My statement about popularity, wasn't that it should be implemented because its popular. I stated I'd like a D&D based game to actually be popular enough for it to get a successful franchise.
Again, it's irrelevant. You're not an authority on what's popular. And I really don't think you're going to change anyone else's mind on what
they enjoy by appealing to this.
I want D&D to be popular, but that's because I want other people to like the things I like. If it becomes
a thing I don't like, then if I care at all then I'll want them to hate it.
If you don't like skill slots/charges, or if your friends you want to share this game with don't like skill charges, then you can talk about that. That would be a solid argument and that's not an appeal to popularity. That's not quite what I'm hearing here.
Again, let Larian worry about what's popular. They can do their own market research and manage their own business. I will understand if they make a decision that I believe makes the game worse simply because they think it's more popular/safe (such as the DOS2-style "open" level design that stripped away the world map). But that doesn't mean I'll agree that it's better, and if they make too many sacrifices then they risk leaving me behind.
There's really no point being here to just advocate for what
other people you've never met might want. It just seems absurd.
And again, the part that really has me confused is that the fantasy RPG you seem to want -- DOS2 -- already exists. Why don't you just ask Larian to make DOS3 instead? It seems to be at least 90% what you want. What would you change about DOS2?
Thought it was pretty clear that I don't like the spellslot rest mechanic personally. I feel strongly enough thru conversations with other people I've played with that that is also a put-off for them, and the market research is already there imho. There is obviously something holding it back from being more popular.
I agree and WoW ruining the MMORPG industry for a long time, is the case of exactly that. I don't care how popular something I don't like is. I wouldn't want it to turn into something I don't like.
....and no that game does not exist. It's getting tiresome having to repeat this several times.
Just because I want the cooldown feature, that is in another game, doesn't mean I want that games sequel. The only thing Ive advocated for is changing to cooldowns for balancing skills/spells/abilities. That's it. DoS doesnt use 5E class system, feats skills, beastiary, races, lore, AC, stats, hit mechanics, etc.
What happens if we don't change them.
1. AA slog battles.
2. Not being able to really appreciate your character in battle, always having to force yourself to hold back, and never truly being able to just unload on an enemy.
3. Rest cycles are entirely unrealistic.
4. You cant fine tune balance, meaning once we get to level 20 in this game or future expansions, all combat will be a slog, and or completely irrelevant, and/or those levels will continue to be locked off, because gameplay at those levels is just bleh.
Ah, the real meat.
Anyway, I could address these points, but I think they already have been. D&D is fun. Given that the Baldur's Gate brand is tied to D&D (which is currently interpreted as 5E), the burden is on you to justify why deviations from the D&D 5E model would be for the best.
The core burden you have is explaining how the element you're criticising fails in the context of Baldur's Gate 3, and why the best solution is to nuke it by completely removing/replacing the element.
Actually they really haven't been addressed or at least not in a conductive manner.
I have made some points, and put together a pros and cons list. I cannot make you think like I do, if you cant discuss those points in good faith, to actually address those points so we can have a meaningful back and forth, I'm not going to continuie to defend my viewpoint to you, especially since you're just pulling out the "burden of proof is on you" card. All I've heard from your side from everyone is "thats not 5E rules" which is the same circular logic battle of "god says the bible is his word", how do you know god said that "cuz the bible says its gods word". The only other thing I've heard is, "a game can be made true to the 5e rules" yep, they have been, and yet other titles with inferior writing get better recognition, awards, acclaim, popularity, and are more enjoyable to play.
Also without bringing the popularity aspect into play, I will and have already been accused of my argument being "only subjective". Which is ironic when they then go on to make a subjective response.
....so if we could have a good faith discussion, without strawman arguments, and dismissing things on an arbitrary basis....that'd be great.
