Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback Why the aggressive 5e Feedback?

I don't see any problems with getting the advantage by attacking from behind. It makes logical sense, but it should only be possible if there is an ally near the enemy.
Normally you are not able to defend yourself from two different directions at the same time.

That's something that totally make sense and that many would probably agree with.

It would also increase the value of melee characters if they also change the exploit jump/disengage... i.e, disengage should become an action instead of a bonus action IF you're engaged in melee.

That way you'll have to choose : staying engaged in melee and trying to kill your opponent - but with a risk of being backstabbed, accept an AOO to disengage OR use your action to disengage.

On the other hand, your melee characters would have a goal to rush into the melee and wouldn't have to run after every ennemies. That would increase tactical possibilites and synergies with your allies. That could also become usefull to block a door because it wouldn't be that easy to disengage.



Sorry that you don't understand what we're talking about

Currently they are catering more to D:OS fans and casuals than to D&D 5e fans and yes, I see that as a problem. Sure, I can use mods to bring it closer to D&D 5e and that's what I'm doing currently but I shouldn't have to since it is marketed as a D&D 5e game, not as D:OS 3. Sticking more closely to 5e rules won't kill the game, but it will fix a lot of issues.



No, they are due to "it's not fun to miss" complaints. They should be reverted at least for "classic" or "core rule" difficulty and only exist in lower difficulty settings once they are implemented, since 5e players know that missing quite often is part of low level gameplay and are mostly fine with it.



Because different people have different tastes.

From another point of view ...people appear to be distilling down the whole this is not 5e & is a false marketing ploy from a few rules - sneak/jump, some modified spelll damages etc..what about all the D&D stuff the game is doing very well. I’ve not played 5e I stopped playing years ago at 3rd edition - but I still know a D&D game when I play one & this one is shaping up very well.

And what would that be?

Ok, so because 25 fedora hat wearing geeks that are tabletop d&d fans are complaining - now developers suddenly needs to change their direction?

Guess what, divinity combat was more fun than Boring gate 1&2. Pillars of Eternity was more fun. None of them are d&d games.

Game mechanics are game mechanics, main thing is to be balanced, challenging and fun.

Also, tip of the hat to you:

I had multiple enemies in my PTs go out of their ways to interact with barrels to create surface/explosions, whatever it's by using special arrows/bombs to hit them or their weapons (and kill themselves in the process for the last one usually).

Throw has only been done by the large enemies and the barrels have to be in their path-range for them to pick them up. Put an oil barrel near the 3 Ogres in the Village and they will pick it up and throw it at you once you start combat.

IMHO if you see people mentioning "Divinity 3" a lot there might be a reason for it. So what you should actually do is look at what is causing this as it seems to be a problem for a lot of people instead of trying to hide the problem. This game does feel like a Divinity 3. DOS3 with a mangled poorly implemented 5e with a whole lot of creative freedom for *goofy fun* that completely breaks the game. That's what the game is at the moment. Calling it Baldur's Gate 3 is just false advertisement at this point.



Yes, they did. "We ported it as faithfully as we could." What? They had technical issues that didn't allow them to code Fire Bolt without leaving a surface? Was there some kind of technical limitation to the language they use to program the game that doesn't allow goblins to have higher AC and lower HP? Did the computer say NO to the poor developer when he wanted to separate disengage from jump? Those poor developers. They did try to make it as close AS THEY COULD but their hands were just tied...




No, it's actually quite accurate and useful feedback. Granted that people saying "Go play Solasta instead" isn't very productive in this forum but I do get where they're coming from.

Someone gave a very reasonable analogy here already using onions and tomatos. I for one loved Divinity OS 2. I would love for a Divinity OS 3 to come out some time in the future. But if I'm told that a Baldur's Gate 3 is coming, that it will be a faithful adaptation of the tabletop’s fifth edition rules ported as faithfully as possible... Well then Larian must also understand that my expectations are in that regard.
People here are saying to give it time and not give up on the game yet. I appreciate this mindset and hope but honestly it really feels like the game has been steered way too deep in the wrong direction at this point to be able to save.
To the others that keep saying "state your reasons and give accurate feedback for what's wrong etc." well, there are countless threads already full of feedback from the players in that regard. I have also given that feedback before in the right place, doesn't mean everyone is gonna keep copy pasting theirs every time they reply to a post.

I'll just leave it here

I think no one really argue about Larian's content. Their mechanics are great and I guess all those that bought BG3's EA were enthousiast.
The actual problem and why so many people complain is that because their mecanics aren't integrated in D&D but D&D is integrated in their mechanics...

Just to give 1 or 2 exemples :
They solve the "you miss a lot in the tabletop" decreasing the AC and increasing the ennemi's HP. On the paper, it work and it's still balanced. In game, it leads to many boring and even slower combats. "Powerfull low level" spells / skills can't OS a single goblin and many of them are become useless (sleep).
You're hit chance is better, but the combat's aren't faster , many D&D possibilites are now useless and the combats are less tactical than they should be.
The only positive thing about all this is that the player see 75% instead of 50%...

They also add verticality, which is awesome but the way they did it is bad because verticality is actually not really an option.
It's the same about backstab and jump/disengage. One of the consequence of their choices is that playing melee character actually really suck.

(Nearly) All their stuff are really really cool and should definitely be a part of BG3 but in the end, they actually don't give lots of systems to players, the entire game itself turn arround/is the systems....

Adjusting some spells isn't a big deal. Some spells have already been modified like a sleep.
Now it has consistently 33 hp(maybe), which is not far from the maximum possible throw. It can always be increased if necessary.

A lot of things need to be improved, but I have the impression that some people on this forum criticize every slightest deviation from the
rules without considering whether the game will actually be better without any changes.
I would prefer it not to be the only big dnd game in the next decade, so if they have to change something for the game to sell better, they better do it.

Its not suddenly changing its actually following what the marketing said before we purchased.. There was sudden changes away from D&D 5e rules imo.

I disagree if you change all the rules to something not D&D the customers will still review it as shit.. Sorry to say.

Well, here we go again. I’d like to add some math in the loop before diving deep into this discussion about “players don’t like to miss”

https://www.reddit.com/r/BaldursGat...p;utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf

Please check the link to know how the changes impacted the number of turns to kill something.

Now, getting back to the discussion:

HP bloat seems harmless at first sight, isn’t it? Seems that the game is focusing more in finishing a goblin in that two turns and that’s marvelous. Now let’s build a rational:

Bless spell DnD5e : +d4 attack rolls > MAJOR increase in the chances of hitting an high ac low hp goblin > increase the chance of killing it in the first round even further = bless spell value : gold.

Bless spell Larian: +d4 attack rolls > MINOR increase in the chances of hitting an low ac high hp goblin > still needs more than one round to finish the goblin = bless spel : why I didn’t attack from highground using my crossbow instead? Additionally surfaces breaking your conc with no save.

Bless is a concentration spell, which means that you’d always want to get the best output of your spell in the first rounds. Concentration being broken is inevitable

I’m using bless but all utilities spells have been nerfed with this BG3 rule atrocity.

What about blasting spells? The fireball that dex saves for half will have the same accuracy as there’s no nerf in attributes. Meaning that your dear spell slot worth less. But again, who cares as you still have Larian’s bedrolls.

The damage output of the basic weapons remains the same.
If Larian want to keep that line, they’ll have to revamp every damage output in the game.

Goodbye action economy

If the goal is that players miss less often, I guess it would have been easier to add a +4 bonus to every attack roll than adjusting everything because they changed HP... They could also have add +x to attack roll if you're higher instead of using so many advantage everywhere in the game.

As Khalid said, it's not only a spell or two... It's the entire experience that has been modified in many ways. Another issue is burning hand and all "contact" damage spells... I guess nearly no one use those spells because they are really weak... even cantrips are more powerfull.
This is not because of their systems but because of their choices to implement them.

I'm not a P&P player so I don't really care about the game being absolutely accurate... But "I know" (probably not everything) the rules and the more I think about it, the more I think the game would be far more fun (subjective), tactical, balanced in many ways and so on if they started to create a D&D game in which they implement their systems instead of thinking about how they could implement D&D in them.

If this would be so easy.
If they leave the AC reduced and restore the original HP, many of the fights in act 1 will become terribly easy and boring at the same time.
In RTwP, you can easily fix this by adding extra mobs that you can't do in a turn-based game.
Turn-based games are poorly suited to fighting a mass of weak enemies.

I simply don’t get your point Rhobar. Where’s the part where the game gets easy? You’re missing more. The length of a battle will remains nearly the same. The counter part of getting back to the raw rules is that your spell slot will become a valuable asset again. If it’s easy, add +1 goblin. You balance the battle CR by adding or removing pieces of the chessboard, not by changing them because you think that it’s more fun to see the hp values popping out for every single attack.

Guys, DnD is a class game. Every class must have balance. Right now they are balancing classes with damn cantrips. Oh, dear lord....

Do I really have to explain why adding extra opponents to game where you have to wait for your turn is a bad idea?
At this point, the worst (not difficult) encounters are the fights in which you fight a lot of enemies (like a goblin camp). Adding additional enemies will only make matters worse.
The last thing I wanna do is wait 10 minutes for my turn (intentional hyperbole).

First +1 goblin not +1 horde

Second: still waiting to see your analysis regarding nerfed spells

Third: still waiting to see the reasons why you think more hp less ac makes the game harder


See you soon

Much of the claims in this quote are adamantly false. The possibility for failure is what makes things interesting, not "shit." There is a way to fix this however, implement difficulties just like the original games did. THIS would be faithful to the game. Let people CHOOSE to play by the core rules or the more forgiving homebrew rules.

I never suggested that they leave the AC reduced and restore the original HP.

Did you read the link Khalid gave you ?
Do you know that Larian's changes about AC and HP has nearly NO consequences on the difficulty of combats and the number of turn to kill ennemies ?
It just increase your %hit and nothing more... In the end the combats are the same exept that many spells and skills become totally useless.

Do you really think changing every monsters abilities AND many spells / skills / classes / ... to give us the FEELING that we are more efficient in combat is a good way of doing things ?

And as Vaell said just above... I don't think why you're talking about adding creatures to encounters. There are way more things that can be done to increase/reduce the difficulty.

Actually the game is often inconsistent and too hard for a normal game mode. This is also partly because of Larian's homemade rules. Think about newcomers.