Larian Studios

[DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3

Posted By: Danielbda

[DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 16/07/19 09:53 PM

Hi all,
I'm a huge RPG and D&D fan from Brazil and have been for around 15 years and, as the news came to my ears I couldn't contain my excitement, specially since BG3 will be based on 5ed, which is a middle ground between the complex 3.5ed and the action focused 4ed.
So, let's cut to the business. I would like to offer some suggestions, and my reasons for said suggestions, based on my experience as a player of both tabletop and PC RPGs so to make BG3 potentially more enjoyable (maybe this can become an official thread where other players can also post their suggestions):

1. Party Customization : BG3 should have a customizable companion system or allow for stats customization by the player.
Game devs are not necessarily good at games, that is, in this case if companions come with preset stats and feats, they might not be optimized or even make sense for their class. A good example is Pillars of Eternity, a fantastic game but it does suffer from the aforementioned issue.
Some companions in PoE have poorly allocated stats, which leads to an incentive to not have them on your party. It doesn't matter how well written a companion is, if he/she becomes a nuissance when in combat.
This leads to the next suggestion.

2. Have the companions be recruited early in the campaign:
If companions' stats will be customizable by the players, it would be better to recruit them early, so to build them in whatever way the player would like. Specifically, it would be better to recruit all companions before level 3, which is a turning point in D&D for you are allowed to choose an archetype for your class, and every player has his/her preferences for each class.

3. Have at least a companion of each class:
Every player has his/her optimal party composition. Having all the classes at your disposal allows you to try them all and will lead to less frustration and moments such as "How I wish I had someone to use Crown of Madness and make this two dragons fight each other" or "How I wish I had a Bard to use an enchantment and convince this NPC to allow me passage without combat".
This was done in Dragon Age: Inquisition, where you have a companion that represents each subclass in the game.

4. Dynamic companion quests/Dynamic quests:
The previous suggestions lead to a very interesting question: What if the companion quests (something standard that I imagine is already planned) change according to their archetypes?
For example, you have a companion Paladin that can choose between several oaths at level 3. These determine his tenants as well as have a lot to with his personality and motivations. An oath of vengeance Paladin would have the same objective as an oath of the ancients Paladin?
Just imagine how much replayability this would add to the game.

5. More magical items (besides +1-3):
5ed suffers from a lack of magical item variety. There are entire weapons types that have no magical items of that type other than +1-3, such as rapiers and crossbows, whereas you have a ton of magical daggers, scimitars and longswords (specially longswords).

6. Better poisons and poisonmaking:
Poison in 5ed sucks. You might require up to a YEAR to craft a single use of poison that is not even that strong. So more potent poisons and just needing the matherials to craft them in a click of a button would be nice.

7. Interactive environments:
Some classes such as the Rogue need an interactive environment to work better. For example, using trees for hiding (through cunning action) during combat, or use a window to sneak into a place of interest.

These are the ones at the top of my head right now, but I will edit this post with more. If some developer could read and give some feedback it would be amazing.
Would be cool if the other members put their suggestions here too.

Posted By: salobard42

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 06/08/19 04:40 AM

Amen!
Posted By: LostSoul

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 06/08/19 06:37 AM

All sounds good.
How about the option of just creating all of your party members from level 1. Obviously optional.
Better crafting (heaps of options for magical and non magical. And quicker to create).
Interesting environs to use in combat.
And I've said before allow friends to bring their characters into your game (it's possible to sort out balance, quest etc issues)
Posted By: Lemernis

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 09/08/19 10:37 AM

I'm actually hoping that the AI is good enough that not only can it simulate a DM well enough (within obvious limits, given that it is a video game), but also that the NPCs can actually think sufficiently independently and creatively for themselves, thereby simulating the experience of playing with other human party members at a PnP game. In other words, I do not control the NPCs and they may at times do things that are surprising and force choices for me.

I know that is asking a lot. But that's my two coppers.
Posted By: Danielbda

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 10/08/19 03:24 AM

Originally Posted by LostSoul
All sounds good.
How about the option of just creating all of your party members from level 1. Obviously optional.
Better crafting (heaps of options for magical and non magical. And quicker to create).
Interesting environs to use in combat.
And I've said before allow friends to bring their characters into your game (it's possible to sort out balance, quest etc issues)


I think the optimal would be written companions but with fully customizable stats. And like I said before, you being able to recruit them very early in the campaign in any order you want.
I personally really like doing companions' storylines, so I would rather not create robotic companions because the story ones suck (like in PoE).
Posted By: LostSoul

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 10/08/19 10:27 PM

This would require extra work.. But dnd 5e has backgrounds to choose. A DM can use your backgrounds for roleplayer/questing.
Just make some quests/dialogue be based on your specific background. Eg if your background is criminal you must choose a particular criminal organisation/in a certain town. When you go to that town you can use your contacts for meaningful dialogue/role-playing options.

The same process can be done for most (or all) backgrounds. Add alignment and personality to other party members there will be no robotic companions.
So if you are a chaotic evil rogue and all the available companions are lawful good, that's a problem. They shouldn't stay in your for too long.

More options, more fun
Posted By: Artagel

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 10/08/19 10:48 PM

Originally Posted by Danielbda

1. Party Customization : BG3 should have a customizable companion system or allow for stats customization by the player.
Game devs are not necessarily good at games, that is, in this case if companions come with preset stats and feats, they might not be optimized or even make sense for their class. A good example is Pillars of Eternity, a fantastic game but it does suffer from the aforementioned issue.
Some companions in PoE have poorly allocated stats, which leads to an incentive to not have them on your party. It doesn't matter how well written a companion is, if he/she becomes a nuissance when in combat.
This leads to the next suggestion.

The option to create all 6 party members should also be an option, for those who like to play Baldurs Gate that way.
Posted By: Hawke

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 11/08/19 03:37 AM

Originally Posted by Artagel
Originally Posted by Danielbda

1. Party Customization : BG3 should have a customizable companion system or allow for stats customization by the player.
Game devs are not necessarily good at games, that is, in this case if companions come with preset stats and feats, they might not be optimized or even make sense for their class. A good example is Pillars of Eternity, a fantastic game but it does suffer from the aforementioned issue.
Some companions in PoE have poorly allocated stats, which leads to an incentive to not have them on your party. It doesn't matter how well written a companion is, if he/she becomes a nuissance when in combat.
This leads to the next suggestion.

The option to create all 6 party members should also be an option, for those who like to play Baldurs Gate that way.


I doubt we will see a party of 6 in BG3 the last DND games all had parties of 4. Maybe 5 members in BG3 because DND 5e was made for 3-5 party members.
Posted By: _Vic_

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 11/08/19 07:33 PM

Albeit I love western CRPG games, as a hardcore fan of strategy games, I always found the fact that you can only use one stack of 6 soldiers at the same time pretty limited. I know in most RPGs you can recruit and switch party members and I appreciate that but I always felt constricted by the number of companions and classes you can use in the same run or at the same time. So a party of four will be a great downside for me.

I like to recruit all characters possible, keep all my recruits leveled up and equipped, switch party members to suit my needs whenever I want and also I like to see the dialogs of the characters in several places, watch different party interactions, etc.

That was not the case in DOS2 games. they decided to limit the number of your party members to 4, limited greatly the party interactions and they made switching difficult (but you can respec your characters at will). Luckily there are mods to fix that (I use mods to allow a party of six in DOS games and also double the number of enemies per encounter to keep the game interesting). The "6manparty" and "increased party" mods have 30K downloads only in steamworkshop so I think many people like it too.

A party of 5 will be a good middle ground, and improvement but still I prefer 6 or more. But always with the option to go solo for all those solo players over there.

Ed: Typos






Posted By: Danielbda

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 11/08/19 08:28 PM

Originally Posted by _Vic_
Albeit I love western CRPG games, as a hardcore fan of strategy games, I always found the fact that you can only use one stack of 6 soldiers at the same time pretty limited. I know in most RPGs you can recruit and switch party members and I appreciate that but I always felt constricted by the number of companions and classes you can use in the same run or at the same time. So a party of four will be a great downside for me.

I like to recruit all characters possible, keep all my recruits leveled up and equipped, switch party members to suit my needs whenever I want and also I like to see the dialogs of the characters in several places, watch different party interactions, etc.

That was not the case in DOS2 games. they decided to limit the number of your party members to 4, limited greatly the party interactions and they made switching difficult (but you can respec your characters at will). Luckily there are mods to fix that (I use mods to allow a party of six in DOS games and also double the number of enemies per encounter to keep the game interesting). The "6manparty" and "increased party" mods have 30K downloads only in steamworkshop so I think many people like it too.

A party of 5 will be a good middle ground, and improvement but still I prefer 6 or more. But always with the option to go solo for all those solo players over there.

Ed: Typos







I think it'll likely be either 4 or 5, because of the way challenge rating is calculated in 5e. It assumes that you have 4 players of the same level of the challgenge rating of the listed enemy.
But if they allow a companion of each class it'll total 12, so you'll probably be able to "store" the ones you are not using and switch your companions whenever you want.
Posted By: Artagel

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 12/08/19 05:22 AM

Originally Posted by Danielbda
I think it'll likely be either 4 or 5, because of the way challenge rating is calculated in 5e. It assumes that you have 4 players of the same level of the challgenge rating of the listed enemy.
But if they allow a companion of each class it'll total 12, so you'll probably be able to "store" the ones you are not using and switch your companions whenever you want.

Why make a major change to the gameplay everyone is used to instead of simply increasing the "challenge rating" to account for 6?
Posted By: Hawke

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 12/08/19 09:38 AM

Originally Posted by Artagel
Originally Posted by Danielbda
I think it'll likely be either 4 or 5, because of the way challenge rating is calculated in 5e. It assumes that you have 4 players of the same level of the challgenge rating of the listed enemy.
But if they allow a companion of each class it'll total 12, so you'll probably be able to "store" the ones you are not using and switch your companions whenever you want.

Why make a major change to the gameplay everyone is used to instead of simply increasing the "challenge rating" to account for 6?


Because most developers design for casuals and they think having too many party members makes the game too complex for them.
Posted By: kanisatha

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 12/08/19 02:20 PM

Originally Posted by Hawke
Originally Posted by Artagel
Originally Posted by Danielbda
I think it'll likely be either 4 or 5, because of the way challenge rating is calculated in 5e. It assumes that you have 4 players of the same level of the challgenge rating of the listed enemy.
But if they allow a companion of each class it'll total 12, so you'll probably be able to "store" the ones you are not using and switch your companions whenever you want.

Why make a major change to the gameplay everyone is used to instead of simply increasing the "challenge rating" to account for 6?


Because most developers design for casuals and they think having too many party members makes the game too complex for them.

Yup. It's also the real reason why the game will be TB, because RTwP in the context of a cRPG is too complicated and too challenging for most gamers. Everything that can be made easier and simpler for people will be made so, from getting rid of misses to simplified spellcasting to smaller party to handle to TB combat. It's the only way to sell more than a few hundred thousand units.
Posted By: _Vic_

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 12/08/19 03:13 PM

POE2 can attest to that. Oversimplification of the rules can cater to a more larger audience, look at skyrim in comparison with previous games. But I do not think it works well with D&D games, because you can do horrid games like sword coast legends.

TB could also make more manageable big fights with a high amount of units, I do not know why they do not exploit that to make more massive battles with more complex mechanics instead of reducing soldier numbers and (excuse the expression, but I do not know how else to say it) dumb-down the mechanics. It is not like the game engine cannot handle it in games like DOS: there are mods that can do that. So it is a conscient decision of the devs to simplify the game.

Even in a 2002 D&D simulator like NWN2 you can have fights of parties with 10 cohorts vs a double amount of numbers without much hassle. In RTwP. Or the massive battles vs hordes of goblins/undead in Targos (IWD2).

D&D5e simplified a lot of rules, like proficiences, skillchecks with the tools, DCs, etc so it wouldn´t be such a hassle to put it into a videogame. It was far worse to translate 4e and look at the magnificent Pathfinder:kingmaker. The only excuse they could say ist that they want to cater to a more casual audience as you said. But if it is the case you can make a normal mode and a core rules mode, like in NWN. Other games like forged in blood or pathfinder also allow you to change some rules if you do not like them, still allowing us, veterans or people that like to play hard; to play with the pnp ruleset.



I prefer RTwP for tradition, but I played plenty of good games in TB, so It does not matter much to me either way.

Posted By: kanisatha

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 12/08/19 05:10 PM

Originally Posted by _Vic_
TB could also make more manageable big fights with a high amount of units, I do not know why they do not exploit that to make more massive battles with more complex mechanics instead of reducing soldier numbers

Sorry but this part I very strongly disagree with. TB combat under the best of circumstances is ridiculously slow and cumbersome. If I had to suffer through a big battle in a TB system, whether "big" is the quantity of combatants or the quantity of hit points of the enemy, that would automatically disqualify the game for me.
Posted By: _Vic_

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 13/08/19 12:58 AM

I play strategy and tactical games, so I am used to play large battles with plenty of units in tb in large maps, lasting over 100 turns and I do not find that slow or cumbersome in the slightest. I actually like that.

But those are strategy games, I understand that is not suitable for traditional rpg games, nor it has to because they are different type of games.

I do not expect to find a total war or Fire emblem battlemap in BG3, but battles of more than 5 turns would be welcome (In pathfinder, for example, most of the random encounters do not last more than 4 turns if you have a kineticist, same as 80% of the fights in BG1). TOEE and Pool of Radiance offered interesting TB D&D fights. A pity those games were so short and with a low number of classes/races available.

Those random encounters you also usually win using auto-attack without doing anything, not issuing a single order. I understand that is the core of adventure, you get xp an loot. Most devs use this to increase game time. But It would be nice to have less inconsequential and repetitive encounters and more difficult fights.
One thing I like of DOS games is that you do not have 2 equal fights in the entire game: every skirmish is unique because you have different enemies or different terrain. I hope they repeat the formula.



Posted By: Omegaphallic

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 13/08/19 09:51 AM

Even major battle in 5e don't last even close to 100 turns.
Posted By: _Vic_

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 13/08/19 10:25 AM

Yeah, because it is D&D, nor Axis and allies or Warhammer. They are a different type of games.
Posted By: Sordak

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 17/08/19 02:16 PM

Oh man.
Are we at that point where "RTWP is for big brain high IQ people" keeps getting repeated by the same 3 users ad nauseum to satisfy some deep insecurity?

I for one am playing Spellforce 3 right now, fun little game, basically RTWP combat without the "pause" part (for the most part at least), not exactly challengign my noggin so far tho.

Either way, im tired of all the "muh casualization", Larian isnt exactly known to do this.
You cannot apply a one size fits all approach with the gaming industry.

If anyhting, bitch at WOTC for dumbing down DnD
Posted By: Artagel

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 19/08/19 06:47 AM

Originally Posted by Hawke
Because most developers design for casuals and they think having too many party members makes the game too complex for them.

OK.... so you're going to anger the built in BG audience that expects 6 party members in order to try and build a new base of casual fans?

Sounds like an amateur start up company who doesn't do the research before they release.
Posted By: Artagel

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 19/08/19 06:52 AM

Originally Posted by _Vic_
~

Those random encounters you also usually win using auto-attack without doing anything, not issuing a single order. I understand that is the core of adventure, you get xp an loot. Most devs use this to increase game time. But It would be nice to have less inconsequential and repetitive encounters and more difficult fights.
One thing I like of DOS games is that you do not have 2 equal fights in the entire game: every skirmish is unique because you have different enemies or different terrain. I hope they repeat the formula.

It sounds like you hope they remake DOS.

Also sounds like you don't remember playing Infinity games with low level parties. No fights are inconsequential and any enemy can kill you if you make a mistake.
Posted By: Sordak

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 19/08/19 09:53 AM

At this point im convinced you are sock puppeting.
Posted By: _Vic_

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 19/08/19 12:42 PM

Originally Posted by Artagel
Originally Posted by _Vic_
~

Those random encounters you also usually win using auto-attack without doing anything, not issuing a single order. I understand that is the core of adventure, you get xp an loot. Most devs use this to increase game time. But It would be nice to have less inconsequential and repetitive encounters and more difficult fights.
One thing I like of DOS games is that you do not have 2 equal fights in the entire game: every skirmish is unique because you have different enemies or different terrain. I hope they repeat the formula.

It sounds like you hope they remake DOS.

Also sounds like you don't remember playing Infinity games with low level parties. No fights are inconsequential and any enemy can kill you if you make a mistake.

Also remember fighting the same 5 slavers in Athkathla, unarmored and with a mage more than a dozen times. And an insanely amount of goblins, kobolds and skeletons every time I enter a map in bg. Or whenever I go buy things at Thatlantyr shop the same 5 skeletons.
Also remember when I reach level 3-5 and get some armor I won all these fights with the ia and auto-attack, not casting a single spell or moving a muscle for the rest of the game. At least in strategy games, you had the option to auto-fight...

In IWD games that does not happen, you had a set amount of enemies in the map, so you can do more complex encounters. You can ambush them, or the enemy is positioned to ambush you or has some traps laying ahead ( Like the unforgettable exploding barrels of IWD2). You feel that you are not living in a deja vu, repeating the same battle against the same 6 enemies every half hour of gameplay.
Even in Diablo games, the enemies reset and vary whenever you load the game, so It does not feel the same even if you had to fight your way again.

Not a remake of DoS but, fighting the same enemies, again and again, every time I need to buy something? An encounter with the same enemies in different colors for a gazillion time like in Japanese games? eternal grinding? unlimited spawning of the same enemies? No, thanks.

Posted By: Omegaphallic

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 21/08/19 01:38 AM

Originally Posted by _Vic_
Yeah, because it is D&D, nor Axis and allies or Warhammer. They are a different type of games.


Not just D&D, but D&D 5e which is known for running more efficiently then past editions.
Posted By: Ahharu

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 25/08/19 08:56 AM

We need information about BG3 And Divinity Fallen Feroes. LARIAN PLEASE
Posted By: Soulfire72

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 07/09/19 12:19 AM

Since looking at some mods and the assets for dragon knights in Original Sin 2 I was thinking a dragon companion in the DnD universe would be very interesting. Since dragons can shapeshift into human forms it could be implemented as some polymorph equivalent for gameplay purposes. But I think such a companion would have the most interesting companion quest as the dichotomy between chromatic/evil and metallic/good dragons is part of the DnD lore that has pretty much never been explored or explained. Having a typically evil dragon join the party in an attempt to overcome their evil nature or having a good dragon that is more selfish and resentful of other races (or both) would be very interesting, probably one of the most interesting party members I could envision in BG3. The only problem is such a companion, if Larian went through with it, might be TOO popular. Then again... is that necessarily a bad thing?
Posted By: _Vic_

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 07/09/19 02:25 AM

That would be amazing, but I think that would be really OP for a low-level party. the lowest rating for young dragons is CR6; and those cannot even polymorph, unless the rules changed.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/monsters?filter-search=&filter-type=6

I remember that half-dragons in pathfinder were banned by some GM because they are too overpowered, and you have the size problem in some settings. And they are only half-dragons, xD

Maybe they can delay the recruitment or something like that.
Posted By: Omegaphallic

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 07/09/19 08:47 AM

Originally Posted by _Vic_
That would be amazing, but I think that would be really OP for a low-level party. the lowest rating for young dragons is CR6; and those cannot even polymorph, unless the rules changed.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/monsters?filter-search=&filter-type=6

I remember that half-dragons in pathfinder were banned by some GM because they are too overpowered, and you have the size problem in some settings. And they are only half-dragons, xD

Maybe they can delay the recruitment or something like that.




I think what is more realistic is the Shadow Dragon spell, the best Illusion spell in 5e.

Or using True Polymorph to create a Dragon.
Posted By: Hawke

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 07/09/19 01:19 PM

I really hope we get at least one companion who isn't a member of one of the playable races.
I could live with a half-dragon but only if they look like this [img]https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net...cale-to-width-down/350?cb=20190802170648[/img] Half-Dragon should have clear Darconic features and not just be humans who can transform, into Dragons at will.
Still, don't understand why they haven't become a playable race but instead those boring Dragonborn who don't even have a tail.
Posted By: Vecna

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 07/09/19 01:48 PM

The most important thing for me is interesting npc companions (and a lot) just like in BG2 with their own personal quests and banters.
Also interaction between npc's and relationships.

As choosable races I would like to see drow, half drow, duergar and thiefling (possibly these races also for npc's)
I could imagine that the arrival of the illithid could trigger a lot of attention from these races, not to mention the Gith which is obvious.

I also hope that they provide for interesting demon summoning spells.

What also could be interesting is an unkown (not mentioned) daughter of Viconia DeVir and the Baalspawn from BG2. Half drow, half Baalspawn.

Posted By: Omegaphallic

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 07/09/19 06:13 PM

MTOFs had a few interesting Demon and Devil summoning spells. But the Clerics Planar Ally is still the sadest way to recruit fiends
Posted By: Vecna

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 11/09/19 07:58 PM

My suggestion during fights with difficult opponents (like in BG2 dragons, demi lich) would be the familiar tune from BG (or perhaps slightly modified). Always reminds you of epic battles
Posted By: Artagel

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 12/09/19 02:02 AM

Originally Posted by Vecna
The most important thing for me is interesting npc companions (and a lot) just like in BG2 with their own personal quests and banters.
Also interaction between npc's and relationships.

As choosable races I would like to see drow, half drow, duergar and thiefling (possibly these races also for npc's)
I could imagine that the arrival of the illithid could trigger a lot of attention from these races, not to mention the Gith which is obvious.

I also hope that they provide for interesting demon summoning spells.

What also could be interesting is an unkown (not mentioned) daughter of Viconia DeVir and the Baalspawn from BG2. Half drow, half Baalspawn.


Can I please have your robe.
I need it.
Posted By: _Vic_

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 12/09/19 05:58 AM

Originally Posted by Hawke
I really hope we get at least one companion who isn't a member of one of the playable races.
I could live with a half-dragon but only if they look like this [img]https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net...cale-to-width-down/350?cb=20190802170648[/img] Half-Dragon should have clear Darconic features and not just be humans who can transform, into Dragons at will.
Still, don't understand why they haven't become a playable race but instead those boring Dragonborn who don't even have a tail.


There is a mod in P:K that allows you to play as a half-dragon, but they do not look like that nice XD. You also have the druid shapeshift and some spells that can turn you into a (very powerful) dragon form.
[Linked Image]

There are wings, tails, and horns in games like P:K or the two NWN, I do not think that is too hard to implement. Dragonborn look like a dwarf with a lizard head, indeed. Tails or wings or claws would be welcome.

Swen Vincke said that "the Mindflayers are not the main adversaries in BGIII: they hinted that the mindflayers are somehow victims, have complex motivations, a tragic story and are slaves of a greater power" Yeaaah... that is one way to put it.
https://metro.co.uk/2019/07/01/bald...e-the-state-of-the-art-in-rpgs-10094263/

So my bet is for an Ilithid or ulitharid companion, possibly inspired in Clarota the mindflayer.
[Linked Image]

Maybe a Gith too. It would be interesting to have both in the same party. I bet they would not be together for too long.

Originally Posted by Vecna
The most important thing for me is interesting npc companions (and a lot) just like in BG2 with their own personal quests and banters.
Also interaction between npc's and relationships.

As choosable races I would like to see drow, half drow, duergar and thiefling (possibly these races also for npc's)
I could imagine that the arrival of the illithid could trigger a lot of attention from these races, not to mention the Gith which is obvious.

I also hope that they provide for interesting demon summoning spells.

What also could be interesting is an unkown (not mentioned) daughter of Viconia DeVir and the Baalspawn from BG2. Half drow, half Baalspawn.



They said that in BG3 they will use the infamous canon character "Abdel Adrian" (also the canon ending of WOTC for the BG saga and the ending of Abdel Adrian in the "Murder in Baldur's Gate" PA). At least in the (terrible) books he romances Jaheira and Jaheira only (if you can call that romance whatever is in that books).
But it would be a nice cameo.

About races, It would be cool to have Genasi, changeling or Goliath races, if possible. I liked the Unearthed Arcana races. Even in a DLC.


Originally Posted by Artagel
Originally Posted by Vecna
The most important thing for me is interesting npc companions (and a lot) just like in BG2 with their own personal quests and banters.
Also interaction between npc's and relationships.

As choosable races I would like to see drow, half drow, duergar and thiefling (possibly these races also for npc's)
I could imagine that the arrival of the illithid could trigger a lot of attention from these races, not to mention the Gith which is obvious.

I also hope that they provide for interesting demon summoning spells.

What also could be interesting is an unkown (not mentioned) daughter of Viconia DeVir and the Baalspawn from BG2. Half drow, half Baalspawn.


Can I please have your robe.
I need it.



Dibs on his eye and hand!
Posted By: korotama

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 12/09/19 07:09 AM

Originally Posted by Vecna
The most important thing for me is interesting npc companions (and a lot) just like in BG2 with their own personal quests and banters.
Also interaction between npc's and relationships.

As choosable races I would like to see drow, half drow, duergar and thiefling (possibly these races also for npc's)
I could imagine that the arrival of the illithid could trigger a lot of attention from these races, not to mention the Gith which is obvious.

I also hope that they provide for interesting demon summoning spells.

What also could be interesting is an unkown (not mentioned) daughter of Viconia DeVir and the Baalspawn from BG2. Half drow, half Baalspawn.


Ah, well that's just what sets the Western video game industry apart from its Japanese counterpart. You see, the latter doesn't let popular characters go to waste (they reappear in non-canon games as cameos or playable characters to the point of being accused of making cash grabs or milking their fan base) whereas the former kills them off as soon as they have a few boss scalps under their belt. Just look up the overall RPG sales stats and you'll tell how the Japanese care about their IP and assets more deeply. More importantly, they develop their IPs more successfully.

EDIT: Yes, I know dealing with a character that is made by the player is harder to work with but it shouldn't have been too much trouble importing your BG2 save and adding a few lines, statues or NPCs based on your previous choices. Especially if they were the main character of all the previous installments and DLC! A shopkeep who is descended from the Bhaalspawn and their romantic partner, a temple housing the Bhaalspawn's remains (if your character was a cleric) etc. So much could have been done. It would have added some semblance of continuity to the series. Now series' veterans (or semi-veterans) such as yours truly will be alienated from BG3.
Posted By: _Vic_

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 12/09/19 07:59 AM

I wholeheartedly agree: Japanese videogame franchises always had more long-standing franchises (some of them are still launching titles like Fire Emblem, Kingdom Hearts, Shin Megami Tensei, Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest, Pokemon, Shenmue, etc)than western ones, with a few exceptions. The older JRPG franchises have more than 25 years of history because of the things you already stated and a solid fan base.

Originally Posted by korotama


EDIT: Yes, I know dealing with a character that is made by the player is harder to work with but it shouldn't have been too much trouble importing your BG2 save and adding a few lines, statues or NPCs based on your previous choices. Especially if they were the main character of all the previous installments and DLC! A shopkeep who is descended from the Bhaalspawn and their romantic partner, a temple housing the Bhaalspawn's remains (if your character was a cleric) etc. So much could have been done. It would have added some semblance of continuity to the series. Now series' veterans (or semi-veterans) such as yours truly will be alienated from BG3.

They made it without much fuzz in Dragon Age series, KOTOR, Gothic, Castlevania or even in Devil May Cry series, each one with a different approach. I think Larian took a stance of getting distance with the previous games, and that showed in all the interviews and tweets about the upcoming BG3 game. Plenty of winks to WOTC but little to none to the old bg videogame series.
Posted By: Vecna

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 12/09/19 01:38 PM

As long as the storyline is solid , the surroundings and enemies interesting and the characters have depth I am all set.
Posted By: chad878262

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 13/09/19 12:15 PM

Originally Posted by Danielbda
Hi all,
I'm a huge RPG and D&D fan from Brazil and have been for around 15 years and, as the news came to my ears I couldn't contain my excitement, specially since BG3 will be based on 5ed, which is a middle ground between the complex 3.5ed and the action focused 4ed.
So, let's cut to the business. I would like to offer some suggestions, and my reasons for said suggestions, based on my experience as a player of both tabletop and PC RPGs so to make BG3 potentially more enjoyable (maybe this can become an official thread where other players can also post their suggestions):

1. Party Customization : BG3 should have a customizable companion system or allow for stats customization by the player.
Game devs are not necessarily good at games, that is, in this case if companions come with preset stats and feats, they might not be optimized or even make sense for their class. A good example is Pillars of Eternity, a fantastic game but it does suffer from the aforementioned issue.
Some companions in PoE have poorly allocated stats, which leads to an incentive to not have them on your party. It doesn't matter how well written a companion is, if he/she becomes a nuissance when in combat.
This leads to the next suggestion.

2. Have the companions be recruited early in the campaign:
If companions' stats will be customizable by the players, it would be better to recruit them early, so to build them in whatever way the player would like. Specifically, it would be better to recruit all companions before level 3, which is a turning point in D&D for you are allowed to choose an archetype for your class, and every player has his/her preferences for each class.

3. Have at least a companion of each class:
Every player has his/her optimal party composition. Having all the classes at your disposal allows you to try them all and will lead to less frustration and moments such as "How I wish I had someone to use Crown of Madness and make this two dragons fight each other" or "How I wish I had a Bard to use an enchantment and convince this NPC to allow me passage without combat".
This was done in Dragon Age: Inquisition, where you have a companion that represents each subclass in the game.

4. Dynamic companion quests/Dynamic quests:
The previous suggestions lead to a very interesting question: What if the companion quests (something standard that I imagine is already planned) change according to their archetypes?
For example, you have a companion Paladin that can choose between several oaths at level 3. These determine his tenants as well as have a lot to with his personality and motivations. An oath of vengeance Paladin would have the same objective as an oath of the ancients Paladin?
Just imagine how much replayability this would add to the game.

5. More magical items (besides +1-3):
5ed suffers from a lack of magical item variety. There are entire weapons types that have no magical items of that type other than +1-3, such as rapiers and crossbows, whereas you have a ton of magical daggers, scimitars and longswords (specially longswords).

6. Better poisons and poisonmaking:
Poison in 5ed sucks. You might require up to a YEAR to craft a single use of poison that is not even that strong. So more potent poisons and just needing the matherials to craft them in a click of a button would be nice.

7. Interactive environments:
Some classes such as the Rogue need an interactive environment to work better. For example, using trees for hiding (through cunning action) during combat, or use a window to sneak into a place of interest.

These are the ones at the top of my head right now, but I will edit this post with more. If some developer could read and give some feedback it would be amazing.
Would be cool if the other members put their suggestions here too.



Just a couple things to consider in this list of suggestions, comments numbered based on the original post suggestion numbers.
1. Perhaps, but IMO better left to the legion of modders that will flock upon release. Frankly, the joinable NPCs is so integral to Baldur's Gate as a franchise I do not believe that customizing them to the individuals player desire is a good thing. Thinking back there was a STORY behind Minsc's low INT/WIS, Khaleid had famously low morale "Better part of valor!" and there was simply something to be said for the fact that the NPCs were not optimized (leave that to the main character, 'Charname')

2. Again, this goes against the fundamentals of what Baldur's Gate IS... It's about telling a story, and in a story everyone is not located at one convenient 'hub'. I frankly dislike how games today allow you to collect a legion of companions, but you only take 3 with you and the other dozen sit at 'camp' or 'home base' or whatever. In Baldur's Gate you can recruit companions, or not... Some will stay where you find them, some will move to a different location in the game world, and others will leave forever, never seen again if you don't bring them in to your party. There is nothing wrong with a companion that is recruited later in the game, if anything the mistake made in the originals was those late game PC's were not properly set up to compete with how your other NPC's leveled. For example Alora's thieving skills were not distributed well and she probably should have been a level or 2 higher (based on charname XP rather than level, perhpas). In fact, I always saw Alora and Eldath/Skie as being late game party members you might grab should you decide to dual class Imoen in to a mage.

3. Agree. And in fact one thing that annoyed me in Dragon Age: Origins is the fact that you either play rogue class or you accept that until you get to Lothering you can't open any chests at all, losing out on 100's (1000's?) of XP as well as loot/gold/potions. However, D&D has insane numbers of classes, so perhaps better to say 'have at least one of each role' You don't necessarily need to provide a Fighter, Paladin, Ranger, and Barbarian as NPCs. I would still prefer that Larian offers the player the option to PLAY all of those classes, but doesn't need to actually provide an NPC for EVERY class and race.

4. love it, so long as it is determined based on player / npc interactions and not just a selection. BG NPCs are supposed to have their own personalities and just giving an arbitrary selection doesn't make sense. Selecting an oath that doesn't align to the paladin's conversations/personalities is arbitrary and has no meaning to the story. However, if it designed where the paladin has a default oath, but the oath could be changed based on conversations and actions of the PC (and perhaps the PCs status with said paladin) and then the companion quest is adjusted accordingly that would be a win. However, it is unrealistic to expect to have a dozen possible companions, five of which you can take with you, all of which have 3 or more potential companion quests. That would be like Dragon Age Origins, but instead of 6, you have about 36 quests. These quests will either be very small or the variations so minimal as to be nearly unnoticeable. Quality over quantity should be the order of the day so discretion is needed.

5. Nope. 5e is not about MORE magical items, it is about more meaningful magic items. In 5e you have plenty of weapons that, instead of +1-3 do other things, such as doing an extra damage die on critical hits, expanding the crit range, providing for circumstantial advantage, etc. You also have goggles to allow humans and other non-dark vision having races to see in the dark (hopefully important!) etc. Regardless, I would rather see MEANINGFUL magical items, like in the original games, with cool back stories, extra powers etc. rather than a +2 weapon of every type. Varscona Long Sword +2, +1 cold damage with interesting back story is far better than +2 of every weapon type. Too much magic cheapens magic and it is supposed to be relatively rare, even in Forgotten Realms. Too many video games even all the way back to gold box games do not accurately portray this. In a PnP campaign a party of level 5 PCs might have 3 or 4 magic items, not including a few potions or scrolls. In most CRPGs by level 5 every character is generally equipping 3-5 magic items... Easier to balance difficulty when magic is at least somewhat rare. This also makes taking an Eldritch Knight Fighter have benefit over Champion or Battle Master, whereas if magic is everywhere there is less reason to focus on being able to cast it yourself.


6. I would hope they would make poison something that is a bit more realistic and usable, but to be honest poison hasn't been frightening since 2e... poison has gone from you better get a neutralize poison or you will be dead quickly, to take a couple points of stat damage that in many cases you don't care about, to simply a damage type. Depending on how much ability they have to change core mechanics of D&D it might be interesting if they are allowed to make poison cooler, but if it's left as just a damage type with different poisons equating to different bonus damages than better to spend their time elsewhere IMO.

7. Agree and would certainly hope for this. Even in BG1 you had a better chance to hide in shadows when in the 'shade' of a tree vs. out in the open... Expectation would certainly be to enhance/improve upon environmental variance.

Overall good ideas, just felt I needed to add my two cents (for as little as it's worth) as some things I feel are integral to what defines the BG franchise and should not be lost in favor of giving more options. Options can be good, but giving too many options can make for a looser game and story, which would be a poor outcome since the BG Trilogy was all about tight story telling at the end of the day. (that and amazingly complex spell mechanics leading to some really interesting tactical battles.)
Posted By: Tuco

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 13/09/19 01:28 PM

What I want from Baldur's Gate 3 is more of what made Baldur's Gate 1 and especially 2 outstanding classics. Which definitely wasn't the story, serviceable at most.

It was the sheer size, scope and variety. The great dungeons, the clean and simple interface, the excellent encounter design and the enormous variety of enemies.
Also, one of the best itemization systems in a RPG to date and a progression system that had a very reasonable, smooth curve of growth (far from some of the absurdities seen in DOS 2).

What I definitely do NOT want from Baldur's Gate 3 is to start taking notes from JRPGs, a subgenre that with very few exceptions has always been the dumb cousin of computer RPGs, with all the focus on the wrong things and sheer negligence for whay I actually love in the genre.
Posted By: Vecna

Re: [DEVS PLEASE READ] Suggestions for BG3 - 13/09/19 05:05 PM

I agree fully with Tuco. The variety and also dedicated lore was awesome in BG1 and 2. Not comparable with Pathfinder Kingmaker where you find another +2 weapon without background story. Not to mention the boring environment, encounters there and discussions without depth (between NPC's)
© 2019 Larian Studios forums