stefan9
Watchdog
I vote yes. Have followed the game closely and I certainly get a BG feel from the videos,ect.
My feeling tells me the same...No, EA will make it too mainstream… that's what I think
No, BioWare doesn't make them like that any more
Clearly we don't know - and in fact, the idea is hard to define. Polls are just a bit of fun.
Ouch that's awful. House rules are critical to a good campaign. Every DM with which I've played has used lots of customized rules and when I've DMed I went even farther astray (for example, I wrote an XP system where you are primarily rewarded for role playing well - combat XP is, at most, 1/3 of your XP gains). Character development and flexibility is core to me. And the struggles of low levels in D&D leads to a lot of advantages. Being weak means you have to be careful, innovative, and impress your DM with great ideas so he decides not to smite you. And going up a level is, in a word, awesome. I actually think the early-game progression of 1st edition had that element just right, although I don't meet many others that feel the same.Character development is way more restricting, there's much less scope for house rules and "rolling your own," and everybody's über-powerful from level 1
But in fact Baldur's Gate *was* mainstream in its days.
I thought we were comparing DA to BG, not BG2. TBH, BG was a lot less fun than BG2. And I don't think the D&D system can make combat in a game very interesting. Though I heard that 4th edition changed a lot…