What did you think of Throne of Bhaal?

[Ihateregistering1]

It wasn't so much that there were other children of Bhaal, it was the fact that they were all basically cookie-cutter "I'm gonna rule the world!" villains. It felt like they really could have given more depth to the other Bhaal-spawn and explored their motivations for wanting to conquer, or presented dialogue options for you to convince them to join you, or abandon their way of doing things. In the way it was, it basically seemed like a cheap trick to create ready-made bosses for the game.

The Monk didn't want to take over the world and he was the most powerful of the Bhaalspawn as I recall. There were the Dragons, the Drow, the Giants, that one that dies at the start, and the Monk who it turns out was planning to use the others ambition to get them to kill the other Bhaalspawn before in the end turning on them, leaving him as the last of the Bhaalspawn so he could ensure the prophecy never comes to pass by in turn killing himself.

Unfortunately seeing as both your main character and Imoen are prominent Bhaalspawn, his plans didn't exactly mesh with your own. Still he definitely wasn't 'conquer the world' evil.

I remember him distinctly because he's the only boss in Baldur's Gate that's immune to Time Stop. Man was that an unpleasant surprise the first time I tried it on him!

Yep, I totally forgot about the Monk (it's been a while since I played it)!

But I still stand by that I really felt like the game lacked a lot of the subtlety and nuance of BG2. The story just felt much more impersonal than BG2.

 

[The Madman]

Yep, I totally forgot about the Monk (it's been a while since I played it)!

But I still stand by that I really felt like the game lacked a lot of the subtlety and nuance of BG2. The story just felt much more impersonal than BG2.

I don't know about impersonal, the story is definitely very focused on the player character and their story. The word I'd use is much more direct. Baldur's Gate 1 is a sort of exploration based story where you're uncovering your characters origin and that of the world and its inhabitants around you before getting caught up in some light political intrigue, Baldur's Gate 2 is a mystery revenge story where you're chasing an enigmatic madman with uncertain plans across a diverse landscape with a company of close companions. By contrast Throne of Bhaal's story is far more straightforward. No real uncertainty, no doubt:

The time of the prophecy has arrived. It's all come down to a highlander style showdown with only the most powerful Bhaalspawn left standing, you among them. Time to bring things to an end one way or another because if you don't one of the others will.

Of course Melissan is meant to add a bit of mysterious spice to the story but I don't feel she's really all that intimidating or memorable a villain compared to those that came before, but then that's fine, she's less of a character and more of a final obstacle for the player to overcome. One last terrible reminder of Bhall's presence and power, lingering over the Bhaalspawn battlefield like a menacing shadow.

Not exactly the most subtle setup, but it works I feel. It's appropriate given the story and as I mention above, I found the ending satisfying. Not perfect by any means, but enough to have left a good final impression on an already amazing series.

 

[endtherapture]

Yep, I totally forgot about the Monk (it's been a while since I played it)!

But I still stand by that I really felt like the game lacked a lot of the subtlety and nuance of BG2. The story just felt much more impersonal than BG2.

I don't know about impersonal, the story is definitely very focused on the player character and their story. The word I'd use is much more direct. Baldur's Gate 1 is a sort of exploration based story where you're uncovering your characters origin and that of the world and its inhabitants around you before getting caught up in some light political intrigue, Baldur's Gate 2 is a mystery revenge story where you're chasing an enigmatic madman with uncertain plans across a diverse landscape with a company of close companions. By contrast Throne of Bhaal's story is far more straightforward. No real uncertainty, no doubt:

The time of the prophecy has arrived. It's all come down to a highlander style showdown with only the most powerful Bhaalspawn left standing, you among them. Time to bring things to an end one way or another because if you don't one of the others will.

Of course Melissan is meant to add a bit of mysterious spice to the story but I don't feel she's really all that intimidating or memorable a villain compared to those that came before, but then that's fine, she's less of a character and more of a final obstacle for the player to overcome. One last terrible reminder of Bhall's presence and power, lingering over the Bhaalspawn battlefield like a menacing shadow.

Not exactly the most subtle setup, but it works I feel. It's appropriate given the story and as I mention above, I found the ending satisfying. Not perfect by any means, but enough to have left a good final impression on an already amazing series.

I still really like the first act of the game. It was really nuanced and had several stages - first you had to get into the castle via one of several routes obviously, with some little sidequests around the town too. Then you had to explore the wilderness areas outside the City for the source of Yaga Shura's immortality, then you had to remove the immortality and go and kill him. This was a great Chapter and if we got a similar situation for Sendai, Abigazal and the monk then I think that would have been a fitting game to end the saga on.

 

[Starbird]

I quite like RPGs, and I have have heard that Baldur's Gate II is generally considered the Half-Life of RPGs. And I saw it on sale during the steam sales for something like 50% off but didn't get it. So I'm just wondering, how badly did I cock that up?

Pretty badly

Oh, BG2 definitely hasn't aged perfectly but to me it still is about as close to a gold standard as Western RPGs get.

OP: TOB wasn't bad and I think it did end the series rather well. It was about on par with the first game - so bloody excellent, but not as great as the second one.