Wrath of the Righteous Feels Like the True Successor to Baldur’s Gate 2
I recently finished all the mythic paths in Pathfinder: Wrath of the Righteous, and I wanted to write a review because I had been playing it for a while, but this was the first time I went through all the mythic paths and also completed the game on Unfair.
With that being said, I really want to commend Owlcat for making a really good game. It takes much more from Baldur’s Gate 2 than Baldur’s Gate 3. It sets up a very large, high-level campaign from the beginning and carries you through the hero’s journey very successfully. I would even say more successfully than Kingmaker, although you can clearly see the same DNA in both.
Strengths:
Using the Pathfinder 1e system is a great idea because it gives a lot of depth to character building. I did miss some of the high-level mage battles from Baldur’s Gate 2, especially the back-and-forth spellcasting and dispelling and the different ways you could approach that, compared to the somewhat more basic mage combat here. Nonetheless, because I’m familiar with D&D 3.5, I was able to adapt easily, learn the subtleties, and get comfortable with the system. It was very well done and made me want to try Pathfinder tabletop.
The story is really good, and its greatest strength is how much it changes depending on your mythic path. For example, the difference between Aeon and Angel is huge, even though both lean lawful and aren’t on the sadistic side, they still feel completely different. Act 4 and Act 5[somewhat Act 3 too, though less imo] in particular change a lot based on your mythic choice, which is a big deal and not something many games have really attempted.
Romances were also well executed. They span all five acts and don’t feel isolated to one part of the game. There’s a wide variety of choices. Compared to Baldur’s Gate 2, where you have three options for a straight male character that are all attractive and interesting in their own way, a lot of modern games lean toward more atypical romances where there isn’t really a straightforward or more conventional option. Here, almost all of the romance choices felt attractive in at least some way.
The story overall is well told and really feels like a campaign. I did feel that the personal side of the story was less compelling than the overall crusade narrative. I was more invested in the crusade itself than in the connection between my character and the main villain. It was interesting enough to follow, but not as strong as Jon Irenicus in Baldur’s Gate 2, which I think was better executed. Still, the story overall is quite good.
Weaknesses:
For weaker aspects, encounter design is the main one. A lot of battles seem to exist just to stretch your resources and make you run low before the end of a dungeon, rather than presenting interesting tactical problems. My favorite fight was Mephistopheles on the Aeon path because it actually felt like a problem to solve. I remember killing him at level 16 and being really proud of that, especially without a fully optimized build. A lot of other encounters rely on large numbers of enemies. A well-built party can handle it and move on, but if you don’t want to fully min-max, it makes the game harder than it needs to be. Even on Core, I think that’s still an issue.
There’s also some dissonance in fighting enemies that would normally be high-level encounters while you’re still low level. For example, fighting demons in the Shield Maze, then encountering them later in much stronger forms. I understand why it’s done, and it’s somewhat mitigated by encounter structure, but it can feel like some enemies are nerfed or adjusted in ways that don’t quite match what they should be. It might have worked better to start slightly higher level or have more buildup before facing demons with things like spell resistance.
Another issue is occasional immersion-breaking dialogue. In Act 1 and Act 2 especially, there are moments where modern phrasing shows up, like characters saying things like “losers” or using slang. Some of that will always slip in, but I think the tone should be more consistent. Baldur’s Gate 2 keeps a very consistent medieval style, and I personally prefer that.
Quest design could also be better in some cases. There are quite a few quests that start in Act 3 but don’t resolve until Act 5, so they sit in your journal for a long time and can’t be completed until much later. It’s a bit frustrating having to come back to them, though it’s not a major issue.
Overall, I think Wrath of the Righteous is less popular than it should be. It really feels like a true descendant of Baldur’s Gate and does a fantastic job with that style. Owlcat clearly put a lot into it. I like Pillars of Eternity a lot, but this feels closer to the Baldur’s Gate 2 experience in how it plays. The mythic path system stands out the most. It’s one of the best implementations of player choice in the genre. I just wish more people were aware of it, especially with how much attention Baldur’s Gate 3 has gotten.