I see many discuss how BG3 is bound by rules of dnd 5e but thats not the case , the game is build more or less on those rules but they can balance whatever they want, if they want to.
I spent 60 $ on an act1 of the game that isnt actually a game i expected, as did many.
First of all Baldurs gate is not a table top game its one of the first most succesfull ROLE PLAYING GAMES, and those who say that you dont chose your path obviously dont understand what role playing is..
When you create your character you plan ahead who this character is and what he will be like, so rolling dices is fine as long as the game remains RPG.
Okei okei killing 1 flaming fist wont yield breast plate but what if i use the new evolutionary feature of the knock down, and KNOCK DOWN THE WHOLE squad of fisties do you think i can manage to undress a 1 piece of intact armor from them??
Its not about realism its all about what developers decide to do, and what reasons are driving them, if they want the game to look like BG there are a lot of things on the list i wrote that should be changed.
No, you clearly don't know what role playing is. You don't pick your path, you choose who your character is, and how you want to play, then the world around you reacts to that. This is the core tenant of DnD, a game that was a role playing game long before computer game were.
Letting the dice decide the outcome of something you try to do, that's essential to DnD.
Many games were the first success in their genre, but that doesn't make them the only way to solve games in that genre. Besides, BG1 wasn't the first successful RPG, it was just the first successful one that had a branching path and lots of dialogue. But since then many games has been successful and done things differently from BG1 and 2.
Heck even successful series tend to mix things up in how they do things, for better or worse. It's over 20 years since BG1, expect things to have changed.
