Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General BG3, DOS and the D&D rule-set

I think the heritage of Bhaal or the image of the BG1+2 games in mind of the fans are not suited for a BG3 story. You followed a corrupted path in the first and second installment in the world of forgotten realms, a part of D&D. Players learned classic P&P experience. The game master was scripted with dice decisions while for battles.

WotC decided to give this franchise to larian. I asume if you look at the roleplaying market no other game engine like the one from DoS2 combines a good orientation in three dimensional turn based setting with the possibility of a truly handcrafted grafic system. Clearly there has to be a divide between world of warcraft and so on mass market games and individual concepted storytelling. But if you look backwards to the great games series of might & magic: the mandate of heaven, ultima 7 or wizardry 8, there is the must have for D & D to reorientate to its core values: turn based battle on a turn based grid and in different pros and cons to use the altitude levels of the environment, for examble the higher the stand of an archer the more distance his arrows fly. That positive effect BG3 from larian will have.

What it cannot be is to continue the story for god players from the end of Throne of Bhaal. There was a cut, an ending, a story ended and it was finished. I personally enjoy the fact of fresh wind and a good new start for the series of Baldurs gate with a larian interpreted part 3.

Guys as much as I like DOS2 (I loathe the armor system though) I think is bad that this game looks too similar to DOS2, it is supposed to be a new IP and as such it should look different, many 3d models are even the same, the menus many look like the DOS2 menus etc.

I get that you are using the same engine but seriously, change it more because it doesn't look appealing to have a game that looks almost exactly the same when they are supposed to be different games and IPs.

to be fair, the new improved camera makes a world of difference.

I very much disagree with this assessment.

You can't disagree with facts and you know this statement is true this is why you didn't even bothered to come and prove what I am saying is wrong because you know I am right.

How can the game don't look like DOS2 if it is being made on the same engine?

Moron.

I also very much disagree with this assessment.

I also very much disagree with this assessment.

Okay, I'm a fan of Divinity Original Sin 2. It's the only game of the series that I've played, but I enjoyed the gameplay quite a bit. All the ground interactions and whatnot are dope; I got many hours of enjoyment out of it.

However I bought this game because it's Baldur's Gate 3, and it's supposed to be based off the 5e D&D system. This doesn't feel like dungeons and dragons at all. It doesn't feel like 5e at all. Why does my Firebolt leave fire on the ground and deal 1d6 damage instead of being a far ranged attack that deals moderate single target damage? Why is Disengage lumped in with jump and takes a bonus action instead of an Action? (there's a reason it takes an Action and not a Bonus Action in the table top). Why on Earth is "dip" a thing? I put my longbow into a fire, it gets set on fire, and then it deals bonus fire damage. Uhhh what? (note: these things wouldn't be out of place in DOS3, but I'm supposed to be playing Baldur's Gate 3)

Now, I understand that there needs to be differences. Afterall, 5e is a tabletop RPG with limitless possibilities, and a video game can't be limitless. And there obviously needs to be gameplay considerations, because a straight one to one port probably wouldn't be as fun as a video game... But could you at least make it feel like this is dungeons and dragons and not DOS3? You've got the action economy, dice rolling, all these abilities (many of which are in name only), but then the game just inexplicably throws random stuff in that doesn't feel like it belongs in D&D

I agree that changes need to be made to adapt 5e to a videogame, but lots of the changes don't really seem that necessary. Firebolt doing D6? Staves and spears no longer versatile? Dual wielding adding the modifier to damage?

Really hoping they change the cantrips. I'm ok with Fireball leaving a fire surface, for example, but cantrips like firebolt shouldn't be better than Burning Hands. I'm not sure how all the damage is calculated for Firebolt, but I think I've seen it do damage from the initial hit, the fire effect on the same turn, and then the fire effect on the next turn. It's pretty overkill.

I totally agree with your few exemples.
Jumps arez totally broken, I hate that I can put my hand and my bow in fire to create fire bow and once gain, surfaces in way to important in the gameplay.

My fear comes true : this game absolutely look like DoS 3 way more than D&D/BG game.

I'm hoping they tone down the surface effects because archers are less archers and more fire and acid throwers. I had a fire effect that I created from a cantrip EXPLODE my Web spell that I cast the turn after. Just like in DOS I sometimes find myself going "Wait, why did this crazy huge explosion just happen?" Of course, mods in the full game will make the game feel more like 5e, but they shouldn't have to do that...

I still really like it so far though. All the bugs are totally expected and I think they will be fixed soon.

I'm a real 5e nerd too... But!

I don't mind tweaking the 5e rules. Most important thing is that we get a good game.

And I fully understand the need for tweaking - as the game must be sold wider than just "us", the ad&d nerds.

Played a bit longer, and yeah the surface effects are driving me crazy. This absolutely doesn't feel like playing Baldur's Gate/D&D at all. Everything about the combat feels like I'm playing a mod that one guy made for DOS2.

I used Acid Splash on a group of enemies and then sent a melee character to fight. They got tagged with an "Acid" debuff that lowered their AC by 2. I actually exclaimed at my screen because that's.not.how.acid.splash.works. Furthermore, there is no Acid debuff in 5e that lowers your armor class by 2. I'm literally waffling between playing more or hitting the refund button on steam. I wanted Baldur's Gate/5e. If I wanted to play DOS2, I'd load that back up.

This is staggering. I get that one would implement rules in a simpler way by cutting off unnecessary stuff but... I don't get why Larian leaves off some of the 5e key features for the sake of gameplay & simplification (backgrounds being just brushed off, starter kits for classes, uncanny dodge / cunning action for rogue...), and yet manage to INVENT new rules out of nowhere. Like they're starting from scratch instead of using the years of D&D5 playtesting to use the core rules as a whole.

D&D5e was already simplified to prevent the use of modifiers AFTER the die is rolled. Compared to 3e and 3.5e, where you had tons of post-roll modifiers like that acid splash reducing AC or whatever, the main goal of 5e was to bring a nice flow by squishing all modifiers into either advantages or disadvantages.

The spells and abilities now work taking this into account and usually, when a spell or ability (take Fairy Fire for example) grants you an advantage, it means it already deals with this spell's environmental effects to grant you a boon (in this spell case, the advantage coming from the bright light surrounding the creatures inside the area of effect).
You don't have to add other bonus/minus on top of this, it's already materialized as an advantage on your throw ! No need to add further surface damage and combos like in Divinity : it's already been taken into consideration by your abilities or spells in D&D5 !

Instead of merging key features from DOS2 and D&D5, Larian should leave them to their respective games : BG3 with little to no surfaces whatsoever and the D&D rules (action economy etc), and DOS3 (whenever this comes out) with action points and surfaces all over.

Agreed.

Cantrips need to have their additional effects removed. Nowhere in the D&D manuals does it say "Fire Bolt causes 1 D6 damage and causes the ground beneath your enemy to ignite, dealing X damage and lasting X turns."

It specifically says it deals 1D10 damage and "ignites flammable objects not being worn or carried". This doesn't mean the stone or grass beneath their feet. This means you can throw it at a tree and ignite it.

Not to mention, Rogues feel INCREDIBLY weak right now as a class. They genuinely feel like a generic class with no skills or abilities, because everyone can do what they do (while wearing heavy armor or casting spells).

I would much rather follow stricter D&D 5e rules than have Fire Bolt deal DoT damage "just because".
I don't want to play DOS3. I don't want a ton of ground effects unless I've thrown a Fireball into a big patch of grass or bushes. I don't want every water or blood puddle electrified or frozen because I threw a Ray of Frost/etc.

I want to play D&D 5e. Simple as that.
1D10 still feels excellent (ie. Eldritch Blast). Fire Bolt doesn't need any special crap added to it; it's already the best ranged damage-dealing Cantrip for Wizards/Sorcerers.

Agreed!!

What he said! (or she)

have to admit, yeah I'd generally prefer things moved closer to D&D 5e and further from Divinity, and I do love Divinity. Right now it kind of feels like a game that is struggling with its identity and as a result is putting off D&D 5e fans AND DOS fans.

I concur that more needs to be done to make this a D&D game and not DOS3.