Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General BG3 must have things

Thank you for some clarification. Can we assume that the abundance of loot found in the demo (e.g. almost every body has armor and weapons) is a placeholder of the DOS2 mechanics (even though the loot itself is 5e)?

I would say a day/night cycle but it looks like that has been deconfirmed. Not sure about weather effects...

They were all equipped with basic armour and weapons. I think common loot is fine, you can horde hundreds of 1 copper daggers if you feel the need or leave them on the corpses as sven often did during his presentation.

I am going to horde boots smiting to throw at enemies.

This ^

The amount of loot is subject to balancing. I'm not sure about the equipment, but there were extra healing potions, etc, added for the presentations, since the save system was not working at the time.

I would like to see EXP handed out for dealing with an encounter peacefully, to make up for what loot and exp you missed for not taking the combat route...

/signed
A big issue of DOS2 was punish you for not beeing an bloodthirsty
Psycho, what gets even a bigger deal when playing honour Mode.

Onboard with this, too. It was always disappointing when you did something "nice" or avoided killing or robbing someone and were basically penalized for it.

It makes it harder to control some of the more spastic members of my multiplayer group when their arguments to do something questionable is always, "We'll get more XP and loot if we just kill them."

If I had it my way you would get more xp by talking your way out of a problem

True, and agreed, but you have to be careful; If the reward for being peaceful is the same, or as good as, combat, then you get the reverse. 'Why fight when we get the same 500XP for being nice?'

I mean, it does not seem that bad, since most people do a nice run before a mean one, but the complaint either way are two sides of the same coin.

I think the best answer is more exp for peaceful option, more loot for violent option (generally but not always).

No, in general, it is always the case that solving a situation by avoiding combat gets you "less" of everything than engaging in combat, less XP, less loot, and even usually a "lesser" quest/story outcome. I personally think it should be the other way around, that finding a way to avoid combat should get the bigger return, but would be exceedingly happy to see the two approaches just being treated equivalently.

I'm definitely on board with this. Too many RPGs are way too combat-focussed for something that's supposed to be about role-playing, and I say that not only because I'm mostly rubbish at combat. There should certainly be more options to resolve most given quests than "kill it! Kill it to death!" and the rewards should ideally reflect aspects such as the appropriateness of a given approach (in terms of the quest itself, the nature of the PC, their relationship to the relevant NPCs, environment etc) and the effort spent on securing not just the best outcome but also the approach. Though that sounds potentially complicated I don't think it needs to be.

You are right and it does take some balancing. It should be rewarded beeing "evil" in
terms of xp and loot but you have to see consequences as well .
Guards attacking you in other cities, beeing feared or other heroes,
or companions dont want to work with you, there is a lot of Potential.
That would be contras that makes you think about "kill all" or
"beeing nice als maybe they will help you elsewhere"

I argued on one forum with a man who said that Larian, like any other studio that makes games in the D&D universe, can do anything with the setting , I quote: " the wizards don't give a fu** what you're going to do with the setting, even add transformers." Interested in how true this is?

I don't mind the corpses having on their person what they wore.
I always find it silly that when you defeat a fully geared out enemy knight, you get 1 copper piece of some trash.

Looting was common in the middle ages and SHOULD be common. Enemies should drop everything you would logically except them to have. BUT (a big but), the condition of the gear is the issue - at the very least the armor should be damaged (if you killed someone wearing it) or ill-fitted for you.

Basically, while you CAN pick up everything, you won't enjoy the full benefit until you have that equipment repaired/fitted.


The second thing I'd like is to be able to enchant a weapon or having it grow with your deeds. That normal, unassuming sword you started with can grow to become a powerful weapon. Killed 100 orcs with it and performed a ritual in orc blood? It's now an orcbane weapon. Basically opportunities to make some pieces of equipment "yours". Personal, valuable and worth to keep.

I don't know if this was mentioned, but I'm kinda worried about the character creator. one of my favorite things in bg,nwn, and all this dnd games is the richness of the character creator. You are not only able to select class and race, but also customize them in great detail. I'm really hopeful that the creator we saw will improve (and most likely it will) but from what we did saw it was really bare bones.

Maybe we'll be able to change the color of their clothes ?
It could be great

(I understand you're not tlking about this)

It is big part of it to me. I'm talking about both appearance (of which we have seen nothing at all) and stats (of which we have seen very little). I think Dos2 was very nice in the appearance part (even tough it wasn't amazing, the option to even customize the appearance was great), but character-wise it was kinda... useless? I don't think it's the right term, but the fact you'd cycle through different archetypes with different outfits (you couldn't even wear because you start in rags) and didn't really mattered in the long term was very different from a DND experience (not necessarily better or worse, just very different)