Lack of NPCs in BG2?

Remove all ads!

I really disliked the the kits/characters of the NPCs. Anyone here actually like the NPC's compared to BG1's?

 

I think BG-2 isn´t really ballanced in terms of NPC´s. To name a few examples:

There are not enough pure fighters in BG-2: Just Korgan and Mazzy. For the rest there you just have the choice between Anomen (a cleric too), Keldorn, Minsc and Valygar.

There are quite a lot of mages in BG-2 but just a one single pure mage (Edwin). There aren´t enough good thiefs too - whereas you had the freedom of choice in BG-1.

Clerics: Here there are just two real clerics: sucking Anomen and Viconia. Aerie is a nice spell battery but just good as a back up. Otherwise you have to find your way to deal with high level undead.

Introducing the nice new kits and classes of the kensai, barbarian, swashbuckler, assassin, monk and sorcerer it´s all up to you to play them yourself.

 

Other NPCs lacking in BG2 are evil aligned characters and a lack of women (especially fighter types). Ragusa also mentioned the lack of true fighters and, to me, it seems that the ones they provide are given stupid weapon profencies too. The best example being Mazzy, she is the only female fighter and she has 5 slots in short bow. Apart from the speed bonus she could have had better with one slot in long bow and the +4 elven long bow. Then she could have used those other slots in some decent melee weapons and so actually be of some use as a fighter (I did use her in one game and she became quite useful in the end but it is difficult to use her on the front lines for ages and I always felt that those 5 slots had been wasted). I also struggle with the idea of Minsc being specialised in great swords (needs two hands) and dual welding. What's that all about?

Anyway, the reason given for fewer NPCs in BG2 is the greater story, dialogue and general depth associated with each one compared to BG1. I reasonable trade off I suppose but perhaps they could have given us the option of a load of additional NPCs without the story and dialogue. That way we could have played the game and choosen interesting characters first time through, then used the greater choice (with less dialogue) on subsequent runthroughs. Or even better, play the game lots of times using one or two dialogued NPCs in a party beefed up with non-dialogued NPCs - great variety and great party interaction.

Oh well, I can always dream.......

PS To be fair, I suppose if they had done that, we would all be moaning that there were some NPCs without dialogue... never satisfied.

 

Minsc is specialised in dual-wielding because he is a ranger. My biggest complain would be, that in bg1 he was a twohanded sword wielding lunatic, while in bg2, everybody has him using two maces.

 

True slappy, there definitely is a lack of evil NPCs in BG-2 - I´m still searching for some nasty, evil aligned villains to help my evil main char messing up Amn in my parallel games (good and evil).

I have the choice: Korgan, Edwin and Viconia - that´s it . Seems as if I had to recruite some scoundrel myself ...

 

I still use minsc as a 2 handed sword wielder, i give him the talking sword, then the silver sword. in bg1 since the was no "2 handed sword" it was all "giant swords" or what ever, u could give him a sword and shield in some situations, or give him 2 handed when you needed more damage done, (specially that berserking sword)

 

Come on BTA, Mazzy could just hold the bow sideways. As for the arm extensions, hmmm, I don't have a smart a$$ comment for that. Go Go gadget arms!

 

With the greater detail of the characters, comes the lack thereof characters. I dont know if anyone realized it, but the characters somewhat interacted in the first game. Like when Ajantis would turn around and say "Your a man of honer" or something like that to Khalid and Khalid would just stammer out something. So I liked to NPC's talking to each other more in depth, but I agree, there aren't nearly enough fighters, makeing it EXTREAMLY hard to play anything that dosent have the possibility of being a tank. I tried playing an Evil Party.

Main Character: Neutral Evil Necromancer
Viconia- Neutral Evil
Korgan- Chaotic Evil
Jan- Chaotic Neutral
Cernd- True Neutral
Heir'Dalis-Chaotic Neutral

And it worked to an extent. But I didn't have the tanks needed to fight front line fights and usueally got my but kicked. Where as in BG1, there were a wide selection of NPC's, which in my opinion made it more like D&D, because in D&D there are NPC's all over the place. That's why when I started playing BG'2, I got really agitated at the lack of NPC's. Maybe they will put more in 3.

 

What if they set up the NPC's with personalities and major traits, but allow the players to tweak their proficiencies? It wouldn't affect the story line if someone decided that Mazzy would be better with a scimitar instead of a short-sword, but it could be helpful.

Now, to totally reverse my position . . .
. . . Maybe BG2 limited the NPC's on purpose?

One of the aspects I enjoyed about BG2 is that there is a sense of art and style when it comes to choosing NPC's. There is the old saying that if all you have is a hammer, everything is a nail. With a wide range of "pure fighters and wizards" many people would try to walk through the game hacking and slashing.

Having to work with Yoshimo, Jan and some of the other NPC's really helped me develope strategy. I'd have to anticipate what encounters a certain quest would throw my way, and then bring the right people for the job.

 

Tactics, tactics, tactics . . .

BTW = Mazzy has a Bow of Arvoreen, which is a short bow, not a long bow.

 

Mathetais makes a good point here. If there were huge numbers of NPCs then it would make it too easy to make an invincible party, and the game would lose some difficulty. Instead you have to make some compromises and this adds to the game. As well, with more NPCs they would lose their personalities and would be just some faceless thug that you picked up on the road to Trademeet, or wherever, as opposed a character with real personality.

 

I think that the worst part is that there aren't nearly enough NPC's there are lik 13 or something but in BG I there were 25 (i think) and another thing that suck is that the only pure thief gets kille quite early in the game (Yoshimo, For those of you who hadnt figured it out) and Jan, well he is pretty good, but i get tired of using him in every game.

 

I think the only problem is that there are too many multi class characters. (example: 3 thief/mages, Jan, Nalia, Imoen)

 

I agree about the multiclass NPCs. I feel like it can be a waste of EXP. I also don't like some of the weapon proficiencies, exception taken for the axe wielding Dwarf. I have tons of long swords with great special abilities and really no one to give them to. My character is a Rangr/Cleric dual wielding maces or flails, so Minsc is still the swordsman with the talking sword and Azuredge. Strong NPC. Right now I have a good party, and I've used everyone except Mazzy, Haer' D'alis, the Stalker, and Edwin. Where in the 9 hells is Edwin? I 'vre heard he's in the docks and he sends youon a few errands and then he joins? I need a straight mage. I don't know who will get the boot when Imoen returns. I'm using Yoshimo until I get Cernd back, if I do (wasn't too impressed, really) so Yoshi will probably be released.

 

cleaver: not to spoil or anything, but if you have yoshimo when you get to spellhold then you WILL lose him for Imoen I'm not gonna reveal anymore to you. just making sure you have the time to prepare for this. I didn't...