You know. I was one of the people who was thinking that throwing barrels around and carrying them in your back pocket was stupid. I have to admit, though, the point about carrying around 10 axes, 8 suits of armor, 20 shortswords, etc. is a good one. You've changed my mind.
That said, it's less important what's realistic, but what's fun. And personally, I thought BG1&2 had a very good balance. Inventory and items to carry were limited, and there were containers to carry smaller things (like valuables to sell, potions or scrolls) and for storing useful items (like armors or weapons) you had bad of carrying. And while BG2 had a lot of items, it didn't have too many items. And there is such thing as too much (looking at you Pathfinder).
Still, modern design seems to be: the more the better, which just makes such limitations either/or annoying, immersion breaking or tedious to manage. Frankly, that's why I found PoE1&2 good - they just ditched inventory all together.
Still, I didn't find BG3 bad. It doesn't have crafting (there is no crafting in DnD 5, right?) so there is less annoying clutter then there was in D:OS2. Crafting in RPGs should die. It's never good.
Pretty good idea. I was already thinking you shouldn't be able to carry more than 1 barrel in your inventory, the current barrel weight is laughable (an empty barrel alone is super heavy and no human can carry a full barrel alone)
The suggestion I had in mind involves both making this particular area more "true"(tm) and "immersive"(tm) and simply making the game's ruleset closer to the PHb while still retaining the changes Larian wanted to introduce - it's the implementation of the Grapple mechanic and making it useable as a tool to carry around things that won't exactly fit in a character's inventory. It's already a missing combat option that adds to the tactical arsenal of martial classes who otherwise are really lacking in variety compared to spellcasters unless they are a subclass that comes with some interesting tricks and moves, and if it was used to carry around barrels and chests and such, it'd have an interesting "Larianese" twist on top of its usual function and introduce a decision into the much hated "barrelmancy" approach - sure, you can use barrels, but you'd have to carry them in your hands, limiting your mobility and stopping you from abusing them, thus making each barrel-heavy area more localized as a combat encounter instead of a trove of explosives to plunder and use in more difficult battles.
I think a lot of us would love to have a more realistic barrels option. I have been wanting something like this since I first heard of the barrel cheese.
Originally Posted by JoB
It's perfectly fine to carry ten short swords, five crossbows, six quarterstaffs, five sets of leather armor, a set a scale mail, two greatswords, and twelve goblin short bows, but picking up a barrel is a step too far?
On one hand, I get that some people think the barrels are "cheesy," but on the other hand I don't care.
Personally, I don't use the barrels. Not because I don't want to, but because I have this problem where I'm always trying to save them for the next big fight. So, I never get around to using them. Same with potions and scrolls and such. I'm trying to force myself to use this stuff more; otherwise, it all goes to waste.
Anyway. I find the barrels interesting, just like I find the terrain interesting. It makes the combat much more dynamic than the old: I run up and hit. I hit again. I hit again. Instead, the battlefield itself becomes much more important, much more alive.
I accept that some of you don't like the barrels. But trying to get them out of the game so I can't enjoy them is annoying.
I would like to see the AI use the barrels more efficiently. I once had an imp blow up a nautiloid tank to cause me damage. I thought that was great. I'd like to see more of that. Not necessarily in every battle location, but peppered throughout fights. Some of the enemies have to be smart enough to consider using these powerful explosives to their advantage.
I would like to have a more realistic carryweight and backpack storage option. The issues I have with barrels is that they should be carried only since they are so large, and npcs should comment on you moving their furniture around in front of them then attack if you don't stop. Not asking for your barrels to be removed from the game, just asking for a menu option so I can enjoy them as well, right now they are too stupid.
Originally Posted by Nameless´s Fan
Realism is SHIT most of times. Imagine your character crafting, building something, then he must stop for urinate or poo. Very, very funny (sarcasm). Or even better (worse), you must make a check or get depression, fail the check and you cannot do anything.
Realism is great a lot of times, is why there are so many survival modes for different games. Bodily functions are already in another game I play, SCUM. This is not a pain at all, you just have to remember to go like in rl before you do something important. Mental states may very well be added before release, there will soon be a better metabolism and injury system than the current one.
You know. I was one of the people who was thinking that throwing barrels around and carrying them in your back pocket was stupid. I have to admit, though, the point about carrying around 10 axes, 8 suits of armor, 20 shortswords, etc. is a good one. You've changed my mind.
That said, it's less important what's realistic, but what's fun. And personally, I thought BG1&2 had a very good balance. Inventory and items to carry were limited, and there were containers to carry smaller things (like valuables to sell, potions or scrolls) and for storing useful items (like armors or weapons) you had bad of carrying. And while BG2 had a lot of items, it didn't have too many items. And there is such thing as too much (looking at you Pathfinder).
Still, modern design seems to be: the more the better, which just makes such limitations either/or annoying, immersion breaking or tedious to manage. Frankly, that's why I found PoE1&2 good - they just ditched inventory all together.
Still, I didn't find BG3 bad. It doesn't have crafting (there is no crafting in DnD 5, right?) so there is less annoying clutter then there was in D:OS2. Crafting in RPGs should die. It's never good.
I agree, the system of the IE games was very good. (limited item slots, weight limit, special bags for some kind of items) PoE or Kingmaker are also nice. Basically in almost every big RPG the inventory system was better than BG3 (or DOS1+2)
One importent thing to note: In every other big RPG it is forbidden to change equipment during combat and you can only use a limited number of items in combat and you have to select them before combat. If there is a limit to the number of items you can carry or use, then I do not care about barrels.
Prof. Dr. Dr. Mad S. Tist
World leading expert of artificial stupidity. Because there are too many people who work on artificial intelligence already
Realism is SHIT most of times. Imagine your character crafting, building something, then he must stop for urinate or poo. Very, very funny (sarcasm). Or even better (worse), you must make a check or get depression, fail the check and you cannot do anything.
Realism is great a lot of times, is why there are so many survival modes for different games. Bodily functions are already in another game I play, SCUM. This is not a pain at all, you just have to remember to go like in rl before you do something important. Mental states may very well be added before release, there will soon be a better metabolism and injury system than the current one.
I can think of a far more popular game series featuring it called The Sims
I'm not so resolutely against barrels from a realism perspective. Most of the time I use them in preparation for a (tough) fight rather than during it, for which you have unlimited time, so you can conceptualise the "able to carry a few barrels" as a shortcut for "took whole party to camp and back a few times" - ie, just a time-saving device.
In real life, when I jump across a gap, my friends don't automatically jump over it after me, so that particular element of the game is unrealistic, but I'm sure glad Larian implemented it!
Realism is SHIT most of times. Imagine your character crafting, building something, then he must stop for urinate or poo. Very, very funny (sarcasm). Or even better (worse), you must make a check or get depression, fail the check and you cannot do anything.
Realism is great a lot of times, is why there are so many survival modes for different games. Bodily functions are already in another game I play, SCUM. This is not a pain at all, you just have to remember to go like in rl before you do something important. Mental states may very well be added before release, there will soon be a better metabolism and injury system than the current one.
I can think of a far more popular game series featuring it called The Sims
This can work on Sims, since the game's own premise requires it. If you are going to put realism in fantasy, forget about huge flying dragons, since flying animals bigger than a Pterodactyl go against the laws of biophysics. What I said can be considered moderate realism, in the extreme of realism you can't even have dragons.
But yes, if you want a good survival, then realism is desirable, but even in this case I cannot think of even one game that I can say it´s soo realist that I can learn real life saving skills from the game in all details. If there is one, then please tell us because I look for a long time.
IMO, the carry weight limits prevent too much random barrelmancy. You can't realistically carry around more than 3/4 barrels when exploring for the first time. Sure, you can load up on barrels for a particular fight if you've already fought and lost it, but ... well, if you want to play a game with all fun removed, that's your choice.
Although I kinda feel you shouldn't be able to have beyond some low multiple of the weight that encumbers a character in their inventory, either through pickup or transfer. I had fun making this, but it is a bit ridiculous.
Not soo cheese as Kensai/Mage of Baldur´s Gate II after learned Tensei´s Transformation spell.
Kensai/Mage with Tensei´s Transformation + Bhaal´s avatar = 7 vampires killed fighting ALONE, Irenicu´s sister as one of them.
The problem is that the very same people who actively look for bugs, grind numbers to explore rules complain when someone have an ideia clever than them.
"It´s not cheating/cheese if it´s me who is doing it" or "It is not cheating/cheese, it is a plausible way of interpreting the rules"
Cheating or not, I appreciate when I have many opitions to solve the same problem. Some people can even say that pacifism route is cheating since you win without fight.
Not soo cheese as Kensai/Mage of Baldur´s Gate II after learned Tensei´s Transformation spell.
Whataboutism has never helped in solving any specific problem.
Originally Posted by Nameless´s Fan
The problem is that the very same people who actively look for bugs, grind numbers to explore rules complain when someone have an ideia clever than them.
Baseless assumption and over-generalization.
Originally Posted by Nameless´s Fan
Cheating or not, I appreciate when I have many opitions to solve the same problem. Some people can even say that pacifism route is cheating since you win without fight.
The point of this and many other similar threads on this forum is not to argue against having many options. It is about balancing those options given to us, in order to make them equally viable. When there is no balance and one option is clearly more powerful, efficient and easier to pull off than any other option given, then all those other options are being devalued and the player is being punished by chosing those weaker options above the clearly more powerful one. To avoid being punished (by having to spend more time, more resources or increasing the risk of failure) the player feels forced to allways use the best option available which overshadows every other option available in any given situation. And because of that all the player has is the pretense of having options.
The problem is that the very same people who actively look for bugs, grind numbers to explore rules complain when someone have an ideia clever than them.
Baseless assumption and over-generalization.
Agree. I was thinking about a very, very specific group of acquaintances that I played with. My bad here.
Originally Posted by Nameless´s Fan
Not soo cheese as Kensai/Mage of Baldur´s Gate II after learned Tensei´s Transformation spell.
Originally Posted by marajango
Originally Posted by Nameless´s Fan
Cheating or not, I appreciate when I have many opitions to solve the same problem. Some people can even say that pacifism route is cheating since you win without fight.
The point of this and many other similar threads on this forum is not to argue against having many options. It is about balancing those options given to us, in order to make them equally viable. When there is no balance and one option is clearly more powerful, efficient and easier to pull off than any other option given, then all those other options are being devalued and the player is being punished by chosing those weaker options above the clearly more powerful one. To avoid being punished (by having to spend more time, more resources or increasing the risk of failure) the player feels forced to allways use the best option available which overshadows every other option available in any given situation. And because of that all the player has is the pretense of having options.
This is usually a problem when you have a lot of classes and races, so some end up getting much better than others.
Another problem quite different from the one I wrote occurs when the developer wants to reward one path more than the other. This is more of a bias. Like the bias toward Lawwful Good of Pathfinder Kingmaker.
Adding grapple mechanic would be fine, just like having dodge, ready, proper reactions and so on. I have never seen a RPG with grapple mechanic. Having to carry only one big item at a time and your hands are full then would be nice.
Temple of Elemental Evil had grapple, and I think the most (if not all?) of the 3.5's combat actions. It also cleverly used shared initiative for making clusters of enemies act simultaneously. I'd say that the way they implemented combat may have lacked in environmental interactions, but, as far as action selection went, it adopted all it could. It was very tedious (owing to the game being 90% combat) and awful to control, unfortunately. If someone's UIs truly were nightmarish, it was Troika's (R.I.P.).
Even with all of it's warts ToEE still has the best DnD-like combat of any attempted adaptation of a ruleset. Larian could have learned a lot by playing that game before they decided to try to merge 5th edition with DOS.
A fondness for power is implanted in most men, and it is natural to abuse it when acquired. -Alexander Hamilton
This is usually a problem when you have a lot of classes and races, so some end up getting much better than others.
This is usually a problem when a designer doesn't want or can't put in the work to round out these edges. I'm not saying that 100% balance between different classes or playstyles is possible, BUT you can put in the work and design them to be about the same level of viability without making one of the options the obvious clear winner.
Originally Posted by Nameless´s Fan
Another problem quite different from the one I wrote occurs when the developer wants to reward one path more than the other. This is more of a bias. Like the bias toward Lawwful Good of Pathfinder Kingmaker.
Yes, and pigeonholing your players into one specific playstyle isn't a good thing and should be avoided at all cost by providing viable alternative playstyles.
If the barrelmancy will remain as prominent as it currently is, the NPC's should become more aware of it.
You can stealth behind hostile enemies, plop down as many barrels as you like from your "magic pockets" right next to them without none of this breaking stealth.
It's all a bit too convenient and gamey for a serious RPG. I would like a more realistic take on the whole barrelmancy stuff, especially when they're so powerful and abundant. Would also like less barrels in illogical places and less explosive substances in general.
There is magic in this game therefore Magic bags of holding, and other magic carrying devices. That should be written in to help deal with the massive inventory.
That said, Carrying around barrels of oil is just stupid. The reason this game is so much better then Divinity is its not all cartoony and kid like, it tries to keep a base in a real universe, something that people can imagine and believe they are there.
Once you get into extreme cartoon land you lose that feeling. All the back and forth extreme examples tossed on one side or the other, aside, all the OP is saying is can we keep this game grounded and not "lose" it in extreme fantasy and bugs bunny cartoon stuff.
What if the weight limit was increased to the point where all but the strongest characters would have to be encumbered in order to pick up a single barrel? You could definitely use barrels, but you'd be slow as hell.
Barrelmancy requires so much planning and takes up such a big chunk of your carry weight, I don't think it's really that big of a deal. What is more concerning is you don't even need it. You can probably beat the whole EA game using nothing but bombs and special arrows without using any of your class features once. This is a bigger deal to me, along with the current advantage/jump for advantage is the biggest deal. Basically you can have a wizard who always has a higher hit percentage by getting to 18 strength and leaving intelligence at like 10 because he'll always be jumping to high ground and this is comparatively a way bigger boost to hit advantage than raising INT proficiency bonuses. We end up with these really bizarre incentives that literally make you not play the game as intended if you're min maxing. Now, by all means, allow min maxing, but can I be a wizard if I'm min maxing a wizard and not just deciding it makes more sense to be the Hulk?
What if the weight limit was increased to the point where all but the strongest characters would have to be encumbered in order to pick up a single barrel? You could definitely use barrels, but you'd be slow as hell.
See I see the logic in this. Honestly, I have never even considered toting around giant barrels. There should be a major weight issue in doing that. I mean the average weight of a quarter barrel of beer is around 87lbs, and that is not even as large as these barrels filled with oil or pitch or whatever it is.
Prof. Dr. Dr. Mad S. Tist 
