The original Baldur's Gate games gave you choices at every turn. Here is a list of things you can implement to satisfy pretty much everyone, while improving the options of the original games.
Difficulty Settings
The original game let us choose between the core rules or more forgiving homebrew options. The same should be expected in this installment of the game as well. Where is it? You can even improve upon this by adding options like iron man mode for every difficulty so choices are always permanent.
![[Linked Image]](https://i.imgur.com/cYPcuxV.png)
I agree with this. Difficulty obviously isn't implemented in the game yet, but I'd rather ask for this now instead of seeing a difficulty settings similar to DOS and be disappointed. I'd love to see a Kingmaker-esque Difficulty system where you can determine a whole bunch of things (aside from just encounter toughness) - Resting limitations/options, Death Options, etc.
NPC Interaction
In the original games you always knew when you were about to enter a conversation because the character would get a highlight, call out to you and actively move towards you before the direct interaction began. This is missing in its entirety and is the direct cause of much of the "skill check" complaints you see on these forums. You could interrupt this interaction by either running away from said npc before they got too close, successfully stealthing via a check or invisibility, or interrupt it by attacking the character. This kind of interaction is important and is entirely missing!
It was kind of the same in BG2 (my memories of BG1 is more hazzy) in terms of "soft railroads" to kick off quests. You couldn't sneak past the Genie in Aerie's Circus Tent (you have to do the Riddle) - and you also can't sneak past Aerie (convo auto-start on area entry). The Paladins at Windspear Hills are also unavoidable. Etc, etc.
In fact, BG3 is sort of better than BG2 in this regard because you can attack anyone mid-conversation (with the built-in attack button).
World Interaction
In the original games, you could run off and explore 95% of the entire game world after the initial intro. In this game large chunks of the world are locked behind forced conversations or world events unless you know they are going to happen and actively work around them. This game feels like you are forcing plot down our throats at every turn, leading to much of the resistance you are now getting from your player base. If we want to explore the whole world before engaging in plot, or wander into a cave full of CR8 mobs at level 2 that should be allowed without having to know about a forced conversation or cut scene and metagaming our way around it. Plot should not be gating most of the world from us. I don't want to see the "chapters" of the world we can no longer go back to like in divinity either. Let us explore the whole world from the start instead of locking out large chunks of it as we progress. If people want to rush through plot that is fine, but it shouldn't be placed in such a way that plot is necessary to explore the world.
Didn't the speedrunners already proved that you can do this in BG3 by completing the EA in 7 minutes? While there are certain set-pieces that will drag you into dialogue if you approach from the front, there are plenty of side paths that, with a little bit of stealth, will let you progress to the next area.
In terms of returning to areas, I too hope they will leave previous areas opened. The assumption that previous areas will become close stems from DOS, which isn't an unfair assumption until they've said otherwise.
Combat and Balance
As of right now, consumable item spam and ranged combat is dramatically superior to melee alternatives. If you are melee you are often relegated to just throwing the quite plentiful offensive conusumables. This isn't good design, it is a bandaid on a bad system. This makes item spam and ranged combat feel like a requirement. We feel punished for choosing melee. The number of consumables are far too plentiful and need to be reduced dramatically, and i mean by like 80% or more. There are too many ranged enemies as well, often making melee feel worthless. So much for class choice meaning anything. The number of ranged enemies needs to at least be cut in half and replaced by melee. A good DM designs encounters based on a party composition. As this is a videogame, that isn't possible. So a good balance down the middle is absolutely essential for making our choices feel meaningful. You are currently failing at this hard and need to take a hard look at a lot of combat encounters. The extreme amount of verticality and advantage gained by high ground makes ranged combat way too powerful too.
I feel like melee is just as strong, if not stronger. IMO, backstab advantage is easier to obtain than high-ground advantage because you're not terrain dependent, and 99% of the time, it doesn't matter what the enemy does, you can always reposition to flank them. Whereas highground is easily lost the moment someone jumps up there with you. You also risk a shove of death when standing on highgrounds (unless you're constantly burning Feather Fall). Because of the threaten mechanic, every time a melee character is in range of a ranged character, you're by default favored in that battle.
Closing in on enemies is made much easier with Jump being so good (most of the time you don't even have to burn a dash action). Ladders currently cost 0 movement to go up. You can even throw/shove your own teammates to give them more movement if desperate. Plus, you get an absurd amount of items that improve your mobility in BG3 (Misty Step amulet, Boots of Speed, Usable Misty Step Scrolls). My level 4 BG3 fighter moves better than most high-level PnP martial characters.
There are obviously situations where ranged is favored, but part of the challenge and tactical fun is overcoming that situation. I worry that some players may have their view of combat skewed because they got smoked at the entrance to the Blighted Village (probably the one of the worst range vs. melee situation, due to terrain and you having limited equipment/options).
Plus, I'd argue that having strictly "melee/ranged-only" characters is a false paradigm. Characters should be rewarded for being capable of being versatile. Similarly, characters that can cover-up the weaknesses of their favored style (i.e. melees that can gap-close effectively), should also be rewarded.
