Icewind Dale 1 to IWD2 engine?

Remove all ads!

Question: How come no ones ever converted Icewind Dale to the Icewind Dale 2 engine? Does it have the same problems that BG2 does? Id really like to see a IWD1 conversion to IWD2.

Gripe: I hate Fog of War, its the dumbest thing, especially outside... inside buildings, especially down in dark cellars and whatnot I dont mind it so much, but outside its just pointless.

 

Yes, i have been wondering when anyone will atempt this myself. IWD1 -> IWD2 should be less problems than BG1 -> BG2, and certainlly a world apart from the BG2 -> IWD2 project.

Would for me at least have made IWD1 much funnier to replay, adding the best of two games into one.

 

Yeah the first time I played the game (IWD1), I didnt enjoy it at all... I think I played the first chapter and that was it.

 

Come on now, who would neeed that, IWD is a great game with 2. ed. rules, and IWD2 has 3. ed rules, that's the only difference.
I mean with BG they had a reason to make TuTu, but this game doesn't need it.
To tell you the truth, i would rather play IWD1 than IWD2, and IMO, that's why a mod hasn't been made yet

 

In IWD2: The interface is better , the chargen is better, especially because youre not forced to roll your stats (yes I know you can fiddle them around), and the Classes and Abilities are better designed/layed out than in IWD1.

 

It could probably be done, yeah.

I think the reason it hasn't is because Weimer or Japheth, the people who could pull it off, are very busy and maybe or not that interested (Weimer did IWG, and Japh adapted that for Tutu). In addition, BGII is a much more popular than IWD1.

So for IWD1->IWD2 it is probably more a question of lack of time and inclination than difficultly.

Having said that, IWD1 does have some commands not present in other IE variants (such as BitGlobal) so they might cause problems in a hypothetical transfer of IWD1 to any other engine.

 

Notes that Andyrs latest gem is "LOL" hehe.

Too bad I suck at programing and scripting, otherwise Id give it a shot.

 

It's iol, not lol.

 

I knew that, but with the i capitalized, it looks like LOL (just in lowercase).

 

Lynadin: Well thats in the eye of teh beholder i guess. personally i thought IWD1 in general to be a better game than IWD2, but i keep missing the 3E ruleset, not becose its 3E itself but becose the 3E gives alot more options and posibilities for character development, and some of the characters (read fighters) actually have options in a fight, instead of just put on aggresive script, click first enemy, and ignore him until he starts screaming for healing. In IWD/3E version you actually have options for the combat persons, like powerattack, expertice, etc. things that made most fights alot more interesting or my part.

Also the customisable UI was a nice touch, but it would stil contain all i liked with iwd1, story, areas, graphics, music, etc. (at least if done the same way as tut was.)


Andyr:
"It could probably be done, yeah."
That was what i suspected,

"and maybe or not that interested"
and that's what i figured :-(

"Having said that, IWD1 does have some commands not present in other IE variants (such as BitGlobal) so they might cause problems in a hypothetical transfer of IWD1 to any other engine."

Curious about that, it cant be any worse than the IWG2 project that does not have any code for joining NPC's for example ? or problems with moving character with dreamworlds. And i did belive that iwd2 had most of the iwd1 stuff since its a further development of the same engine. oh well.... i still think it would have ben interesting. It just seemed like a logical first step in cinverting, instead of jumping on something so wild as BG2 -> IWD2 (all props to weimer for doing it though, it almost made me wanna play bg2 again (hate bg2))

 

Someone who hates BG2... now theres a first.

 

^Hating BG2? Interesting...

ANYWAY I think IWD is a very good game, it is nostalgic and I want it to stay as it is. At least it does not have too many bugs like IWD2. OH and the fact that I am more comfortable with 2E rules is just the icing on the cake.

Would I ever want to play good old IWD areas with spiffy 3E rules? NO I don't think so, it feels wrong somehow.

BUT, can someone make BG2 rules into IWD? Like COOLEST spells ever?(contingencies, triggers, countless 'remover' type spells, timestops, imprisonments etc.)I wonder why these spells are NOT in IWD series?

PLUS what about HLAs? What was the levelcap in IWD? (with all those expansions unfourtunately I still do not have.) Certainly HLAs make the combat more interesting for fighters if you are bored.(and even more interesting than 3E?)

OK this is my (wet)dream so do not blame me?

 

@Silverstar, get the expansion, that's my advice

 

Hmm.. the only thing I really want in in a conversion is the interface, the IWD2 interface was the best out of all of them. Plus I would like the Feats option in chargen. And get rid of these inane rules about arcanists and clerics not being able to use weapons like swords and stuff.

Everything else can stay the same...

 

Well, i'm in a ranting mood today... (obviouslly)

The more i play the 2E games, the more anoyed i am at the complete lack of options save spellcasters in combat. wich basically translates into me having almost only spellcasters to play these games. My last game thought IWD1 ALL character was spellcasters of some sort. granted one was a ranger, and a few multiclasses, but still, that means that specialisation was best on weapons etc. and when you ranger is the best frontliner *sigh*.

Any more wrong than playing BG1 with Swashbuckler kit ?, kensai ?, halforc wildmage with two-weapon fighting katanas (yeah i know it aint posible). or BG2 with the 3E rules, wich has been done (although never finished).

I just find the way IWD2 engine and rules work to be more exciting. The last time i played BG1 i got so pissed of at the way 2E handles so many things i satt down and edited all crossbows and bolts so mages and clerics could use them, changed all ability statistics just becose im so sick of strength 6 and strength 15 is absolutelly no difference in combat ? i mean strength 6 is like a 7 year old child, and str 15 is more than most weight lifters have. It is personal preference, so of course id like to see this converted.

Nope, that is not posible. I think BG2 is the only engine that has the codes and functions to run most of those spells. Coolest = overpowered btw, those spells is why wizards/sorcerers are overpowered in bg2:soa, another reason that game anoys me. It was cool they added a bunch of different than normal spells though, rather than a horde of fireballs.

Becose i found bg2 so boring i have only finished it once, and played TOB for about 10 minutes before i just shut it down and never bothered to try it again. I cannot say i have any experience with teh HLA's so i wont comment. but do note that they come at pretty high levels, where feats alter your playingstyle from level 1. I'd say point to 3E there

Sure, iwd1 in iwd2 engine is mine. so do not blame me ?


And yeah as Lynadin said, installing the Heart of Winter expantion adds more things to the engine, it did add alot of fun things, tracking for ranger was mostly useless but very fun! Also Bards more exstensive songs etc deed deepen things upa bit. problem is that al these things already exists within iwd2.


Bleeh, a ise man once said "If you want something done, you have to do it yourself." pitty im no programmer.

edit: just tried to tiddy things up a bit with some UBB codes, after finally reading the FAQ how to use them.

[ September 11, 2005, 17:19: Message edited by: raptor ]

 

^OK I understood your problem, you don't like fighters just clicking on the target, and they bash it until it is (or the fighter irself) is dead. 3E gives some flexibility with feats, right, but actually HLAs are more fun and they can be gained at approximately 3.000.000xp, (I know it is pretty high but still do-able in HoF and ToLM) whereas HoF has a cap of 8.000.000? (like the ToB) (I am not sure as I do not have it)and after some level the xp needed for a level up remains same(it increases in first levels) so no problem in leveling up fast.

As for other things, they are the differences between 2E and 3E, and there are people who prefer and love one of them...(NOT both perhaps???)

 

HLa's might be more fun, duno as i have never tried them. but a system that means that a fighter have to be boring for uhm 18 levels ? before getting a fun ability ? .... its just..... not gonna happen. Also many of the HLA's in BG2 for fighters already exists in varuiable forms as feats in the 3E rules, unfortunatelly not all of them was added to IWD2, especially Whirlwind attack, comes to mind

With BG2:SoA, and ToB installed, you would have to pla through entire SoA just to get far enough to finally maybe earn one or perhaps two HLA's at teh end battles if you palyed normally. Thats a friggin long time to be playing a *very* boring fighter just to get a HLA.

And it is not only about fighters, but almost every character benefits from more varied posibilities such as skills and feats. And the multiclassing also adds more customisability to the game.

I have DM'ed both 2E and 3E in P&P games, have been comfortable with both. but unless the CRPG games like iwd1 and bg2 started adding Players Option rulebooks they wil enver come close to the options and posibilities that 3E gives you fom the base core book only. and its only teh core books added to these games. wich means Fighter = "Yeah, yeah. Show me a target, and I'll smash it."

 

^You know Player's Option rules too? SO GLAD! They are VERY fun to exlplore and really enhances 2E in so many perspectives, but to tell you the truth it would be NEXT TO IMPOSSIBLE to convert those complex rules to a PC game.

I do not find normal fighters boring, but it is just me that I favour caster classes all the time.

Fighter = Yeah, yeah. Show me a target, and I'll smash it.

It is actually 'I know the routine. Show me a target and I will smash it' I knew it! It is from male fighter soundset from IWD and IWD2! REALLY cool and CUTE soundset full with FUNNY messages! A VERY crazy fighter that is!!!

 

I know of the PO books of corse, i have DM'ed with them :-/ let me tell you, it can be anightmare. heheh, the point is simple. with 2E you need PO books to get the same level of complexity and character customisiibility as 3E offers with one book, PHB.

That is why such things as feats and skills are implemented in IWD2 and not in the other games, becose they didnt touch the PO books.

Had they used more things from PO' in BG1, IWD1 etc it would have added much more interesting things to the various classes such as Fighters. but i know from a DM's view that 3E is much easier to DM. and play. and implement in games it seems

 

You are right maybe but I still prefer good old 2E and games based upon it for personal reasons...AND I DM'ed a few times in 3E and in 2E and to tell you the truth I WAS more comfortable, flexible and creative in 2E. (for some reason? I DO NOT KNOW)