Originally Posted by Milkfred
DC20 checks just seem ridiculous. DC 5 feels terrible when you fail. A little bit of randomness is fine, but I think BG3 is bit too heavily loaded towards the dice roll.

It's not that BG3 is heavily loaded towards the dice roll, it's that D&D is. Anyone coming from a D&D background should know this. A friendly DM wouldn't make much a difference at all, unless they just give you ridiculous bonuses all the time.

Originally Posted by Milkfred
And you don't even get experience for making the skill checks either. Oh, and the fact that so many of them are just DC10 (aka coin toss) is another related problem. I assume a lot of the numbers can and will be changed, but the underlying structural issue of it not being fun or interesting to fail is a deeper problem.

XP for some checks is something that can be added, sure. But "fun to fail?" What do you mean? And sometimes, shit is a toss up (DC10). What do you want?

Originally Posted by Milkfred
Perception checks as you're exploring - as being similarly annoying. What did I miss? Who knows, but now I have this feeling in the back of my head that I'm missing out on something. Was it something that I'd think was cool? A neat bit of lore? Something to make Lae'zel like me? I can tell myself that it was probably just two gold pieces and a fork, but my brain will insist otherwise.

Maybe I am not bothered by this as much because it's all brand new and I see things I miss as something to be found on subsequent playthroughs. I would be okay with hiding these checks, though.

Originally Posted by Milkfred
Players draw a distinction between choices in dialogue and choices in gameplay. Going into combat with Nettie to get the antidote is not seen as a 'choice.'

We can only choose options available to us (btw you should preface the Nettie stuff with 'Spoiler Alert'). After you 'chose' to let her help you, your choices were limited to dying, convincing her, or killing her.

Originally Posted by Milkfred
On one hand, it's great that for the first time in the history of Baldur's Gate that Charisma isn't the dump stat. On the other, it sucks that it's now THE roleplaying stat which you better put a bunch of points in unless you want to be stuck failing everything.

You can't have it both ways. You mention how it sucks that even with a +4 bonus you can fail. Well, the flip side is with no bonus you can still succeed.

Originally Posted by Milkfred
D:OS2's freedom of skill-based as opposed to class-based felt a lot better.

This just sums up how I see basically everything you said. You seem to just want everything to go the way you want it. Have any character be able to do whatever they want and be able to do it as good as anyone else and have everything go your way. It's the mentality that gave rise to such wonderful RPG features as fast travel, no death penalty, loot everywhere and hundreds of levels. Sorry man. -1