Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback Master List of why BG 3 feels like DoS 3

One area I feel definitely needs attention is enemy reactions when attacked by a stealthed character.

I’m finishing up the Underdark running the whole thing with just a Drow rogue in my party without any of the npc’s. I’ve only rested in camp once to boot. This is primarily due to the fact that monsters just stand there and do nothing if they don’t see who’s attacking them, so you can just snipe and hide until all of the enemies are dead. It’s a little time consuming, but it’s actually easier than running a full party 4.
I’d like to see monsters / enemies roam in a random direction if they’re being attacked and don’t see the attacker. This will at least force the player to reposition and potentially lose a “prime sniping spot”. It would also create the chance the monster / enemy would randomly advance toward the player.

I’d just like to see a little more difficulty when fighting 2 minotaurs at the same time than watching them stand there and become horsey pin-cushions.

Now make one for how its like BG 1/2 and then a third one of what they need to change

Excellent list.



I think it would be much more useful to state the differences between BG3 and D&D 5e since it's actually something that can be aimed at Larian since they stated that BG3 would be a faithful adaptation of D&D 5e but never really said it would be a BG1/2 clone. On that note I would love it to be not only faithful to 5e but also take into account the overall atmosphere and choices that were made in the original BGs. Instead we have a colourful candy land world narrated by what seems like a porn actress and horrible writing where everyone wants to sex CHARNAME. Mostly looks like the game is targeted to edgy pre-teens.

Which choices? What if the choices they choose to run with run counter to what you chose? Then there's the whole "It's Act I" thing. I have yet to play any video game that laid out it's entire narrative that fast. That's akin to "why didn't we have to "take back Earth" in Mass Effect 1" to me.

of course it 'feels like' Divinity Original Sin 2-- to think that it wasn't going to is asinine.

All of you are forgetting SIMPLE FACTS;
1) Wizards of the Coast chose Larian because they loved DoS2 and WANTED their IP to be handled by the same company.
2) Larian Studios made DoS2 and are making BG3 using assets (engine, code, art, etc) from DoS2
3) BG1 and BG2 were made on OLD technology, were based on a different ruleset, made by a different development team, and most importantly WERENT EVEN TURN BASED (real time with pause is not a substitute for turn based).

these facts should have made it overwhelmingly clear that BG3 was going to be VERY different than 1 & 2. Likewise it should stand to reason that if you did not like DoS2 you will probably not enjoy this game either, you should have considered that BEFORE spending your money.

I get that there are plenty of people out there that are fans of D&D (old editions and new) that want a true rules as written game, but to expect that from this again is pretty stupid. To reiterate see point 1 above- WotC chose Larian.

of course it 'feels like' Divinity Original Sin 2-- to think that it wasn't going to is asinine.

All of you are forgetting SIMPLE FACTS;
1) Wizards of the Coast chose Larian because they loved DoS2 and WANTED their IP to be handled by the same company.
2) Larian Studios made DoS2 and are making BG3 using assets (engine, code, art, etc) from DoS2
3) BG1 and BG2 were made on OLD technology, were based on a different ruleset, made by a different development team, and most importantly WERENT EVEN TURN BASED (real time with pause is not a substitute for turn based).

these facts should have made it overwhelmingly clear that BG3 was going to be VERY different than 1 & 2. Likewise it should stand to reason that if you did not like DoS2 you will probably not enjoy this game either, you should have considered that BEFORE spending your money.

I get that there are plenty of people out there that are fans of D&D (old editions and new) that want a true rules as written game, but to expect that from this again is pretty stupid. To reiterate see point 1 above- WotC chose Larian.

I will ignore several general responses you provided:
- Responses that questioned why something was a complaint, because none of them are complaints.
- Responses that some things should have been compressed because I'm trying to strike a balance of including both General and Specific factors, with specific factors being broken out when there appears to be sufficient focus on it in this forum and Discord.

Lastly, my responses are not in numerical order but rather in the order you provided.

#29. This is categorically false, least of which because the Beast Master Ranger *in the EA* already runs into this problem by not being able to have their Find Familiar and Animal Companion at the same time. Never mind when spells like Conjure Animals, Find Steed, etc. comes into play. This restriction to 1 summon is a feature of DoS and does not exist in BG, where you were only limited by the capabilities of the engine at the time. Do note, that the DoS engine is perfectly capable of having more than 1 companion (Glut's army), so the restriction is clearly intentional by Larian.

#35. Already breaking my rule above, but the complete overabundance of British accents is also something I meant to include, but decided to make it specifically regarding Malady. You will notice I did not write the factor that they reused Amelia Tyler. It's that they had her do the *exact* Malady voice. Having the exact same voice from DoS in your ear, without any changes at all, is objectively a factor that makes you feel like the game is more DoS and BG. Amelia is an incredibly talented voice actress who is more than capable of varying her voice to be a different character. The choice to have her repeat the sounds of Malady was a conscious decision and consequently is a factor on the list.

#46. First, that is incorrect. D&D is not balanced around a 4 person party. Specifically, it if balanced for between 3-5 (based on the DMG), and WotC published adventures assume 4-5 players. Moreover, the BG series is well known for being 6 characters, while DoS is known for being 4 characters. Neither game has those as exclusive factors, but both those statements are true. So on the list it goes. Ironically, making it be 5 characters would make the game more 'unique', though 6 would make it more BG.

#48. This factor was tweaked slightly to better emphasize the specific factor. See the previous posts in this thread.

#58. You are correct regarding the capability to do the math....except no. Because the math requires you to know both your to-hit chance and the enemy's AC values, neither of which are immediately apparent. Again, not complaints, just factors. You do bring up a good point though that I will add to the factors, which is that you have full access to the stats of the enemy just by Examining the target (with the caveat that DoS did require you to level up a particular skill to get more information, while BG did not allow that at all).

#61. Incorrect, which leads me to believe you don't really know the rules of 5e. Which is fine because that's not what this discussion is about. Companions block movement in DoS, they don't in BG.

#66. That is both wrong (you can see creatures well before you party can) and not what Fog of War references.

#70. Admittedly I knew 'aimbotting' is not an accurate term, taking suggestions on something that better conveys the factor. Enemy AI perfect knowledge? This remains a factor, more so because DoS literally patched this exactly factor because every enemy had essentially Max stats for knowing the characters statistics. But it still famously happens in DoS and does not happen in BG, so it's a factor.

#17. Normal enemies refers to enemies that do nothing more than attack with their weapon, without any special moves, abilities, consumables, or throwables. BG had plenty of enemies like this, DoS practically had none. So its a factor.

#10. Not really sure how to respond to this besides agreeing with your statement of facts but disagreeing with the conclusions you draw? I listed roughly 10 elements to this factor (start as prisoner, on a vessel, mentally based enemies, etc.). BG 3 shares all 10 elements with DoS. BG 1 shares zero of those elements. BG 2 shares two as best I can count (prisoner, freed by outside attack). So across 20 possible times to have those elements occur in the introductory areas of BG 1 and BG 2, it occurred 2 times. In DoS it correct 10 out of 10, in BG 3, also 10 out of 10. That's why it's a factor, and that's why the most commonly typed response in chat when Swen did the first gameplay reveal was BEACH BEACH BEACH.

#53. Did you actually play BG 1 and BG 2? You could literally make a party of entirely custom characters.

#56. Again, this is just wrong. Here is a link to the books provided in the BG series. Please just do a spot sampling. History/lore Books in DoS, and BG 3, are a few sentences at most and usually contain text in < > brackets to indicate a summary. Compare that to your spot sampling, where there are several paragraphs of lore for each book in BG. Ironically, this can easily flip from a DoS factor to a BG factor if Larian just copy + pastes the lore text and then updates them based on 'current events' at this point in the Faerun timeline.

Hopefully I didn't miss any!

Simple fact is also that we are the clients-we can ask for the game we wan't to play. Like what's wrong with a desire to play genuine BG3 game instead of a DOS reskin in Forgotten Realms ?

Simple fact is also that we are the clients-we can ask for the game we wan't to play. Like what's wrong with a desire to play genuine BG3 game instead of a DOS reskin in Forgotten Realms ?