How would one prevent making IWD-in-EET too easy?

[Jarno Mikkola]

And of course we're not talking about doing any of this by default. But it would be cool if an add-on mod could accomplish all of this in a nice seamless way:

- slight XP modification in the south

- major XP modification in the north

- separation of the three IWDEE campaigns

- probably, adjustment of the final IWDEE fight

- do something about item/money accumulation in the main IWD campaign - doable by simply rewriting the random loot tables and replacing particular weapons with +1 and +2 stuff, with a very very very few +3 weapons findable in Lower Dorn's Deep. Honestly this probably wouldn't be very hard.

Good suggestions. Though I wouldn't personally install the BG1 component. Yeah, so take in that if those were separate components, it would be best that way. Why I would not the BG1EE portion, well there's a lot of NPCs I switch around so, I loose lots of the XP to that, and I don't really do much extra monster spawning.

Though... the three campaigns .. could be default for IWD-in-EET, and SCS/(take your pick of AI adjusting mod) can adjust the final fight far more than IiE needs to. Just like they have done to every other fight in the whole series. And the monster call for help and respond to help calls needs to be in that. The IWD-in-BG2 was far harder for it's tweak pack added that. Again as an optional component, I like those really much more than chocolate cakes.

Edited February 2, 2017 by Jarno Mikkola

[Lightbringer]

 

 

I just reached [level 9] in my EET game, having defeated the cloakwood mines

 

From what I've experienced so far, a global reduction in XP -- monsters or otherwise -- would have been very unwelcome.

See that is too fast for me. At this point you'll be level ~11 before starting SoD, and 13 or so starting SoA. Add IWD into the mix, and increase those levels by 4. Personally I'd rather stay a bit under-leveled to get more of an organic challenge (versus the dumb artificial challenge given by the difficulty slider).

 

But I don't think anyone's talking about doing this by default. Only as an optional tweak. And what would be an appropriate reduction for such a tweak.

 

 

from what I understand such values in Lightbringer's game are mostly caused by BG2 rewards for thieving skills and spell learning (thousands per activity) which by no means are recommended for BG1 portion of the game. It's unlikely that BG1 mods changes progression so much but if that's the case it would be good to highlight which ones are most offending when it comes to XP rewards. Maximum XP values after doing everything in vanilla BG:EE with a party of 6 is about 227k per character according to this post.

 

--------

Not sure how much XP can be acquired during SoD. This will be important to figure out suggested values for global XP reduction so if someone can provide such data (preferably separate for quests and monster kills) it would be useful. I think the overall goal when all is said and done should be not more than 500k total before starting BG2 portion of the game (vanilla SoD XP Cap)

 

It is most definitely from the scrolls and lock/traps, primarily (plus some of the add-ons from DS and NT). Definitely an experiment and I have no earthly idea what SoD will add to it. I wouldn't consider it amiss to start SoA around level 12. 15 would be a bit much.

 

Also, in my playthroughs, I don't really factor in character level as a power indicator very much (once I get past level 9 or so). I play a very warrior-centric party, so levels mainly just add in occasional proficiencies and a few points of THAC0 and saves. Now, the monk is very level dependent, but that gives it viability more than anything. My clerics are warriors who can heal, and my mages are fireball chuckers only when needed. Even they are multi-fighters, and swing swords and maces when they aren't called upon to heal or throw fireballs. Honestly, I'm not sure my party power level would be that much higher between level 9 and level 15 (monk aside) -- all else (gear) being equal. THAC0, saves, a few spell slots. That's about it.

 

Admittedly, I might be completely wrong about the above paragraph -- hence the experiment

 

Now, someone who heavily leans on spellcasting to own everything, well, yes it would make a huge difference. Yet another reason to make everything optional

Edited February 2, 2017 by Lightbringer

[bob_veng]

is it possible to consider setting cut-off values (according to chapter) for southern quests instead of percentile reductions in order not to disincentivize players from solving petty quests?

 

something like (just made up numbers, probably very very off):

 

bg1 - 10k

SoD - 16k

(IWD maybe even - 16k)

BG2 - 64k

HoW - 24k

TOB - 100k

 

something like that, dunno

Edited February 3, 2017 by bob_veng

[K4thos]

is it possible to consider setting cut-off values (according to chapter) for southern quests instead of percentile reductions in order not to disincentivize players from solving petty quests?

 

something like (just made up numbers, probably very very off):

 

bg1 - 10k

SoD - 16k

(IWD maybe even - 16k)

BG2 - 64k

HoW - 24k

TOB - 100k

 

something like that, dunno

technically yes but people didn't like an idea of xp cap even between campaigns let alone chapters. There is a topic regarding it somewhere in EET section.

[bob_veng]

no, i'm not thinking chapter cap, but quest reward value cap, so no SoD quest has a reward greater than 16k etc

 

so in sod chapters if reward>16k than make it 16k

 

that prevents certain quests from having too small a reward which might feel a bit sad

 

the real offenders are bloated quests and plot milestones that hand you over xp

Edited February 3, 2017 by bob_veng

[subtledoctor]

I just played some of HOW... I found Hjollder on Burial Isle and said "hi Hjollder" and boom, 280K XP. Then I showed him the talisman I found and boom, 420K XP. Lol, a bit ridiculous.

 

I will note in its defense that this is not "Quest XP" in the BG sense, of everyone getting it. That 600K XP was split among my party, so 100K per member. Still that's a lot.

 

I agree that hand-tailoring each XP reward would be great, but also a pain. I only suggest a percentage because it might be a shortcut to a roughly similar result.

Edited February 3, 2017 by subtledoctor

[bob_veng]

e: tl;don't read

 

yeah percentage method is ideal for iwd, and k4thos already implemented -75% which i believe is fine

but still, added xp of these sections
BG-TotSC + EE new content
SoD
BG2 + EE new content
ToB + EE new content

is by itself too high, and with iwd brought to reason it will still just only be higher

so specific reductions in all of these "sections" can be considered

this could be the desired path imho:

0. calculate new, reduced IWD-main quest xp (~200k?) and HoW+TotL xp
1. reduce total BGEE quest xp just by all of the new EE xp and 20% of IWD-main xp
2. reduce SoD xp by 40% of IWD-main xp
3. reduce SoA xp by the remaining 40% of IWD-main, by new EE xp and by 50% HoW xp
4. reduce ToB xp by the remaining 50% of HoW, by 100% TotL and new EE xp

this doesn't (and practically can't) be exact science.
we can approximate the amounts and see how much should be "subtracted" from each set of EET chapters.

but how to actually implement the reduction?
percentage method is probably ok
but maybe better for bg (not needed for iwd) is putting a cutoff on very high rewards so that 1000xp isnt touched, but 32k becomes 20k, 100k becomes 64k (something along those lines) /and somehow this is supposed to produce the results from above...with lots of tuning and hand-tweaking of the cutoff value...yeah probably not happening/

if i'm overcomplicating and this is just way too much work for something that is not so necessary, i'll just stop lol

maybe a certain global % reduction will magically scale similarly to what i've outlined above

there are two important goals basically: start soa with 600k and end the saga with 5.5m

edit: sorry about ugly formatting. phone...

 

 

anyway the point of the rant in the spoiler is how to subtract IWDEE quest xp from BGEE+BG2EE quest xp so that the total amount is the same and you finish the saga with ~5.5m

obviously a simpler method would just be to subtract ~300k from 5.5m and get the corresponding global reduction percentage that is needed for BGEE+BG2EE

but this wouldn't produce ~600k at the start of SoA and that's the main goal that should be strived for...i hope i'm being clearer now

 

(i'm completely ignoring monster xp btw)

Edited February 3, 2017 by bob_veng

[K4thos]

All XP in IWD:EE is handled via XPLIST.2DA (3 or so exceptions for TotLM if I remember correctly) which allows different XP values based on level, so it is possible to adjust XP based on the current party XP. If someone would like to help rebalancing it for IWD-in-EET by hand than here is the file: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/35433122/XPLIST.2DA

View the file in proper text editor without word wrap rather than dropbox preview to get proper formatting.

And here is a list of all quests and XP acquired in IWD:EE: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/35433122/XP.ods

 

edit: converted XPLIST.2da to ODS to make editing easier: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/35433122/XPLIST.ods

Edited February 3, 2017 by K4thos

[subtledoctor]

A mod (or an optional component of IWD-in-EET) that aims to balance out XP in order to provide a single long campaign will necessarily have to make decisions about what goes when. If I was making it I would be guided be a couple factors:

 

- 90% of the IWD main campaign is balanced to be beatable by a party of 10th level or lower. (Lower Dorn's deep and the final fight would be tough at such low levels, though.)

 

- HoW and TotLM are balanced to require a party *higher* than 10th level.

 

- The transition point between SoD and SoA is right around 10th level.

 

- Without spoiling, there is a plot connection between IWD's main campaign and SoD.

 

So the first obvious thing is to move Hjollder and Hobart from Kuldahar to Athkatla. Now we don't have to worry about XP from HoW and TotLM affecting balance in BG1 or SoD. The second obvious thing is to require the IWD campaign to be done, if at all, before SoD. Let's draw up basic steps for what the mod would do (not in any particular order):

 

1) Move Hjollder and Hobart to Athkatla

2) Mechanism for travel to Easthaven only available pre-Sarevok's death

3) Rebalance Lower Dorn's Deep and the final IWD boss fight

4) Rebalance loot lists in the main IWD campaign

5) Add mechanism for traveling back to Baldur's Gate after beating the IWD boss

6) Slight reduction in BG1 XP... like 25% for BG1 content, 50% for TotSC content. I'd barely even notice that.

7) Major reduction in IWD quest XP... probably around 85% though we can do the calculation easily enough and be more precise

8) Reduce SoD XP by probably 50% or so. (SoD is linear and story-driven and you begin with good gear, and in this case you will begin at the level you would finish it in vanilla... so it doesn't really need much leveling to remain compelling.)

 

The combined reduction in BG1, TotSC, and SoD XP should match the new lower total for the IWD main quest. You want to end SoD with a range of about 400K (if you don't do a lot of things) to 750K (if you do everything).

 

This is the pivot point: BG1, TotSC, IWD, and SoD are firmly behind us (not to mention DSotSC, NTotSC, etc.). SoA, HoW, TotLM, WK and TOB (plus TDDz etc.) are in front of us. This is the line that would not be crossed.

 

9) Drastically reduce HoW and TotLM XP.

10) Reasonably reduce SoA and Watcher's Keep XP.

 

SoA + HoW + TotLM should add up to about 2.25M XP, and WK another 500K or so. This way you're going into TOB with between 2.75M XP (in a lean playthrough) and 3.5M XP (in a more completionist run).

 

Now, those specific changes are focused on Quest XP. Making it all work with monster XP is easier: just add up the total XP value of [bG1 + SoD + SoA + WK], and compare it to the total for [bG1 + SoD + SoA + WK + IWD + HoW + TotLM]. Use that ratio for a simple game-wide reduction in monster XP.

Edited February 3, 2017 by subtledoctor

[bob_veng]

going good so far...

 

90 Because you bashed the bottle-bogarting basement beetles

90 For whuppin' the wild Wolf in the workshop

90 For lying to Jhonen or For telling Jhonen the truth

90 For telling Elisia you delivered the blade of Aihonen to Johnen

90 For helping Old Jeb stay off the wagon

150 For giving Damien the remains of his fish

150 For showing Gaspar evidence of the caravan's demise

900 For telling Hrothgar about the caravan

90 For giving the shopping list to Pomab

300 For rescuing Jermsy

150 For giving Ghereg Arundel's headache cure

150 For pushing Ilmater to the peasants

300 For forcing Aldwin to confess or For blackmailing Aldwin

900 For returning Mirek's heirloom

900 For trying to reason with Mytos

6,000 For telling Kresselack that you dealt with Lysan

3,000 For reporting Arundel about the Vale of Shadows

3,000 For... err... well, failing to recover the Heartstone Gem

6,000 For killing the Lizard King and saving the villagers and merchants

3,000 For rescuing Conlan's son, Sheemish

6,000 For saving Egenia and numerous villagers from the Talonites

3,000 For exposing Albion and his cohorts

12,000 For slaying Yxunomei and recovering the Heartstone Gem

3,000 For bringing Denaini some Holy Water or 24000 For killing the crazed occupants of Solonor Tower

6,000 For putting Kaylessa's soldiers to rest

3,000 For giving Gelarith the piece you found on an undead shadow

3,000 For giving Gelarith the piece you found in in Solonor Tower

3,000 For giving Gelarith the piece you found in the war room

3,000 For giving Gelarith the picee you obtained from Kaylessa

24,000 For giving Larrel the Heartstone Gem

BUT arent there more IWD quests in chap 3

@subtledoctor

i'm not skipping your comment, just can't read now but just by looking i can tell i agree to the extreme

[Roxanne]

This started out with asking How would one prevent making IWD-in-EET too easy?

Obviously this is not the question discussed here, not is it the question that is really relevant.

 

The issue is much more this:

IWD-in-EET will be an additional major mod to be considered and integrated. But how?

 

About a year ago I was attacked from all sides by saying this mod needs a proper integration into the storyline of Baldur's Gate just like any of the other big addons. At that time, everyone cried out for freedom for the players, like *put IWD on the worldmap and let everyone try.*

 

It now seems that there should be a more controlled way to do this, like it was already discussed in *Request: An in-game reason to go to IWD* http://gibberlings3.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=28195

 

I have done and tested a provisional story for IWD1 and HoW that would open the respective plots at a certain *time window* in the main game and connect it to the protagonist's story (also solving the *SoD Issues (SoD end-game spoilers!)* http://gibberlings3.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=27995. Just like Durlag's Tower or DSotSC it does not mean that you are forced to do the quest at that time, it just makes the most sense...(With EET you could play Werewolf Island in ToB part instead of BG1, but what is the point?).

 

Also, the whole IWD is not necessary one (two) big block, but once you travelled to a new IWD area you add it to your worldmap and can go back and forth between BG and IWD areas. This means you can e.g. do IWD chapter wise in between your main plot progress (Similar to NTotSC in BG1 and TDDz in BG2).

 

In summary - mechanisms to make parts of IWD available at certain stages (which includes of course the removal of the original IWD transitions between the parts).

TotLM is a pit fight episode to be separated from the game, which can be easily done by putting the quest giver to some adequate location (proposals have already been made).

 

Afterwards, IWD will just be another *megamod* to be considered in the overall balancing of the various campaigns of EET. In order to do this in a sensible way, however, the first step must be to give IWD1 and HoW their rough positioning within the total story.

One proposal is here http://gibberlings3.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=28559&page=2&do=findComment&comment=251388, another is the one I have created in my mod, they may differ in some detail but they follow the overall same concept.

At least they provide a starting point for reasonable evaluation and afterwards fine tuning.

 

It makes little sense to look at IWD in isolation. In the end the conclusion is the same that we had ealier (and also back in BGT), which is that you have a game with a large number of optional mods adding stuff and xp and you need an overall *broker*-mod that provides you with a reasonable levelled and equipped party at specific points in the story.

 

Providing all this would still give any player enough freedom to decide which mods to add or not and to decide at which time to do a specific quest (I cannot remeber anyone ever complained about DSotSC being available only after Cloakwood or WK not being accessible from Ulgoth's Beard.)

[Lightbringer]

I just played some of HOW... I found Hjollder on Burial Isle and said "hi Hjollder" and boom, 280K XP. Then I showed him the talisman I found and boom, 420K XP. Lol, a bit ridiculous.

 

I will note in its defense that this is not "Quest XP" in the BG sense, of everyone getting it. That 600K XP was split among my party, so 100K per member. Still that's a lot.

 

I agree that hand-tailoring each XP reward would be great, but also a pain. I only suggest a percentage because it might be a shortcut to a roughly similar result.

 

Wow, ok even I would say that is rediculous

 

 

e: tl;don't read

 

yeah percentage method is ideal for iwd, and k4thos already implemented -75% which i believe is fine

 

but still, added xp of these sections

BG-TotSC + EE new content

SoD

BG2 + EE new content

ToB + EE new content

 

is by itself too high, and with iwd brought to reason it will still just only be higher

 

so specific reductions in all of these "sections" can be considered

 

this could be the desired path imho:

 

0. calculate new, reduced IWD-main quest xp (~200k?) and HoW+TotL xp

1. reduce total BGEE quest xp just by all of the new EE xp and 20% of IWD-main xp

2. reduce SoD xp by 40% of IWD-main xp

3. reduce SoA xp by the remaining 40% of IWD-main, by new EE xp and by 50% HoW xp

4. reduce ToB xp by the remaining 50% of HoW, by 100% TotL and new EE xp

 

this doesn't (and practically can't) be exact science.

we can approximate the amounts and see how much should be "subtracted" from each set of EET chapters.

 

but how to actually implement the reduction?

percentage method is probably ok

but maybe better for bg (not needed for iwd) is putting a cutoff on very high rewards so that 1000xp isnt touched, but 32k becomes 20k, 100k becomes 64k (something along those lines) /and somehow this is supposed to produce the results from above...with lots of tuning and hand-tweaking of the cutoff value...yeah probably not happening/

 

if i'm overcomplicating and this is just way too much work for something that is not so necessary, i'll just stop lol

 

maybe a certain global % reduction will magically scale similarly to what i've outlined above

 

there are two important goals basically: start soa with 600k and end the saga with 5.5m

 

edit: sorry about ugly formatting. phone...

 

 

anyway the point of the rant in the spoiler is how to subtract IWDEE quest xp from BGEE+BG2EE quest xp so that the total amount is the same and you finish the saga with ~5.5m

obviously a simpler method would just be to subtract ~300k from 5.5m and get the corresponding global reduction percentage that is needed for BGEE+BG2EE

but this wouldn't produce ~600k at the start of SoA and that's the main goal that should be strived for...i hope i'm being clearer now

 

(i'm completely ignoring monster xp btw)

 

It seems to me that there are two points of view when it comes to how to handle IWD's contribution to the main BG saga.

 

1. Make it so players can enjoy the content of IWD, while preventing it from changing their level progression through the BG saga.

or

2. Reward players for taking this excursion by allowing them to become higher level when they start later content.

 

The former appeals to those who wish to experience content while never "over leveling".

 

The latter appeals to those who want to feel like they gain something concrete for their efforts. Incidentally, this is the approach taken by TotSC, and SoD. Both of them extend the XP cap, and allow you to import into SoA at a higher level. This creates "over leveling", but it also creates a concrete reward for those who go through extra content.

 

My rambling thoughts spoilered out, because Roxanne just framed the argument so much better:

 

 

I just wanted to bring this up, to caution against an assumption that the goal in all cases is to keep the exact same leveling structure as the vanilla game. If (arbitrarily) I end at the Throne at level 25 in a vanilla game, I would want to end at the throne at level 35, if I also threw in SoD, DSotSC, NTotSC, TDDz, IWD, etc. Clearly there are those who want to end Throne still at 25, even with all that extra content. Options for both approaches would be best, if possible.

 

What I'm wondering is if there's a way to thread the needle, of sorts. For instance, I'm leery of an across the board reduction in XP, as those first 3-5 levels or so are tough enough. Going at half pace sounds laborious. I would actually support some way to let XP rewards have a graduated or stair step reduction scheme.

 

Let me get full XP rewards from levels 1-9

 

 

 

<train of thought derails as I read Roxanne's reply, which appeared while I was typing>

 

Ok yeah. What she said.

I think Roxanne's idea would probably handle what I'm trying to say

Edited February 3, 2017 by Lightbringer

[Roxanne]

I just wanted to bring this up, to caution against an assumption that the goal in all cases is to keep the exact same leveling structure as the vanilla game. If (arbitrarily) I end at the Throne at level 25 in a vanilla game, I would want to end at the throne at level 35, if I also threw in SoD, DSotSC, NTotSC, TDDz, IWD, etc. Clearly there are those who want to end Throne still at 25, even with all that extra content. Options for both approaches would be best, if possible.

This is another very valid point I was about to raise myself...

A party that did Drizzt Saga AND (part of) IWD before they face Sarevok IS a different party from one who did only vanilla plot. Not just by level and xp but also from the player (the one before the screen)'s perspective. The BIG boss does not scare you that much anymore - you have already seen worse -

 

and the frightened child who left Candlekeep KNOWS that this time Sarevok will loose.

 

Personally, I never had a problem with the fact that in a modded game Sarevok was not the worst enemy to fight in BG1. The road to him is the challenge, by the time you face him he is already a loser (all his dreams and ambitions have failed already before that moment),

 

Adding more contents and experience to the original game via mods naturally changes the *original* feeling and pace of the vanilla game. You cannot eat your cake and still have it. This is always the decision you have to keep in mind when adding such mods - and in this respect IWD is not different.

Edited February 3, 2017 by Roxanne

[subtledoctor]

About a year ago I was attacked from all sides by saying this mod needs a proper integration into the storyline of Baldur's Gate just like any of the other big addons. At that time, everyone cried out for freedom for the players, like *put IWD on the worldmap and let everyone try.*

I hardly think you were "attacked." As I recall you advocated to include certain story-based mechanisms for integration of IWD i to the core functionality of IWD-in-EET. Which would preclude any other modder from developing alternate mechanisms. You might even have suggested integrating it with the Sandrah mod - meaning any players who don't want to use the Sandrah mod would not be able to play IWD-in-EET. (I don't specifically recall, now.)

 

Far from attacking you, people simply disagreed, suggesting that such mechanisms are best left to add-on mods that could be installed after, and separately from, the core IWD-in-EET mod. And that is precisely what we're talking about now. I've stated like three times, we're talking about doing these adjustments in a separate optional mod.

 

I have done and tested a provisional story for IWD1 and HoW that would open the respective plots at a certain *time window* in the main game and connect it to the protagonist's story (also solving the *SoD Issues (SoD end-game spoilers!)* http://gibberlings3.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=27995. Just like Durlag's Tower or DSotSC it does not mean that you are forced to do the quest at that time, it just makes the most sense...(With EET you could play Werewolf Island in ToB part instead of BG1, but what is the point?).

Cool. This is all abstract discussion right now, since IWD-in-EET is probably a year away from being a reality. But once it is released, perhaps a few of us could pitch in and work together. Even as an optional add-on, this would be a pretty large undertaking. You certainly have skills modding dialogues and scripts that few other people have. I'd be happy to put in some work on XP changes and item replacement, etc.

 

the whole IWD is not necessary one (two) big block, but once you travelled to a new IWD area you add it to your worldmap and can go back and forth between BG and IWD areas. This means you can e.g. do IWD chapter wise in between your main plot progress

I don't love this, and assuming IWD-in-EET allows it, I think an add-on mod should consider undoing it. Simply because the idea of being stuck in the North - with that big avalanche behind you cutting you off from Easthaven and keeping everyone stuck in/around Kuldahar - is such a big motivator in the IWD story. There's a bunch of dialogues that mention it. It would be cool to embrace it, rather than dismissing it.

 

You cannot eat your cake and still have it.

Sure you can - you just need an "Eat + Have Cake" mod

Edited February 3, 2017 by subtledoctor

[Lightbringer]

the whole IWD is not necessary one (two) big block, but once you travelled to a new IWD area you add it to your worldmap and can go back and forth between BG and IWD areas. This means you can e.g. do IWD chapter wise in between your main plot progress

I don't love this, and assuming IWD-in-EET allows it, I think an add-on mod should consider undoing it. Simply because the idea of being stuck in the North - with that big avalanche behind you cutting you off from Easthaven and keeping everyone stuck in/around Kuldahar - is such a big motivator in the IWD story. There's a bunch of dialogues that mention it. It would be cool to embrace it, rather than dismissing it

 

These are interesting points. I understand where subtledoctor is coming from, as that is the feel and intent of vanilla IWD. Many will want to preserve that in their IWD-EET.

 

In my view though, IWD-in-EET is not IWD vanilla. In IWD, the adventuring party who defeats the Narrator (remember that gotcha?) does so as the culmination of an adventuring career. In IWD-in-EET, the adventuring party who defeats the Narrator does so as just one part of a much larger story. Sarevok is a grand master villain. Until you meet Jon Irenicus. Jonny is a grand master villain. Until you meet Mellisan. Somewhere in there, the IWD Narrator was also a master villain. I'm in Roxanne's camp on this one.

 

The adventurer who survives the ambush outside of Easthaven has already done things in the sword coast down south, and has other things on their plate as well.

 

Fire Giant warlords, Vampire guilds, dragons, wolfweres, demon knights, drow cities, mind flayer cells, golden lich-lords, cults of dead gods, cults of false gods, gods of the falsely dead: they ALL want a piece of the Bhaalspawn. IWD-Narrator needs to get in line with the rest.

 

HOWEVER, Subtledoctor's perspective is still quite valid. I can definitely see a reason for the approach he takes, though I may approach it differently myself. I image there are many players on both sides of this issue. If it is viable, I agree that there should be a way to have IWD be a separate excursion, as well as a way to integrate it into the larger BG story.

Edited February 3, 2017 by Lightbringer