Which rule-set do you think the enchanted Edition should use?

#1 Edited by mordukai (7092 posts) -

So Baldur's gate remake, of sorts. GIven the long time that has passed since I played that one I think we need talk about which rule set should this game use. I remember the original, god it's so weird saying that, used a modified 2ndE AD&D ruleset which was just a chore to deal with. Honestly, who wants to deal with THACO's and negative AC all over again. I know I am going to get bashed for saying that but I would like them to use the modified 3rdE ruleset they used in Icewind Dale II. I mean, I really don't want to go bakc too2ndE AD&D and the headaches it bought me, and 4thE , while being an ok rule set, just feel wat too simplified for my taste, so 3rd it is.

Frankly I am kinda confused to the point of this remake. I mean the new content will be welcomed but then again there are plenty of mods around that has kept this game going to this very day. The new graphics and new UI will also be welcomed, as long at it makes sense and won't get too simplified.

What are your thoughts.

EDIT: Yup I said enchanted edition!

#2 Posted by Brodehouse (9370 posts) -

I hate all D&D; systems but I think I hate 4th Ed least. No, because they released book after book making it complicated and broken.

Rules should be simple and clear. The actual gameplay should have depth and strategy.

#3 Posted by Hailinel (22713 posts) -

I think that the game should remain true to the original ruleset to maintain the classic gameplay experience. But if they have to change, they shouldn't move up further than 3.5.

#4 Posted by artgarcrunkle (971 posts) -

I just hope they don't update it to 4th to appeal to babies. Anything else is fine with me.

#5 Posted by mordukai (7092 posts) -

@Hailinel said:

I think that the game should remain true to the original ruleset to maintain the classic gameplay experience. But if they have to change, they shouldn't move up further than 3.5.

Don't forget the crazy attribute system and how high you had to get to actually make a difference. I remember the difference between 10 - 14 was just minuscule.

#6 Posted by llamaegg (208 posts) -

*clears throat*

PATHFINDER.

That is all.

#7 Edited by Subjugation (4693 posts) -

Seeing as how I never took the time to understand the intricacies of any of the D&D rule sets, I am completely ambivalent. The stuff always sounded really complicated to me.

Edit: But I'm all for some Baldur's Gate.

#8 Posted by ArbitraryWater (11015 posts) -

AD&D 2nd Edition with class kits. I almost feel like it would be sacrilege to do anything else. Also, everyone basically tells me that 4th edition is crap and I'll take their word for it.

#9 Posted by deathfury (529 posts) -

I'd like to see it use 3.5e, as long as it has mod support. D&D 3.5 isn't complete without locate city bombs and crazy Hulking Hurler builds.

#10 Posted by mordukai (7092 posts) -

@deathfury said:

I'd like to see it use 3.5e, as long as it has mod support. D&D 3.5 isn't complete without locate city bombs and crazy Hulking Hurler builds.

That another thing I'm afraid of. I have a feeling that the old mods won't work on it unless they will come with a really good creation kit that will make the conversion easier. If it won't at least it'll give the modders a good chance to revisit their creations and improve it.

#11 Posted by llamaegg (208 posts) -

Fourth Edition isn't junk, it's just not what players wanted. You know that dudes complained that third was junk for the longest time, then they finally gave it a chance and loved it.

Not saying that Fourth is great, by no means, ironically enough they made some things more complicated for the players/DM's by making things simpler. Theirs no real middle ground for it, it's what you want out of D&D or it's not.

#12 Posted by HotSauceMagik (264 posts) -

As someone who has played a lot fo the InfEngine games, I can tell you that I don't really know the difference or specifically which game used which rule set (other than seeing all the hubub now about BG using the 2nd edition as it originally did).

Could one of you give a brief summary?

#13 Posted by Slay3r1583 (584 posts) -

How is this even a question? It needs to be 2nd edition like the originals. Anybody who says otherwise is a dumb poopyhead.

#14 Edited by UltorOscariot (164 posts) -

Wasn't the first game 2nd editon and the second game 3.5rd edition? I'd personally like to see 3.5 in the first. I'd love to get my dual wield and Monk/Wild Mage on in the first game without struggling with mods.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.