Icewind Dale is great for themed parties.
Had lots of fun with my LOTR party and sword&sorcery power trio (Fafhrd, Grey Mouser, Cappen Varra).

I have thought about that before, and I put the line in whether it has short- or long-term consequences to the game.

So: it is ok that there is an element of chance when I hit a monster and it hits me back, e.g. whether I occasionally miss the enemy (and it misses me), and whether I do 10 or 15 points of damage. It doesn't have any real long-term consequences even if I miss occasionally and sometimes do less damage. In the average I still do certain amount of damage, and if I am unlucky, it just means I have to heal up more during and after the combat. No biggie.

However, if I have to create my party members with mere rolling and e.g. be content with the fact that my fighter character got very low strength points and my wizard has a very low intelligence due to bad luck in rolling, no thanks. I prefer that I can create the characters manually, sharing the limited points how I see fit (e.g. my wizard will have pretty low strength but high intelligence, while my fighter tank will have the opposite).

The same with e.g. how much extra HP my characters get when they level up. It just doesn't feel fair that they might get very low number of extra points due to a poor roll. That also promotes saving and reloading the game just before a level up, trying to make sure my character gets near maximum points of extra HP.

Fortunately, at least in e.g. Icewind Dale 2 there is an option "maximum HP points on level up", ie. it makes sure all your characters get the maximum number of HP points that they are eligible for, during their level ups. Good, then I don't have to reload and re-level up several times just because I don't want to be a victim of sheer bad luck.

At least in IWD games you have to have a versatile party, as there are those rock-paper-scissors encounters where "magic does no damage to these monsters" or "these trolls don't die at all unless your final blow contains fire damage" (which is naturally the easiest to do either with a fire magic weapon, or fire spells).

That's actually what I like about IWD, and BG games, needing diversity in your party. Even a thief is quite useful in those games, as a scout who can hide in the shadows and detect enemies (and traps), before the enemies can detect you.

In many other RPGs the thief characters feel unnecessary. Maybe you can obtain some extra money by their thieving skills, I guess.

Sure, that's maybe an issue for people that don't want to start with the first game (or don't want to play it at all). IMO, the best sequels are never standalone. I consider BG1&2 one big game.

Well explained, timppu. Couldn't have said it better.

I meant: the sequel aspect (how it relates to the previous instalment), not how good the game is by itself.

Agreed. That actually was a rather annoying feature of Baldur's Gate, you pretty much had to save before leveling up, because the risk of getting something like 2 hit points (instead of 10) was too high. Values like that should be set and predictable.

All we have evidence for so far is that he likes Cyberpunk and posting on this forum... but I see the logical conclusion you're suggesting!

Hah! Great response :D

they are cheap when discounted , get both

Play them both ! It is hard to recommend one over another because both are really good games and based on your interests it is hard to tell what you are going lo like more. Personally I would prefer BG but just because it leads to BG2 which you'd want to play after it /the writing is just really really good/

Yeah, I agree that can be a lot of fun for a player that has some experience with the ruleset and knows what they are doing. But, for a totally new player, there is definitely some potential to screw that up. IWD is a great game, but from what I recall I don't think it is possible to change party members after you start, so if you screw up that initial party build, you can be in for a somewhat miserable time.

BG is a bit more forgiving in that regard, because if you do a poor job of making your main character, you can compensate for it with the companion NPCs. You can also rebalance the party later on, if you realize your party build is sub-optimal.

I usually set those games to give max hit points on level up for the first 2-3 levels, as I agree the hit points for the first few levels are very dicey and can have a huge effect on the difficulty level. Having a mage or rogue that starts with 1 hit point at first level is just ridiculous - they stub their toe walking down the stairs into the dungeon and they're done for, lol!

I would definitely recommend a new player to use max hit points until they feel comfortable with they way things work.

Nope, not entirely convinced. In BG1 you meet and team up with Imoen (unless like me you ditch her immediately, “hi, I’m Imoen” *pow*, so you have to get used to theif skills early in either game. If you start 2, as a mage maybe more spells, but you have that wonderful tutorial dungeon to go over that. You don’t have so much of a tutorial with candlekeep. So it’s a bit of both. If you don’t know anything about DnD then you will struggle with any DND game, but there are loads of good guides out there. Heck you could try it solo first time, no need to take anyone, a noob will die repeatedly though, the others are there to give them a starting chance.
TBH I wouldn’t recommend either a mage or thief for a first play through. My first game, I remember starting in candlekeep with a female mage, probably died 6 or 7 times on the guy in the house! Heck, the last battle there (with no spoilers) I had to use summons to block access to me and wands!

I would go with cleric or fighter first time, get the basics down. As I previously mentioned you can do to level 7 as fighter and then dual in BG2 to mage with no loss. In fact this is probably a good way if you want to be a spellcaster as low level DND is ruled by fighters, where higher levels are ruled by mages. I,e, you get no good spells until later levels.

Hello kai2!

Based on your liking of the two "Drakensang" games and of "Baldur's Gate Dark Alliance", I guess you might enjoy both "Baldur's Gate" and "Icewind Dale".
Which one of them depends on what gameplay style you like more: a more freeform style of exploration (to a degree in the "Drakensang" games) or the much more linear on-rails in "Dark Alliance".

As others have mentioned already, "Baldur's Gate" (especially the first one) is more non-linear in its approach of available areas as soon as you have left the starting introduction town! I did enjoy the exploration and discovery.
But in contrast to what the many in the community think, I did not like neither the story, its way of story telling nor the companion characters and their banter or timed quests. Another annoyance for me were the many trash mobs you had to fight while exploring. Its true, it had more staged fights against unique individuals, but no one told me before playing, that you will be kind of frequently overrun by samey groups of enemies, if you try to explore each map to the full. The majority of dungeons are boring empty corridors (with the exception of the new areas in the expansion), and some overland maps seem to be filler material. The overall aesthetic in "Baldur's Gate" one actually resembles somewhat medieval architecture and late summer or autumn forest landscapes with very few fantastical elements. (The second one had too much fantastical and semi-industrial (almost futuristic) elements for my tastes.)

"Icewind Dale" in comparison is really on rails, a strictly linear path. While you can go back and return to areas already visited, there is mostly no real incentive to do so. However, its story and dialogue are not any shorter than of its big brother "Baldur's Gate". The presentation or narration of "Icewind Dale's" story could hold my interest much better, and at its weakest points at least gave the right motivation for the following dungeon crawl. The encounters usually involve larger groups of enemies, but the fights and environments where they take place are arranged really well, giving you different challenges each time, and allowing for utilizing the environment features for your advantage. And "Icewind Dale" has more variety in its beastiary than "Baldur's Gate" (one).
Unfortunately, there are a few fights that can be borderline unfair due to certain immunities of individual creatures or bosses. (I got stuck once and had to look up alternative strategies on how to beat one enemy. Because I became to inflexible in my approach.) Either certain magic or special weapons/items (found nearby) can do the trick in those cases.
What really steals the show among the Infinitiy-Engine games are its winter themed unique environments and harsh atmosphere, starting out as an adventurous expedition that goes wrong, leading to both disturbing and awe-inspiring places! Each area is beautifully designed with lots of small details. The marvelous soundtrack further adds to that unique atmosphere (that the second entry in the "Icewind Dale" series could not match, due to too much rehashing of environments).

Overall, I enjoyed the first "Icewind Dale" a lot more than any of the Infinity-Engine games!

But I am also quite a bit biased towards low level adventuring in roleplaying games, where each level up feels more meaningful and does make a difference. I do not mind the hit & miss frequencies of attacks. They are not too different, for instance, from the "Drakensang" games. (And I know games that are way worse with respect to that aspect.)

I would suggest to give both games a chance.

If you can deal with the underlying AD&D system, start both, and forget min-maxing (or power leveling) your characters.
In case of "Baldur's Gate" it is worthwile to continue at least until you see the map opening up, allowing to go in any direction you want, and with a little patience to visit the city of Baldur's Gate, once.
In "Icewind Dale" it is recommendable to play at least until you have entered the tombs in the Vale of Shadows, after you have visited the settlement of Kuldahar.
Thus you can get a good impression of what the rest of each game is going to look and feel like!

Kind regards,
foxgog

I really appreciate your indulging me and taking the time to let me know your thoughts. It's very much appreciated.

Getting this number of respsonses has definitely shown to me that both series have made strong impressions on many people.

It sounds to me that -- if I connect with either -- it would probably be the dungeon-crawling and difficulty of Icewind Dale (plus I'm reading The Icewind Dale Trilogy!)...

... but...

... it would probably be foolish to pass Baldur's Gate.

Thank you all!

Yeah, that's a very unfair encounter. The reason why being a low level mage or thief sucks in D&D are mostly situations like these where the game just doesn't show any consideration for your chosen class and treats everyone like a fighter.