Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback A collection of thoughts from a veteran D&D player and why I think the DOS:3 vs BG3 debate matters.

I did not player BG1&2. I did play the goldbox games for Dragonlance series and I played NWN1 a lot, but did not get very far in NWN2. I have not played a lot of D&D in my childhood but did play a few times in recent years (but those sessions only lasted one or two nights, so not a serious group). I have kept loose touch with understanding of the rulesets because I actually owned a DM handbook, PHB, and monster manual when I was 16 but I didn't understand that the game was more than just a board game and needed other people to play, I just knew I liked the AD&D games so much I was interested in the art and books. I later returned those books because I realized how pointless it was to have those and no one to play with, so that has been my D&D experience.

I am familiar with the mechanics from THACO to just regular AC. Advantage/Disadvantage is new to me in 5e though, but I adapted easy enough.

So point back to why I went on a history trip. I have been a huge fan of D&D games for years, but I enjoy them for the setting and storytelling, not because of the dice and the rules. The various worlds that have been created by the fans and the official releases for D&D range from space and future magic/science tech and all the way back to swords and sorcery and even some HP Lovecraftian insanities. I don't like all those worlds but the "rules" are fairly consistent between them based on the different generations of the D&D editions.

I then put forward again. The game is interesting to me because of the story and world lore. The interface and mechanics make it a fun game to play. If the mechanics were unfun, that would turn me off from seeing the rest of the story. For some here, they don't think surface damage is fun, or having too many actions per a turn is fun. Others find too many restrictions and strict adherence of a table top interaction to be unfun.

Does being unfun to some players make this "not" a Baldur's Gate game? No it can be a Baldur's Gate game because of the story. Those users simply do not enjoy the interface enough to see the rest of the story. If this turned into a point and click adventure like Maniac Mansion or Monkey Island but in the world of Baldur's Gate, it would still be a BG game, I just wouldn't' want to play that interface is all because it isn't engaging to me today.

How can some users say they enjoyed the Divinity Original Sin games but as soon as it is labeled with Baldur's Gate it is not fun suddenly? You either like the mechanics in DoS or you don't, that mechanic works the same regardless of the name applied to it.

With the changes to the previous BG games via mod support, the game changed, the rules changed, new classes/races are added, yet the game is still BG even if those were not originally in those rulebooks, things can change and adapt. Speaking of mods, apparently there is already mod support for BG3 and even one of the forum moderates stated they liked a more hardcore rule with short/long rest so they use a mod when they play to add more restrictions. This leaves room for Larian to make the core game and interface and the community to tailor it to their liking. As long as the engine and core mechanics are functioning the supporting data can be adjusted to each players interests.

Is this ideal? Maybe? Some say that makes lazy designers, but this also keeps breathing life into games that should have died years ago (I'm looking at you Skyrim! Why do people like you so much??!).

----edit---
ok I rambled. I guess what I am trying to say TLDR: This can be a BG game but if you don't like the mechanics, it shouldn't be pseudo insulted and call it DoS 3 as if that makes it a lesser product. It is still BG, you just might not like how it plays and that's fair.