Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Miss! Miss! CRITICAL MISS! Miss! Miss! Miss! Miss!

cheese the environment
why?
why should melee take the backseat to range?

The inflated HP is a huge problem with D&D based video games and was even bigger a problem in Dungeons And Dragons Online.

Enemies in that game could have thousands of hit points, but spells still followed the PnP limits of 'enemy must have under 30 / 75 hp'.

So Symbol of Death originally killed any enemies with under 75 HP, except all the basic enemies had like 2000, amd going up to 6 figures for bosses. By the time an enemy was at under 75 HP, the next standard attack swing would kill it anyway. They later reworked such spells to no longer be HP based, so symbol of death was changed to inflict negative levels instead, but that was several years after it was already in its completely unusable HP limit state.

If following PnP HP amounts, the fact is that a Wizards spells slots would last for many fights in a row as you wouldn't need to use up every spell, or such ability. In this game you pretty much need to long rest after most encounters die to how many HP the enemies have and how often your spells will still miss.

Yep, and I did find her, but it was hilarious.

I dont remember the game but it considered higher hit percentages as sure crits. IF you had 17-20 crit range you would surely crit if u had 81% hit chance. In this game i have missed on 90% hit chance. FUNNY

It shouldn't. I should have clarified. I hate cheesing the environment. But clearly Larian is setting up BG3 this way. Which I think is a MASSIVE mistake.
Melee shouldn't take a back seat to ranged. But think of all the encounters you have been in. IF the enemy has 1 melee at least 2-3 others are archers. There are just too much ranged to deal with when you're melee atm. AND all the melee enemies seem to havet fire bombs just to chuck at you for good measure. The ranged attacks/enemies need to be toned way way down. I am having the least fun atm when my main character is a fighter. By the time you are any bit setup, they have 6 archers just launching arrows at you from the top of a building. So I take down one target then have to run 9 miles to get to the archers on one side. With them having the advantage of high ground. It's next to impossible to win the encounter. (yeah I know I am exaggerating a little here)

It reminds me of when they showed the game in the first time and Shadowheart kept missing and Sven is like :"she is good I swear" lol

As a long time D&D player, the horror stories of misses that this thread has claimed don't even come close to what I've seen in real life.

I once had a player roll 9 critical fails in a row. I believe he ended up trashing all three sets of dice he used for these rolls. I also had another player roll 11 natural 20's in a single night, he only rolled 17 times that night. (I remember these numbers because we were all laughing so hard about it, we wrote them down to preserve the memory.)

Playing Savage Worlds, I also had a single goblin with almost no HP solo a max level character over 10 rounds. The player just needed to hit once. The goblin needed to hit over and over and over (neither ever got the wonderful exploding dice). In the end, the player lost.

True randomness is weird. I've also had 3-4 rounds in BG3 where I can't hit anything despite an 80% chance or better. I also crushed the goblin camp my first play-through because ~12 goblins landed about 4 shots on my party (3 on Gale) over 3 rounds and I easily picked them off. It wasn't so easy the second playthrough...

To avoid people whining there should be an option where you can see a mini 20 sided dice in the combat log with the number you rolled in the attack.
Early levels are like this you don't have enough gear to improve your to hit bonuses. Probably they will add a story mode for people that don't want to enjoy D&D combat.

Take advantage of the surroundings guys. I just arrived at the hut and took out all minions of the hag with absolute ease by climbing the ladder and attackin from up there. meanwhile, the minions tried to reach me and i kept firing from above. when some of them actually came in melee range they were already like 70% damaged and i finished them off easily.

so: try always to get on higher grounds. you're hit chance increases dramatically.

I'm sure the full game will have difficulty settings with more favourable rolls

I think if other messages like blocked or dodged appear as a result of my bad rolls it could be more acceptable.

Because some part of me can't imagine why my character suddenly became so incompetent that they could not hit this giant target.

And by the way I just remembered in the very same battle my rogue missed 3 times (Sneak + 2 offhand strikes) against one of the bugbears that had slipped on one Gale's iceblasts and was dodging my drows attacks while lying on his back.

I lost my sanity right then and there lol.

You should become a Grenadier. You don't really need to hit anything, just throw grenades, aoe spells, etc. Although with your luck you would critically miss and light yourself on fire. :p

I agree. BG 3 must have virtually weighted dice for the most Nat 1's or Critical Misses. They definitely need to work on the d20 roll.

I feel like this thread is too focused on the arbitrary percentage in the lower left corner. I personally didn't pay much attention to it since it isn't explained anywhere how it's calculated.
SOMETIMES you see modifiers next to it, like " ^ High Ground" but you don't always do, and most of the time I have very little idea why my hit chance is only 50% while I'm standing in a well lit room next to an Ogre the size of a barn door.

The most likely reason for me missing (or more accurately "not doing damage") are bad dice rolls. And attack rolls in BG3 are horrendously bad in my own humble experience.
I've parsed my most recent run through the goblin camp and part of the Underdark and took 100 rolls. I'm talking raw attack dice rolls here, just a D20 roll before modification.
Character was a Dwarf Fighter using a 2-handed weapon. At least half of these rolls were made with advantage. The average initial roll was 6.32.

It doesn't only FEEL bad at this point, it just is.

Lae'zel as an Eldritch Knight doesn't have any similar problems.

My inspiration to do this parse was a guy in a neighboring forum that measured 50 rolls at 6.35 average, which I already thought was quite low.

I seriously hope that Larian is also taking a look at roll averages in their telemetry and sort it by class, stats, weapon used, whatever it takes, because something is just off here and the number of posts about this topic tells me that players feel it.

I noticed too this strange accuracy. When my roug have 84% chance on backstab and he missed - its ok, i can understand dat... but he missed it 3 rounds in a row !!!!! Just how??? 84%... main-hand atack skill... And dat situation was more then once or twice. May be backstab atack bonus ist count? We just dat "hey you have 84%!!" but in real life you have 50%? And with magic - my priest have 50-55% chance to land his focus-based magic skill, but as fact statistic shows dat she land her spell in 20-25% cases. I dont get it rly... I think there is bug with % what we SEE and we with what we ACTUALLY HAVE.

When talking about this I always think of America's funniest home videos, where you see a thousand guys slipping hilariously on ice. Then you recall how you also did fall that one time, so you think: "Wow, that really does happen to everybody!" yet you are deliberately omitting all the times everyone in the country including yourself obviously did not fall flat on his buttocks. That is confirmation bias and probability at work.

I just say it again - in DOS and DOS2(mostly in DOS) i have my fails with control, atack, resists and other - and it was fine! I accept dat no problem. But here is BG3 - when i have 3 1hit enemies and calculation of success near 80% for 4 members of your team (+ all of them dual weapons). In DOS i will expect dat with 8 hits with 3 neaded (even if count 4 hits with twice lesser chances) - my team will kill them all. Dats what expect. In BG3 i have 2 hits (may be 1) - and dats not normal. It isnt normal when you team go flank and ogre, have 75% to hit - and YOU NOT SHURE if any ONE OF THEM will land a hit! With something of dat you have to be shure dat 1 miss! May be 2! I agree dat we remember mostly bad - but it ist the case, rly. With skill checks all the same. I undesrstand dat if you need go through 2-3 skill checks in a row with 50-60% each = 25-36% eventually, or even worse. But when you go to swamp and go wizard/magic check, when you need roll at least 9, and you fail... again and again... like 4-5 times in a row. Then after half an hour i decide reload and leave dat land for next levels, i just.... meet the same.... bad luck? I have 60% chance of success and fail it again and again. Dats aint normal. Its just... after 20 hours of gameplay all dat you rly understand - "You have <80% for hit? Well you may try of course, but if only nothing else you can do". I played XCOM 1 and 2, i more then once, i know how it feels when miss on 98-99%, i know there is a bit risk bet on a shot with 75%, even there will be 2 shots - there can be fail (like 6,25%). And it can happens 2-3 times across full gameplay (many hours). But not in each battle! Dat not normal!

The amount of times lae'zel misses is staggering. I had fights where her hit chance was consistently around 90% and she didn't hit once. So, what I am saying is that the percent chance seems to not matter too much as such. Characters with darkvision, such as Astarion, seem to have less misses when having the same hit chance. So, like others mentioned, there are factors affecting your hit chance that are not expressed in the numbers and are not very clear.

You can check this some in the combat log, at least it displays advantage/disadvantage. Low hit chances next to an opponent are typically ranged attacks, as you gain disadvantage with any ranged attack if the enemy is (too) close. It could be simply a high armor class though, a buff on the enemy or a debuff on the character.





Characters who can't see enemies fully due to darkness have disadvantage on their roll, which is calculated into the percentage displayed. E.g. Lae'zel who doesn't have darkvision targets a phase spider clouded in darkness. The phase spider has an armor class of 13, Lae'zel an overall attack bonus of +5. Therefore she would need to roll an eight, which is a 65% chance. Due to the disadvantage, you roll the dice twice and are forced to take the lower one, which makes this but a 42% chance. This is being displayed correctly, it also says in the combat log that the character was at a disadvantage (due to not seeing the enemy properly).

Ideally there should be a turtorial how the more basic things work, too.

Consider that at lower levels we are all weaker. I am fairly sure that melee will be much more useful as we progress in levels. Unless you are a combat expert, would you want to be surrounded by enemies? I would think that you would get more creative and avoid putting yourself in a situation where you are guaranteed to take damage.