I think my favorite thing I have seen so far in this thread is people who are criticizing BG 3 for "HP bloat" and then a few posts later, praising the combat system in PoE 2, a system with hp bloat like no other. I am starting to think the people with these criticisms are not even playing the game. Those "HP bloated" goblins which get complained about so often most of the time die in a single hit to spells like Shatter and pretty much all of the time die to single target hits, unless you roll a 1.
I agree with this. While it's undeniable that Larian has modified the HP of certain creatures in BG3, I think some very vocal people have really overstated the effects of this.
1) Larian is buffing the individual Goblins to reduce clutter and turn-time. Goblins are only CR 1/4 creatures. By the time your party is level 3, you'll need 6-7 of them for a medium encounter, 8-10 for hard*.
You'll have to further increase the numbers because BG3 characters are more powerful than table top (better loot, bonus action abilities)
2) There are plenty of other official CR 1/4 creatures that have similar stats to BG3 goblins. Kenkus have 13 hp, 13 AC, Grimlocks have 11 hp, 11 AC, standard Drow monsters are also CR 1/4 with 15 AC, 13 hp. Hell, even CR 1/8 guards have 16 AC, 11 HP.
People are acting like 12 AC, 12 HP goblins are some sort of crime against D&D.3) Realistically, based on the amount of Goblins we face in most of these fights at level 3/4 - they are acting more like CR 1/2 creatures. You know what else is a CR 1/2 creature?
32 hp Thugs with multi-attacks.A few Goblins with some extra HP doesn't spell the doom of spellcasting effectiveness. If my campaign's primary enemy are the aforementioned those 32 hp thugs (very possible in a city adventure), are all casters useless then?
*
Calculated with this tool a lot of Table Top groups useYou are, objectively, incorrect.
Average damage of a Longsword Attack = 1d8+3, so
7-8 damage.
Average damage of a Short Bow Attack = 1d6+3, so
6-7 damage.
Average damage of a Greatsword attack = 2d6+3, so
10 damage.
5e rules basic goblin is
7 hp.
BG rules basic goblin is
13 hp.
Under 5e rules, on average, a 1d8 weapon or greater will kill a Goblin in 1 hit. A 1d6 weapon will kill a goblin in 1 hit slightly less often than a majority of the time, just slightly.
Under BG 3 rules, no weapon wielded by a player character will kill a Goblin on average, not even close. Even the current non-resource class abilities to boost damage (Dueling FS, GWF, Sneak Attack) will not kill a Goblin in one hit, on average, with the sole exception of Sneak Attack at level 3 and beyond.
What you've said here has nothing to do with my arguments are. My points are:
1) Difficulty should be calculated at an encounter level (X vs X) as opposed to a 1-on-1 level. If you're buffing creatures, by reduce the encounter numbers, you can potentially gain the benefit of decluttering the fight, and vice versa.
2) Just because a Goblin has buffed HP does not make it an unsuitable encounter for its CR. This is more an answer to people saying enemies with 10+ hp at level 1 is absurd. I showed tons of other creatures from the MM with an equivalent CR (implying similar difficulty level)
I honestly have no idea what one-hit-kill on Goblins does to signify difficulty in the scope of an entire encounter (given point #1). Nevermind that is it is an incredibly arbitrary benchmark. Are dual-wielders godlike now because they can still one-hit KO goblins? If anything, this change encourages more team-play and strategic options. Instead of "attack" being the optimal choice, maybe this will encourage different tactics. Use 1 cast of magic missile to finish multiple weakened goblins off, etc.
Ironically, you provided a great (partial) solution to the problem created by Larians lack of faith in the 6+ years of 5e playtesting. Don't make characters more powerful than the tabletop rules intended. Give them loot progression as intended and make their abilities only those assigned in the 5e rules. Aka, de-power low level players, so you don't need to rebalance literally every low level encounter.
The #1 rule of D&D (and the #1 reason why it works) is because what the DM says, goes. They can alter the campaign any way they want to make it work. Matt Mercer - probably the most famous DM in currently in the game - doesn't use Monster Manual stats (he HP bloats) - does that make him a bad DM?
The RAW game is far from perfectly balanced and riddled with tons of crazy, unbalanced stuff. You say 6+ years of playtesting - I say 6+ years of people complaining about imbalance and broken things in the game. You got crazy stuff like the Hex evoker, Coffeelocks, Hexblade dips, etc, all making through play testing. Not to mention infinity simulacrums true-polymorphed meme squads. Even Wizards have to add adjustments to their own RAW in adventure leagues. There's a reason why every class continues to receive updates - like with the upcoming Tasha's.
Now lets tackle your claim that...what...Goblins are underpowered by the rules of 5e because other similar CR creatures have the same BG 3 stats? Good intentions for your argument, but bad execution. Yes, a basic Drow warrior has those stats. Know what else they have? Sunlight Sensitivity, a massive character weakness unless you're in an Underdark specific campaign. Goblins also have Nimble Escape, upping their mobility and making them more difficult to pin down in melee combat.
It's almost like the CR rating of a creature considers more factors than just AC and HP.........
While I agree with the general idea that CR considers more than just AC and HP, why did you choose to nitpick one potentially inconsequential, environmental base weakness (no DM needs to force Drows onto the surface) to try to invalidate my point?What about Kenkus? They don't have nimble escape, but have a far more devastating Ambusher ability - that has FAR more TPK potential.
Besides, the point was that there are people saying HP bloats in BG 3 are inappropriate for the level of play, and I'm showing other examples from the MM that has that higher level of HP.
I trust 6+ years of playtesting over Larian's attempt to fix a problem that doesn't exist.
By that logic, I also trust a game developer with 20+ years of experience to adapt a table-top game into a videogame format.
Novelists do not make good screenwriters. Amazing book-to-movies adaptation are always reworked. Same with games. You have to respect the medium.
