I loved reading your response, Bill! I'm sure if we lived closer together, we'd be playing LAN games to the point where our wives would probably chuck our computers out the window!
One thing I forgot to mention in the post was the emphasis on constructing your own adventures with NWN. Apparently, NWN's extensive construction toolset was one of its main selling points for some people, though that kind of thing hasn't really appealed to me. However, the idea was to create an engine that would let everyday D&D gamers (particularly the hardcore pen-and-paper folks) create commercial-quality CPRGs. Seemingly, the strategy has paid off beyond anyone's wildest speculations, with hundreds (if not thousands??) of eager dungeon masters unleashing decades of creative potential into the construction of freely downloadable modules for the game.
It was an awesome idea, and I'm sure that, again, if I had the right circle of friends, it'd be something I would've wanted to do. However, without friends to play the game with, it'd be a waste of time. I had no interest in getting SSI's Forgotten Realms Unlimited Adventure, which was pretty much the same deal. I mean, it'd be fun, but for some reason, I was always more interested in playing CPRGs than making them.
I remember reading Shigeru Miyamoto saying that RPGs sucked because your character started off with so many limitations. However, I thought that was the main draw. It's really fun babying and pampering a character, watching him or her develop slowly through experience, and always having a hand in the process. The very best games really focus on this aspect, and let you create very distinct characters from a sort of generic pool, gradually refining them. Obviously, the party-based games add immensely to this element, because you have to think so far beyond just one character. You have to think about how the characters will work together, and which skills will complement the group. I guess most people now would be tempted to call it a "turn-based" or "real-time" strategy game rather than an CRPG, which has come to mean the solo-player games like Morrowind.
But really, it was so fun taking all the gold to the shops and trying to decide if you'd buy that platemail for your fighter or a ring of protection for your mage. Would you have a straight thief or multiclass? In the gold box games, there was always an important choice in whether you'd focus on melee or magic. I'd usually opt for two mages, usually of different specialties, since the "artillery" was usually pretty amazing once you got far enough into the game (though at first they were huge liabilities).
My usual party consisted of a half-orc or dwarf fighter, a human paladin (or elf ranger), a halfling thief, elf cleric, and two wizards, usually elves or humans. Sometimes I'd multi-class the thief with fighting.
I loved reading your response, Bill! I'm sure if we lived closer together, we'd be playing LAN games to the point where our wives would probably chuck our computers out the window!
One thing I forgot to mention in the post was the emphasis on constructing your own adventures with NWN. Apparently, NWN's extensive construction toolset was one of its main selling points for some people, though that kind of thing hasn't really appealed to me. However, the idea was to create an engine that would let everyday D&D gamers (particularly the hardcore pen-and-paper folks) create commercial-quality CPRGs. Seemingly, the strategy has paid off beyond anyone's wildest speculations, with hundreds (if not thousands??) of eager dungeon masters unleashing decades of creative potential into the construction of freely downloadable modules for the game.
It was an awesome idea, and I'm sure that, again, if I had the right circle of friends, it'd be something I would've wanted to do. However, without friends to play the game with, it'd be a waste of time. I had no interest in getting SSI's Forgotten Realms Unlimited Adventure, which was pretty much the same deal. I mean, it'd be fun, but for some reason, I was always more interested in playing CPRGs than making them.
I remember reading Shigeru Miyamoto saying that RPGs sucked because your character started off with so many limitations. However, I thought that was the main draw. It's really fun babying and pampering a character, watching him or her develop slowly through experience, and always having a hand in the process. The very best games really focus on this aspect, and let you create very distinct characters from a sort of generic pool, gradually refining them. Obviously, the party-based games add immensely to this element, because you have to think so far beyond just one character. You have to think about how the characters will work together, and which skills will complement the group. I guess most people now would be tempted to call it a "turn-based" or "real-time" strategy game rather than an CRPG, which has come to mean the solo-player games like Morrowind.
But really, it was so fun taking all the gold to the shops and trying to decide if you'd buy that platemail for your fighter or a ring of protection for your mage. Would you have a straight thief or multiclass? In the gold box games, there was always an important choice in whether you'd focus on melee or magic. I'd usually opt for two mages, usually of different specialties, since the "artillery" was usually pretty amazing once you got far enough into the game (though at first they were huge liabilities).
My usual party consisted of a half-orc or dwarf fighter, a human paladin (or elf ranger), a halfling thief, elf cleric, and two wizards, usually elves or humans. Sometimes I'd multi-class the thief with fighting.
Matt Barton, Managing Editor
Location: St. Cloud, Minnesota, USA
Email: matt@armchairarcade.com