Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4
BG3's... Complexity. #666965
01/05/20 11:23 PM
01/05/20 11:23 PM
Joined: Apr 2020
Posts: 25
Beeber Offline OP
apprentice
Beeber  Offline OP
apprentice

Joined: Apr 2020
Posts: 25
I played Divine Divinity, loved it. I played Baldur's Gate 2, liked it. I played Planescape Torment, revered it. I played Dragon Age: Origins, hated it.

But there is one aspect in Dragon Age: Origins that I grew to love. Overall, I don't like that game. But I loved one of a few aspects of it, which was this: Complexity of gameplay.

I'd say Origins had about 70% of the complexity of Baldur's Gate 2. My question is, how about Baldur's Gate 3?

Because I wanna occasionally feel like I'm playing a strategy game. It's an acquired taste, but I've been tasting it for a long time and I've acquired it.

Thanks.

Last edited by Beeber; 01/05/20 11:24 PM.
Re: BG3's... Complexity. [Re: Beeber] #666966
02/05/20 12:03 AM
02/05/20 12:03 AM
Joined: Sep 2017
Posts: 1,052
_Vic_ Offline
old hand
_Vic_  Offline
old hand

Joined: Sep 2017
Posts: 1,052
I have to say I´m a little lost in here. I played all the DA games and I have to say I do not know what elements it has in common with an strategy game ( civilization, age of wonders, warhammer, Heroes of Might and magic, etc) or even tactical games (xcom, mutant year zero, tactics ogre, FF tactics, Fire emblem games, etc)

I supposse it depends on how do you define complexity in a RPG game, I think?

Last edited by _Vic_; 02/05/20 12:03 AM.
Re: BG3's... Complexity. [Re: _Vic_] #666967
02/05/20 12:09 AM
02/05/20 12:09 AM
Joined: Apr 2020
Posts: 25
Beeber Offline OP
apprentice
Beeber  Offline OP
apprentice

Joined: Apr 2020
Posts: 25
Originally Posted by _Vic_
I have to say I´m a little lost in here. I played all the DA games and I have to say I do not know what elements it has in common with an strategy game ( civilization, age of wonders, warhammer, Heroes of Might and magic, etc) or even tactical games (xcom, mutant year zero, tactics ogre, FF tactics, Fire emblem games, etc)

I supposse it depends on how do you define complexity in a RPG game, I think?


Here's an illustration...

In Divine Divinity, you level up and distribute stat points and skill points. That's it...

In Baldur's Gate 2.........

Re: BG3's... Complexity. [Re: Beeber] #666968
02/05/20 12:29 AM
02/05/20 12:29 AM
Joined: Mar 2020
Posts: 177
qhristoff Offline
member
qhristoff  Offline
member

Joined: Mar 2020
Posts: 177
In that regard, BG3 will be as complex as 5e.

BG2 was only as complex as 2e.

Re: BG3's... Complexity. [Re: Beeber] #666971
02/05/20 03:21 AM
02/05/20 03:21 AM
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 368
SorcererVictor Offline
enthusiast
SorcererVictor  Offline
enthusiast

Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 368
5e is far less complex than 2e. But nobody expect high complexity for a big modern title.

PS : Divine Divinity is the unique larian game which i liked,

Last edited by SorcererVictor; 02/05/20 05:03 AM.
Re: BG3's... Complexity. [Re: Beeber] #666972
02/05/20 04:09 AM
02/05/20 04:09 AM
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 26
macadami Offline
apprentice
macadami  Offline
apprentice

Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 26
Sounds like you would like Pathfinder Kingmaker, or the new one that’s about to come out. If you don’t understand the complexity, normal will seem too hard, but once you understand the intricacies of the system, you can solo unfair.

I think BG3, and in essence 5e, opens up multiple ways to play and succeed, but limits the ways to play and fail if that makes sense. No matter how you build your character and how you approach objectives, 5e allows every class a multitude of options. Less linear and more Jack of all trades, by design. This isn’t to say it lacks complexity in how powerful you can do certain things, but I do think the ceiling is significantly lower than older iterations of DND.

Last edited by macadami; 02/05/20 04:11 AM.
Re: BG3's... Complexity. [Re: Beeber] #666975
02/05/20 07:28 AM
02/05/20 07:28 AM
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,221
S
Sordak Offline
veteran
Sordak  Offline
veteran
S

Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,221
its not complex its bloated.
I sure do love kingmaker, but the complexity of pathfinder isnt something id praise.

the cool part about it is the ridiculous builds you can make, but i dont think the way pathfinder works is actually required for that.

Re: BG3's... Complexity. [Re: Beeber] #666985
02/05/20 12:43 PM
02/05/20 12:43 PM
Joined: Sep 2017
Posts: 1,052
_Vic_ Offline
old hand
_Vic_  Offline
old hand

Joined: Sep 2017
Posts: 1,052
In that regard, the 2nd edition of Pathfinder reached a more balanced middle ground between character creation options, "roleplayability" and swift combat mechanics, IMHO. I hope some studio would make a game using pf2e. Maybe it´s because I´m used to the almost infinite builds you can make and I like PF1e, but I understand that PF1e can be a little overwhelming at first.

5e is fine, but the strong point is not the complexity of the character creation options in comparison with other tabletop games like pathfinder, TDE, Starfinder, etc... or previous instalments of D&D.
If you want games with great character creation options and party-based you could try the games based on the Tabletop "The Dark Eye" like the Drakensang series or Realms of Arkania series.
You can even try old titles with rich character creation options like Temple of elemental evil, arcanum or Pool or radiance or even more modern games like NWN2 or Pillars of eternity 2. You can make an incredible amount of multiclass builds with the latter to complete your party, and all classes are very balanced ( The best defensive builds are multiclassing enchanter wizards, for example =D )

There are a lot of dungeon crawlers too that have very cool party creation mechanics (Demon rise series, battle chasers, Etrian odyssey, etc) or even tactical games like Fire Emblem or Tactics ogre titles.

Re: BG3's... Complexity. [Re: SorcererVictor] #667000
03/05/20 07:43 AM
03/05/20 07:43 AM
Joined: Feb 2017
Posts: 50
X
Xvim Offline
journeyman
Xvim  Offline
journeyman
X

Joined: Feb 2017
Posts: 50
Originally Posted by SorcererVictor
5e is far less complex than 2e. But nobody expect high complexity for a big modern title.

PS : Divine Divinity is the unique larian game which i liked,


I don't think I agree that 2e had far more complexity than 5e. The 2e system had fewer moving parts overall.

There was a little more in terms of your leveling up choices for each level...proficiency (if you had it at the level) and Thief Skills (if you were a thief). Otherwise it was just "take what the chart says." If you were a human, you could choose a dual class (otherwise multiclass was a decision at 1st level only).

In 5e, you get a choice at 1st, 2nd, or 3rd level for a subclass. Some subclasses of each class have choices periodically. Each level you can choose if you want to multiclass. Every 4 class levels you can choose a Feat or 2x Stat Advancements.5e also has more moving parts in combat.

Last edited by Xvim; 03/05/20 07:43 AM.
Re: BG3's... Complexity. [Re: Beeber] #667005
03/05/20 08:22 AM
03/05/20 08:22 AM
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,221
S
Sordak Offline
veteran
Sordak  Offline
veteran
S

Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,221
2e certainyl has less trap options from what ive heard, pathfinder that is

Last edited by Sordak; 03/05/20 08:22 AM.
Re: BG3's... Complexity. [Re: Sordak] #667008
03/05/20 08:59 AM
03/05/20 08:59 AM
Joined: Feb 2017
Posts: 50
X
Xvim Offline
journeyman
Xvim  Offline
journeyman
X

Joined: Feb 2017
Posts: 50
I think my problem with D&D 3.5 / Pathfinder (at least 1st, I haven't played Pathfinder 2nd) is that you build your entire character at creation. There is no real space for character development based on choices and situations in the story unless your GM allows you to rebuild your character from the ground up. This is less of a problem in a video game, but I find it a shortcoming for Tabletop.

D&D 3.5 had this a bit due to all of the requirements of prestige classes and feats. Pathfinder just turned that up to 11. It felt less like you had more choices and more that you had more illusion of choice.

Last edited by Xvim; 03/05/20 09:01 AM.
Re: BG3's... Complexity. [Re: Sordak] #667009
03/05/20 09:50 AM
03/05/20 09:50 AM
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 368
SorcererVictor Offline
enthusiast
SorcererVictor  Offline
enthusiast

Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 368
Originally Posted by Xvim
I don't think I agree that 2e had far more complexity than 5e. The 2e system had fewer moving parts overall.


Well, 2e had way more depth on everything else. For eg, plate armor actually has a way higher armor class vs slashes than vs blunt and it makes perfectly sense. Maces > Swords against armor. Enemies are also much simpler. Liches on 2e = immune to cold; Liches on 5e = resist cold. Different classes require different XP to level up among a lot of other things.

5e also got rid of OHK spells/traps. It can have little impact on the typical high fantasy but if i wanna play tomb of horrors, i wanna fer my death that can come any time by any unexpected reason. Ravenloft also lost much of his horror. The 5e rules are also much rigged towards the party.

Originally Posted by Sordak
2e certainyl has less trap options from what ive heard, pathfinder that is


What is a "trap option?" Because Warlocks for eg, are way less versatile and powerful than wizards but i know a lot of DM's encouraging warlock play over wizard play on 5e. Contrary to 3.5e, a lot of DM's banned 3.5e warlocks because "they are too powerful", a teleporting, invisible flying eldritch horror that can cast without any spell slot limitation in armor, put a entire battlefield under chilling tentacles that deals increased cold and has a higher AB than a fighter with 18 DEX and greater weapon focus(8 + caster level) and that can reanimate armies of undeads is just too powerful.

Not everything is about creating the strongest Pun Pun...

Last edited by SorcererVictor; 03/05/20 10:12 AM.
Re: BG3's... Complexity. [Re: SorcererVictor] #667010
03/05/20 10:18 AM
03/05/20 10:18 AM
Joined: Feb 2017
Posts: 50
X
Xvim Offline
journeyman
Xvim  Offline
journeyman
X

Joined: Feb 2017
Posts: 50
Originally Posted by SorcererVictor
Originally Posted by Xvim
I don't think I agree that 2e had far more complexity than 5e. The 2e system had fewer moving parts overall.


Well, 2e had way more depth on everything else. For eg, plate armor actually has a way higher armor class vs slashes than vs blunt and it makes perfectly sense. Maces > Swords against armor. Enemies are also much simpler. Liches on 2e = immune to cold; Liches on 5e = resist cold. Different classes require different XP to level up among a lot of other things.

5e also got rid of OHK spells/traps. It can have little impact on the typical high fantasy but if i wanna play tomb of horrors, i wanna fer my death that can come any time by any unexpected reason. Ravenloft also lost much of his horror. The 5e rules are also much rigged towards the party.

Originally Posted by Sordak
2e certainyl has less trap options from what ive heard, pathfinder that is


What is a "trap option?" Because Warlocks for eg, are way less versatile and powerful than wizards but i know a lot of DM's encouraging warlock play over wizard play on 5e. Contrary to 3.5e, a lot of DM's banned 3.5e warlocks because "they are too powerful", a teleporting, invisible flying eldritch horror that can cast without any spell slot limitation in armor, put a entire battlefield under chilling tentacles that deals increased cold and has a higher AB than a fighter with 18 DEX and greater weapon focus(8 + caster level) and that can reanimate armies of undeads is just too powerful.

Not everything is about creating the strongest Pun Pun...

Enemies in 5e almost all have special rules. Sure very few things are not immune to non-magical weapons, but immunity to magical damage types still exists. I will give you the AC vs specific attack types being removed does remove a layer of depth.
OHK spells/traps do not add depth imo, but that is a personal view and can go either way. It really depends on the particular adventure.

I'm pretty sure Sordak was speaking of ways to screw yourself over in Pathfinder by making really bad choices that destroy your character.

Last edited by Xvim; 03/05/20 10:20 AM.
Re: BG3's... Complexity. [Re: Beeber] #667013
03/05/20 02:29 PM
03/05/20 02:29 PM
Joined: Sep 2017
Posts: 1,052
_Vic_ Offline
old hand
_Vic_  Offline
old hand

Joined: Sep 2017
Posts: 1,052
Originally Posted by Xvim
I think my problem with D&D 3.5 / Pathfinder (at least 1st, I haven't played Pathfinder 2nd) is that you build your entire character at creation. There is no real space for character development based on choices and situations in the story unless your GM allows you to rebuild your character from the ground up. This is less of a problem in a video game, but I find it a shortcoming for Tabletop.

D&D 3.5 had this a bit due to all of the requirements of prestige classes and feats. Pathfinder just turned that up to 11. It felt less like you had more choices and more that you had more illusion of choice.


I have the exact opposite feeling of those game rulesets if we are talking only of character development.

(To simplify, I´m going to compare non-multiclass builds)

In 5e you choose your class at the start. You have The 13 base classes ( Artificer, Cleric, druid, bard, sorcerer, wizard, rogue, fighter, ranger, paladin, monk, barbarian, warlock) plus the two from beyond the pale (blood hunter and gunslinger) and some homebrew you made.

Then you pick your subclass at level 1-2-3 and then the only thing you have to choose in the next 17 levels is if you want an ability upgrade (with a limit of 20) OR a feat, every 4 levels (or less if you are a fighter). The class features are fixed, your languages are mostly fixed, your skills are chosen at the start because they improve automatically, you do not get to choose what skill do you want to improve or learn new skills unless you are a thief or bard (every 6 levels).
Unless you are a spellcaster and you have to learn new spells there´s nothing else to choose when you level up because subclasses´ features have no options to choose from, they are fixed.



In Pathfinder you choose your class at the start. You have more base classes to choose, even if you do not count hybrid classes as new classes (which I do myself and anyone that played PF, but for the sake of discussion we will say they are not "pure" classes ┐(´~`)┌ )
You have the same 12 (Cleric, druid, bard, sorcerer, wizard, rogue, fighter, ranger, paladin, monk, barbarian, gunslinger) plus 8 more (Oracle, Alchemist, Witch, Summoner, Inquisitor, magus, cavalier, swashbuckler) 6 more of the occult book (kineticist, medium, mesmerist, psychic, occultist, spiritualist) and all the 20 hybrid classes ( Hunter, Arcanist, shaman, Investigator, Ninja, samurai, brawler, bloodrager, warpriest, Omdura, Vampire hunter, etc) and all the homebrew classes/subclasses.

Then you can choose an ability to upgrade every few levels (no limits) AND a feat every few levels(unlike 5e you have +50feats to choose, some of them are class or race-related), then you can choose your subclass if you want to (its called archetype, and you can choose it not at the start, but when you level up. Also in tabletop you can choose two archetypes if they are compatible).
You choose your traits (similar to the backgrounds, but you can choose one or 2 positive traits plus one drawback-penalty if you are using the variant ruleset)
You can also choose what skills you want when you level up and learn new skills, they do not level up automatically like in 5e. It depends on your INT so you also do not have a set number of ranks you can learn, you will have more skill points the higher your intelligence.
You can learn new languages after character creation using the linguistics skill, not only in downtime if your DM allows it.
If your class is a favored class of your race, you get to choose a new ability, +1 skill or +1 hp.
If you have a permanent pet like an animal companion, mount or Eidolon you get to level it up yourself, choosing stats, skills, etc. You can even choose archetypes for your animal companions too if the DM allows those books.

In my experience, I found that when you roll a barbarian berserker with the same background, for example, you have the (almost) exact set of abilities at level 20 as any other LVL 20 barbarians with the same background and basically you will play it the same way(maybe you can choose what weapons you use but that´s it). In PF you can make a melee powerhouse, a ranged fighter, a raging pugilist, a beastmaster fighting with his animal companion, an expert rider marauder, etc with the same level 1 barbarian character.

And if we are talking multiclass, you have the multiclass rules, the same as 5e AND also the prestige classes. Same in 3.5. You also have more base classes from start to choose from, for starters.


So, in my honest opinion, 5e its fine to play and its fun, but I think the illusion of choice it´s in 5e. When you choose your subclass it´s auto-level up the next 17 levels besides choosing your stat improvement(and choosing your spells for spellcasters, yes, but that´s the same for any game ruleset).

You can mess up your character in 3.5 and PF; yes, but because you have open choices, they do not railroad your character from level 3 to 20 (Not that it matters that much if you are playing a roleplaying tabletop, flawed characters are fun to roleplay, but I suppose it matters more in a videogame. That´s why you have respec options) This is great when you start playing or if you are playing short adventures but it gets old fast when you are a veteran with several years of experience or playing large campaigns.




Last edited by _Vic_; 03/05/20 02:50 PM.
Re: BG3's... Complexity. [Re: _Vic_] #667016
03/05/20 04:24 PM
03/05/20 04:24 PM
Joined: Feb 2017
Posts: 50
X
Xvim Offline
journeyman
Xvim  Offline
journeyman
X

Joined: Feb 2017
Posts: 50
While I agree there are more boxes ticked per level in Pathfinder, I don't necessarily think that means that the system gives you more character development freedom. You still need to plan out your feat paths to meet requirements for later feats, so you can suffer for taking things that would make more sense by narrative path.

If you want to be a prestige class, you can spend multiple feats to get those prerequisites. Some things in the system are not possible (being a Bard in Heavy Armor without spell casting failure...even after spending 2 feats for the proficiency and 2 to reduce failure).

AC / Hit scaling (imo) feels atrocious. Stats would be fine, but they tie into the hit formula, so if you have your stats scale without a cap, so too must your AC to let things be a challenge to hit. This is quite penalized if you split your specialty between 2 things. By giving those little BAB or Stat boosts along the way, it makes things become ridiculous when you think about them (like the AC to hit a Dragon). I could expand more on this, but it ties into a problem that is rooted in the system more than 'choice complexity'.

Originally Posted by _Vic_

So, in my honest opinion, 5e its fine to play and its fun, but I think the illusion of choice it´s in 5e. When you choose your subclass it´s auto-level up the next 17 levels besides choosing your stat improvement(and choosing your spells for spellcasters, yes, but that´s the same for any game ruleset).

You can mess up your character in 3.5 and PF; yes, but because you have open choices, they do not railroad your character from level 3 to 20 (Not that it matters that much if you are playing a roleplaying tabletop, flawed characters are fun to roleplay, but I suppose it matters more in a videogame. That´s why you have respec options) This is great when you start playing or if you are playing short adventures but it gets old fast when you are a veteran with several years of experience or playing large campaigns.

There is some truth in that...though there can be a few more or less options along the way depending on subclass.

I think that playing flawed characters is fine (I played much more WFRP than any edition of D&D), but that is also why I think that the direction your character progresses level to level should be more malleable to what the story has set forth instead of changing your perception of the story to fit the character you had in mind (when it comes to Tabletop).

If I make a character in 5e D&D, I just make the character and how I progress, if I multiclass, etc is based on the story and it isn't penalized too heavily. If I make a character in Pathfinder, I make the character based on what I want to be at level 20 because the system punishes you for not planning ahead. So generally I find that I don't make any more choices as I level, I just check off a box that I already decided to check when I made the character. In that sense, the character does not develop with the story.

Re: BG3's... Complexity. [Re: Beeber] #667017
03/05/20 04:39 PM
03/05/20 04:39 PM
Joined: Sep 2017
Posts: 1,052
_Vic_ Offline
old hand
_Vic_  Offline
old hand

Joined: Sep 2017
Posts: 1,052
Mmm I think you are assuming that everybody min-maxes and makes power-gaming in PF. You can make a perfectly playable character in PF without choosing all the feats you want to get at level 1 and get the more powergamey builds. If you want power gaming, of course, you have to plan in advance, but that´s the same in any game.

And you are playing a campaign and an adventure, of course, your character evolves with the story the same as in Vampire, TDE, D&D and any other TTRPG, but also you get to choose some character development, mechanically speaking.

You do not have that option in 5e, in fact, the system in 5e punishes you if you choose Orc and not draconic at level 1 and you find an army of kobolds and dragons you do not understand. In PF you can learn new languages learning the skill linguistics. In D&D you do not, you are stuck with your choices at level one. Your languages and skills are given at level one and those would be the same for 20 levels. What´s the character development in that?




Last edited by _Vic_; 03/05/20 04:45 PM.
Re: BG3's... Complexity. [Re: _Vic_] #667018
03/05/20 04:53 PM
03/05/20 04:53 PM
Joined: Feb 2017
Posts: 50
X
Xvim Offline
journeyman
Xvim  Offline
journeyman
X

Joined: Feb 2017
Posts: 50
I wouldn't say it is necessarily about power gaming or min-maxing, as much as it is saying that you need a somewhat clear idea of what you want direction you are going earlier in the system to meet requirements.
*Example: If I want a rogue to move into combat, stab someone, and move out, I need Spring Attack. That means I need Dex 13, Dodge, Mobility, and BAB 4. If it were not a requirement, I would skip Mobility and the earliest you can do it is level 6. By contrast, a 5e rogue gets this at 2nd level (disengage bonus action).

I do agree that lack of additional training in skills or languages is a downside of 5e, though it is uncommon to really spread skills too far across the field in Pathfinder either or you don't beat DCs of anything.

Last edited by Xvim; 03/05/20 05:04 PM.
Re: BG3's... Complexity. [Re: Beeber] #667019
03/05/20 05:20 PM
03/05/20 05:20 PM
Joined: Sep 2017
Posts: 1,052
_Vic_ Offline
old hand
_Vic_  Offline
old hand

Joined: Sep 2017
Posts: 1,052
At least you have the option... It's tiresome to have to plan downtimes in 5e for players in the middle of all the adventures and made custom rules for teaching so your players can learn new languages or new tricks instead of having an official feature for that. Multiclassed players that want the skills of their new class and they found out they cannot so you have to give them the option... And well, languages do not have DCs, you have it or you don´t.


I still prefer the more dynamic ruleset of PF2 any day of the week, generally speaking.

Re: BG3's... Complexity. [Re: Beeber] #667020
03/05/20 05:36 PM
03/05/20 05:36 PM
Joined: Feb 2017
Posts: 50
X
Xvim Offline
journeyman
Xvim  Offline
journeyman
X

Joined: Feb 2017
Posts: 50
I realize languages don't have DCs, but if you were to spread other skills too thinly, you suffer.
Again, I agree that 5e is by no means a perfect system. I can't speak on PF2 as I've not played it, but maybe it fixes some of my issues with the PF base system as well.

Re: BG3's... Complexity. [Re: Beeber] #667021
03/05/20 05:41 PM
03/05/20 05:41 PM
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 368
SorcererVictor Offline
enthusiast
SorcererVictor  Offline
enthusiast

Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 368
> f you are playing a roleplaying tabletop, flawed characters are fun to roleplay, but I suppose it matters more in a videogame. That´s why you have respec options

I always hated respec options. It takes out character individuality and choices. Also allow to cheese things. Eg "this chapter we fight too much undeads, i will respec my silver draconic sorcerer into a gold draconic sorcerer and use mostly fire based spells, but on the next chapter we will fight fire elementals and fey, so i will be a sorcerer of undead bloodline and know mostly cold and necromancy which allow fort save based spells" and so on. Respec takes out too much of your character identity and encourages min maxing.

Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.2