Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General A simple request.

A feature consideration for the game, or a future expansion, the ability to create a Castle/Fort/Village/City of our own for whatever site we chose to destroy in EA. I loved this little side plot in Dragon Age....1 or 2's expansion. The city management part was really kewl. It gave another aspect of play to the game. I found it rather limited in what you could do, but since it was in addition to more plot, it was still nice.

This might make peeps always choose the Goblin Village to destroy since it has the better template to build on, but maybe it can always be the Goblin Village its just a matter of what races are filling the village when you destroy or take control of it. I just like the idea that maybe we can get some real playability out of our choices of sides in our playthroughs. Anyways, just a thought for consideration.

Aslo, since this is always my request, make Kobolds a playable race please. I've been in love with them ever since Deekin from Neverwinter Nights. "3rd Ed Dragonkin Kobolds". I say this specifically, because Baldurs Gate 2 had them as basically halfway between goblins and mephits, and Everquest depicts them as wendigo type creatures.

I know I won't get kobolds, but I have to ask. I'll settle for an easter egg on Deekin in some book you can find in the world too. Deekin, the Drizzt of the Kobolds....kinda thing.

I'm against this. It limits travel distance and forces backtracking. It would also encourage more immersion breaking gimmicks like long distance orders. I prefer being a traveler across faerun and eventually the other realms freely without a gimmick like that. The camp is enough.

Imagine being right near a boss in the astral plane and then going "oh wait let be backtrack to a boring fort to talk to ncps about nothing". Pathfinder kingmaker and especially dragon age has these and they were the most hated parts of the game. It breaks the flow waaaaaay to much.

The camp is kind of guilty of all this already and is already rather immersion breaking. A keep might make it worse, but it is kind of bad already.

Yeah unfortunately. Maybe if they changed the background to depend on where you rest might ease it a little. It's not too bad but yeah I don't think the game needs more. The camp works.

I like the idea of having a fort or keep in games, I love it even, that sort of thing is an instant way to get me interested in an RPG. But I don't really feel like this is the game to include that. Maybe if Larian were to go the Dragon Age: Origins route and make it a DLC adventure taking place after the main campaign, but the way the story seems to be playing out setting up a fort like that would feel out of place.

Play Pathfinder: Kingmaker instead.
I don't want building and management in BG3.

If you don’t want to play the feature then don’t.

That’s why so asked for it as a possible feature, expansion, dlc, w/e.

It wouldn’t be forced on you to have to play it, but it could add storyline to the world for others.

The class-unique Strongholds feature worked well in BG2 and was something I enjoyed. They were fun, had some quests if I remember rightly and weren't too taxing on your time. It's a nice feature which suggests a progression for your character, should you choose to undertake the quests to unlock them.

But I don't like the idea of running a village/town/city; if it was implemented as such, I doubt very much it would be a feature that one could simply ignore. This isn't Civilisation: Baldur's Gate Edition after all.

All Larian would need to do is be rid of the daft mechanic where party interactions only happen at basecamp to circumvent concerns over heading back to your stronghold while travelling the planes, for example.