Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General New interview with Sven by Gamespot

Pretty much.

- High Ground/Low Ground should just be turned into a +2/-2 accuracy bonus/penalty thing. This opens up room for Sharpshooter feat to exist.
- I don't have much of a problem with field effects besides how damage from field effects forces a caster to roll for concentration. That should not be a thing.
- Backstab should be a rogue exclusive class feature, *assuming* shove and jump/disengage remain bonus actions. Now Rogues get some of their identity back.
- Implement the option to shove enemies prone to make up for the loss of backstabs on every other class. Now each party member doesn't need to use their bonus action jumping behind enemies for advantage, only one party member needs to use their bonus action to shove if they are successful in their attempt.

(On the note of Sharpshooter feat, it's pretty nuts how Great Weapon Master exists in BG3, but Sharpshooter doesn't. Considering the main downside of using GWM is canceled out by backstab advantage existing. Having one but not the other is eventually going to result in archer damage output for most classes really falling behind the melee and casters later in the game.)

Additional crap:

- When Paladins are implemented, give Paladins the ability to smite using ranged attacks. Archer paladins are typically not a thing in 5E, but it does in Pathfinder (and thus I assume 3E had it too). I have a theoretical archer Paladin/Bard multiclass idea waiting on the wings if this happens, taking advantage of the fact that Bards will get more spell slots to smite with, they don't have very many offensive spells compared to the other full casters to begin with, and that Valor Bards also get extra attack later on.

"since BG3 is not even going to reach levels where casting WISH would be a thing."

What?? Gosh, I sure do wish we could eventually get to those levels. Boy, if there is one thing I could wish for, it would be to try out those pinnacle 9th level spells. Maybe it is just wishful thinking on my part, but I think even a limited wish would be worth implementing, but only if Larian wishes to believe so.

The game was originally supposed to cap at level 10 and then at a later date they said it will go higher than that because they were preparing too much content to stop there.

Even in the most optimistic prediction I can't see it going beyond level 14. So no WISH.

There is a small chance it could go to 17. Tbh, I'd love for it to get 1-20 just so it can be a full experience and people can really sink their teeth into things like multiclassing. It'd be nice to hear some things on what level they plan for the game to end at now.

Edit: Since I didn't hear anything like that in the Interview.

This is a thread about the recent interview, so it is not about any specific subject, therefore don't try to shut down others for their discussion points. Just because you don't care, doesn't mean you get to dictate talking-points in priority over others.
Anything relevant to the interview goes, and if others are touching upon other details that doesn't interest you, ignore it.

Well, in that case you won't get WISH anyway because Swen Vincke doesn't like it.
Tough luck, sucker!

Uh, sure?

THIS ONE context about "Being faithful to D&D or not" where the posts were made is *unquestionably* a discussion about mechanics.
And no one said a word about the what can and cannot be posted in the thread, anyway. Nor I'd have the power to put any veto even if I wanted.

This, putting aside that frankly "I care for the story" is not a particularly relevant to the context of the interview in general.

It is a tangential thread by nature, so even suggesting that some specific law-of-the-land decree of what is ok or not to discuss is being rather disingenuous. And it's precisely the point I'm making, it's a broad reactionary thread to an interview as a whole, so there is no particular one topic of focus, however there likely will be a few dominant ones, such as discussions about mechanics. You do not get to say that other comments are irrelevant, or decide how much others care.

People can discuss things in more detail around those tangents, and/or make comments of their own, such as what they enjoy more (eg. story and characters) unrelated to which ever discussion is going on amongst others. Continue discussing your burning passions, but for everyone in general as a blanket observation to several posts, be kind to eachother and patient with different views.

Man. I'm so tired of the negativity out here. I find that the negativity makes me negative.

Let's just be glad Swen said something. At least the deafening silence was ended, even if only briefly. We know they're still working on it and they're at least acknowledging their considering our feedback...

...well, all your feedback anyway... Mine gets shot down every time. EVERY time.

Ah! There I go again, being negative. See? It's infectious.

And the result was a system which uses half the rules from 5e and half the rules from a homebrew, and those two rule sets don't work well together.

What does it matter that Larian tested and iterated the game long before it went to EA? It was not a perfect game then, and it's not one now. That's the reason Larian is doing EA. To get feedback from other people outside their own bubble.

Developers can think something is great which players end up hating (The D:OS 2 armor system). Developers can lose confidence that something is good as is and change things which didn't need changing (Adding a Source point cost to the Bless spell in D:OS 2).

I'm wondering what questions people would have liked to have had asked in the interview. Is it only about how close the game is to 5E RAW mechanics? Doesn't anyone else wish there had been questions about general game play?

Q: Any plans to adjust pathing to prefer non-injurious travel over climbing and throwing yourself off high places?

Q: Any plans to remove the "swarming" where party members buzz around the party leader like stoned idiots? (does this only happen when everyone is sneaking?)

Q: Any plans to separate the action of designating party leader from the action of selecting a party member? When I click on someone to check their quickbar or change their active weapon, etc, I don't want everyone to start swarming around them becuase there's a new leader; has a tendency to set off nearby traps, walk into the vision cone of enemies, etc.

Q; Any plans to add party banter text to that text box with the dice rolls? I'm tired of hearing the tail end of conversations as my companions catch up to me while traveling.

Q: Any plans to improve visibility of hidden objects/traps once you've passed the perception roll? Currently, if a companion makes the perception check it's often easy to miss what they detected because they're lagging behind or buzzing about aimlessly while I'm openning containers, etc. ("Scratch" would make a great companion. He should almost always make his perception rolls and stand next to and "point" at whatever he just found. Maybe growl quitely. More of a Pointer rather than a Flusher.)

Q: Any plans to enlarge (widen/thicken) the scroll bars on the Journal (and anywere else there are scroll bars)? Currently they're a mighty thin target to grab with the mouse.

Q: Any plans to remove useless junk like feathers, inkwells, bones, cups, plates, forks, spoons, knives, cuttings boards, milk bottles, rotten baskets, etc and add more potions, food, gold, weapons, etc where they make sense? Having everyday items/nicknacks can help flesh out a scene but if there's no use for them they don't need to be actual objects that the game would have to track.

Q: Are you working to improve interface responsiveness? There's a perceptable delay between mouse actions and world response. For example, when the pary is stationary and I click somewhere for them to move there's a delay before they start moving. In the inventory screen to move an item there is a delay between left clicking on an item and having the item become movable. It's not a terribly long delay but it is long enough to be annoying and feel like I'm fighting the interface.

Q: When do you expect to have difficulty settings available for players to test? Currently there seems to be some tweaking of difficulty that will need to be undone for less difficult settings. Might also provide useful feedback to see how many people play at which difficulty setting.

Q: And, of course, will the built-in game console use the same commands as in the earlier BG games or are you coming up with new syntax?

Dude, that's so fucking sad. Really. I feel for you.

Go take a cookie asap .

You and me both. It's why interviews or any release of information has no upside. The fanatics will tear everything apart looking for something to criticize and a lot of them have no filter - and the regular players don't care.

It went from "I just...wish...they...would...say...something" to "I HATE all the things they said!" very quickly.

And it's so weird to me to hear these arguments that "Larian doesn't listen to feedback" when they clearly do. I think they listen to pretty much everyone, but I think some people have this idea that because they show up here when they proclaim something that they should be carried around like a conquering hero and savior of Baldur's gate 3.

People be losing they minds.

It's important to remember that Swen has all the Metadata from millions of playthroughs that shows him what people like to do. BG3 will be affected more by that metadata than us crazy people who post on the forums.

God, you people are EXHAUSTING.

Just to add my voice to what so many others have already said very well, I am one of those longtime cRPG fans who has played a lot of D&D over several editions, LOVES the original BG games, but who does NOT like D&D rules generally. So I am all for Larian changing up some of the D&D mechanics to provide a better video game experience in BG3, in much the same way that BG1 and 2 also did not implement 2e rules 100%.

However, I am also firmly in the camp that is NOT happy with the specific things Larian has introduced into the game as their "homebrew" alternatives to D&D mechanics, and find most of these changes to be frustrating, aggravating, and making the video game playing experience worse rather than better. But not liking these Larian/D:OS mechanics in the game does not in any way, shape or form make me a D&D 5e "purist."

Go take a break, Tuco.

It's important to remember that having data is worthless unless you know how to use it, and Larian has demonstrated that they do not.

Personally I find myself somewhere in the middle, love both games and D&D sessions with friends but I'm also fairly easy to please. However I too would love a more conservative approach in starting out with more or less a 5e copy-paste and be rather reserved with any changes to it, particularly for spells in regards to balance and such. But more importantly, I'd love to see more in-depth discussions around design changes and decisions about it, as I believe it's a lot easier for a lot of people to respect a decision if the thoughts behind them are made clear. Without it, the changes easily seem arbitrary and "just because", at least that's how I see it playing out. Even as things aren't set in stone (and maybe is the cause of reluctance of discussing it publically), I'd actually argue on the contrary, and advice discussing it in a community update or interview, because the forementioned reason, and as many have pointed out, it makes it easier for the rest of us to discuss more accurate and relevant things for feedback around it.

At least that'd be enough for my gamer-heart.

Why? I’m not the one having an emotional breakdown every time there’s some “negativity” (aka “any degree of criticism “).

"You guys are exhausting." is negativity and emotional breakdown, you even rely on the full caps-lock. Don't hide behind the criticism card. Let me put it very clear for you then: Be critical but positive. Be constructive, not destructive. If you continue the negative-tirade, I'll provide a break for you.