I don't mean to be contrarian but you could side with the bad guys(and be the antagonist) in older BG games.
Kind of. You couldn't side with Sarevok in BG1 and you could temporarily side with Bodhi over the shadow thieves in BG2 but this game seems like it's going to give the option to fully side with the villains.
You could also side with the shadow thieves. You could also side with the corrupt figureheads of water deep or the malignant genies. You could let the Raksasha go etc. You could actively choose to be the bad guy and you could actively choose to ignore the plight of common people. You can let Irenicus win. Obviously there are cases where you couldn't join the minor villains because of extraneous factors(such as being a flesh puppet to a skinwalker) but you could choose to be the main villain and antagonist as well. You can choose to become the God of Murder. The games mechanics even reflect this because if you do choose to be evil people will find out, your infamy will spread, and righteous people will hunt you down. I understand that the older games where not perfect in this regard but they where created during the dawn of the genre. We are currently in it's renaissance so there is no reason for there to be less choice.
Originally Posted by sunset261
Originally Posted by Argonaut
5e rules do not prevent prebuffing either
I didn't say it did but concentration prevents just stacking a ton of them before every hard encounter. You can pre buff but each caster can only have 1 buff active at a time.
I can have two mages in my party in 5e and one can cast fly and the other can cast invisibility. I have now stacked two very powerful buffs pre battle in 5e. I would agree if you had said that it is harder or more situational to stack buffs but not even all buff spells are concentration and you can stack potion buffs and buffs from other sources such as items or wands readily.
Siding with the shadow thieves was the default 'good' option.
Could you please explain to me how you came to that conclusion because I would consider it to be the lesser of two evils. The shadow thieves are not good people and many people are discontent with their existence. They are open with the laws they break and have done equally questionable things as the vampires. The vampires are only worse because they are unholy undead abominations but murder is murder. Theft is theft. And being slightly less worse than an unholy undead abomination is not good in the most forgiving of conditions.
Originally Posted by Alodar
No-one has played BG3 , we've only played Early Access of the first chapter., so it would be impossible to have an informed opinion.
Ask again in a year once BG3 comes out and then people can compare.
This is an extremely poor take and very condescending. Do you think we lack the reasoning to make estimations in lieu of that knowledge? Did you think the points we are making are not in consideration of that? In a year the game may not be early access and it would be much more difficult, costly and time consuming for changes to be made or things to be adjusted making this not only the best time for Larian to receive feedback but it is also the purpose of early access. If you disagree with the points being made you are more than welcome to dispute them with your reasoning and supportive evidence. If that was not the intention then I would like them to please explain to me what I paid full price for?
Last edited by Argonaut; 18/10/2010:05 PM.
I am here to discuss a video game. Please do not try to rope me into anything other than that. Thank you.
