Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Mega-threads and Guides The Turn-Based/Real Time with Pause topic

The Witcher series started out NWN's Aurora engine, but upgraded with REDengine. I don't own any of the Witcher games but looking at videos doesn't it fall into the category?

I think the larger the Party is, the more I want Turn Based combat as an option.

Ideally though, if they can make it have both then that's of course optimal

People here dont understand what "Engine" means and just assume it means each game in one engine is a reskin of one another.
Dragon Commander was built in an earler verison of Original Sins engine so obviously the engine means nothing in that regard.

Not necessarily. I'm not seeing why Divinity 2 (IMHO Dragon's Dogma is a lot like it) couldn't be done with the OS2 engine, for example. I'd wondered about that at the time of DOS and it was apparently impractical at the time but perhaps not so much now; but this is conjecture on my part and I don't really know.

The engine does have some awkward limitations as of OS2 though, perhaps partly with the isometric setting being an excuse, but a particularly serious problem is that the pathing is only two-dimensional, like the original Doom. Though it's possible to give the illusion of 3D using raised areas of terrain, it isn't. I guess it depends how deeply that design decision is embedded.

I think the divinity engine and combat would be perfect for bg3.
Most features in 5ed simply rely on turns, such as Assassinate and gloom stalker's extra attack.

Be more honest. It's not perfect for BG3, it's perfect for saving money.
Which is what you want, right? You want to recycling the same tools you used for your earlier turn based games and save some money that way.

Changing the franchise to turn-based is frankly a massive disrespect to the precious two games.
Let's not pretend the previous games didn't have concepts of turns and rounds. Giving someone an extra attack per round, or applying some special conditions to the 1st round was never an issue in the previous games.

You are incorrect.

This^. That RTwP doesn't truly represent how PnP D&D works is the single biggest piece of false propaganda out there being pushed by people demanding that every RPG must be TB.

It's not false propaganda, 5e is very much designed for Turn Based, to do 5e faithfully its has to be turn based and it's not me saying that, its Tactical Adventures saying that, a company in that is actually turning 5e SRD rules into a video game, with a playable free demo coming with its September 3rd Kickstarter. They've come put and said you can't properly do 5e with RTwP, it has to be turn based. Honestly I was on the fence about what I thought this game would be, even concidering the possibility of a hybrid until I read what a company with actual real world experience in turning 5e into an actual video game had to say about it. Larian would run into the same sort of challenges as TA.

I'll see if I can find the link to the interview where this was discussed.

Here is the interview I was referring to.

https://www.enworld.org/threads/a-chat-with-solasta-5e-video-game-developers.666696/

Don't shoot the messenger.

2nd edition was made for turn based on the table top as well. And look where it got Baldur's Gate.

Your arguments are nothing more than propaganda.

Hummm, they really make their case well. Some of the things they said have sense. If you want rules like bonus actions or reactions fully implemented does not make much sense to make`em in RTwP.

Weak excuses.
You know pause is a feature in Badur's gate? Just pause the round if you want to prompt the player for reaction.

But I know why you guys use this weak-willed defeatism attitude.
Because it's already been decided Larian wants to save money and use their old turn-based tools.

Propaganda?!?! Is turn based combat a political or religious movement now?

What defeatism? I'm fine with turn based.

Defeatism, when you use bad excuses, instead of creativity.
When you insist something is impossible, while refusing to consider the possibilities.
When you pretend you are so smart and insist the reaction mechanism is impossible, but in reality it's just because you are a lazy developer who wants to save money and recycle tools.

All to the detriment of Baldur's Gate.
If Bioware had the same defeatist attitude as Larian, and insisted the 2nd Edition must be turn based, the Baldur's Gate series would have never even existed.

What's next? Why don't you turn Street Fighter into Turn-based while you are at it.
You're so happy about making things sour for the original fanbase after all.

None of your post have any merit in this discussion as they do not give any reason as why RTwP is better than Turn-Based. You have only called names to discredit someone else's view on the subject. You have directed most of your comments toward Larian Studio without even knowing if, or why they may choose Turn-Based over RTwP. That can only be speculation at this point.

I can give several of my speculations.

• Larian has stated that they want to follow the 5E rules as closely as possible.
• WotC told Larian to make it turn-based so that people who play the game can easily go to play tabletop and vice versa.
• Other RPG's who had RTwP have now included patches or Mods that make their games Turn-based because people like Turn-Based.

But I do know one thing. Calling people names or degrading them never gets your way!

Defeatism? thats rich.
Considering that your camp, which i am now convinced consists of a single guy with multiple accounts simply because of how simmilar the posts are getting, keeps going with the most uncharitable interpretation of anything possible.

Why would anyone use Turn Based, a very popular game system right now, instead of the GLORY that is RTWP, an old system that exists due to convenience at the time?
IT must be LAZYNESS; it must be SAVING MONEY, saving money in the most expensive game the company has ever made.
Its justa money grab afterall.

Man, who sounds defeatist here?
I just dont like RTWP , its a blatantly bad system.
Im glad if its anything but that, so im not gonna be defeatist about it.
IF its RTWP, ill still play it, but ill call that lazy, because thats just rehashing a game that came out ages ago, without actually improving the formula.

Chances are, well end up with an action RPG system and this entire thread will look realy stupid in hindsight.

You do realize I'm not a developer right? I have no reason to find creative solutions to mixing 5e with RTwP as it's not my job and I'm fine with TB.

And if they came out with a Street Fighter turn baed CRPG I'd totally play that. Mortal Kombat Turn Based CRPG even more so, but only if it was pre boob size nerf.

Too bad this forum doesn't have a like or xp button.

In other words, if Baldur's Gate 3 is like its predecessors, you might just barely tolerate it,
This is like admitting you were never a fan of the series to begin with. Maybe the developers shouldn't pander to you at all.

The Defeatism camp is the one who insist d&d 5e is impossible to implement in real-time. The people who are weak willed and give up at the 1st excuse to give up.
By definition my camp cannot be defeatists. Because we are saying it was possible to turn d&d 2e and 3e into real-time, it would be just as possible to turn 5e into real-time.
We see solutions where you see impossibility. That's the difference between our arguments.



This argument is more of a side-note, but the Baldur's Gate franchise sold 3,5 million copies by the time Throne of Bhaal expansion was released.
You're speaking to a fanbase that had an active modding community a decade after the game launched. Things have slowed down as we approach the 2nd decade anniversary, but it's still a testament to how big and dedicated the fanbase was.
(I'm not talking about silly reskin mods, but hundreds of elaborate ones that added new quests and character dialogues, and even the ones who merged together both games and both expansions)

That's the legacy you are disrespecting when you use arguments like this.