I really tried to like this game. It's set in the forgotten realms, its an infinity engine game, its top down. The problem is I just can't seem to get into the difficulty. Im talking about Dale 1, although Ive played the 2nd which isn't my fav either.

It just seems like every game ever made where you create a party instead of a character like Bg and PS:T, just doesn't have as much to offer. I can't say that there's been 1 experience where Ive created a party and enjoyed the game. It's either too hard or something else.

But if I can role-play with a character like BG, Avadon or PS: T, your in the money. Im sure that action/rpg fans must love ice wind dale as its got very little story enough to call it an rpg. Still up to chapter 2 is ok until you get to the lizard king. Then again action/rpg fans of sacred must love it.

For me, I prefer turnbased rpgs where I can give orders all at once.

Never played Sacred, but I loved Icewind Dale.
As much as I love turn based combat and didn't like Real Time with Pause at first, now I'm glad that BioWare did something different with the Infinity Engine.

If you think Icewind Dale is an action game, then you have misunderstood. It is a hack&slash game, though, and a damned fine one at that.
And if you think story is what makes an RPG you are even more misinformed.

There are pre-made characters to import during the character creation stage, and a few parties in IWD2. Someone who don't want to create a party can jump into the game in few seconds.

I haven't start BG yet, but I played PS:T.
PS:T is an unusual RPG in terms of traditional "save the world" RPG, you really need to imagine you are TNO, discover your past, who you are and what should be done.

IWD just like PetrusOctavianus said is a "hack & slash" game, with a fair storyline (compare to PS:T). It is much more action oriented instead of story telling. But still a fun game.

IE game actually is a "turnbased game", there is a "round" (a turn), "speed" (movement) concept, die rolling etc, only the game engine do the job for you.
Or is I misunderstood your "turnbased rpgs" just like Final Fantasy?

I recommend using the Joinable NPC mods from G3. I loved IWD the first time, but missed the party interaction. The joinable NPC mod was great for that. IWD2 I tried twice and lost interest in, just didn't grab me, but playing with the joinable NPC mod was much better. Still not my favorite of the IE games by any means, but at least I was able to stay interested enough to finish it.

Its still too fucking hard. I mean the enemies you face in Baldurs Gate and Planescape are but a fraction of what you have to face in IWDale1. Its just brutally imbalanced and some of the enemies are impossible for any party. I rolled up a really good party with good stats and yet the enemies you face are just frustrating.

I played IWDale 2 a while back and that game like this one is crap as well. You can't expect people to get through games where you got to be 100% right all the time.

The makers of the game just littered each lvl with enemies regardless of their stats and abilities. It doesn't take a lot of smarts to know that the game wasn't properly finished.

I took my rogue through the lvls in stealth and all I found was enemy upon enemy upon enemy. In planescape and BG, there was at least some interaction and talking involved.

This game is a good reason why Black Isle went bankrupt.

Did you check and make sure you have it on the normal rules, not hard core?

I am HORRIBLE at combat in games. I'm not a tactician at all, and I had no real trouble with IWD. A couple fights in IWD2 nearly took me to my knees, but still, I got past them. If you really find the combat that hard in IWD, but didn't have a problem in BG/BG2, then there is something wrong with your setup. What do you mean 100% right? IWD2 was definitely rushed, but I think they finished it well. Well, if you aren't talking to anyone, that seems like a user related problem. You definitely have to talk to people through out the game. That's a lot of hate for a game you paid, what $3 for? Black Isle went bankrupt because Interplay was a horribly run company. It had nothing to do with any of the games that they produced.

If you don't like the games, that's fine, but there is no reason to go about trashing them like they fucked your sister behind your back.

^

Excellent post here and right on the money.

I've had several play thoughs with imbalanced parties and could still handle what IWD had to throw at me. Don't like IWD because you don't like combat oriented games, that's fine. But saying IWD is too hard and impossible with any party.........there's tons of us here who can prove you wrong.

IWD does have a learning curve though, and yes, it is much tougher than BG or PS:T. For me, this is one of IWD's strong points.

EDIT: Dialog in PS:T was excellent but in BG, let's face it........... is utter crap. I say this because you really only have a few responses, a do gooder response and 1 or 2 assholey responses. Honestly, when I wanted to roleplay my character in BG, I cringed at my dialog options but had to pick the "good" response cos that's where the XP and loot are. In BG, there really is only one way to respond in dialog which made it tedious, Dialog took a backseat in IWD and the game was better off for it.

The thing that gets me so annoyed about the game is the same reason I get annoyed about many games that are good but refuse to let me finish them and are generally frustrating beyond reason. What annoys the heck out of me is that I WANT to be able to finish it, I get into it A LOT and then the game just becomes unplayable for my party.

If the game sucked completely I would just be like ok whatever, but when a game has a lot of good qualities and then just bails on me, I get IMMENSELY frustrated.

I think that my party was a good 2 man party but I just don't know what to do to get past those beetles in Dragons Eye.

A party of 2? There's nothing wrong with that, but keep in mind the game was designed with the intent that you'd be playing a six character party. If you're having that much trouble with your party of two, then I recommend adding at least one other member.

That being said, what character classes are you playing with your party of 2? The beetles are fairly easily handled with a simple magic spell like Web or Entangle, then pelt them with ranged weapons. Or you could use summons to act as meat shields/cannon fodder. Depends on what your party is capable of.

I completely understand what you are trying to say, however I am not very bad where I don't think its the characters I made. My characters happen to be a bunch of little badasses, the problem I am having is moreso that I havent played all my tactics yet and don't want to be forced to using them. Im going to have to use some of the most cheap tactics its just Im not used to this game after just finishing Planescape Torment and Baldurs Gate. If this was turn based I would be using 4 or 3 characters, but its real time and PS:T and BG 1 and 2 Ive used only solo and 2 man parties.

I find a party of 6 is too confusing to manage all the players. The less characters you rely on the better. Besides your telling me that a party of 6 at least 2 of the characters aren't worthless compared to the rest. There's ALWAYS at least 2 characters that can't pull the weight. Also a team of 2-3 badasses is much more realistic.

I know it isn't realistic but solo characters if there wasn't a lvl cap would be the most insane. Who wants to mess with a badass warrior who can utilize number of different utility skills and be as powerful as a team of 4.

Im using a human Paladin who wields a Longsword and Shield with plate mail armor and defensive items. He is resistant to weapon damage and has high health. My thief is a badass too. He is elven and wields a scimitar +2 which is lucky. He deals damage on par with my paladin and has 1 thaco better than my pally which is awesome as he is a thief. He also has similar health points to my pally (from items) which is awesome seeing as my pally has a good constitution.

Any tips on the party weapons? I wanted to give the pally a better weapon like a mace but wasn't sure that would be ideal as swords are usually better in most of these games.

I can see you want to play a party of two or at least a small party, but do try to understand that the game was designed with the intent that you'd be using a full party of 6. You're complaining that you can't play the game in a way it wasn't designed to be played. It really doesn't make sense to complain about that.

You can emulate turn-based play with some of the game settings, as well as using the pause function liberally.

As you've actually inadvertently pointed out in your post though, in this game, due to the (generally considered to be excellent) encounter design, the less characters you rely on is not necessarily better. I understand you'd like it to be that way, but it just isn't. While many of us play with fewer characters, you still need to make sure you have at least the basics covered. Which leads me to...

You lack any magic capability, which in this game makes it extremely difficult. Due to your choice of character classes, you've really made the game a very tough challenge. Hell, even veteran players would have difficulties with only a Paladin and Rogue.

Not to belabor the point, but at a minimum, you should be looking to have a warrior (which you do), some Rogue skills (also covered by your party), spell capacity - both offense and defense (and you have none), and healing (although this last can often be covered by potions). Large swords are in abundance and are a good choice, as the best weapon in the game is a longsword that only a Paladin can use (but you only get it close to the end of the game). Axes are a good choice too, as there are some nice ones as well as a great returning throwing axe. Hammers are another choice that would allow you to use Conlan's Hammer at need for certain tough mobs.

The best piece of advice I can give you though is to at the very least add one more member to your party - a mage. If you can stand to play with 3 characters, and make that third one a spell chucker, I'm pretty sure you'll see such a vast difference in the game that you'll wonder how you got as far as you did without one.

Re your previous comment about at least two members not being able to pull their weight, I have to disagree. The only class I find I can get by without missing is a Cleric, but even they have some great spells and are far from useless if you take one. As an example, for a bigger party, here are some thoughts on classes:

Bards I find are great secondary mages (and this can be huge boon, as you can load them with defensive spells or single target spells, while filling your mage spell slots with pure AoE offense and disablers - or you can use the Bard to take the spells a specialist mage can't cast - or any number of other useful combinations). They can also use bows or crossbows whiile hanging outside the main battle and pelt the mobs with extra ranged attacks. And at higher levels they get the healing Song of the Sith which will keep your party going without having to rest for a long, long time.

Druids get one of the best spells in the game IMO, which is Spike Growth. Toss that into a brew of Grease and Web, and you can actually just sit back and watch the mobs die. Hmm, maybe that makes the rest of the party superfluous... just kidding. Druids are also great secondary healers and can raise the dead. They also have some decent spells to disable mages. Finally, they can, in a pinch, act as a secondary melee fighter if pressed.

Paladins: no need to elaborate here, as you're playing one.

Rogues: Again, no need to elaborate. They certainly have a place in the party with their trap and lock abilities, as well as a really awesome backstab once they get some levels under their belt. I personally prefer to use a multiclass Rogue/Ftr, so they can act as a more effective secondary melee presence.

Mages: they're powerhouses when they get a few levels and have a selection of spells to cast. Sure, they're weak at first, but it doesn't take long before they hit that level of awesome that makes them indispensable. They can turn a tough battle into a cakewalk with the application of just a couple well chosen spells.

Clerics: again, the only class I can regularly do without, since much of their strength can be covered by the Druid or Bard (healing) or by Druids, Mages, and Bards (some of the spell power). They do have some excellent spells though, can turn undead (and at higher levels can outright destroy them) and even though I can do without them, they're by no means superfluous in any party. They're also great buffers and can be great as a tertiary melee presence or as another ranged attacker.

Keep in mind, as well, that with more party members, you have that many more characters that can toss some ranged attacks before many of the encounter default to melee. And with some AoE spells added in to hinder or outright stop the mobs from getting to you, you can often wipe out most or all of the opposition with ranged attacks and/or spells.

So by insisting on going with only a 2 character party, you're making the game far more difficult than it needs to be. And the lack of a spell chucker is really, really handicapping your game.

The enemies you face in IWD1 are way harder than the ones you face in the BG series? Are you kidding me? There were like four or five different kinds of Liches in BG2, and every one of them was categorically more powerful than your party. If you didn't have the proper protections, you would die (might take a while, but you would die, because you wouldn't be able to get at the damn things otherwise). virtually all of the undead, except for the skeletons, in BG2 were capable of causing permanent skill and level drains (which meant that you couldn't wait out the duration of the spell. you'd have to find a temple priest or cast your own priest spells to fix it, and even then, you'd have to re-memorize the spells you'd lost. or you could just activate the CLUA Console). Oh, and don't even get me started on Golems. Every enemy in IWD that was also in the BG series was dumbed down to fit the template of the game. The main difference is that IWD has the habit of throwing larger numbers of enemies at you at any given time, and you can't always rely on the standard tactic of coaxing one or two of them away from the group, because there are numerous areas where the monsters use the call friends skill and they all come at you. It's just a different kind of game. It requires that you think relatively strategically. Plus, there are four different difficulty settings, which you can switch between at a whim.

And on the subject of party creation, this game requires that you either create a power gaming party composed of all fighters that you then dual class after the first or second level up (characters have to be human in order to do that), or that you create a well balanced and traditional party that has at least two mages, a thief, two fighters, one of whom may be better as a Ranger, and another character that is either a full blown priest, or at least has some priest abilities, such as a Druid (one of my all time favorite classes) or a Bard (depending on how you roll your stats for that character, a bard can really hold their own when it comes to fighting). There are tons of combinations and any number of ways to set your party, but this is the basic template. It also helps to know that you can roll your stats as many times as you want, and can even shift them to acquire higher ratings in various qualities once you roll a good turn in that class's primary stat. True, there is little story, and that disappoints me, being fresh of of BG2, which has an abundance of such, but that doesn't mean that the Icewind Dale series was a bust. I quite like it, myself.

And like so many of us here are trying to tell you: If that happens, you have to try to find a different tactic, a different playing style, a different party. BTW: these games allow you to drop any party member at any time and create a new one in the same game.