If anything at all?
For me, as several discussions around here have reminded me, I would not have complained to see changes to the reputation/alignment system. Above all, the treatment of evil PCs. For example:
1) If your reputation hits rock bottom, the Flaming Fist act more like the Cowled Wizards in BG2; they keep sending powerful groups to stop you, but once they've sent their best and you've wiped the floor with them they learn their lesson and leave you alone, for the most part. For a mercenary army on the cusp of a major war with an enormous empire, they seem awful keen to throw away their men's lives in pursuit of little ol' me, long past the point when the cost-benefit analysis would suggest that this behavior is utterly stupid.
2) The entire world does not go hostile just because you have a low rep. Guards, yes. Unarmed commoners who would die in two seconds if they openly confronted you, no.
3) Shopkeepers would provide discounts both for high AND low rep. The high rep discount is because of your nobility and heroism. The low rep discount is because the merchant in question doesn't want to die horribly.
4) Since BG is well-covered in the field of 'evil PC as obnoxious psychotic jerkass', dialogue and quest solutions for 'evil PC as clever cold-blooded manipulative monster' would be added, with accompanying rewards and consequences for that behavior.
And so on. All but the last would be gameplay tweaks, albeit big ones, while the last (involving drastic content change) might function as a DLC or some such.
I can understand not changing the original game too much, and how too much change can ruin what's great about the original, but like I say...I would not have complained to see changes like the above.
For me, as several discussions around here have reminded me, I would not have complained to see changes to the reputation/alignment system. Above all, the treatment of evil PCs. For example:
1) If your reputation hits rock bottom, the Flaming Fist act more like the Cowled Wizards in BG2; they keep sending powerful groups to stop you, but once they've sent their best and you've wiped the floor with them they learn their lesson and leave you alone, for the most part. For a mercenary army on the cusp of a major war with an enormous empire, they seem awful keen to throw away their men's lives in pursuit of little ol' me, long past the point when the cost-benefit analysis would suggest that this behavior is utterly stupid.
2) The entire world does not go hostile just because you have a low rep. Guards, yes. Unarmed commoners who would die in two seconds if they openly confronted you, no.
3) Shopkeepers would provide discounts both for high AND low rep. The high rep discount is because of your nobility and heroism. The low rep discount is because the merchant in question doesn't want to die horribly.
4) Since BG is well-covered in the field of 'evil PC as obnoxious psychotic jerkass', dialogue and quest solutions for 'evil PC as clever cold-blooded manipulative monster' would be added, with accompanying rewards and consequences for that behavior.
And so on. All but the last would be gameplay tweaks, albeit big ones, while the last (involving drastic content change) might function as a DLC or some such.
I can understand not changing the original game too much, and how too much change can ruin what's great about the original, but like I say...I would not have complained to see changes like the above.