Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Mega-threads and Guides Differences and Similarities between BG3 and D&D5e core ruleset.

As someone who is not a DnD veteran, main issue I have with BG3 and DnD games in general ( only played Pillars of Eternity Dreadfire as other DnD game ) is that combat is much less interesting than in good non-DnD games like DoS ( or even Wasteland ). There is less opportunity for meaningful choices, tactical decisions, synergies between your own actions across turns or between actions of different characters ... in general, DnD combat turn is "one swing, and sometimes maybe one bonus something".

Therefore, looking at this list I unfortunately see some "true" DnD features that could potentially make combat even worse. Granted, I may have maybe to play with those to understand their full impact, but there are features from this list that look to me as bad for "increase combat options".



These are features from that list that looks to me as they would make combat *WORSE*:

- In D&D you just have an action, bonus actions are bvery specific features you have to use wisely. In other words in D&D bonus actions are bonus actions, not a second action.
*** in other words, even less choices per turn if even bonus actions need to be rarely used ?

- Jump and disengage have nothing to do in D&D. One is for jump, the other is to disengage. None of them are bonus actions.
*** in other words, even less actions per turn if even jump would prevent me from doing some major action like damage?

- Dip doesn't exist. In the reality of the Forgotten Realms you can't dip your sword in the fire of a candle/torch/... To create a magical fire sword.
*** in other words, even less tactical choices if we can not dip ( now you need to decide between spending some time to go away to dip or setup initial attack close to dip )

- shove, hide and disengage are actions (with a few exceptions)
*** again, if they are actions it means using them removes use of another major action like damage, and reduces number of actions per turn

- you can't eat during combats in D&D
*** so one more thing you can not do during combat, therefore one less choice. Even if I never eat during BG3 combat, removing choices during combat is not good in my book.

- those that never use magic can't use magical Scrolls
*** so they would have even less choices during combat, and much less possibilities to synergize with others?

- an attack from highground doesn't give an advantage.
*** this would be HUGE negative if removed, as it is source of main tactical decisions, initial positioning and general flow of combat. Without it combat would be even more bland

- an attack on your opponent's back doesn't give an advantage if he know you're in its back
*** same as comment for highground - this is currently only interesting tactical per turn goal for melee fighters

- In D&D items aren't completely WTF (healing someone never coat poison on your target's weapons)
*** those WTF effects presumably increase options during combat, or potentials for tactical decisions or synergies.

- In D&D every single goblins or monster doesn't have magical stuff (arrows, potions,...)
*** again, magical stuff could only increase options during combat, and DnD is already too limited in what you can do per turn





Of course, some of those look like they would help make combat more interesting, add more options or tactical/turn decisions.
So I think these would make combat *BETTER*:

- you can choose when to use your reaction
*** one more thing to choose is one more "tactical decision" thing to make combat more interesting, so this is good

- D&D have a cover mechanic
*** another tactical decision option, so this is good in regard to making combat more interesting

- D&D have a better variety of actions : shove to prone, help to have advantage, dodge, ready, administrer a potion,...
*** any additional action option is good

- In D&D you can usually play from 4 to 6 characters (many campaign are designed arround 5 if I'm not wrong)
*** more party members is always good, increase chances for synergies and tactical combinations, make combat more interesting

- Time exist in D&D, such as night and meteo... not in BG3
*** if time of day influence combat, this would also be good, as another tactical consideration





These are just an opinions but they underline differences in DnD vs non-DnD gamers -there are obviously expectations for "true DnD 5e" from one side and expectations for "DoS3" from the other side ( ie for BG3 to be similar but better than DoS2). It seems like Larian is trying to make mix of "best features from both worlds", but obviously that would leave many people unsatisfied - not enough DnD for one side, not enough DoS for other. Another approach would be for Larian to make few BG3 'modes" , similar to how Pillars of Eternity made "realtime" mode and "tirn-based' mode - and difference in play and balancing in those are comparable to than differences in DnD vs normal game. For example:
- "true DnD" mode , with entire above list implemented as in base 5e
- "normal" mode with whatever mix Larian think is best (current situation)
- "low DnD" mode ( practically DoS3 mode).

But that would require adding all above features as OPTIONS that could be turned ON/OFF, and then bunching them in appropriate modes, while keeping game balanced regardless which mode is selected. I believe that "keeping game balanced" would be even harder in that case than actually adding those features as an options.