Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Compliance with D&D5 rules?

I think the gameplay shows a very good effort to make a videogame of D&D 5e but yeah, some things are game-fied. I mean, there is no bloody way that a party of two level 1 players will survive an encounter with three intellect devourers

Hate those little buggers.

hmmm, when you think about it. It is a party of 4. Two PCs and a couple if tag a longs. The tag a longs most likely enhanced the PC's abilities, cause Swen said the tadpoles helped the rogue jump.

still dont like the whole jump thing.
as for DnD mechanics.

Eh, 5e isnt an edition with a lot of mechanical depth to it so i dont midn them changing stuff around.
the shared initiative is divisive, but having played a lot of turn based games in multiplayer it certainly is for the best

Yeah, not a fan of side initiative variant rule in the TT game, but In a multiplayer videogame session could be great that all the players could take simultaneous turns to move in the same round.

Still curious about how they plan to implement reactions or feats/class features that affect the initiative of a single character into the game, if they even plan to.

doesnt look like they are planning on doing that.
but if they do, just have em beeing active.

takes some guts (for some reason), but just make you press the hotkey during the enemy turn.

that would actually get my coop partner to not fall asleep during lenghty enemy turns...

Alternativeley just make it a readied action

I've never used side initiative, mostly because, as it says in the description, that the side that wins can simply focus down a party member or a high threat mob. I think Larian did it to speed up combat and attempt to placate the people looking for RTWP or were apprehensive about TB with standard initiative. Judging from interviews, it was their attempt at a compromise. I do think, when polished, it will speed up combat considerably. But it seems that the combat debate rages on regardless...

Either way, echoing others, it will make multiplayer much much better. I'm certainly willing to give it a shot.

I do hope we get more than 4 characters in a party though.

the whole "focusing characters down in one round" would be mitigated with a good reactions system tho

I think they stated that it wouldn't work, prompting players if they want to use their reaction point after every enemy movement action would cause the game to slow down. There might be ways to do it which would work okay, but they've (at least in this build) scrapped it, reactions are only used to take an attack of opportunity. Spells like feather fall are cast using your action (or possibly bonus action, I didn't quite see) and have a duration.

Other DND games have done this as well, where shield was a temporary buff to AC and negated any magic missiles being cast, but those were in real-time and you could cast them in response to seeing an attack coming. So we'll have to wait and see if the reaction spells still work well after being amended.

--

I don't mind the initiative change, original sin 2's multiplayer had an issue with waiting for other players to act, having simultaneous player and enemy turns makes sense.

In the game Solasta, also based in D&D5e (Although in the OGL) they made turn based combat with alternate turns based in intiative and implemented reactions without so much of a fusss

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qcglnx3rDmY

That game does not have MP mode, so maybe the issues would be implementing the reactions in multiplayer.

Hi Melkyor95, your concerns were justified.

Locking another necro-ed thread