Originally Posted by clanpot
Originally Posted by porrage
This isn't purity testing. If your expectation going into a completely different series is that it'll operate the same as an unrelated IP, that's patently ridiculous. This is an entry in one of the most iconic RPG series of all times that is known for trying to faithfully adapt a tabletop system. I agree the game should be to make a good game first, but if you're not prepared to make a sequel to Baldur's Gate, then don't half-ass it.

I've played through the BG trilogy probably a half dozen times over the years, and the thing that sticks with me, the thing that made them great, had nothing to do with how well-implemented the rules for AD&D were. This fixation on fidelity to the tabletop ruleset is a fool's errand.

Larian got the license because they demonstrated with D:OS2 they were capable of making an RPG with fun, complex combat. That's what I want more of - fun, complex combat. It's not crazy to play this EA and ask, "hmm, what changed?" and see the influence of 5e as a hinderance.

And let's be real, the BG label has almost nothing to do with the original games and is almost purely a marketing/nostalgia grab. There have been a slew of other games over the years with BG in the title that bore little to no resemblance to the originals.

Put simply, I just want the game to be good. Some people seem to think that as fidelity to the tabletop rules will create that, which is complete insane to me.


I've mentioned in other threads that I don't think a 1 to 1 adaptation would work. But if you're going to call your game Baldur's Gate 3, if you're going to use the 5e ruleset as a marketing tool, either adapt it to the best of your abilities (and take some creative liberties to capture the essence of the tabletop while still making an excellent game), or make a completely different game and drop the name. Because right now? What we have isn't dungeons and dragons and it isn't Baldur's Gate.

And I'm saying this as someone that enjoyed DOS2 quite a bit.