Originally Posted by mrfuji3
Originally Posted by Zenith
But it is heavily implied that Khaga is the de facto leader of the druids with an authority that cannot/will not be questioned by any of them, and any direct interference in the events would lead to combat with the druids. The end result of how I save the child might be different, but either way it forces me to have to kill the druids, or reload and convince Kagha otherwise. And killing the druids over a failed dice roll is simply not something I'm gonna put up with, because it's not the character I'm playing.

Either way it would be criticized. If we boiled down the dialogue to RP flavor but with the same outcomes, people would criticize the game in that your choices don't have consequence in outcome, but if we commit to having a succeeded dialogue branch have consequence, then failing the dice roll becomes the bitter point. There's also no fun alternative as a druid player with invested skills in history and religion to fail the fresco dice roll for Ketheric's defeat; it is highly impactful from the story perspective of a druid player to recognize the fresco of banishing Shar's Dark Justiciars and reciting it to Khaga to bring her up against Olodan, and failing to recognize the fresco's has that outcome, all because of some crappy dice roll if you don't save before reading each plate and reload if the dice roll does not go your way despite proficiency.

I just resent the amount of save scumming this game pushes on me even compared to DoS, where you might save scum after finding out what the possible outcomes are, but not many times because in order to get each outcome it's a matter of rolling the dice like in BG3. Too much feels outside the player's control.

I feel ya and agree that too much depends on the rng, and failing means you're locked out of content or that you have to do something in a suboptimal way. Failure should mean different results/methods, possibly often worse, but not necessarily.

See my previous example, which I thought of and typed in a few minutes (and thus Larian could easily do better).
-Succeed on persuasion: you get the child taken away from Kagha. Everything is great
-Fail on the persuasion: you're given 3 additional options
1.) Stand by and watch the child die. No need to explain consequences
2.) You put yourself in front of the snake, which bites you. Kagha (perhaps with another persuasion check?) is moved by your willingness to protect this child, perhaps realizing that you just saved her from the sin of killing a kid. Not only do you not have to kill the druids or reload, but this scenario makes Kagha more friendly to you than otherwise
2b.) You fail the additional persuasion check after stepping in front of the child. Kagha, unmoved by your sacrifice, calls you a fool and tells you to get out (but with the child). You're not allowed to visit Nettie (but you can find the back way and sneak in)
3.) You attack the snake, killing it. Kagha attacks you. But you save the child.

This way has different outcomes, somewhat determined by RNG, but also heavily determined by your choices. And the consequences of all of your options are mostly predictable; there's no surprising "Oh, you failed this a seemingly straightforward persuasion check? Welp, now this child is dead and it's all your fault."

Edit: Oh, and DragonSnooz, no worries. I appreciate the data you've given so far!

That would be more acceptable, and I hope they consider it, but it seems like creating extra work to mitigate the effect of RNG on dialogue outcomes. Either way, I'd be satisfied with your solution or the removal of RNG from dialogue/object checks, whichever comes first, though I'm biased in favor of removing RNG altogether.

---

On a completely unrelated note, it's kind of strange how utterly fixated people are on surface and surface interaction and barrels when not a single encounter hinges particularly on any of them. Surprise stealth atatcks grant a total of 8 free actions through the surprise system, yet somehow it's the completely redundant barrelmancy and surfaces nobody uses in EA that get brought up as this big balance offender.

You don't use surfaces in the Githyanki patrol fight when you can Thunderwave 2 of them off to their deaths if you position your wizard at the top of the barricade, and Bless and Mirror Images on 3 out of your 4 characters are more than sufficient to survive the initial barrage of attacks; then Lazael Frightening Strikes Baretha and CC's her to death with action surge, you kill off the raider with another Frightening Strike or an Inflict Wounds combo, and the "hardest" encounter in the EA is not so hard anymore.

Same with Bulette or Ethel, you surprise stealth attack them with a martial class backstab and proceed to grant your party 8 free turns of action to burst them down with, no surfaces used ever. When Lazael or any fighter can do 45+ damage in one action surge and frighten the character within the same turn, effectively half healthing the lv5 hardest bosses in EA with just one class, what's the need for barrels or surfaces? Won't even mention rogues.

When people keep yapping about surfaces I only have to assume they're playing really suboptimal party comps and spell loadouts for the use of barrels or surfaces to feel remotely necessary when martial classes are infinitely better than these gimmicks and far less convoluted than preparing barrels before combat.