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

Sure. And again, no one is arguing any differently on this point. But this is a forum. And the very purpose of a forum is to discuss, debate, and <gasp> air alternative points of view. So just because Larian has made this choice and that choice is not going to change, does not mean people can't comment on their feelings that it's a poor/wrong choice. If that discussion is not of any value to you, there's a very easy way to deal with it: ignore it and move on. But trying to shut people down or even worse, insult and attack people using despicable language (not necessarily you but certainly there have been those kinds of posts) is outrageous and wrong.

As for your idea of how a tabletop game can be made more "simultaneous," @dlux is correct that that is NOT real-time. It is correctly identified as phase-based, which is considered to be a type of turn-based system (so also sorry, you haven't invented something new). In fact, phase-based systems are quite common in large-scale strategic games like wargames and also Civilization, and everyone agrees those are TB games. However, as someone who dislikes the strictly sequential nature of traditional TB systems, I do agree that a phase-based system is a huge improvement over the traditional TB system.

Josh Sawyer's table top Pillars of Eternity used that at some point (I don't know if it still does, it's changes as is gets developed) - characters roll initiative and commit to moves in reverse order. I actually like the idea a lot. The downside is that we would need to get rid of rolls - fine for computer game, less so for PnP. Having to double guess what players will do plus making plans based on uncertain outcome is absurd way for things to spiral into chaos. I do like how this system trabskates "reaction time" though.

Yes, thank you. I’m happy to debate it. That’s why I’m here where this topic was banished to. My main reason for participating in this thread in the first place was to try to explain that turn based games can be fun and some things work better in them than real time. As I’ve said before, it’s just different, not fundamentally inferior.

Believe it or not, I don’t say this to try and shut you all up. I say it because I feel bad for all the old BG fans who are convinced the combat will just be shit. Maybe I can persuade a few that it might not actually be a terrible decision if they give it a chance, and it might even be enjoyable. I realise it won’t work with the most vocal critics.

That said, if I see an argument I believe is nonsense, I’m going to call it out as nonsense. Such as this:



Do you think that sounds reasonable?

As for the tabletop thing, I never claimed it was real time, or really thought no one had done it. My point was that if original BG was closer to what was “always intended by D&D”, it’s odd they didn’t make the rules closer to how how original BG works. I only went into a little more detail when you both said that was impossible and you specifically asked how it might work.

Bottom line is that D&D is not a simulation, it’s a game designed to be fun to play. BG games are also not simulations, they are games based to some extent on D&D and designed to be fun to play. So dlux’s argument is silly.

Which brings us back to if turn based combat can be suitable and fun for BG3?

Larian are creating complex 3D environments, lots of things to interact with on the battlefield, they want stealth to work well in combat, etc. They want people to experiment and find interesting ways to approach things inside and outside of combat. That’s what WOTC said they liked about them. Not that they make turn based games, but that they make systems that allow players to be creative.

So I don’t think the key question is which is better between turn based and real time. It’s about which is most suitable for the systems Larian are building and the kind of gameplay they want to make.

While you could argue that you can do all these things with real time and pause, I strongly suspect that the reality of trying to carefully position characters, use stealth, set traps and use the environmental would be a frustrating mess as you try to fight the AI. It can be enough hassle in original Baldurs Gate just stopping companions charging into AoE spells. BG3 will have far more complicated environments and options.

Interesting, thanks. What I said there was just something I threw together in a few minutes to answer a post. I haven’t actually thought about it much. Not sure why you’d need to get rid of rolls though. Couldn’t it all still be dice based?

I suppose trying to guess what’s going to happen would be the point. How much fun that would be to play is another question.

Dice rolls were purely my thoughts. I don't remember how his systems worked. I have been doing theorycrafting around this idea. I am big fan of Frozen Synapse and I wondered if such planning phase followed by real time execution could be a valid way of make an RPG. The problem I see that could emerge is, that such planning phase revolves around "what will happen", and If you add a healthy dose of RNG, we start talking in "what could happen" not only in terms what enemy could do, but also if he or I will succeed. I just think that could be a bit too much. While if you have full-turn based you mainly focus on what kind of damage you can do, and what are you chances to do it.


I think the problem we will run into here, is that different people played BG1&2 in different ways. Here or on another thread someone expressed an opinion that it will be detrimental to the game having to manually control all units. Custom AI scripts were praised in PoE2, and I know some people play those games rarely using the pause. There are players who try to solo runs from the get go, and don't bother with companions at all.

I would argue that those playstyles are a result of the game being badly balanced - to me those are negative side effects, not a feature. If one can beat a party based RPG with a solo character that means that either the content is too easy, or character builds way to unbalanced. If one can play with a party based RPG and not control what 5 out of 6 characters are doing then something is very wrong - it should be about party interactions after all. Still, that's my opinion, and one that many people who played BG1&2 seem not to share.

As a micromanaging player, I don't have a big problem with using turn-based system. I set up a generous auto-pause in my IE games and manually pause on top of that - analyse rolls, make sure everyone does what I want them to do. All AI scripts are off of course. Making the game turn-based doesn't slow the game to me that much, and makes it far easier to follow. On top of that, I believe that with that pace Larian can expect players to engage with systems more, and design a better balanced and challenging encounters. Still, players who enjoyed those games in other playstyles might not be served by BG3. Even if solo runs will be possible for BG3, I doubt they would be enjoyable.

Ok, good. So it seems like there is space for civil discourse between us, and that makes me happy.

I appreciate your attempts to convince me that BG3 combat could be fun despite the nature of the combat system. Speaking only for myself, I am actually still keeping myself open to that possibility. I do not believe it is likely, but it is possible. Larian can end up surprising me with what they ultimately produce. As I've said elsewhere, I think the only thing that can possibly make a TB combat system palatable to me is if the combat encounters are such that they can be concluded in a relatively short amount of time. In D:OS, for example, three rounds was my limit before I got too exasperated and annoyed with the combat. So what I did in that game was to always just drop the difficulty to the lowest setting just before combat, breeze through the combat in three rounds or less, and then bring the difficulty setting back up afterwards. Yes a pain to keep doing, but it made the game immensely more enjoyable for me. The point of all this is that encounter design I think is ultimately what will matter in BG3. If encounters are designed well, and especially with only a small number of opponents and opportunities to "remove" some of your opponents ahead of time (through dialogue, checks, or stealth), such that even on normal difficulty combat does not last for too long, then I can see myself being okay with the combat. I will still not consider it "good" by any stretch, and the combat system will remain a strike against the game for me meaning I could never give this game anything more than an 8/10 rating at best. But given that story, storytelling, characters, character development, writing, lore, branching dialogue, meaningful choices with meaningful consequences, interesting quests, etc. are MUCH more important to me than combat will ever be, if the game is very strong in those areas then those strengths can overcome what I see as a less than stellar combat system.

As for your last point about whether RTwP can do justice to all the "systems" in a Larian game, I strongly feel that that is ENTIRELY up to the quality of the developer (whoever they are). Yes, 5e D&D rules can be fully implemented in a RTwP game, as well as all of Larian's environmental interactions. It is purely a matter of the imagination and competence of the game's designers and programmers. Swen Vincke, in an interview some months before BG3 was announced, spoke at length about how he as a game developer can make only so many games in his lifetime, and therefore he wanted to be challenged by making as many different types of games as possible and not just making the same games again and again. So my challenge to Swen would be (post BG3 obviously): "Prove to me your reputation is well-deserved and that you are one of the greatest RPG designers of all time by making the greatest ever RTwP RPG. You've already made several TB RPGs that a lot of people love. If you truly believe in a challenge, demonstrate this to me by making an awesome RTwP RPG."

Having a new, modern RTWP game with Larian's gameplay mecanics would be that awwwesome.

That's all what I hoped when I learned they're doing Baldur's Gate 3.
Everyone on the BG's forums I read was something like "Larian ? DoS ? That sucks for a BG game" while I was saying "if they're doing something out of what they usually do, it's gonna be awesome".

What about the whole "I'm not going to play this game..."?

You're life looks very sad and boring...

The annoucement of BG3 came months before we knew anything about the game

xD ha! No, that's is pretty much what I expected. It actually is looking much better then what I imagined.

You/re almost there Kanisatha ! embrace the TB !!! after this game you'll be loving it ! - i cant recall your feedback but I truly hope you're going with early access so the debate can continue & hopefully we all give some ongoing feedback to make this the D&D/BG game of a generation !!!

It looks better than other TB games but I'd really love a whole new RTWP that include such verticality and such interractions with environnement.

Maybe Larian's going to realize my dreams

Well, my personal worries revolve more around structure, lack of singleplayer role-playing, poor companions due to them being empty shells for coop players and not actual companions, etc. then with how Larian will translate DnD combat. But with with their focus on coop, financial success and overall popularity of turn-based combat over RTwP combat I was convinced they would make BG3 turn-based. Doing otherwise would compromise too much of their design and alienate their existing fanbase. Still, one thing I was worried was that they will mess too much with DnD systems, bringing it closer to D:OS. That doesn't seem to be the case so far.

Not gonna' happen. At most I will try it only when it is at least 50% off. If you hated the combat system of a game, would you consider it fair to pay full price for that game?

(joining the topic late...)

turn-based combat used to be the core of this experience playing D&D Rpg computer games...since champions of krynn..back in the days of 2D poor vga graphics.
(yes...I remember Death knights of Krynn too..haha....with text messages and rudimentary combat screen..but TB of course! )

maybe some people only remember baldur´s gate and neverwinter nights...so they think it is natural for a game to offer both experiences, TB or rtwp.

But before Baldur´s Gate 1...there were a series fo D&D games for dragonlance, forgotten realms... and they were turn based only.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_Box

for those who played that, DOS 2 and BG3 are like the next step in the evolution of turn-based (not RTWP) and we do not mind all the funny situations that can arise, such as one person talking while other is walking or fighting,
or the new hilarious situations with 3D environment, teleportation, etc..because...we remember how much it evolved since Pool of Radiance and DKK...

[You/re almost there Kanisatha ! embrace the TB !!! after this game you'll be loving it ! - i cant recall your feedback but I truly hope you're going with early access so the debate can continue & hopefully we all give some ongoing feedback to make this the D&D/BG game of a generation !!![/quote]

Not gonna' happen. At most I will try it only when it is at least 50% off. If you hated the combat system of a game, would you consider it fair to pay full price for that game?[/quote]

Well - yes if your keen enough to be in the forums probably 8-12 months prior to the release I expect you are already heavily invested or interested in this title. For me its D&D and thats what i like about it - that and finally a developer with some grunt & form taking it on - this is our best shot of getting a decent game out there. While I prefer turn based if Larian Studios & WOTC came out tomorrow & made it RTWP I'd still buy it & play EA. - whats $100 at the end of the day (Thats NZD maybe $60 USD?) to get a great game in your favourite genre.

Although my preference is TB i'd not keep myself from what otherwise is going to be an awesome experience - I played 150 hours of Sword Coast Legends - absolutely panned by critics & D&D players alike it never got a chance - I thoroughly enjoyed it , played it straight from start to finish- it is completely RTWP with modern graphics - beautiful game. Clearly not to everyones tastes though.

Lets face it the line between RTWP & TB is very small in reality its just a slower pace vs a faster pace - maybe they can implement that fast combat scroll wheel like they do in the remastered final fantasy games so you can speedily zip through the best part of the game - combat ! (yes I know story, characters, progression, etc etc I need that to be decent too) but combat is D&D the games built around it, its the exciting part & hopefully the same will shine through in BG3.

First, I applaud you for having given SCL a chance and actually ending up liking it. I like that game a lot too, and see a lot (though not all) of the criticism aimed at it as having been grossly unfair.

The reason I've been invested in commenting on this forum is entirely because this is a Forgotten Realms setting game and a Baldur's Gate game, and not really because it is a D&D game. To repeat, I dislike D&D mechanics and rules, because they are far too dependent on dice rolls and luck. To have even drinking a healing potion be dependent on the luck of a die roll is just utterly ridiculous. I much prefer RPG systems that are only minimally or not at all dependent on luck.

Furthermore, no, combat is most definitely NOT why I play RPGs. I play RPGs for ... the RP in RPG!! Combat is a generally boring chore that I have to tolerate to get all the other stuff that makes the game fun and worth playing.

As I've already said, there's more to my unhappiness with BG3 than the combat system. So if BG3 is our best shot at getting a good D&D game, then that's a stake through my heart because it means I will not ever be getting a D&D - or more specifically a Forgotten Realms game that makes me happy.

You a such a whiner. It's actually nearing epic proportions.
Get it through your head: it's a game.
Furthermore: you have been crying and whining because you think it doesn't live up to your expectations. Perhaps you are not the target audience of this game. Perhaps you should consider going back to the combatless, and mechanically predictable games that you admire.
Finally: you are not a victim of jerks. You are simply an attention whore with entitlement issues, and when people confront you with this, you claim victim hood.

I love BG1/2, I think they are some of the best games ever made. They brought D&D into video games and the RTwP worked excellent with the 2e rules. However, it can be a challenge to adapt 5e to it. One rogue ability is triggered by attacking an enemy who has not yet had their turn. It gives a rogue almost a guaranteed sneak attack every combat, and is crazy useful. How would this work in RTwP? How does it count an enemy's "turn"?

Also surprise seems a little strange as well. In TB, you just have an extra round before the enemy, so what happens in RTwP? Do the enemies stand still for that? And do you have to stand still if you're surprised? While it's doable, I feel like it would break the RT part for just a bit.

I've seen a lot of people talk about how you're a squad leader in RTwP and you can count on the AI for some things, which is actually crazy rewarding imo. One pretty big detail about D&D that wasn't in BG1/2 was how resourceful you could be and just kinda make it up as you go along. I know BG isn't TT D&D, but I still missed doing stupid stuff just to see if it would work. In what I've seen of BG3, I'll definitely have stupid stuff to do all the time and I'm crazy excited about that. However, custom scripting and AI in general doesn't really allow for these stupid antics. I'd have to micromanage and pause a lot, which I might as well just have TB so I don't have the micromanage part. This is just me, I know not everyone is into dumb ideas, but man do I love when it works out lol.

If we're talking about entitlement, be polite or find somewhere else to post. This sort of attitude isn't welcome here.