Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback Patch 5 - Suggestion

That are my suggestion after playing patch 5, but not restricted to it's new features.
(Most of them are mechanic suggestions)

1- Swapping between equipped weapons (Bow to Sword/Shield) should cost something (BA or RA), I mean the way it's currently, there is absolute no reason anyone shouldn't end the turn with the melle weapon, making possible for an AoO.

1.1- Shield giving +2AC even when you are currently holding a Bow seems unbalanced. Although it make sense when you think that you can swap to your weapon and shield for free even after attacking with the bow(I mean, it could be a way to don't pressure people to getting back to it's melle weapon everytime). But if that is the logic used, why you don't to AoO when are holding the bow, I mean, there is one contradiction on this.

2- Encumbrance -> I am a fã of the feature, with that been said, I know many people aren't. But what is the point of having it and been able to send itens to camp whenever you want?
- For people that like this kind of feature, it will feel pointless since it does't actually imply a real limitation.
- For people that dislike it will feel like a unnecessary micromanaging.

3- Remove the possibility of Wizards learning other classes spells, that is broken, not immersive, and frustrate for who like others spellcaster classes.

4- I personally don't like the mechanic of swapping prepared spells anytime, I mean, spellcasters are already strong, that make them even more versatile. I can understand why it was like that, since before you could just "long rest + change it" making it just a unnecessary micromanaging, but now that, in theory, you can't long rest all the time, adding the prepare spell only on long rest feature would make sense.

5- The most important to me: Make Hide an action for everyone but rogues.
Reason -> The way it is currently it's better for everyone fight without lights just (Hide+Attack), that will give Darkvision characters advantage and making the others neutral. And the ones more cunning can even (Attack+Hide) so you pass all enemies turn not possible to been seen.
Been honest, I would be "ok" with it if the enemies use this strategy too, as it was with backstab, but been a player's only seems unbalanced.


Thanks for taking you time to read, and for the replies showing you opinions!

I dont see any benefit in such change. O_o
On the contrary, i believe that AoO with meele weapon should be provoked even if your character curently is holding Bow ... after all, as you said ... change weapons is free action. :-/

It seem to me to make sence all the time ...
After all, AC is just numeric value, that shows amount of armor you have ... your shield does not become unsubstantial, when you hang it to your back ... you are simply less armored in the front, and more armored on back, but total amount of armor remain unchanged. o_O

Personaly i stached my gold in camp ... since it become quite heavy (23k) ...
Then, when i needed to buy something, i rather sold everything i had by myself, before returning to camp ... bcs its anoying.
So i believe there is point.

Even tho i still believe that weight of certain items should be different ...
I mean, 1Kg thieves tools? What does he even have there, hammer and chisel? :-/

Even tho i agree with this being misstake (no matter if that is bug, or intended) ...
I believe that Larian should NOT change this.
People really should learn self-moderation. -_-

For one, people who are not hardcore DnD fans will only loose something, they might find useful ... and more importantly, fun.
And people who mind it, can easy avoid it by "not doing it" ...

I know you people dont like this "argument" around here ... and in some topics i totally get it ...
But simmilar to eating pig heads, or carying barrels with Oil, or Gunpowder ... this is something you are never forced to do, and if you dont ... you dont even notice that option is there, bcs you are simply the only one in whole world who have that option. :-/
This game is NOT suppose to be 1:1 copy of PHB, please remember that. :-/

There is no need of Micromanaging, All Larian needs to do is keep "previously prepared spells" prepared again next day ... and just allow us to change it, "until next combat starts" after Long Rest ... or (worse option IMHO) give popup window, warning us that we will no longer be able to change our prepared spells after leaving camp, but who reads those, right?
I mean i know that "technicaly" Wizard who dont prepare his spells for next day dont have any ... or, if your DM is not jerk, they probably let you prepare spells at beginning of the adventure, instead of right before combat begins ...

But again, self-mdoeration ... and lets remember that this game is for unexperienced people too. :-/


Again ... self-moderation. :-/

I get it, its exploit ... exploits are not fun ... unless you use them intentionaly.

But let me ask something ...
You say that: "And the ones more cunning can even (Attack+Hide) so you pass all enemies turn not possible to been seen."
I dare to presume that is something you dont like ...
Lets presume your suggestion was inplemented, and Hide become an action for everyone, but rogues ...
So the Question is: What exactly is stoping me from creating 4 Custom Rogues party, and exploit it just the same?
Answer is simple: Nothing. And therefore i see no reason in this inplementation, since the problem remains ... it only makes the game more anoying.

I think everyone should be able to hide at anytime without an action. Just because you try to hide doesn't make it successful. characters with stealth proficiency should be allowed to use it no matter what class they are ?

@Ragnarok, sorry buy I don't go with the Self-Moderation idea.

If you are diabetic, you just ask for you folks to not leave a chocolate bar on your bedroom. You do not act like if this would be ok just because you can "Self-Moderate".
A friend of my was recently playing a game WT3, and he complained to me that the game was just to easy... so the solution he had was to play all of it without armor, sacrificing a big part of his immersion to make the gameplay pleasant. Do you think he was ok with that? He wasn't!
It's not the players obligation to "moderate"/"Balance" the game. That is why "difficulties" are implementes as well as "Toggle features" so everyone finds an "reasonable" balance (IF he wan't to), of course, some people just wan't to experience the story.
Adding more on the matter, using Self-Moderation as an argument to not balance something would work on so many aspects that the company could just forfeit this part of the development and just say "Be moderate people".


This aspect, IMO, it's not about liking or not. I dislike weighted dice, so I just turn it off, and for people that keep it on it not breaking the game, it just change the experience, same as Easy/Normal/Hard effect. This case is completely different, because it does break it.
Make me remember a tactical game of a mutant party that the game was completely unbalanced with only few characters been really good and the others trash. You could play with only one of the spectrum? Yes, but again that is not you job.

About you creating 4 rogues......, yeah, there is nothing stopping you from that but then it just wouldn't be an exploit. It how the class suppose to work and how it is balanced, you're "paying" the price for this in others aspects like social interaction, AoE attacks, versatile etc. The problem is not the feature/possibility of sneaking and then attacking, the problem is making this for everyone, that is "hurting" the rogue in the same way that giving wizards every spell on the game are hurting Clerics/Druids/Warlocks etc.

On the hiding issue... if my character has "Stealth" as a skill proficiency.... why wouldn't that character be able to use that skill even if it is not a rogue? I spent the skill point in acquiring that skill, I should be able to use it to hide. Part of 5e is allowing some cross over of skills by allowing other professions to acquire proficiency in skills not normally associated with their class. This is where background comes into play (say an urchin that made a deal with a devil to become a warlock for example). Sometimes I think too many die hard DnD'ers just want to be rules lawyers and push there interpretation of the rules out on everyone else that plays this game, and it is really starting to get annoying.

Mind you I am an old school DnD'er (I started in Boxed set back in 1978), and played pen and paper through 2nd edition... and left the game when WoTC bought it as I did not like some of the changes. Back in the old days these "rules" were designed as guidelines, not absolutes. I played with DM's that mixed in Dave Hargraves Arduin Grimoire rules as well (nothing quite like running a lvl 6 mage through Caliban (lvl 8+ dungeon) winces... But my point is DM's were encouraged to modify, and adapt alternate rules and styles within the game settings, and not be linear and strict on absolute rules from the books. So I don't see that Larian needs be strictly by the "book" as long as the basic guidelines are there. As some of the rules in 5e are in my opinion a bit absurd (such as not allowing a surprise "sneak attack" when one does not have "advantage" in an attack. Make it harder to hit sure... but if I am hidden below an opponent shoot up at them with them totally unawares... I should be able to get off an attempt as a surprise sneak attack, same if I shooting at them from out of "normal range" in a long distance surprise shot attempt. Just lower the "to hit" chance as a difficult shot, don't make the sneak attack simply "impossible" because I "no longer have advantage".

+1 to everything.

Can't agree more. I'm sure @RagnarokCzD had the best intention and I see his/her point but yes, if a game has issues it is not the player's job to play the game pretending they are not there. They are, and they should be addressed and corrected

But if they leave a chocolate bar on your bedroom ... and you ate it, even if you know you should not ...

Is it their, or your fault, that you will get glycemic shock?
I say its yours.

I dont even know what WT3 is.
But it was his decision ... if he was unhappy with it, it was probably poor decision.

Simmilar to people who learn all Cleric spells with their Wizzards, and then are unhappy with the fact that they in fact have two Clerics in party, of wich one have really poor defences.

I would say: Their loss.

Sure ...
But if you scratch half the rules, bcs "you dont like it this way" ... people who would like it, have no way to as you say "finds an reasonable balance".

That is why i say, every time you wish to complain about it ... ask yourself what will happen, if you simply stop doing it ...
If you are hitting the wall, with your forehead ... it will hurt ... you dont need to tear down the wall, to stop that pain ... you just need to stop hitting it with your forehead. :-/

Yes, it would ... and i cant help the feeling that is often even SHOULD ...

You know the problem here is that you are not tuning the game just so it perfectly fits to yourself ... you (well, actualy Larian do, but you get the point) are tuning it for millions of other players.
Some of them might like the fact that their Wizard can easily heal when they get to tight situation ...
Once you are using self moderation, it this specific matter ... you get the experience you want, and they get th experience they want > everyone happy.
Once you are restricting the rules, so Wizzard cant use anything exept their own spells (no matter how "right" that is in DnD) ... you get the experience you want, but they are no longer able to. :-/
I just cant see that as good design for everyone. :-/

Congratulation.
You just used basic self-moderation ... you determined what you dont like, and didnt use that ...

How? o_O

I mean, i get that people are complaining here about High Ground advantage ... bcs even if you self moderate as hard as you can, there is no possible way to stop NPCs to get that advantage, wich is understandable source of frustration (and will be even more, once Larian adds some Rogue NPC, that will actualy use Sneak Attack ).
This i can understand.

But there is no NPC in the game, that would use Cleric spells, while being Wizzard ... the only one who can do this is you, there is litteraly nothing that is forcing you to do that (and also nothing stopping you) ...
How possibiliy "breaks the game" ?
If you do it, and you use it ... YOU are the one who is breaking the game, simmilar as if you are using exploits ... and if you dont like it, i honestly cannot understand why you did it. O_o

I mean, dont get me wrong ...
But using exploits is, by my own point of view, compareable to using cheats ... yes, the game can easily become boring if you do ... so, i would not recomend it, but if you wish ... its your choice, and your consequences. :-/

That is not adequate comparsion ...
For one, i dont even know what game are you talking about, and i doubt i played it anyway ...
For two, another game means another rules, wich makes it kinda irellevant to this case ...
And finaly, even if you would demand to use it as example, the game would need to be closer to BG-3 situation ... and that would mean that some characters would need to have OPTION to become POTENTIALY much more powerfull compared to others, but game should be still perfectly playable with anyone with regular power level.

Hiding against every single attack?
I bet majority of people around here would see it as pure exploit and almost nobody would say "oh yeah, that is just clever use of totally regular abilities"

But removing it would "hurt" the other classes aswell ...
If i create dexterity based, light armor wearing Fighter ... why should i be less stealthy then a "rogue" ?
If i create dexterity based, light armor wearing Ranger ... why shouls i be less stealthy then a "rogue" ?
etc.

Also, the hurt from Wizard is still not so hard as i see it ...
Cleric still have chanel divinity, that Wizard cant aquire by any means.
Druid still have his Wild Shapes ...
Warlock still have eldrich invocations ... and as far as i know, there is still no way to get Eldrich Blast.

Yes, by the fact that Wizard is POTENTIALY able to learn litteraly any spell he can find on scroll, the caster classes are much closer to each other than in tabletop version ... but that is the only effect it actualy have. :-/
I would never call that gamebreaking, especialy since all you need to do to prevent that, is simply stop doing it.

I could agree on this ...
The problem here is the fact that i dont see those things as issues ... but at worst minor inaccuracies.

Im all in for nice ballanced game ...
I even agree with the fact that Wizard should not be able to learn Cleric spells, since those spells are "in roleplay sence" provided by their deities ... that mean, no Wizard, no matter how long, or how hard he would try should be able to cast them ... bcs he simply dont have that deity, to provide him such power.

But, on the other hand, i see that there are people (and i dont know how many of them is there ... i can be 1 of 10 ... it can be 1 of 10.000) who are using this feature and concidering it fun.
And it simply dont feels right to me to destroy their fun, just bcs i dont agree with it ...

---

In multiplayer, or MMO ... it would be totally different question, and i would be first one who would offer a signature to petition against it!

But we are talking here about Single player game ... where if someone is playing his Dwarf Wizard in Chain Armor, with Shield casting one Guiding Bolt after another ... there is no harm in it for mine gameplay, so why deny him his fun? :-/

---

That is why i keep asking people, why do you do things you dont want to do? :-/
In few weeks it shall be year, since i registered on this forum ... and so far, nobody managed to answer me properly. :-/
Usualy they are talking about "character is stronger/better that way", or "the urge of using this is too strong" ... but is your game any better, if you hate every aspect of it, just bcs it makes "better statistic"? :-/

I dunno ... im affraid i will never be able to understand those people. :-/
I could savescum every option in game, to determine wich is easiest and then use that one ... but i will every time choose more dificiult way, if that is fitting my character, bcs that is what i concider fun ... and fun is main reason this game even exist. :-/

Regarding Wizards being able to learn any spell, I initially wanted to compose an argument about how it will unbalance the game at higher levels, but you know what? It's actually not OP at all, all things considered. With a couple of possible exceptions (looking at you, Spirit Guardians), most cleric spells wouldn't be too disruptive in the hands of a wimpy dude in a robe.

The only serious downside I can see is that it's kinda stealing the Bard's shtick, since they are supposed to be unique out of all classes being able to dip their beak into other people's spell lists, which is one of the primary reasons for wanting to play a bard. To a lesser extent, it also steals some thunder from Divine Soul sorcerers, whose main appeal is being able to play an arcane caster with divine spells. It feels a bit sucky to take the one good thing these classes have going for them and give it to the class that already has the broadest and richest spell list of the game.

But no, mechanically I don't feel it would be unbalancing at all.

@Ragnarok, I will give you an answer in respect of the time you took to give yours. Because... Well, I can't find the logic you used to get to most of you conclusion, so it's hard to argument against arguments you can't understand.

Anyway:
-Still on the chocolate analogy: Yeah, i agree it's the person fault since he eat it. But if he know he would probably doing eventually, asking his folks is the correct thing to do. And if his folks, even knowing that, left a chocolate bar on his bedroom... they sure don't care for him.

-About the WT3(It's one of the biggest cRPG released up2date). I am not saying the name straight because it wouldn't be on a good tone, since we are on other company forum.
How could you possible conclude that he was frustrate because of his decision? I am pretty sure he would do that again, since the other option was way worse.

-The "hitting the wall" analogy, to me, made no sense at all. I mean, yeah, I diabetic would indeed have the temptation to eat the chocolate, even if he know he should't, on the same note a guy would be tempted to procrastinate even knowing he shouldn't and so on. But, who would be tempted to hit his head on the wall?

-Somewhere on the topic you got the conclusion that I was scratching the rules I don't like, and again, I don't see how you can logically got to that conclusion since I clearly position myself ad an adept to the ToggleOnOff Feature as way to bring people the experience they like.

-Now the worse parte of all:

Here I can only think you are really pushing... You should be less stealth because you are not a rogue. Because you have passed you years studding magic, or in communion with nature, or even trainning to use all weapons on the word with mastery.
It should be obvious that two person with the same physical capacity wouldn't have the same results on a sport that one play hours everyday and the other don't. [Guess what!? this basically why classes exist on RPGs]

And NO, you wouldn't be hurting the other classes aswell. For instance: The government gave two children 3 apples for each and zero for another kid. If/when they got to the conclusion that this was a poor decision and they are hurting the third kid, and that from now on they will give 2 apples for each, they are NOT hurting the first two, they are just making it fair.

FINALLY
I think everything can be resumed by the fact that you believe on something that orbit around the idea that: "Developer shouldn't have to balance the game" but the player. Sorry to break it to you, but it's not the players obligation.
Maybe one day you will work on developing games too and you'll understand that, and u'll understand that the closer you can bring your game to balance the more people will enjoy it.
That is not that self moderation is completely unnecessary, but it should be minimum, and btw, if a company EVER says to it's players that they won't change a feature because they need to learn/use self moderation... Well, let's say they wouldn't been doing games for long.

It was your example, not mine. :-/

Actualy, when i think about it ...
Asking (politely) people to not bring something i dont like, is kinda self-moderation example ...
Demanding destruction and prohibiton of any sugar-containing food in whole nation, where he lives, seem like acurate parabole to change the rules. O_o

Was i suppose to understand your sentence: "Do you think he was ok with that? He wasn't!" as "He was actualy ok with that"? O_o
I presumed otherwise. O_o

EXACTLY!
That is the point ... you are not tempted, there is no positive outcome for you, so you dont do it ... right?

So how is that possible, that in game, where you are not tempted to do something (since you hate it), and it have no positive outcome for you (again, since you hate it) ... why do you do that?

We both (i hope) should know by now that is impossible to ballance game around two entirely different rule settings ... allowing wizards to learn all spells, allowing everyone to cast from scroll, allowing people to change their spells whenever they want, allowing people to hide with bonus action ... those changes are too big, even separately, not even mention together ... to create some "toggle". :-/

Rogue is not ninja ...
Even shadow monk is closer to that ... yet you would make them "less stealthy" than rogue, bcs for some unknown reason you simply decided and stated that rogues are the stealthiest beings in the universe. :-/

I could say the same to you ... my Ranger passed years practicing camouflaging and stealthin in wild ... while your Rogue was just bumping to people and pickpocketing them.
It just dont make sence to simply asume someones whole backstory, based on "he is rogue". :-/

I honestly hope that Larian will be more open minded in this. -_-

Obviously ...
Except you are determining who is who by class ... i determine that by their backstories.

Funny ... have you ever heared about archetypes?
That is something that every class contains, so players can see wich DIFFERENT characters can be played with that class (and yes, even those are just examples ... bcs the final word allways have only fantasy of its user).

That is very nice of them ... but have nothing to do with our case. :-/

We are not talking here about Larian redistribuing specific amount of stuff ... we are talking here about allowing one kid to eat that apple right now ... but restrict every single of the others to adhere strict process of preparation, serving and consumption.

Then your first conclusion in this post was the only right one ... you really dont udnerstand. :-/

Developers should obviously balance the game ...
But developers should balance the game as THEY see fit ... and certainly should not to fulfill every whim players come with. Especialy in cases when their changes would ruin game for others, just bcs they "cant resist the temptation". -_-

Company would say that they wont change a feature, bcs feature is working as intended and they are satisfied with its function ... and since you like guesing so much ... gues what?
That is happening all the time.

Good points, I'll chip in with my thoughts.

1. Weapon swapping being free is indeed very odd, especially now when considering that it costs an action to equip a single dropped weapon I think? Also, I don't think a shield on the back is ever going to be as effective as a shield in hand ready to block, it's totally illogical to me. So I hope they remove that persistent AC bonus when it's not in hand ASAP.

2. Encumbrance is indeed a tricky thing to implement, like with damaged weapons and repairing, and so on. But I'm pro-encumbrance too, and think sending items to camp shouldn't even be an option for most things, perhaps just keys and story items, books, letters, etc. Plus, it might make you think more about how much food you want to haul back to camp too, because right now food is so abundant it's a non issue resting after every battle as you can just send it all to camp with not a care in the world.

3. I don't think a Wizard should be able to learn divine spells either, too powerful and it breaks immersion/lore in my opinion. Nothing further to add to that really.

4. Agreed. Make spell preparation for camping, I imagine preparing magical spells is complicated and not really something they should be able to do on the go, I don't know.

5. Hide being an action for non rogues, maybe, but I'd argue Rangers in light/medium armor it should be a bonus action too, and for everyone picking stealth feats/proficiencies and not wearing heavy armor simultaneously. Otherwise investing in stealth in any way as anything but a rogue would be pretty bad no?

So yeah, pretty much agree with everything.

Juts my 2 cents after some patch 5 testing, on some points:

2. Encumbrance i like how they did it in patch5, and UI is nicely indicating when items will change your status, though some weights could be altered to make more sense. I think once they improve UI and inventory management it should also ease this feature a little. I agree with people saying we should not be able to carry heavy items to camp with a click, just light ones.

3. Agree, wizards should not be able to learn non-wizard spells

5. Hide is currentl OP so yeah, change would be nice there

The rest i can live with as is, but the above ones i care about more.