Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General BG3, DOS and the D&D rule-set

Yeah, I think Larian's DOS engine will be wonderful when you start moving into the realm of Fireball, Spiderweb, Shatter, Gust of wind and Ice storm to name a few from the top of my head. I already have Thunderwave on my mage and think the engine does an amazing job with that spell! It's just to much for the cantrips. It throws everything out of wack. It's not like those cantrips are badly designed in 5e and needed fixing either. I feel the effects that Larian gave them moves them beyond cantrip level:

Ray of Frost: There is a huge difference between losing 10 ft of speed when you're hit by a ray of frost or falling prone even when you're missed by it.
Acid Splash: Giving you the ability to hit 2 targets if they are next to each other is something radically different from a -2 on AC! 2 AC is a shield's worth! And you don't even have to get hit, just stumble through the puddle.
Friends: Anyone not casting that on every person they speak to? It's annoying to do but gives you advantage on every Charisma check that comes up, no consequences.
Firebolt: From wonderful little blast spell in 5e to the reason having melee fighters is pointless in BG3. They'll just hurt themselves on the fire anyway. (If they hadn't lost their armor in a puddle of acid earlier.)

So, yeah, could use some work I'd say...

I bought the game on the same day as it was released, convinced that it would be my home for the next few months, but the enthusiasm faded shortly after, I'm really sorry to say it, but this is not and will not be the sequel either " spiritual "of Baldur's Gate

I want to clarify that I have played both DoS 1 & 2 in EE versions, and this looks much more like a DoS 3 than a BG3, I really say this with a lot of disappointments, I'm very sorry, I had already seen the various introductory and gameplay videos, as I had been following the game for some time

I told myself that even if it looked like a DoS 3 I would have to play it to really understand if it was so, and I was convinced that I was wrong, after all the mechanics of D&D would have made a difference, but I was still wrong

I tried the game and tried to convince myself that it was different, but it wasn't enough to add more interaction with the environment, in the movements, and the rules of D&D, the roll of the dice, the characters, the universe of D&D in this context it fits really tight

my opinion is personal and I really say it with huge regret, as I have been waiting for this game more than any other for years, after 3 days I had to ask for a refund from Steam, I have never asked for a refund of any game since I have steam since far 2004, and I never expected to ask for it for this game.

Another "this looks like DOS3" post. Everyone, take a shot.

There is no such thing as DOS3. This is BG3. Im sorry for you that a few inherited UI elements and environmental effects convinced you that its similar to DOS2 and prevents you from enjoying a great game.

You made an account just to complain?

I guess it helps I never played DOS because this clearly looks and feels like BG3 to me.

I don't remember people hating Fallout 3 onwards for being clones of Elder Scrolls games.

Apology accepted.

DOS 1&2 basically tided me over til the next D&D game.

Sword Coast Legends fell flat on it's face(sadly). I'd had a lot of hope pinned on that game as it had a toolset and DM mode.

So for me this game doesn't 'scratch that itch' it eliminates that itch completely. I have been waiting for a decent multiplayer
D&D game since NWN2 basically. Finally we have it, and I am very happy with what we have. It could only get better with
a DM mode and a toolset. Larian have yet to clarify one way or the other on that, and we are only in EA anyways. The only
thing I see stopping Larian from doing a toolset/DM mode is Wizards(and if they still want to monetise their D&D MMOs).

Bye o/.

Oh they sure did back then. They called it "Oblivion with guns". A lot of original Fallout fans were pissed off.

But for me, getting the same mechanics as the original games isn't as important as getting the setting and narrative right. When it comes to Bethesda and Fallout, I don't feel they understood the universe, and to them Fallout was more of a "post-apocalypse theme-park" rather than a post apocalyptic setting where civilization and new nations are being born again from the ashes.

I feel Larian has done a good job in depicting the Realms as well as making reference and homage to the story of Baldur's Gate 1 & 2, which I'm sure there'll be loads more of in the full version of the game. And though overall I am pleased by BG3, I have to say that the comparisons to Divinity 1 & 2 are PERFECTLY valid. Larian does need to put effort into distinguishing this game from their previous games, because this is Baldur's Gate. It may not work mechanically like BG1 & 2, but it deserves to have it's own identity. And there are lot of tweaks they could do to separate it from Divinity, which I'm sure they will put effort into considering. It could be small things like not having this Divinity-esque "power-up" GFX effect when using an ability like Jump.

Am I the only one who thought DOS 1 and 2 where just D&D games with out the rule set? Cause that is how I played them. They were more D&D than the D&D licenced games imho.
That said, I agree with the original post, this does feel like DOS3, but that to me is 100% a win.

Baldurs gate 1 and 2 were good, and a top down rpg like the original games would be cool but it would be highly restrictive I feel. I am glad we are not going to be capped at level 10 now that I say that too, as levels 11-16 are some of my favourite (just being shy of level 17 wizards warping reality and shape shifting into dragons of which I wont object to either)

We have a great game in BG3, with a multitude of opportunity ahead. Its up to Larian now to make this all come together and up to us to provide feed back to help Larian do just that.

All those arguments about it not being BG3 flying around these formus and I have yet to find a person to actualy explain why. So let me try here: OP, what exactly should be made for it to be a Baldur's Gate 3?

Okay? I mean I understand if people don't like the game (and it's early access, which a lot of people don't seem to be wrapping their minds around), but can you at least give some helpful criticism about why you don't like it?

It should use AD&D rules obvs, despite them being 2 editions out of date. And be in 2D, because, technology, FECK technology. And continue the Bhaalspawn story, despite it being concluded in Throne of Bhaal.

Nah, but a more thorough implementation of 5e would help.

I can't feel any sympathy for you, OP. You could have made an informed decision before buying and deduced whether this game was what you're looking for or isn't - there were many sources/videos even before EA that conveyed the gameplay well enough... but instead of informing yourself, you rushed in blind, and then -SHOCKINGLY- got disappointed.

This!

Exactly Neverwinter Nights 2 wasn't a direct sequel to NWN1. Nor did they use the same rule edition.
Icewind Dale II wasn't a direct sequel to Icewind Dale. Again they switched to a later edition of the rules.

So anybody who tries to say it isnt BG3 is making a redundant argument.

It is set in and around the city of Baldur's Gate. That is all that is needed to make it a Baldur's Gate game.

Yes, I think you're the only one

That's YOUR point of view, because that's what define BG to YOU.
This is as stupid as saying BG3 doesn't look DoS at all because the rules are not the same.

No its not saying BG3 doesn't look like DoS at all. Thats you putting words in my mouth and is you saying I have
said something I clearly haven't. This is akin to outright lying on your part, and it also a totally irrational thing to infer.

Fact: The game is set in and around the city of Baldur's Gate.This makes it a Baldur's Gate game. It isn't opinion at all
on any level whatsover. There is no valid argument to say it is not a Baldur's Gate game. Sure it might not be the
Baldur's Gate game a lot of people want, but it is a Baldur's Gate game nonetheless.

Anyone trying to rationale that it isn't a Baldur's Gate game, no matter what 'evidence' they provide is like trying to
prove the earth is flat. All the details like game engine, rulesets,UI, gameplay etc are 100% redundant.

The game is set in and around the city of Baldur's Gate. That by definition makes it a Bauldur's Gate game.
You know it, I know it, and everyone else knows it.

Learn to admit, and accept you are wrong(and maybe re-evaluate your life too if this is your mindset).

If you're hearing that so much then it means that it is a shared feeling and that there's some truth in it, don't try to minimize their opinions please, why should everyone be enthusiastic about a same product ? Let's be honest, there's many similarities for 2 games not sharing the same rulesets nor the same lore.

If it can convice the devs to try making something realy unique then it's good. There's many things that can remind you of dos : UI, color used, way of playing, level design, ... I understand why some people think that this game has no proper identity so far, which does not mean it's not good (have perspective).





Sadly it's often the unique way to be heard these days : jumping on personal forums or DC, as even steam forums & reddit seems to be utterly ignored.