That 100% unfair because most players don't care playing a 100% RAW game. There's something between RAW and the "cheap" combat system that is now in the game.
His scenario only give solution for those usually called the "D&D purist" and that's probably a very small part of players.
I'm 100% for a game that is closer to 5e for many reasons as I said in many threads but these difficuty level suggestions are only thinked to satisfy :
- a minority of players that say "the game is perfect"
- another minority saying "the game should be 100% RAW".
How is that "unfair"? Larian is creating a rule, that employs a 5E mechanic, Advantage, and applying it to ranged-combat from high ground. It's not about being "purist", as they are misapplying a 5e mechanic itself; it's unnecessary.
There is not some universal truth that having high ground, makes ranged combat more accurate, especially when firing into melee combat. Which I'd also point out, that Larian has yet to implement the +2 cover defense for targets engaged in melee, who are attacked from range.
If anything, Larian giving ranged combat from height 'Advantage', but not giving the +2 cover defense to the melee combatant is "unfair".
It is unfair because everyone doesn't want to play OR a story mode OR a RAW mode as you suggested in the previous message.
But anyway I won't argue more about this because it's not very constructive.
Suggested changes to Maxiumuuus's settings
Highground & Backstab No more Advantage
Options of 0/+1/+2/+3/+4/+5/Advantage. Why not still allow Advantage if we have fully customizable difficulty options?
Flanking
- If possible, add an "Advanced Flanking" option where creatures have to be on opposite sides to get the flanking bonus.
Furthermore, allow the same bonus options (+0/.../+5/Advantage) as Highground & Backstabbing
Shove Prone and Away
Shove Prone: %to hit depending your dexterity Both actions should be strength options. Dexterity doesn't need more skills attached to it, especially at the cost of one of strength's few uses. Alternatively, allow a toggle for which ability is used to shove prone: Strength/Dex/Whichever is better.
Jump is a part of your movement and only cost speed
- Distance depending your strength (if you can jump further than you can move, you're stuck after you jumped) You should not be able to jump further than your movement allows
- Jumping if you're engaged is not possible Jumping is allowed if engaged, but provokes AoOs. This allows more tactical decision making than simply disallowing jumping while engaged.
Surfaces arrows
- Better option : you can target a creature to deal elemental damages or target the ground to create a surface (the accuracy should be a thing, you should miss the ground you targeted) The accuracy to hit the ground shouldn't be lowered because we're already accounting for this effect by allowing a ST for surface effects. The accuracy should only be lowered if surfaces auto-deal damage.
About advantage / backstab and highground- According to me having a lot of possibilites to increase its %to hit is awesome in tactical TB games.
D&D is deep and has 2 layers to increase it : flat bonuses (very limited, mostly bless or equipment) and the advantage/disadvantage mechanics (many possibilities).
Increase the variety of the "flat bonus layer" would add more depth to the game and it would increase our possibilities/the meaningfullness of our decisions (not sure "meaningfullness" is a real EN word..)
Should I also try to have an advantage or not ? Is my %to hit good enough ? What would it cost to increase it even more ?
On lower difficulty level, the advantage layer would be the cherry on top of the cake.
In higher difficulty levels I think it could be VERY interresting because players would have to think about many things to have a satisfying %to hit against higher AC creatures.
This would require a good knowledge of BG3 and of D&D... and according to me that's what higher difficulty levels should rely on.
- From a game devs point of view, which I'm not at all so maybe I'm totally wrong... I guess if they implement a flat bonus, they can easily tweak it.
Advantage is another system and I'm not sure it's as easy to implement "another mechanic for the same things" as it is to change a single value.
I may be 100% wrong but this is something I also had in mind while I was writing the previous message.
About jumping I was thinking about the spell "jump".
- I'm not sure how it works in D&D and in BG3 but if I remember well with this spell you're allowed to jump further than you can move.
That's the only reasons why I wrote "if you can jump further than you can move". I may be wrong.
- Jumping while engaged... yes, I guess it would be the same as moving without jumping if it trigger an AOO.
But you're right, it could be interresting especially to get out of surfaces.
Another related question : Should we be limited to 1 jump / turn ? If it only cost movement, could I jump 3 * 3m if my speed is 9m ?
You're 100% right
about surfaces arrows. It doesn't make sense to be able to dodge the damages 2 times.
About shove your opinion is probably more accurate than mine because you know the rules better so... Why not
About flanking, why not for the "advanced flanking". Obviously it would be cool.
About the flat bonus, how would it work with backstab ? Will you have the +"x" for backstab AND the +"x" for flanking ?
