Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback Compilation of community feedback and suggestion - How to Improve combats in Baldur's Gate 3

Hi guys,

This is a part of my thoughts, but I write it after reading many players’ feedback.

Feel free to Download the PDF of the initial version (without update) here if you want a better layout and greater reading comfort : https://we.tl/t-lfSQ88wpj6

I actually read every title of the 160 last pages of the forum, tons of feedback and more than half the compendium to compile the most the usual suggestions and the most usual feedbacks about combats.
Of course, I also read the surveys and lots of polls/threads on reddit and so on…
This thread was build arround those feedbacks.

Whatever we like them or not, combats are an important part of the game and they deserve a great attention. This thread is an attempt of suggestion to improve combats in Baldur’s Gate 3.
I hope it could suit the most of us. It should be okay to everyone that accept what BG3 claim to be: a D&D experience in a Larian setting.

D&D combats are all about choices, consequences and resources management.
Larian’s custom rules meant to offer us more choices and should definitely be a part of the game.
But on the other hand, in the actual state of the game these additional or reworked mechanics determine what combats have to look like in Baldur’s Gate 3.

Keep in mind that this is a suggestion and not a definitive patchnote suggestion. The game is in EA and Larian probably has more surprise for us.
Anyway, I think all this could increase a lot the tactical value of the game and the possibilities a great strategy TB video game should offer to its players. Larian and Baldur's gate 3 deserves the best.

I just want to add that I’m here because this game is named Baldur’s Gate. I’m a player of BG but I’m also a player of DoS, of TW3, of Xcom, of Wasteland, of Civilization, of Total War, of Solasta, of …. I’m just a huge fan of video games who really care about BG3 and who really love RPG and many strategy TB games.
I never played any D&D TT game, but I find the rules awesome.

Feel free to help me improve this suggestion whatever you’re a D&D player, a video game player or another.
Whatever our opinions, problems or feedback, our common goal is to improve Baldur’s Gate 3.

Just read the underlined sentences if you don’t want the details.


CHAPTER 0: INTRODUCTION

0.1 Advantages/ Disadvantages
We already discused A LOT about advantages and disadvantages. There are great and very usefull.
Having custom rules to increase our % to hit is necessary, but advantages are powerfull and very easy to grab. The easiests way are going higher for ranged or (jumping to) backstab with your melee characters.

Open the spoiler to discover Isaac’s awesome message and to understand why the actual implementation of advantages / disadvantages is a real balance breaker in a D&D game.

At the moment, advantages are very powerful…
We have a god mode and I like being able to enter god mode… but when it’s special. At the moment, it’s totally common and without any consequences in Baldur’s Gate 3.

Increase the depths of combats and possibilities to play with the game is probably fine to everyone …
There’s a lot of place for interesting custom rules and bonuses if you don’t allow players to enter god mode at each turn and without any consequences.
Rework advantages and create real consequences/conditions/choices could lead to more tactical combats and options for the players.

0.2 The D20
The D20 is another thing we talked a lot on the forum.
Missing to much is not fun for many players.

There are lots of solution to increase our % to hit in D&D, but there’s also often a D20 that could be very unfair.
We have to find a good compromise between the balance of D&D and the D20… and what many don’t want to experience in a video game: missing very often.

Community suggestions :

- An option that could add a +”x” bonus to every D20, in every situation whatever the check could be something that keep D&D’s balance safe while at the same time would increase our % to hit.
This could be a good way to customize our experience. From a +0 for a more authentic D&D experience to a +5 to increase our overall % to hit by +25% in any situations if needed.
- An option to reduce the ennemy's AC. (EDIT 15/11/20)
- An "auto advantages" after 3 miss. (EDIT 15/11/20)
- Something like "+5% to hit" each time a character miss. (EDIT 15/11/20)

With this mechanics and what is suggested below, we could have many possibilities to increase our control on the game.
This should be totally optional and not a part of the “normal” game mode.


CHAPTER 1: USUAL ACTIONS IN COMBATS

This is a list of action and bonus action that everyone should be able to use at each turn.

1.1 () actions
- Dash*
- Hide*
- Disengage*
- Ready (let you act using your reaction before the start of your next turn to range or melee or cantrip attack when an enemy move within your range)
- Dodge (Until the start of your next turn, any attack roll made against you has disadvantage if you can see the attacker, and you make Dexterity saving throws with advantage. You lose this benefit if you are incapacitated or if your speed drops to 0)
- Administer a potion to someone else (replace the actual “help”)
- Knockout
- Throw

1.2 (Bonus) actions
- Drink a potion
- Shove (to push)
- Shove (to prone)
You make a strength (Athletics) or dexterity (Acrobatics) check contested by the target’s strength (Athletics) or dexterity (Acrobatics) check. If you succeed, the target is prone.
An attack roll against a prone creature give you an additional +3 bonus if the attacker is within 5 feet of the creature. Otherwise, you suffer a -2 malus to your attack roll. A prone target gets up its next turn with ½ less movement).
I’m not sure it’s relevant to grant an advantage to a bonus action.
- Help] (to move)
To aid a friendly creature in attacking a creature within “5” feet of you. You feint, distract the target, or in some other way team up to make your ally more effective.
If the ally you choose move within range of the ennemy’s weapons before your next turn, the enemy can’t use its reaction and can’t use its AOO.
- Help (to attack)
To aid a friendly creature in attacking a creature within “5” feet of you. You feint, distract the target, or in some other way team up to make your ally’s attack more effective.
If the ally you choose use a range attack or a cantrip before your next turn, the first attack roll has a bonus of +3 (+15% to hit).
This could greatly increase the synergy between companions
- Dipping (consume rare component and is only available for the next attack, see 4.3 Dipping).
- Change weapon (take your second weapon)

* Rogue Cunning: Dash, disengage and hide are bonus action instead of full action at lvl 2.
* Rogue Sneak Attack shouldn’t be a specific action and should apply to normal attacks, left hand attacks and AOO if the conditions are made.
* Rogue expertise is implemented. Maybe it (could) helps them to shove (to prone) or to dodge. I’m not sure how it works in D&D.

* I’m not sure about Help.
Maybe it could become a reaction as AOO… I mean why not?
When an ally attacks the creature you targeted with help, you use your reaction to distract the monster and give a +2 bonus to attack roll.
I think it’s important to avoid another “help” loop where everyone help everyone at each turn. If reactions are properly implemented, “Help” as a reaction could become a consistent choice.
If help has to stay a bonus action for a reason or another, it should then require a check and a bad consequence if you miss.

1.3 (Re)actions
Reactions should definitely work like in D&D and be considered like another type of (re)actions.
Reactions “when you choose to react” add awesome choices, depth and tactical value to combats. It’s another thing to manage, to think about and another “action” to do during our turns.

It would increase the intensity and the feeling of chaos in combats.
Reactions should be something you have to care and think about. You have a very limited number of possibilities in Baldur’s Gate 3. The trigger is automatic and you never choose what, and when.

At the moment you don’t really care about reactions because there is a huge lack of possibilities and because you have a very limited control on them.

I.E: Being able to use Feather Fall while a goblin just Shove (to push) a party member in a hole is absolutely awesome. Being able to use Shield to avoid the magic missile an enemy spellcaster just throw at you is also awesome, being able to “ambush” an enemy using the “ready” action… There are tons of reactions in D&D and that would definitely suit a video game. That’s how D&D create more chaotic and intense combats in their TB game.
Maybe it’s impossible to add every D&D reaction, I don’t really know but there’s a lot of potential there.

Reaction are a part of the “resource management”
Reaction cost a reaction, and you have only 1 reaction per turn. That mean you won’t be able to do another one until your next turn but it also often cost a spell slots… Spells slots and reactions should be something we have to manage and care about. I guess everyone would be pleased if we could choose what to do with these (re)actions in a larger panel of possibilities.

I.E using a reaction means you protect yourself with a shield to avoid damages, BUT you loose 1 spell slot and you won’t be able to use your attack of opportunity or your “ready” action to attack an enemy as soon as someone enter your line of sight.

Reactions are real strategic choices; these choices have real tactical consequences and combats feel more dynamic.

I know Larian is working on it, but they never really confirm that they’ll enable the “reaction when you choose to react”, which is really necessary. That’s a must have in such a game.

The question “how?” is open.


CHAPTER 2: USUAL ACTIONS TO MOVE

2.1 Movement
Ladder and climbing should probably cost movement.
About the “how”, I don’t have the good answer…
Maybe a “fixed” value whatever the size (let’s say 2m) could be okay… or an accurate reduction of your movement… I don’t know, but it should probably not be cost free.

2.2 Jump
Jump should only be a part of your movement.
It shouldn’t be nor an action, nor a bonus action.

If you jump 5m, you should just have 5m less to move during your turn.
I don’t really know how it work but jump looks a little bit buggy atm. I shouldn’t be able to go further if I just “normal” jump without spells or something.

Jump should absolutely not avoid AOO.
When an AOO trigger, an attack roll VS your AC is done.
It doesn’t require an acrobatic check or something else. That’s maybe what you’ll do in P&P but the result is the same… They don’t have to create another “special AOO in reactions to jump”.
And if you can jump further than you can move (because of a spell or something), you jump and your speed reach 0 after it’s jump.


CHAPTER 3: ADVANCED COMBAT MECHANICS

3.1 Backstab
Backstab is actually a very common and too easy mechanic at the moment.
We can backstab easily, without any limit and without any consequences.
On the other hand, the AI won’t be able to focus to create the good conditions to use backstab as much as we will.

Community suggestions :

- Backstab could be a more common bonus, something like a +2 bonus (+10% to hit)(EDIT 15/11/20)

- Maybe backstab could still be an advantage, but in that case it should be toned down a little bit… Why not something like that.
You move behind your enemy
The enemy use his AOO (if possible)
You attack with an advantage
Dexterity / Strength saving throw for the enemy against a specific DD (15 in normal game mode).
If he fails, you deal 100% damages (resistances could decrease the damages)
If he succeeds, you deal 50% damages (resistances could decrease the damages)

+40 % to hit if you play with the +3 bonus to each D20 roll (see 0.2), but maybe you’ll deal 50% damages and take AOO damages if no one “help” you (to move). A usual advantage with real consequences if you play without any bonus. I guess it’s everyone’s choices.

3.2 Verticality
Having a bonus when we’re higher to increase the % to hit of ranged characters is fine.

Having a malus when we’re down is too powerful.
This mean being higher significantly influence combats. You have an average of 75% to hit on the D20 while everyone that is lower than you have an average 25% to hit you. You’re god, again.

Advantage for the player is too powerful and again, the AI wouldn’t be able to efficiently play with it.
Your enemies won’t be able to create the conditions to break your platform, to shove (to push) you just to avoid the 75% / 25% to hit chance, to cast an efficient Blindness to delete your advantage and/ or to use dash a few turns to regroup and find better positions to continue the combat…

Tone down the bonus and use higher ground as a "normal" common strategy instead of an overpowered mechanic could probably balance the game a little bit more and reduce our possibility to significantly cheat the AI.

In exemple (and that’s just an exemple…)
We could have a +2 (+10% to hit) bonus to attack roll when we’re higher.
That’s really not so bad and if you combine this with other mechanics and use the synergy between your companions, your % to hit can be even higher.

If you combine this with “help (to attack), you have a bonus of +5 (+20% to hit), but it costs the bonus action of an ally nearby your target.
A total of +35% if you play with the” +3 bonus to every D20 roll” optional rule.
I think that’s fair enough. What do you think?

3.3 Light
I don’t really know how it work yet.
It’s great to be able to play with the light but it’s hard to understand without D/N cycle.
You never really know when you’re in shadows or in light.
Lights looks a little bit buggy. Advantage when you’re in the shadow of a tree or if you’re 10 feets away from a candle doesn’t seem consistent, but I have to test a little bit more.

Does anyone has feedback in mind about lights?

3.4 Increase your % to hit
This is a summary of actions that could lead to (new) bonuses / advantages.
- Help from a friend: bonus action = +10% to hit
- Attack a prone target: +15% to melee attack, -10% to range attack
- Backstab: attack with an advantage with a saving throw to avoid 50% of the damages
- High ground: +10% to hit
- Ambush: advantage (hide, invisibility, blinded enemy, …)
- Light : ?
- D&D spells, features, skills, … click the spoiler to read how you can have advantages or suffer disadvantages in D&D


With all this, it should be easier to limit AC reduction and HP bloat.
You have more options to increase your % to hit, you can combine them to be more efficient if that’s a part of your strategy and advantages are toned down.

This would lead to an easier D&D “balance” while custom rules would give us more possibilities to increase our %to hit without using something like a level 9 spells so easily.

As I said, keep in mind that this is a suggestion. I’m not a DM nor a TT player.
Bonuses and % I suggested are just an attempt to play with the rules. Better, easier or other ideas are welcome.


CHAPTER 4: SURFACES AND ADDITIONAL DAMAGES

Playing with surfaces is an awesome signature of Larian.
Nearly everyone agrees to say that surfaces definitely have a place in Baldur’s Gate 3.

Surfaces give us more things to do in combats and this is exactly what a D&D game should do.
But surfaces are, as backstab and higher ground advantages, on the way to fully determine what combats are going to be in Baldur’s Gate 3, especially when we’ll have powerful AoE spells like fireball or ice storm.

Exactly like backstab and higher ground advantages, they’re on the way to become so powerful than players won’t have any other efficient alternative… And that’s probably not what a great RPG, D&D and strategy turn base game should offer us.

Toned down and reworked surfaces effects could lead to more opportunities, but also to choices that are more tactical, to more “special” encounter and to an experience a little bit more authentic if you consider the original balance of D&D.

The most common and general suggestion to tone down surfaces seems to be something like this :
a saving throw or any other skill checks should always be done to avoid conditions and/or additional damages done by surfaces

At the moment, surfaces arrows, surfaces potions, surfaces cantrip and every elemental damage from dipping are the same. Baldur’s Gate 3 multiply the mechanics that all lead to the same results.
This could give a feeling of freedom, but it certainly limits our real possibilities and devalues our choices to take control of the game.

Choices are more difficult if you don’t have the same opportunity everywhere. We should have to choose wisely how and when to create surfaces.

Larian’s rules deserve to become a part of D&D’s rules… but they won't ever be a part of D&D if they alter the experience so much.
There are too much powerful items and mechanics to have the feeling you’re playing with D&D’s rules… Because D&D is all about choices, consequences and resources management while Baldur’s Gate 3 combats are “all about” backstab, high ground, surfaces or additional elemental damages.

4.1 Cantrips and Area Of effect.
Cantrips shouldn’t always create surfaces.
Many players suggested that cantrip could target a creature or the ground.

Players choices – 2 possibilities:
- You hit the ground with your cantrip so a surface is created and it’s proper conditions/damages/saving throws apply. I guess it’s fair to increase a little bit the range of the AoE in that case.
- You hit a target, and the cantrips effects/damages sticks to D&D’s rules.

About Area of Effect, we probably can't test enough at the moment but they will probably be another good reasons to tone down surfaces effects.(EDIT 15/11/20)

4.2 Surfaces potions and arrows.
Surfaces items are a good way to increase the difficulty of specific encounter and to give great reward to players. These items are powerful because it leads to many damages.
This is another way to easy tone down surfaces: Rarer surfaces items.

If several encounters (i.e boss fights) are harder because the enemies have a few surfaces arrows or potion…
These combats are more special and harder to deal with. On the other hand, it could be a less common boost for players. We’ll have to think more before using them.
Less surfaces items would lead to more important surfaces items.

4.3 Dipping
Dipping is also a very common, easy and powerful mechanic.
You don’t need it to beat the game, but it lead to extra damages nearly cost free… The AI won’t dip its weapons, so players have another huge bonus over the AI.

First of all, dipping should probably require surfaces to be enabled. A candle on the ground shouldn’t be able to ignite your sword.

Then I guess rework dipping so it requires “rare” component should balance this mechanic a little bit more according to D&D and become something a little bit more “special” instead of something very “usual”.

With less common and “inconsistent magical weapons”, the game could include many items players would fall in love with…
A real magical sword dealing +1D4 additional fire damages or a bow/quiver that always give +1D4 electricity arrows is something we all enjoy in a game.

Community suggestion :
- Remove dipping and why not, remove "surfaces potions". Create potions that allow us to coat our weapons.(EDIT 15/11/20)


CHAPTER 5: VISUAL IMPROVEMENT

5.1 Miss

A beautiful animation and/or the removal of the word “miss” on enemies (his place is on the combats log) could tone down the bad feeling player have while “missing”.
If you increase what player can choose to do during one turn - (bonus-) (re-) -actions, give them more opportunity to influence the % to hit and show us beautiful dodge or weapons that are repelled by armors and shields … Combats could become more fluent, players could easily find new ways to influence the dices and to masteries combats, missing would be less boring.

Community suggestion :

- More verbiage for missing would be good.
Wielding a melee weapon and being missed by a melee attack will occasionally replace the miss with a "parry". Wearing no armour, light armour or medium armour will pop an occasional "dodge". Wearing heaving armour or wielding a shield will sometimes pop a "block". More variety in miss animations would be nice (e.g raising your shield". This could work in combinations of specific animations.(EDIT 15/11/20)


5.2 Critical cutscene improvement
Critical cutscene are awesome, but the angle of the camera and the speed should be adjusted so we can enjoy them more.

5.3 More combats cutscene and/or animation.
I am not sure what could be considered realistic expectations on this point, but "better"/"more" combats animations could give a feeling of more dynamic, more “real”, less “static” combats.
[u]
Community feedback :
- More cutscene would probably slow down combats.(EDIT 15/11/20)


CHAPTER 6: OTHER COMBATS RELATED SUGGESTIONS

6.1 Must have
- Scrolls shouldn’t be usable by anyone (D&D rules)
- Tone Down Enemy 'Special' Attack (Stick more to D&D – Also related to HP bloat / AC reduction and the overall balance of the game)
- Game should let player to use versatile weapons 1H or 2H regardless whether their offhand is empty or not
- Longbows, shortbows, and crossbows all having the same range doesn't make sense. Longbows and crossbows should have a longer range than short bows.
Proper range attack for everything (spells included).
- We should be able to choose who our spells affect if D&D allow us to choose (i.e choose who are the targets of bless)
- In combat, don’t allow us to access to other’s companions inventory. EDIT 15/11/20 - Some players love shared inventory, some love personnal inventory, some suggest being able to pick in others inventorry at "short" (to determine) range.
- Food shouldn’t be an alternative to healing potions or spells. We certainly shouldn’t be able to eat food during combat and maybe we shouldn’t find so much food. HP management is too easy.
- Speed up combats. I guess these suggestions could improve the speed of combats. Less AC reduction / HP Bloat and creatures a little bit closer to the MM should also increase the speed of combats (Faster =/= Easier. There are many ways to increase the difficulty. I.E more damages for ennemies)
- We shouldn’t be able to stay out of combats after we hit an enemy. An enemy under attack should always move to find where the attack come from (to avoid or limit the shoot / hide / shoot / hide / … loop)

6.2 Why Not?
- Maybe % hit and/or information about creatures shouldn’t be visible at the first time we encounter them. Something like a growing bestiary could be cool
- The cover mechanic of D&D is great and could increase the tactical value of the game.


TO DO :

CHAPTER 7 : ITEMS
7.x Introduction and influence of items on combats
7.x Potions
7.x Barrels
7.x ...


Anyway all this could :
- Balance the game
- Lead to a more D&D general experience in a Larian setting
- Increase synergy between companions
- Increase the tactical value of the game, the possibilities and the freedom in the gameplay. increase our possibility to control the game.
- Cancel the "lack of actions at low level in D&D" (to quote someone)

This is more D&D, this is more Larian and this is more BG. What could be wrong ?

Thanks to the community because it's only because I read MANY feedbacks and suggestions that I'm able to create such a thread. According to me this is consistent and a very good compromise to what BG3 combats could looks like. Please help me to improve this.

Very well done compilation, Maximuuus. Just to support the part where you discuss the advantage system (which for me is the most cancerous rule of the game regarding balance) let me share my list of the special conditions that they’ve nerfed & spells that can cause that.


Attack rolls made by a blinded creature have disadvantage. (Deafness / Blind, blinding smite, color spray, contagion, divine word, holy aura/weapon, sunbeam, sunburst)
Attack rolls against a blinded target have advantage. (Deafness / Blind, blinding smite, color spray, contagion, divine word, holy aura/weapon, sunbeam, sunburst)
Attack rolls against an invisible target have disadvantage. (invisibility & greater invisibility)
Attack rolls made by an invisible creature have advantage. (invisibility & greater invisibility)
Attack rolls against a paralyzed target have advantage. (Hold Person)
Attack rolls against a petrified target have advantage. (Flesh to Stone)
Attack rolls and ability checks made by a poisoned creature have disadvantage. (ray of sickness)
Attack rolls against a prone target have advantage if the attacker is within 5 feet, or disadvantage otherwise. (Tashas hideous laughter, Destructive wave, earthquake, sleet storm, thunderous smite, Grease, etc)
Attack rolls made by a prone creature have disadvantage.(Destructive wave, earthquake, sleet storm, thunderous smite, Grease, etc)
Attack rolls against a restrained target have advantage.(Poor Grapple :()
Attack rolls and Dexterity saving throws made by a restrained creature have disadvantage.(Ensnaring Strike, Entangle, Mental Prison, Telekinesis, Web, Whirlwind, Transmute Rock, Snare, and many more)
Attack rolls against a stunned target have advantage. (Stunning strike – Monk, Contagion, Divine Word, Psychic Scream, Symbol)
Attack rolls against an unconscious target have advantage. (Catnap, Eyebite, Sleep, Symbol)
A frightened creature has disadvantage on ability checks and attack rolls while the source of its fear is within line of sight. (Fear, Eyebite, Hallow, Illusionary Dragon, Phantasmal Killer, Symbol, Wrathful smite)

Great suggestions. I agree with all.

1. What's wrong with accessing other companions' inventory? The only thing that changes is that you don't have to waste time dividing items between
characters and also to constantly transfer items from character to character because your main character no longer has a capacity.
This is a typical quality of life change that literally doesn't spoil the game.

2. Weapon range. Well, it's because of the limitations of the fight. But if you increase the range of longbows,
wouldn't that mean you should increase the range of the spells as well? Or maybe lower the range of shortbows?
There is not the slightest reason to range attacks even stronger.

3. How are the various miss animations going to make a difference? No matter how good the animations are, you end up missing 5 times in a row.
It's not that it's boring to miss,
but rather that when you repeatedly fail to hit an enemy or die worse for it, it becomes frustrating quickly.
In this case, AC reduction is 100% justified and the fact that some opponents have a little more HP does not have that much impact.
Besides, someone recently put in the calculations that increasing HP and lowering AC does not have a great impact on the speed of the fight
and the only thing that improves the player's better experience by allowing him to hit more often.

4. Adding more cutscenes to a fight is a very bad idea and all it does is extend the fights.
These things are fun for the first few hours, but then they quickly get bored and waste your time.

5. What's the point of hiding creature stats?
It's not like we come across the same creatures over and over again (except maybe goblins).
We will probably meet many creatures once or twice for the entire game.
Even enemies of the same type may have different resistances (such as minitaurs), wouldn't if you hide their resistances it wouldn't make all of them the same?
Let me not even mention hiding% because this idea is just too stupid.

6. If the dip becomes resource consuming you might as well remove it. What would be the point of introducing special resources for one action if the game had removed the required resources for everything else.
You don't have any spell components or even arrows in the game (that doesn't mean I'd like them to add them).

7. The changes in the help do not make much sense, it will be an action that will not make sense to use in combat. Not only are you wasting your action on something that doesn't deal damage / heals, but the bonuses it provides are very small. As a reaction, it also doesn't make much sense as it will hardly ever be used, the other available reactions are just better.

8. I am against any popups during a fight, especially if they stop the fight.
Popups (potentially multiple times per turn) are terribly annoying, even in a single player game like Solasta. This is much worse with a multiplayer game like BG3.

9. Ready with the current reaction system makes no sense.

I'll answer the rest later.

Also, if something is in the D&D rules, it doesn't mean it's a good idea to implement it in-game.

Thanks for putting this together. I agree with the problems identified, but not necessarily the solutions.

Note, the below might seem nitpicky, but that's because I'm pointing the things out that I'm disagreeing with, not all the great stuff that I do agree with.




I would suggest giving the option to lowering DC instead of you having a random +5 bonus, etc. Should provide the same results without breaking the logs/calculations.

It can be a separate difficulty slider (kind of Kingdom Management in Kingmaker - lower difficulty = lower DC). We can theoretically do that for AC too, but I would prefer having that baked into enemy difficulty.




I agree with the toning down, but I don't agree with the solution. Adding so many different components into this (saving throw, 50% damage), will still throw a lot of 5E's core balance out of wack and introduce more RNG. You're essentially trading hit RNG for damage RNG. There'll also be weird situations where you end up hoping an enemy backstabs you instead of attacking you from the front.

It'd be much easier to just give a +2 hit bonus for flanking and just call it a day.




The "Help from a Friend" Bonus Action is interesting, but I worry that is adding another stealth nerf to Bonus Action heavy classes - i.e. Rogue.



Prone gets Advantage from 5E RAW, and I'm not sure why we'd be removing/nerfing that.



Light shouldn't give advantage as a cantrip - it'll make spells like Faerie Fire obsolete. It should help remove the "obscured by shadows" disadvantage like dancing lights does in game right now (but I consider that a bug)




I think it's good that Larian is rebalancing monsters. I think the HP bloat is overstated, and extra abilities are needed to improve difficulty. We get more items in BG3 (a good thing IMO) that makes our characters stronger than their typical level. Also, a single person playing a PC game is on average FAR more tactical than a chaotic D&D table (just go watch a D&D game).

Strictly following MM will make things too easy IMO. Not to mention the MM isn't perfectly balanced within itself either (different monsters of the same CR have huge variance in actual difficulty)




Yes and No - it should depend on how the spell is written. Yes to Bless, but no to spells like Sleep*, where the lack of targeting is part of the spell design - i.e. you don't get to choose with Sleep in RAW (it goes from lowest to highest).

*Granted, Larian has already changed Sleep to make its targeting better but effects weaker to reduce RNG.

I'll add them in 3.3 as a quote if that's fine to you, so it's a part of "the list" that summrize how you can play with % to hit in the game.





Keep in mind that we're talking about combats.
If you don't have potions left in your inventory, that make sense not being able to pick in the pocket of someone that's not close to you.I mean, if we're talking about the reality of the Forgotten Realms.
That's not how things work in the FR. It could be okay to pick in other's inventory if you're close to them, but it's not how things works at the moment.
On the other hand many players don't like such inventory management.
This should probably be an easy things to toggle ON or OFF.



I'm not sure you have to increase any range.
You could just decrease some a few. The range of weapons type is something you can easily change.
The game doesn't have to use D&D's range as written. You can keep original balance using the same "proportions".



I think combats feel more dynamic in Solasta because there are more "cutscenes" but you're right... better animations or cutscene won't solve the source problem : missing too much.
Hopefully, there's a ton of tweaks in this thread to increase and control our % to hit.

AC reduction and HP bloat is another huge part of the D&D's balance issue.
I'll probably think about adding a "0.3 HP bloat / AC Reduction" because the question is really important.

This suggestion should allow Larian to balance creatures a little more towards D&D, without having to create tons of new "monster's superpower" to counter the god mod everyone can easily enable at the moment.
Many issues related to the original balance of D&D are major issues for level 5+ characters.

They're probably way too far from D&D at the moment to keep the whole balanced.



You're right.
This was a suggestion I read that I found interessting in a few games.

But it would definitely be useless (or a fun breaker) in the game.
I'll delete this one.

And you're right about what's in D&D is not always a good idea. If your comment is related to the cover mechanic, I agree with you.
It's fun in tactical game because it's another part of the tactic, but Baldur's Gate 3 is not a military game in which anyone would be able to flank ennemies with it's archers and spellcaster.
It would also need a lot of job to redesign the map and every encounter.
That's not necessary.

Some great suggestions, I agree with most of this. Also nice to see it all condensed in one place.

However, highlighting some exceptions and issues I personally have:

1.1 & 1.2 Acions and bonus actions:

I definitely don't like shove being a bonus action considering how powerful it is. I don't think changing the rules for attacking a prone creature is necessary, either. Edit: I'd also like to see players have an option to knock prone with shove, shove be reduced to 5 feet as per 5e rules and have it utilise a contested atheltics vs athletics/acrobatics ability check (currently I believe it's an attack roll but may be wrong on that).

I think Throw should remain an action, it's fairly powerful as is and was something people really complained about back in the initial showcase months ago which was actually changed before EA iirc.

Changing weapon shouldn't take a bonus action either and should remain a free action (between your ranged and melee option). I think they should let us have two weapon loadouts which we can switch between as a free action once on your turn using a toggle (see Solasta), much like the current one-handed vs two-handed attack option.

I'm actually a big fan of the current implementation of Help. The only problem I have with it is that it restores 1 hit point to a downed character instead of stabilising them, which creates these awkward and frankly ridiculous combat scenario where one character is trapped reviving another character in an endless cycle. Maybe they could add an option to use Help on an opponent within melee range to give advtange to the next attack roll or ability check an ally makes against the creature. Also maybe using Help on a stabilised character could cause a Medicine check that if successful grants an ally 1 hit point.

2.1 Movement
Ladders should essentially count a difficult terrain unless you have a climbing speed as per 5e rules. Probably not a major priority or issue, though.

2.2 Jump
I don't really mind Jump being a bonus action and thus being more powerful, although I can be swayed on this. I definitely don't like the fact it disengages, however.

3.1 Backstab
I think these backstab rules are convoluted, unbalanced and unnecessary. Just get rid of backstab altogether, it doesn't make sense without the full implementation of facing rules, which would just be a chore. At most a small benefit for flanking maybe?

3.3 Light
I think the rules for light are just currently bugged at the moment...

4 Surfaces and Additional Damage.
Surfaces need to be toned down; rarer, shorter and more balanced. Use spells like Spirit Guardian and Sleet Storm as examples: if you start your turn or move into the area for the first time each turn you take some damage with a relevant save to take only half damage.

4.1 Cantrips and Area of Effect
Hard disagree on all AoE spells wantonly creating surfaces. There already are spells that essentially create surfaces (see again: Spirit Guardian, Sleet Storm). I don't think they need to be arbitrarily slapped onto all AoE spells just because they are AoE spells. I don't mind relevant interactions creating surfaces, such as casting a fire spell on grease, but otherwise it's going too far.

5.1 Miss
Definitely don't want miss cutscenes slowing down combat and emphasising feelsbad moments.

5.3 Combat cutscenes
Again, in my opinion combat cutscenes are jarring, slow things down and dilute the momentousness of critical hits. Having them for crits is enough.

6.1 Must have
I actually think allowing all classes to use scrolls is a good move. It adds more things for everyone to do (which Larian has issues with) and it facilitates people who want to run party composition of their choice, rather than feeling compelled to bring spellcasters.

I don't see anything wrong with accessing companions inventory. It's really just QoL but maybe a range limit if there isn't one already (haven't tested).

I don't necessarily mind monsters having more special attacks. I haven't noticed it being particularly overdone so far, either.



I also wanted to highlight some excellent points you've made that I think deserve some extra emphasis.

a). Advantage is definitely too prevalent currently. An optional loaded dice mechanic could help alleviate issues many people have with missing. Not sure how I feel about lots of additional/different modifiers affecting hit like you've suggested (3.4). 5e was created to be very streamlined and a lot of these floating modifier were removed, but they are a lot easier to manage in a video game, so some might be beneficial.

b). Hide, Disengage, Dodge and Ready as actions, definitely. Ready and Dodge give options if you've nothing else to use your action on, and add some more tactical decision making (e.g focusing on defence, or setting up ambushes). No idea why they weren't implemented.

c). Reactions as they stand now are terrible. I would love pop-ups personally but understand why many people are against this. Not sure what the solution is but believe Larian should just trust 5e on this.

d). Again surfaces need to be rarer and toned down and more in-keeping with existing 5e rules.

e). More verbiage for missing would be good. Wielding a melee weapon and being missed by a melee attack will occasionally replace the miss with a "parry". Wearing no armour, light armour or medium armour will pop an occasional "dodge". Wearing heaving armour or wielding a shield will sometimes pop a "block". More variety in miss animations would be nice (e.g raising your shield).

f). Eating during combat is ridiculous, definitely needs changing.

g). Love the idea of a growing bestiary but I understand it being a low priority. Personally, I think Examine could be an interesting bonus action that makes a relevant Intelligence check to uncover extra information, but reckon a lot of player would find it boring.

h). I cannot fathom why Bless doesn't let you choose your targets; the technology exists with Magic Missiles. Why did the decide to make it so cumbersome to use?


Finally, while it may not directly relate to combat, I don't think you can discuss D&D 5e combat ideas and balance without talking about rests. Currently long and short rests in BG3 are terribly implemented. So much of the game, in and outside of combat, revolves around them. We need more limits for long rests and greater availability of short rests.

Again, just because I don’t think you understood completely that this game is not just about martial classes, but casters as well. The calculation of the ac was built over a martial class. Sharing fallacious information just to make your argument stronger is counter productive and dishonest. Actually Maximuuus saved a lot of effort by posting the list of the nerfed spells. I’d suggest to read it again. Google it > read them > understand them. Quite simple recipe.

Players don’t like to miss is also an argument that I can’t simply understand. Where have you found this academic paper that people don’t like to miss?
I do think that missing is charming and clever and I’m not brave enough to state in this very forum that “people like to miss”. The way WE feel about certain aspects of the game it’s very personal. I’d advise you to not speak for the others, unless you have statistical evidence.

Now, regarding your last phrase: yes you are right. Some features cannot be translated to a video game. Yet, judging by your counter arguments it’s clear that you are not very interested in understanding the mechanics that are being challenged by the community. I can only see someone trying not to hurt Larians feelings

You could stop being toxic to anyone who disagrees with you.
If the opinions of veterans like Josh Sawyer (if you don't trust Swen) are not enough for you (if you want, I'll look for it later), I don't know what you expect.
I can always reverse the argument and ask you how do you know players like to miss? However, this type of discussion does not make sense.
Due to the changes in the rest system, the casters are much stronger than normal even after the AC change, and this will get deeper with each level.
In a computer game, rest will never be as limited as in PnP, provided you don't give a hard limit, which no one will do.
Even in BG2, you could rest after almost every fight (which D&D game had a limited rest?).

Outside combat, sure.

But in combat the choice who carries certain items should matter. And we have throw you can use to transfer items during combat. It would even give Acrobatics or Sleight of Hand a use if you would need a check to catch items thrown to you.

What is the point of such restrictions? What does this add to the game apart from being another annoying and pointless mechanic?
Why force players to over-manage their inventory.
Already, you often have to transfer items from character to character because they are running out of load capacity.

This is a game, putting restrictions just because they are realistic without looking at how they negatively affect the game is silly.

Keep in mind that this wouldn't affect negatively the game for everyone.
It would be a good improvement for "some" players.

Of course own opinions is available for everyone.
It also looks like shared inventory is something lots of player like. That's how it works in Baldur's Gate 3 at the moment, exept that we have lines between "own inventories".

Not sure what to think about it.

Not being toxic. Being rational for once.

I’ve said that even though I like to miss I don’t speak for the others like you do. Instead of justifying why missing is bad with arguments you simply throw in the air that people don’t like to miss without a good argument. We all do know what are the side effects of the mechanics that Larian built to the game so you can hit more. Have you tried to understand the arguments of the ones who dislike it? I guess not. That’s what I call being toxic

Why you didn’t addressed my counter arguments? I guess you can’t

I referred to them

No you didn’t. First, Josh said that the FIRST levels of DnD are boring because of the d20. That’s what he said. He said that advantage is a good way to fix that? No. See how you shape your arguments to fit your point of view? See how I don’t? Second: he speaks for himself as everyone does. He don’t speak for the others. His opinion is not an argument. Can you see the difference between that words?
Third: Larian didn’t release whole the game, so you don’t have a clue on what’s going to happen with the resting system. Me neither. Nobody does. Swen maybe will know in some months. Do you have a crystal ball?

My whole point regarding you is that you carry a lot of affirmative arguments where you carry no clear evidence at all.

Putting aside the fact that you and I seem to be at odds in other threads, I LOVE that you have taken the time and effort to put this together. Right now I do not have time to compose a response worthy of the post, Bu I will later. in the meantime. Thank you!

Good post.

1.) I'll emphasize your point you made in Dipping that: enemies should have access to the same standard abilities as us (obviously not our class-/race-specific abilities). If we can dip, the AI should dip. If we can jump to disengage, the enemy should be able to.

2.) Your fix to backstabbing is too complex imo. At the very least, it shouldn't provoke AoO and allow a save by the enemy for half damage. That is too punishing for the player. I suggest either:
-flanking (require ally on other side of enemy for Advantage). This adds some level of tactics/cost while preserving the ability to get Advantage
-OR flat, smaller bonus (+2) to hit. This reduces the bonus you get for freely circling around. (This is what Topgoon suggested)
-OR provokes AoO to get behind an enemy. This increases the cost (get AoO's or use disengage jump) to get such a powerful Advantage

Your opinion that misses are fun is not worth more than mine. If you think I should provide evidence to prove my thesis, maybe you should do the same.
You say that players don't mind missing, but it doesn't agree with the opinions of people who design games professionally for years. At the same time, you have not written any argument as to why you disagree with it.
If the opinion of a longtime game designer is not important, why should anyone care about the opinion of a few people on forums?
After all, it's all just opinions.

As for Josh's opinion, I meant this:

Q: I'd wager that you're underestimating the fun of dodging and missing. It doesn't need to be as prominent as it was in Baldur's Gate-era missfests, but people like making characters that dodge all incoming damage. Also, the risk of doing no damage is fun.

I think you're overestimating the fun of dodging and missing. I don't think most players find it particularly enjoyable, and it's exacerbated/amplified in games like the new XCOM where players are constantly in stunned disbelief at the RNG.


If so then to Larian did not release whole the game, so you do not have a clue on what is going to happen with the combat. Do you see the absurdity of this argument?
What are we to relate to other than the current state of the game?
If none of the previous D&D games had a limited rest (in times when games were more niche) and even PoE2 gave up such mechanics, what is the chance that suddenly Larian decides to go against the tide and add something that will be unpopular among a large number of players.

Dear god. I guess I understand now why you can’t understand the arguments of the people who are against the advantage system. You suffer from a “lack of logical thinking problem”.

Let me explain what I’m talking:

I like to miss more / you like to miss less. That’s our opinion.

You say that people like to miss less. I say that you can’t speak for the others.

That’s where you logic problem fails. You are comparing your attitude to mine. I’m just saying that you can’t speak for the others.

No one is saying that your opinion don’t worth anything. On the contrary. I think it’s damn good to see disagreement in this world. This is the source of all critical thinking and there’s where new solutions flourishes.

Now, you are not speaking YOUR opinions. You claim that you understand what the majority thinks. I’m not arrogant to think I know what the majority thinks.

I hate advantage system. You might like it. We don’t know about the others. Deal with that for god sake.

Sludge Khalid: Cut out the snarkiness.