It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
IwubCheeze: Ahhh, okay, I'm following along now. Considering summons (and enchantment magics) were king in BG1, I can see characters with OP summons just wreaking all the lower level critters.
avatar
pi4t: As opposed to...spamming wands of summon to swamp your enemies and exploiting the game that way? BG1 has plenty of ways to wreak encounters too if you're inclined to play that way, and just like the BG1 methods you can play in the BG2 engine without choosing the few options which are broken.
There's probably a good reason why a summoning limit was introduced along with the removal of the arrows of detonation from BG2. I did spam summons but it was only in the final fight with Seravok, doing that trick anywhere else was a waste. There was also a finite amount of wands making common use of that trick impractical.

However, wands and arrows of detonation are equipment and while they are OP, you can't compare them to presitige class innate abilities. Cheesy equpiment can be skipped easily enough but if you are going to play a class but not use the abilities that define how that class is played, then what's the point in playing them? I'll play a totemic druid but not use the summons. Maybe I'll use an archer but keep him to melee. Or maybe play an assassin but not using poison or backstab. I'm sure you can see the problem here.
Post edited June 19, 2014 by IwubCheeze
I prefer BG1. I like the raw simplicity of low level DnD. I don't deny that the sequel is a masterpiece, but I always get bogged down in it about halfway through.