|
|
|
stranger
|
stranger
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Well, it looks like they may just fiddle with their dice. I personally hope they are going to make it optional. Because the audience is so much bigger and they're coming from such different games, their expectations for how narrative is handled is very different. So for a D&D player who is completely cool with getting three ones on the D20 in a row, they go like "yeah, this happened yesterday to me, this is completely normal." And then there are people who are coming from titles like XCOM or something more strategic where they would expect some dampers or stabilization on RNG so that you never see a really bad streak or something like that. So we're now discussing how we're going to tackle that. From our own experience at the tabletop, we know that even though dice are supposed to be pure randomness and very honest, the DM has has the screen for a reason where they're rolling their dice in secret. That is already in D&D this built-in mechanism for stabilizing randomness and an understanding that creating a compelling narrative takes a bit more than just completely [rolling] in a random motion.[
It has to be handled very carefully, because players are very good at spotting the game putting its thumb on the scale and the cheating the randomness. So right now we're discussing where exactly we're gonna start stabilizing RNG, most likely in combat scenarios. This is something that people have very specific set of expectations for. It's where they want a lot of control, have a lot of plans, and come up with very interesting tactics and strategies. If you have too much RNG it just messes it up. It devolves tactics to something less interesting. I knew it and frankly I can't blame them. Strick adhereance to dice rolls was never the purpose of their inclusion. They were designed to inject "dramatic" randomness into the game, not to become a noose around the players necks. Dice rolls can and *should* be fudged when doing so results in a better experence for the players. Pure randomness doens't care about player experience. DM's (and game designers) do. This game has to appeal to more than just the hardcore tabletop crowd. Their biggest mistake however is *admitting* they're doing it at all. That's going to cost them. It immediately pisses off the purests, while making the regular players feel cheated when things come together for them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Jun 2020
|
This game has to appeal to more than just the hardcore tabletop crowd. Their biggest mistake however is *admitting* they're doing it at all. That's going to cost them.
It immediately pisses off the purests, while making the regular players feel cheated when things come together for them.
It does -- I've personally only got the 5e starter set (which I really haven't much played yet, and only have limited tabletop experience mostly from The Dark Eye and a selfmade system from the late 90s/early 2000s. :P Anyway, they've also said that they intend to offer "loaded dice" for conversation checks. Looks like collecting any data isn't "needed" anymore.
Last edited by Sven_; 27/10/20 11:14 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
apprentice
|
|
apprentice
Joined: Oct 2020
|
I would offer it as an optional. When starting a game (and during the game) the player could be able to choose, if they want chances to be forced or not. Then everyone can have what they prefer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
stranger
Joined: Jul 2014
|
I would offer it as an optional. When starting a game (and during the game) the player could be able to choose, if they want chances to be forced or not. Then everyone can have what they prefer. Isn't that like D:OS2's Story Mode? Seems fair for folks that would prefer to not have a challenge and/or to build conversational skills up and simply want the story.
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Jun 2020
|
I would offer it as an optional. When starting a game (and during the game) the player could be able to choose, if they want chances to be forced or not. Then everyone can have what they prefer. Isn't that like D:OS2's Story Mode? Seems fair for folks that would prefer to not have a challenge and/or to build conversational skills up and simply want the story. People expressing frustration towards this don't necessarily want an easier game. They just get frustrated by the bad streaks when rolling. That said I'm personally glad that there's still more niche games that don't need to care much about this, as they don't attempt to cater to everyone. Big budget RPGs often tend to be action games with pretty light RPG elements to appeal to people who wouldn't necessarily even play an RPG, so kudos for Larian to at least not go that direction. When Larian had voiced last year that "missing wasn't fun" in D&D, I first had speculated that they may exclude attack rolls in their combat for this game entirelly.
Last edited by Sven_; 29/10/20 11:11 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
stranger
Joined: Sep 2020
|
What pisses me off the most is that the cleric damage cantrip never does anything because the mobs ALWAYS save.
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Jun 2020
|
I'm still curious how Larian intend go about this. It is clear that they are aiming to, er, "stabilize" the dice some; the question is whether this will be optional or not.
I hope it's going to be optional, as winning just because the dice have been slightly nudged in your favor feels really cheap; much cheaper than missing a few in a row. With all the liberties they have taken as to the ruleset, even monster stats, I'm not so sure now though.
Larian have made RNG less of a factor in between DOS1 and DOS2 already, so there's history with that.
Last edited by Sven_; 02/11/20 10:10 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
|
For my next playthrough, I think I might keep track of every single attack roll. Then I can make a report.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Duchess of Gorgombert
|
|
Duchess of Gorgombert
Joined: May 2010
|
I'm still curious how Larian intend go about this. It is clear that they are aiming to, er, "stabilize" the dice some; the question is whether this will be optional or not.
I hope it's going to be optional, as winning just because the dice have been slightly nudged in your favor feels really cheap; much cheaper than missing a few in a row. With all the liberties they have taken as to the ruleset, even monster stats, I'm not so sure now though.
Larian have made RNG less of a factor in between DOS1 and DOS2 already, so there's history with that. It depends. I know dice-rolls are an integral part of D&D, but many non-D&D RPGers hate them and prefer character skills to take a much more significant role than chance. One way or another BG3 is going to have to appeal to both and it may not be easy to reconcile without having a player-selectable option to mitigate the influence of randomness.
J'aime le fromage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Jun 2020
|
Yeah, I hope they are going to make this optional. For my next playthrough, I think I might keep track of every single attack roll. Then I can make a report. Oh, please do.  In the meantime, we have collected thousand of throws in this thread already (everything appears pretty fine). I've personally stopped because it's apparent where this is going (everything is pretty fine) -- plus Larian's decision appears made already.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Duchess of Gorgombert
|
|
Duchess of Gorgombert
Joined: May 2010
|
As I pontificated earlier on, there's no guarantee everyone gets the same "dice". I'm not suggesting this is the case and there isn't even a hint it may be, it's simply what I would do. But y'know.
J'aime le fromage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
|
I've had some characters luckier than others. Had one that seemed to do nothing but miss.  one, my ranger, always rolls good in combat but fails dialog checks like no tomorrow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
apprentice
|
|
apprentice
Joined: Oct 2020
|
I think I also might start a new collection of rolls. Attack rolls seem to fine, as far as my data show. But attacks requiring saving throws - especially Sacred Flame - feel like they are being resisted way too often. But well... that's a feeling I have. I'll see what actually happens, once some data have been collected.
Last edited by TyPinOwly; 02/11/20 05:06 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
|
I think I also might start a new collection of rolls. Attack rolls seem to fine, as far as my data show. But attacks requiring saving throws - especially Sacred Flame - feel like they are being resisted way too often. But well... that's a feeling I have. I'll see what actually happens, once some data have been collected. Man for having such low armor classes most mobs have a heck of an easy time passing a dex save against Sacred Flame. I think I have hit with it 5 times in multiple playthroughs. I just give Shadowheart a bow and have her shoot things vs cast it. More reliable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Sep 2015
|
This one's funny. It should be a failure of course, even though I think most DMs wouldn't ask you to roll it.
Last edited by Nyanko; 02/11/20 10:58 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
apprentice
|
|
apprentice
Joined: Oct 2020
|
It shouldn't be a failure. General principle in D&D 5e is that you have to meet the DC. And ability checks don't have critical hits or misses, that's only for attack rolls.
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Sep 2015
|
It shouldn't be a failure. General principle in D&D 5e is that you have to meet the DC. And ability checks don't have critical hits or misses, that's only for attack rolls. Oh really? Didn't know. I used to play D&D when a 1 was always a failure, no matter the DC.
|
|
|
|
|
![[Linked Image]](https://i.imgur.com/kV49A9O.jpg)