Changes from Grimrock 1 you DIDN'T like

Talk about anything related to Legend of Grimrock 2 here.
User avatar
Dr.Disaster
Posts: 2876
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 11:48 am

Re: Changes from Grimrock 1 you DIDN'T like

Post by Dr.Disaster »

Luj1 wrote:1. Charged weapons
Now: Charged weapons consume energy as well as one charge.
I'm ok with the need for a bit of energy to activate a spell charge.
Yet activating spell charges costs as much as casting the regular spell and that is IMO way too much.
User avatar
Jaelus
Posts: 25
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2012 6:12 am

Re: Changes from Grimrock 1 you DIDN'T like

Post by Jaelus »

Weapons with spells in them generally work one of three ways in RPGs:

1. The weapon can cast a specific spell but it does not hold energy, it channels it. Casting the spell uses the caster's own energy. Use of the item is unlimited, but it requires something like magic item use (in this game it would be concentration). Basically it lets you cast a spell you do not know. The casting cost may sometimes be greater than normal for the spell.

2. The weapon has charges, and casting the spell depletes a charge. There may or may not be an available method for recharging the item once it is depleted.

3. The weapon has X charges that can be used over a specific period of time. For example 1 charge per day. The item self-charges but the number of uses is constrained.

Having an item use energy AND deplete a charge is absolute nonsense because the charge is the energy for casting the spell that is already stored in the item! That's what having a charge means! You don't have to put batteries in your remote control and also plug it in.
User avatar
Luj1
Posts: 168
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 11:12 am
Location: Belgrade, Serbia

Re: Changes from Grimrock 1 you DIDN'T like

Post by Luj1 »

Dr.Disaster wrote: Yet activating spell charges costs as much as casting the regular spell and that is IMO way too much.
Yeah exactly.... these items are supposed to hold magic themselves and shouldn't require any energy to cast IMHO
RPG veteran
User avatar
Saice
Posts: 399
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 11:17 pm
Location: Level 14 Mount Grimrock

Re: Changes from Grimrock 1 you DIDN'T like

Post by Saice »

Luj1 wrote:
Dr.Disaster wrote: Yet activating spell charges costs as much as casting the regular spell and that is IMO way too much.
Yeah exactly.... these items are supposed to hold magic themselves and shouldn't require any energy to cast IMHO
But you can give this to your non mage to use and they don't have to know the spell or have the relevant elemental skill. So they are still useful just not as useful as they where in LoG 1
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
My end game stats LoG 1st play through
User avatar
Luj1
Posts: 168
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 11:12 am
Location: Belgrade, Serbia

Re: Changes from Grimrock 1 you DIDN'T like

Post by Luj1 »

Saice wrote:
But you can give this to your non mage to use and they don't have to know the spell or have the relevant elemental skill. So they are still useful just not as useful as they where in LoG 1

Can't really say that I see the use for it. Every party member has something better to do. If I'm hitting with my sword I surely am not going to drop it and pick up a sceptre or a staff and start throwing fireballs with mediocre damage at the expense of energy.

On a non-mage I'd much rather use that energy for special weapon moves we see in this game .
RPG veteran
User avatar
Chimera005ao
Posts: 187
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2014 8:34 am

Re: Changes from Grimrock 1 you DIDN'T like

Post by Chimera005ao »

Every party member has something better to do. If I'm hitting with my sword I surely am not going to drop it and pick up a sceptre or a staff and start throwing fireballs with mediocre damage at the expense of energy.
I would. BUT only against specific enemies, like the mosquitoes. I was constantly hitting x in my game to swap weapon sets, as everyone's hands were full so I'd always have the right tool for the job.
User avatar
Sorez
Posts: 73
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2013 9:26 pm

Re: Changes from Grimrock 1 you DIDN'T like

Post by Sorez »

Personally, I miss a person you follow noted from who was in the same situation as you, like Toorum. (Also miss Toorum mode)

I also miss some of the story aspects of the first one, with the dreams, and finding out the guy helping you is a the final boss, a giant cube (Which was amazingly well played with how the game is tile-based)

Also, I miss the different dungeon stones. There are a couple, but not as many as the original, mostly land based tiles now.

Although, this does mean that there's STILL reason to play the first one, it's not obsolete or anything :D
User avatar
Komag
Posts: 3658
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2012 4:55 pm
Location: Boston, USA

Re: Changes from Grimrock 1 you DIDN'T like

Post by Komag »

Um, the first game only had "dungeon" and "temple" tile sets (and "prison", which I personally feed didn't really count), so the second game definitely has more tile sets
Finished Dungeons - complete mods to play
2_hype
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2014 9:49 pm

Re: Changes from Grimrock 1 you DIDN'T like

Post by 2_hype »

I didn't like that my Minotaur rogue got nerfed so hard.

But Minotaur Barb with a certain axe is just as Godly.
User avatar
Isaac
Posts: 3185
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:02 pm

Re: Changes from Grimrock 1 you DIDN'T like

Post by Isaac »

It's a fair chance that the empty bottles can be modded back in for those mods that plan to use them.
Post Reply