Originally Posted by Stabbey
Originally Posted by Bumblephist
The Game Developer Conference youtube channel has a talk about D:OS2 given by Swen. At the end of the talk the second person asking a question goes on and on about a something that can be exploited to the players advantage and starts to expand his question to other exploits when Swen, after trying several times, is finally able to interrupt the repetitious questioning with his answer: It's intentional. Swen seemed kind of frustrated there as well while he waited for the person to finish repeating himself. Swen goes on to explain that they leave that stuff in because they know players like "to glitch a game" and he made some other comments about it. So, in the past, that kind of stuff has been added to their games intentionally for the people who like it not for the people who don't. I suspect that's the same reason it's in BG3.

If that is the case, that would be a troubling sign that Swen doesn't properly "get" what the intended playstyle of the DnD 5e ruleset is. DnD rules are based on the idea of attrition, having to choose how to spend limited resources in the best way to make your way through a series of encounters and still have enough left to still defeat a tougher encounter at the climax of a section.

Players naturally gravitate to the easiest possible path. Allowing players cheap and easy exploits is going to value those exploits more highly. Players will feel obligated to use them regardless of whether players "like" them or not. Cheap and easy exploits being available means that the mechanics and rules still based on 5e less useful and therefore less used.

There's nothing wrong with making a game with built-in exploitable mechanics. But mixing mechanics from systems with two different design goals is good for neither set of rules. If Larian really wants to keep their fun exploits, then keeping a large portion of the rules based on the 5e system which is based around attrition is counter-productive. Throw out the rules and design which are based around 5e which get in the way of the exploits, or curb the exploits so that using the 5e rules is not a clearly suboptimal strategy for gameplay.
This. What Larian need to get is that they can't do both 5e and "break the game", which they are now trying in current EA.

They also can't choose to go with the OP fun-cheese approach alone because BG3 IS a D&D 5e game and large part of the player base expects that instead of DOS3. And because the D&D gameplay is completely broken by the fun cheese rest whenever sprinkled on top.

If they really insist on keeping the OP cheese tactics and letting players "break the game", which can be fun at first but grows old VERY fast, they have to split the game into two completely different game modes.

And do people really like to play like that? Or is it their "data" showing that people throw and shove a lot, hence they must like those mechanics. I throw, shove and stealth cheese a lot because it's the most effective way and I absolutely HATE every second of it. It pains me to see the potential of BG3 wasted by ridiculous bad gameplay.