Part of the fun of these games is finding your way around them so I wouldn't look too hard for advice into this area. I wouldn't say that there is anything you should be aware of in the sense that you won't be able to progress because of a mistake you made. Seriously, just dive in and play it by ear. You are going to make mistakes on your first play through but they won't be anything serious. Also, the BG and IWD games have a lot of replay value so just remember what you could have done better for your next play through.

I also recommend keeping modding at a minimum for a first play through. I would only stick with a widescreen mod but this is just me.

Oh, and just as a side note, Demon Stone is a button bashfest. You don't need to know anything about DnD to finish that game. Actually, You don't need to know anything to finish that game. Hell, you could probably switch your brain out for a chunk of cheese and still be able to finish the game :P. It's one of those "kick back and let my brain switch off" games so you know which game to go for if you're in that mood :P.

Also, Neverwinter Nights' main campaigns stink. The only reason to play NWN is for user created content or the multiplayer. If you do decide to play through the campaigns, you probably won't play through them a second time.

I think Baldur's Gate is a good place to start for a D&D-noob. That is where I started, and those games instantly became top 5 favorites :) Unfortunately, I can't say I have gotten much farther in D&D. The only D&D-game I've finished other than the BG-games, is Icewind Dale and its expansions. I do own the whole bundle though, and plan to play through them soon.

There is a sea of different D&D-games out there, there is even a D&D beat em up called Shadow of Mystara. It's not easy knowing where to start. The reason I think Baldur's Gate is the best place to start, is that it is modern enough/easy to get into, not too hard, and it is a excellent game overall. I think it would be much harder to start in a early 90's D&D dungeon crawler, such as Eye of the Beholder, though I have not played it, so I cannot say it without certainty.

Thanks everybody for the inputs! :)

I found everyone's diverse insights asto what to play very cool and it helped me understand D&D a little bit more. I also found the comments about "Sleep" and NWN's campaign pretty silly. Though I guess for you D&Ders a better word would be "charm"ing. xD I didn't know chronologically they were a bit different too (such as Matewis when BG1 -> PT -> IWD was mentioned). I might've just been overthinking D&D's complexity a little bit, so I really appreciate the clear up! :)

I actually plan on playing as a dwarven fighter for my main character the first time around.

If you play a dwarf fighter I recommend maxing str(18/..), dex(17) and con(19). 18/00 strength is optimal, but 18/51-99 is very good too.
If you can afford pump up charisma to 16, wis can be lowered to 3 without negative consequences, int is also useless in BG1. If you play modded or BG2 you need 9 int to read scrolls, but even then it's not important for fighters.

Most important is weapon specialization, put 2 stars each into a melee and ranged weapon type. Powergamers specialize in long bows and long swords, but axes work well too in melee and you can combine them with missile weapons (slings, darts) and a shield if you want to play a more melee oriented typical dwarf fighter.

A dwarven fighter is a fine choice. Much easier to keep alive than for instance a mage, and you can use any weapon you find, though of course it's best to only use those you are proficient with. For a dwarf I love to use axes, but you can choose whatever you want.

Also, when you've run out of D&D-games to play, and want something similar, check out Dragon Age: Origins. I believe it is heavily inspired by D&D, and the combat is very similar to the combat in Baldur's Gate.

More like check out Pillars of Eternity, which is definitely inspired by Infinity Engine games and is largely hailed as their comeback. Dragon Age: Origins is okay, but personally I didn't like it much.

Didn't massively enjoy Dragon Age: Origins either. From what I recall I gave up in a dwarven mountain or some such place. There were just hordes of enemies behind every door, nook and cranny, and it became pretty darn boring to slash through them all. More similar to Icewind Dale than Baldur's Gate in that case, except I had fun throughout with Icewind Dale.

Yeah, I've also burned out in Orzammar earlier. I had a week where I was dead set on finishing the game, played a couple of hours every day, did side quests, explored, but I took a break when I got to Orzammar. I love the game, but that part of the game is a slog. I picked up progress on my save again a few days ago, I think I'm nearing the climax of the main story.

Well, it's worth finishing once at least at any rate. The thing I really appreciated about Pillars of Eternity was that all dungeons are relatively short and to the point and there's a massive, optional mega dungeon if you happen to be the sort of person who enjoys dungeon crawling.

Dragon Age made a huge mistake of pushing its dungeons far beyond being bearable - they were all a couple of floors too long, with extremely repetitive enemies. Additionally I'm not too fond of cooldown spell systems as they just make me stand in place, waiting for them to recharge. Still, DA: O is worth finishing purely to play some of the DLC and especially Awakening, which was pretty great.

And then Pillars of Eternity did everything right and I fell in love.

Cheers for the dwarven tips, mates! I might go longsword/sling or something for my first run. I didn't really realize Charisma was that useful, though? I feel like in most games that's an unnecessary statistic, but of course this is D&D we're talking about.

Haha, in terms of DA:O, I actually did play that a few years ago. For some reason it wasn't my cup of joe personally, and I even 100%'d it! I enjoyed Awakening and one or two of the DLCs (Leliana's comes to mind mainly), but something about it just didn't fully click to me. I never really played a semi-tactical game like that before either, so maybe that's a factor. =P I think it was the combat that definitely factored it in a little.

Yep.

:)

I'm not a big fan of avatars constantly moving around by requirement. Those are the games I avoid like the plague.
Cooldowns are not such a bad idea, nor is standing in place waiting for cooldowns to recharge.



Have you forgotten that Role-Playing Games are traditionally turn-based?

Well question is why. Without cooldowns, you can feel free to stand around and think upon your existence all you want - or, alternatively, not, as you wish. With cooldowns, you don't have much of a choice. I don't want to be forced to progress - I don't want to be forced to wait either tho.

Turn-based doesn't mean slow ;-)

I can think of an obvious way to deal with issues of cooldown and waiting for effects to wear off: Have battles take place on a separate screen. When the battle ends, return to the main exploration screen. It is now easy to have effects and cooldowns expire instantly at the end of battle because you now have a clear notion of battle versus non-battle.

Incidentally, one other issue I have with the Infinity Engine games is an irritating combination of two factors:
1. The pathfinding is not that good
2. You are forced to rely on it; you can't just take direct control of your party with, say, the arrow keys.

Ultima 6, as an example, didn't have this issue, as you controlled your characters manually (aside from the battle AI that can easily be turned off).