Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Is this really the consensus?

Can the argument, "but this is fun" please die in a fire somewhere and never come back. In case people are not aware, fun is entirely subjective. I hate MOBAs and FPS. Last I checked those are both very popular game genres. I would bet most of the people playing them, are having a lot of fun, despite my hatred of the genre. Some people enjoy stabbing themselves. I am sure that the majority of us do not. "Fun," is not an argument for anything, so please lets leave it out of the thread since its not something which is objectively measurable and nor does it move the discussion anywhere.
Its not nonsense though, because strictly speaking, no games "need" to use any specific ruleset at all. Using a ruleset is a choice and there are both pros and cons to making any choice.
That may be one reason, but there are also plenty of other reasons you could choose to change rules. Its actually fairly likely that if they made the game significantly shallower it would have a larger audience, just look at games like Skyrim for example. The trend from Daggerfell -> Morrowind -> Oblivion -> Skyrim was to dumb the series down and it seems like the public at large loves it. WoTC also agrees with this idea, since the whole purpose of 4 and 5e was to dumb down 3.5 and make it more accessible. Whenever 6e comes, you can almost certainly bet it will dumb itself down even further.
Die hard fans of the original games want 2e, not 5e. Hell will freeze over before WoTC allows a company to make a game using the 2e rules, but thats another story entirely.
If you poll people of any edition of D&D, the majority of players actually, by and large do not care at all about rules purity. Their main draw to the game is the social interactions with other people, which may explain Larian's heavy focus on multiplayer.
Actually, Solasta proves that you can make a financially successful game (although likely not sell 2m+ copies or at AAA graphic/audio quality), which appeals to the niche subset of players who do care about rules purity. Solasta is not a complex game. 5e is just dumbed down 3.5e and even then, none of these games (neither BG3 nor Solasta) are mechanically deep. These are not 4x games with high levels of strategy and long term planning. There may be more emphasis on what you do on the micro level, but the macro level is completely devoid. With that being said, I can enjoy both games (BG 3 and Solasta) for what they are trying to do, but I will never pretend that they are games which are trying to sell depth - they are not.
Whilst the general public may not care about specific details on a micro level (for example, whether you can dip weapons or not), there are certain themes and trends which can be observed in the general public and which its very clear Larian is aware of. For example, the hatred of (and inability to understand) RNG. 4x games manipulate RNG because of player cognitive biases against RNG. So do FPS, Squad based tactics games like XCom and even racing games. You can find quotes from developers of very successful games in pretty much every genre of gaming stating that players hate RNG, which is why its one of larian's primary focuses.

We also know that the majority of people who play RPGs do not finish them, which sadly, heavily promotes front loading the good experience. It doesn't matter if the last 70% of the game is bad because 90% of players will only play the first 30% and if that leaves them with a good impression, then the chances are they will buy the sequel.
Just because someone is listening to you, doesn't mean they will always agree with you.
Fortunately for you, they have already said mod compatibility will be something that has a high level of priority.

I am so happy to read that. Because, you know, it is Larian's argument. They said they do not follow d&d rules because it is more fun.
Funny, isn't it ?

I don't really care which side is using the argument (there are people on both side who say that something must stay a certain way because its more fun), I would just appreciate if it stopped happening. I imagine they probably did have reasons for making changes aside from just "well fun," (in fact, I could write my own argument for either side were I so inclined) but writing a full on technical analysis of why a change is made takes time away from someone whose time is likely better spent doing something else and so the "but its fun" got used as a cop out. Better that they had not said anything at all however, if they could not get the relevant person to write out their explanation for why.

I wanted to say the same thing 😁

Frankly, this is all that matters.

Ehh, I'm not sure framing this like it's a formal debate between us and Larian - where both sides are required to present sound arguments - is really the correct way to look at this.

100% agree that Larian's vision for BG3 is based on their subjective definition of "more fun"

The difference is, between us and Larian, only Larian is actually making the game. If both parties are just offering subjective opinions, why the heck would Larian follow our subjective opinion over their own? Especially when we do not represent the majority of consumers.

The majority won't care.

The argument presented is false. 'oh pure 5e is less fun'

They don't know that. They didn't implement it. It's as hollow a statement as the name drop Baldur's Gate.

It's corporate speak.

There are no objective arguments presented by either side here that can be deemed true or false. Both camps (5e RAW is more fun) and (Changing 5e RAW can be more fun) are subjective opinions.

The only objective truth here is that 5E Raw isn't perfect, and neither is Larian's adaptation. However, it is perfectly reasonable for Larian to choose to follow their own subjective opinion over others, or what they deem to be the majority's subjective opinion.



From a PCGamesn Interview, Swen said the following:


If we are to believe Larian, then they did start with RAW, but made adjustments prior to making it into EA.

You can choose to assume that they are lying in that interview. However, if that is your position, that one: they are lying, and two: they never had any desire to implement 5e RAW, then realistically, it might be best to disengage until you see an in-game update from them that proves this position wrong.

The "Pure 5E is the only way to save this game" posts in this thread approach self parody.
Want to educate your children and ensure your place in heaven? 5E
Want to lose weight and restore your hairline? 5E
5E must be implemented in all games for always ever even chess and Fortnite or the human race is doomed!

Seriously. 5E is not the only way D&D has ever been played and I guarantee you, sure as sunshine, there will eventually be a 6th edition and its rules will be, horror of horrors, Different!

On a related note, I do really love when people use "homebrew" as a pejorative. The entirety of roleplaying games descend from Dave Arneson's homebrew game Blackmoor and Gygax selling his homebrew version of Blackmoor as D&D. There may be DMs somewhere out there who only follow the rules of 5th Edition with zero deviations, but that's not the tradition. People have always adjusted the rules for their own games, whether they were PnP with three players or AAA games with 3 million. Larian's got every right to adjust the rules to suit their needs and some of us, as players, have every right to enjoy it. Whether or not other games have used different editions or implementations of the current edition doesn't deny them that right.

It's not that I believe they are lying, Sven's statement just rises more questions than it answers.
How did they see it worked or didn't work? Did they implement every rule and class in the game? If I want to see if something works or not, I have to test it thoroughly. Or did they just test it on paper and thought - "oh, ok, that is probably not working in a vido game"?
If they implemented and tested everything in the game, why is it not in EA? If they did not implement everything and tested it, on what basis did they come to the conclusion something doesn't work?

For me that statements just doesnt add up.




I think it was stated time and time again, that nobody who likes a more true 5e implementation is against homebrew stuff. It just needs to make sense.
If I imagine a situation like with some of the homebrew stuff Larian cooked up at a table, it would probably be rejected by most people (at least I play with). But thats what a Season 0 is for - to compromise on homebrew stuff. Right now we are in EA - kind of season 0 regarding the game, at least thats how I see it.

EDIT:
Session 0, not season 0

Also, Solasta is fun, so claiming pure 5e isn't fun is flatly false.

I love the dice rolls in BG3. But I'm in the minority there I think

Well spoken, friend.

Oh we certainly wouldn't want our arguments to turn into a parody....

As long as its all open to mods, I'm past caring.

Fix Movement Controls.
Make EVERYTHING open to Mods.

Races, Spells, Actions, Bonus Actions, items, Consumables, resting, all of it.

Then we can homebrew to our hearts content, while people play dress up, teleport to camp from inside a dungeon, and try and score with some NPCs.

Don't get me wrong Larian is making things pretty.

The gameplay isn't there though. The actual game, we play.

Good news for D&D5 (well it HAS to be good news) :
"Featuring Principal Rules Designer of Dungeons & Dragons Jeremy Crawford (D&D5 Respect Rules Man), Creative Director Swen Vincke ..."

+ 10,000

Right now I'm hoping that Solasta becomes such a success that its engine becomes the basis for new modules.

Is it open to Mods?

Probably will be. But "open to mods" doesn't really mean anything to me.

If you need to mod to get the experience you want something is wrong with the core game.

The fact it's based on the SRD is why I ask. The SRD is very shallow. Mods would allow one to make what they want, while bypassing licensing.

Good point. I'm sure it will be -- it's unity based and there are plenty of mods for unity games.

Yeah, the biggest thing missing from the SRD is 1) the Forgotten Realms lore and 2) the battlemaster

So I could see someone modding the battlemaster. Having said that and while I'll always prefer Faerun to other settings I think devs have done a nice job within the limits of SRD. Hopefully they will get a crack at full license someday.