy.
Team sorcerer finally hit its roadblock in Icewind Dale: the last boss seems to be immune to magic and is flanked by two iron golems, which, you know, are well-known for their magic resistance as well. I cranked the difficulty to easy and basically soloed the fight with the cleric. There may have been a cleverer solution, but Lower Resistance failed on the boss, which shouldn't be possible.
I had fun with the game, so I'm not complaining. The team got to do some clever things with the other tough fights, like one where the boss starts with sky-high MR, globe of invulnerability, and a bunch of other buffs and the exit is sealed (this becomes very common in later fights in IWD, because doors are OP in this engine). I managed to find a corner where he forgot about me and waited out his buffs before going back in and kicking his out-of-spell-charges butt.
Or the fight where there are about ten fire giants besides the very intimidating boss, and aggroing any of them draws them all. I took out one giant and set up cloudkill after cloudkill as I retreated, causing everything to reach me half-dead. It's a good thing the arena was large enough to pull that off, because I'm not sure we'd be able to last long enough in a prolonged fight.
All in all, IWD is very light on story and very heavy on combat, and yet it was a good time. If I had to do it again, I would have swapped in a single-class fighter or paladin for one of the blasters: five is just unnecessary overkill, and the late game is stacked with magic resistance. Opening fights with a huge volley of magic missiles never got old, though.
I finished the first Baldur's Gate, can't believe how long it's been since the last time I did this... there was a period of time in my teens where I would play through this at least once, if not twice a year with plenty of side files. Anyway:
The first entry's expansiveness and freedom of exploration are definitive qualities of the game, what with the first four chapters giving the player's party all the space they want to follow the wind- so much so that I've had at least a couple friends cite it as the first reason why they would prefer it over Icewind Dale, or the other way around. But I think the biggest accomplishment isn't that the expansiveness is there, it's how it's all flipped on its head in the fifth of the game's seven chapters:
The city of Baldur's Gate, congruent to the rest of the game's scale, is a whopping nine zones- yet still only a fraction of the rest of the setting's wilderness, towns, and dungeons. It sets a new pace immediately with the sheer amount events/interactions that are available to you, or happen around you, or especially thrust directly upon you; you're totally swept up in the city from the moment you step inside, and easily more lost and helpless in these nine zones than you could possibly manage in the rest of the world map's wilds, and this inversion left the biggest impression this go 'round.
When I consider its sequel, I'm even more amazed. Being witness to the introduction up until resurfacing in Athkatla, I quickly realized I had no idea what to expect from the game at all. And then, there's Athkatla itself... It's hard not to contrast with the arrival at Baldur's Gate in the first game, where the namesake city sets a new pace, but the player is still largely in control; in fact, most of the closing three acts are about wresting control back from the machinations of Sarevok, and by the end you do so completely. But from the introduction to Athkatla in BG2, things are largely out of your control. You start in captivity, Khalid is dead, Imoen is taken, and every encounter that has happened up to this point and thereafter is arcane, enigmatic, or increasingly otherwordly. It manages to be a completely different experience from the first game right out of the box - you're surrounded by the city, strong allies, magical trinkets, and you've never been less safe or certain of what in the Nine Hells is going on. And I think that is the part of BG2 that is most striking to me, just the way it shatters the expectations and precedents begotten from its prequel. And then to think that Throne of Bhaal eclipses even that!
As for this file, I think I largely achieved what I set out to achieve: mitigating reloads and having a less machinated experience. I wrote about it earlier, but I think the key element for me was just to use all the damn tools at my disposal. I think when I was younger I would just hoard potions or sell them/wands/whatever because I had such a hard time consuming consumables. Never using elixirs in FF, etc. So long as I wasn't using them, I would sell and just play for getting the best AC on everybody possible because I was always getting some value out of that, right? So then everything became by the numbers, but there was such a large array of encounters that were totally unmanageable and so many risks I had no response to that I was re-loading. A lot. This playthrough I think Khalid and Jaheira, my main frontliners, spent most of the mid-late game with a modest -1 AC, and I barely noticed - except against Sword Spiders, where I definitely noticed - because I was throwing explosion potions and wanding the heck out of everything, casting support spells from scrolls, and on two occasions (one of which was the final battle lol), Raise Dead. I found myself nailing many rather treacherous encounters on the first go, including the spider lair in Cloakwood! That felt good.
My Bard MC had constitution of 10, so I ended up playing her as an archer/caster - honestly had way less deaths than I could've expected with her meager frame, but Bracers of Defense shored that up while giving her full access to her repertoire. MVP wiz spell was Stinking Cloud, which controlled so many of the game's hard encounters for me, with healthy doses of Horror if I wanted extra insurance. Really appreciate that Xan is an Enchanter and prohibited from memorizing Evocation spell lines since those are so immediately impactful and easy to use, and definitely my preference when I was younger. My favorite answer to a Siren's Dire Charm was to just charm the other person back, finish the encounter, then rest it off haha.
If I dabble in any expansion content before I move on to the sequel, I think it'll just be Durlag's Tower. I am not absolutely certain I want to carry over my MC to BG2 or start a new one? BG2 feels a lot more natural to play, like, non-good aligned characters from the outset, whereas with BG1 it's kind of hard to spin the first four chapters of the game as something they would, like, do? I don't know it's not terribly important. I can't remember if I can change my alignment via my actions in the sequel - iirc it can happen later - so I may roll a new char if I decide I want to play as someone else.
I've gone back to Pathfinder Kingmaker. Compared to Wrath of the Righteous, there are far fewer character options (but still way, way more than any of the Infinity Engine games), but the simulation aspect is way more developed. (I was disappointed when WOTR ended the military campaign suddenly at the end of chapter 3.)
I do think that kingdom management is overly punitive for anyone playing unspoiled. Without a treasurer, you can't increase your Economy level; without increasing your Economy, you're stuck at starting income. There are two treasurers available where I'm at in the game: one is a permanently missable PC that I missed; the other is an evil NPC that you can easily kill or lock yourself out of if you make the wrong choices. (And even if you make the right ones, it's not obvious he's recruitable!)
If you have the DLC, there's another candidate PC that isn't missable (unless, presumably, you force her out of your party), but I'm not sure if that makes things better or worse. It also occurs to me that you can put mercenaries (i.e. player-generated PCs) into any advisor position, but, again, it's very easy to A) decide not to create mercenaries, since the story PCs are entirely sufficient and mercenaries cost gold, or B) not realize that mercenaries are even an option. Mercenary advisors get a hefty -4 penalty, so you have to build them
Anyway, I don't want to complain too much about this. Once I realized I had no idea how to get a treasurer, I looked up the candidates. I had just barely locked myself out of the PC by the time I read this, but Baldur's Gate broke me of companion completionism -- they all have personalized side quests in BG, and BG has like 30 PCs. Fortunately, I had not offended or killed the NPC, or I would have reloaded (and then I would've been annoyed).
Since I avoided those traps, I have been enjoying the game!
Beat Durlag's Tower in BG/TotSC, then start & finished Baldur's Gate 2 and its expansion over the course of like, two weeks or spending all my free time on it - still blown away with just how dense Athkatla is, and it's such a neat contrast to Baldur's Gate 1. I think the opening of the game does great job subverting the expectations of a player who completed BG1 previously since so many things beyond your control happen to you from the outset, and continue to sweep you away through the course of the game. This juxtaposes against the choices you do get to make throughout the story - of which there are many - and gives them a lot more weight imo. I think that dichotomy is pretty cool, and that dynamic differentiates the sequel from its predecessor in terms of how they contribute to the series' legacy.
I continued on with my Neutral Good Half-Elf Bard from BG1, though as I was allowed to pick a Kit for BG2 upon importing, I went with Skald. The HLA feat of Use Any Item that rogue kits get makes for some pretty cool possibilities, though ultimately she was there for her Skald song and supporting spellcasting. It was mostly Jaheira and Korgan in the frontlines, though in Throne of Bhaal I replaced the dwarf with
a certain returning character because, I mean, come on... but yea I think I bolted through all of ToB in like the two days of last weekend. I haven't gone through Watcher's Keep yet - I can't remember how it compares to Durlag's Tower in length/complexity/relative difficulty, but given we're all like level 26-29 I'm pretty sure I can stomp most of it.
Other thoughts: there are so many riddles in BG2 - they must've had a great time with Durlag's in TotSC and just held onto that energy for the sequel haha, but it's a lot of fun. The one where you have to deduce the Zhentarim agent's name with limited information was a good time that I'm certain I hadn't puzzled out before. Also, the backdrops in the sequel are stunning.
I haven't quite psyched myself up to try BG3 yet, but I have been dabbling a bit in Neverwinter Nights. I went through Rob Bartel's Witch's Wake premium module, and it was as good (and woefully incomplete) as I had heard! The world-building, atmosphere, narrator, and original compositions for it were all top-notch and I'm now one of many keeping my fingers crossed for some kind of chance that he could ever finish the other four parts.
Presently, I'm torn between whether I want to replay some older OC/premium modules (SoU > HotU, or PotSC) or explore the endless sea of community modules of which I've barely scratched the surface. When Neverwinter Nights is good, it's really, really good! I'm much less savvy with "builds" re: 3rd edition combos - I'm not that interested in like having some meta build, but sometimes I have a hard time assessing for myself what may be an effective choice for a feat, a good time to multiclass, and such. It's pretty cool the sheer amount of possibilities that are offered, and that characters are generally less restricted by their initial class selection than AD&D.
Yesss I never finished it back in the day, but I'm very, very curious about experiencing it again now that I'm, like, a decade or two older. I should absolutely get it set up... I've still got those discs somewhere! I may finish up this NWN module series I started - "The Prophet", which is very impressive so far - but I think my next play will be PS:T for sure.
I liked the Enhanced Edition also, they took a ton of the bug fixes from the fan patches and added stuff like resolution switching, zooming, and character outlines. The fan patches I tried let you hard switch the resolution, but it meant on a 1080p screen your characters were still sized for 640x480, and super tiny. You don’t get the “cut content”, but I think much of that was buggy anyway.
Yeah, the Enhanced Editions of the IE games seem like the best choices for modern displays. I also appreciate Beamdog's attention to collaborating with the authors of renowned fixpacks / unofficial patches and integrating their work into the re-releases. The revival of the Master Server for NWN1 and the community content promotion they have within the game's interface is amazing too- though I spent a little time modding the title screen to restore the gorgeous design of the original release. NWN1 honestly has one of my favorite UI's.
I'm wrapping up chapter two out of three of The Prophet and am pretty blown away by the world-building, the plot, and the area designs... pretty much everything about it is masterfully done - I can't believe just one person did it all, really, but there are quite a few mods I feel that way about. Anyway, the synopsis is that one character (you, if you're playing solo) will play as a prognosticator, and your journey begins swiftly to investigate your dreamt portents of apocalypse. But you're not the only person with the Sight in the history of the world, and you are pitted against the machinations begotten of other seers' efforts to prevent the same encroaching doom. It's ripe with tragedy, disturbing revelations, and deliberation on causality and purpose. The whole thing is as dire as it is interesting, so I may seek a palate cleanser when I'm done - still got the Bartel's Pirates of the Sword Coast on my mind, but I'm sure I'll miss the company of my friends who played through it with me in high school.
I really like playing spellcaster classes in this game, I think, since D&D 3.0+ rules allow for much more flexibility in general, even without multiclassing. Despite their preferred class being Wizard, I decided to try Sorcerer for like the first time ever. I thought they were OP when I was younger since they get so many casts per day at the outset, but I gotta say- the reduced spell selection and relegation of spell preparation to leveling is quite a cost. I thought I would try and pivot to Arcane Archer, but at level 11 she still doesn't have the prerequisite Base Attack Bonus of +6... plus since neither Sorcerer nor Arcane Archer are her race's (Elf) favored class, I would get hit my the multiclass exp penalty iirc? Anyway, magic is strong and the module's henchman hench quite handily dressed with Flame Weapon, Stoneskin (lol this spell is so good), Haste...
Might anybody have opinions on NWN2? I didn't play it back in the day because my comp just couldn't hack it, and then I kind of never came back around to it. I don't have any experience with its OC's, but I'm pretty tempted to check out the original campaign for the sole purpose of leading into Mask of the Betrayer, which I've heard wonderful things about. I was always turned off by the controls and UI of NWN2, but I guess I'm over it haha.
I don't know what you mean with regards to opinions, but here goes:
NWN2 and Mask of the Betrayer are, to me, most interesting as companions to Dragon Age: Origins.
I would recommend going with wizard as your spellcasting class, or going with bard, because I feel like the game possibly over-rewards skill checks and getting skill points is an important feature of the intelligence attribute.
That's an interesting tip! There are so many more classes available to even level 1 players that I'll likely dabble, but Bard is always a favorite so that's never a hard sell.
re: opinions, anything goes, really. I don't have experience with the game so it's all good to me. But I guess recommendations on OC/expansions/user mods you liked, things you had strong reactions to or thought were cool, unique single player / multiplayer experiences, or other points of interest?
May I ask in what ways you would consider NWN2 as a companion to Dragon Age: Origins? I played through Bioware's DA:O once way back, I and remember it had an original setting whereas Obsidian's NWN2 campaigns were, of course, all Forgotten Realms. I remember thinking to myself when I played DA:O "combat feels like a modernized IE game!", so that would def be a contrast against NWN2's more formalized implementation of a D&D ruleset - how the design kind of diverged or something.
There are also lots of set pieces and pacing decisions made in NWN2 and Mask of the Betrayer that are trial runs for elements that would and would not appear in Dragon Age.
That said: These transferable qualities are less core to the combat of 3(.5)e D&D. It is MOSTLY the "cruft". For the smallest example: The role alignment plays in NWN2 is closer to its DA:O "implementation" than it is to NWN and Baldur's Gate.
EDIT:
Feel like I've either been percolating or plagarizing a thesis unhinged screed about this for close to 15 years.
