Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback Remove Height and Backstab as Sources of Advantage/Disadvantage

Patch 6 please!

A thought about Backstab.

I think it was something we should keep, as it is really a thing in real life too, and other games.
However, it would be nice, if you could only backstab a character if you were already behind that character (maximally 2 meters away) before the start of your turn.

I am not sure how difficult it would be to implement this, but I think this way you could still gain advantage by backstabbing someone, yet you would really need to plan for it, so it would be actually something rare in the game.

Nah. Backstab stinks. Too easy for enemies and players both to get behind others. I mean, I get that if you are defending against more than 1 person in melee it is harder, so I could see getting advantage if facing more than 1 at a time, but not just running around behind someone.

If they put backstab back, they would need to make it only if you have 2 allies facing a single foe. Then, at least, you are limiting it to flanking and providing more strategy for melee fighters.

The way they did "backstab" before patch 5, you could literally have two people fighting in melee who would take turns backstabbing each other.

Seriously, that's Monty Python level stupid and this ain't a comedy. Larian lost some credibility in combat design releasing that nonsense to the public.

A lot of people expressed their thoughts on how removing backstab would make combat better. And boy did it turn out to be true.

Advantage is so potent that it became a chore the player would go through each turn, finishing by making sure their characters weren't facing the wrong way. We don't have to go through that crap anymore. And it's lovely how much more fluid combat is.

Each round is 6 seconds, is it realistic that an opponent would just stand there for six seconds and let an opponent walk behind them? 5e has surprise rounds to mimic the element of surprise.

And sure, conceptually backstab sounds interesting but it played terribly. Literally slowed down combat as the player chased advantage and ensured the AI wouldn't get advantage.

I don't have a problem with high ground Advantage currently. Even used against the party there are obvious counters to it.

I was glad to see the end of backstab advantage to be replaced with simple Flanking for sneak attacks.

It never made sense that you could run behind an enemy and sneak attack them if you were the only one there. It DOES make sense if the enemy is flanked that you could do that.

Does a ranged attack gain advantage when an enemy is engaged/flanked by one of your party members? Or would you need to be able to do a Bonus Action Hide in order to gain advantage and sneak attack from range if Height Advantage was removed?

Backstab Advantage wasn't replaced with anything. Flanking allowing sneak attacks was already in the game, just never noticeable because you always could just get backstab advantage.

Ranged attacks don't gain Advantage when an enemy is engaged by one of your allies, but you do get sneak attack. To get advantage with ranged attacks without height, yes you'd have to BA Hide or use some other ability/spell.

To clarify -when an enemy is engaged by an ally you can or cannot use ranged sneak attack?

In 5e, there are two ways that rogues get sneak attack (outside of specific subclass features):
1) You have advantage on the attack.
2) You have an ally within 5' of your target and you don't have disadvantage on the attack.

It doesn't matter if your attack is melee or ranged, but if it's melee, you have to be using a finesse weapon.

I think they should keep the high ground advantage to simulate all of the 56,000 to infinity ways that players will improvise tactical advantages in a PnP game. Ideally, combat in DnD is the players constantly thinking of creative ways to maximize their advantages and the DM constantly improvising complications to throw in their path. In a video game, that is simply not possible. The high ground advantage provides a way for players to turn the environment to their advantage with careful positioning.

It also provides an alternative to simply conjuring a fog and hiding in it at the end of every turn, which is currently overpowered due to bonus action stealth, and would be the default tactic in almost all circumstances if high ground didn't provide a sizable bonus.

FInally, this game uses a lot more adaptive lighting and shadows than I have ever seen in a PnP game. I love it. I wish that I had the patience to do this kind of lighting in my games, because it adds a lot both flavorally and tactically. However, it does mean that I'm shooting into the shadows a fairly significant amount of times. Almost as often as it is providing advantage, high ground is just negating the disadvantage from shadows.

I never played the game with backstabbing, but I don't like the sound of this mechanic at all. However, they should re-implement sneak attacks if an ally is threatening (or within five feet, the difference is negligible). A +2 for flanking would be nice but is not necessary. The sneak cones already provide a facing mechanic that is immensely exploitable without an additional flat numerical bonus.

I read through the first few pages of the thread and saw a lot of comments arguing that the advantage from height is overpowered because it's just as good as Foresight, which makes me wonder if the commenters have ever played DnD, indeed if they have ever played BG3. You still get all the same advantages from Foresight for any roll that is not a ranged attack from high ground. If you do find yourself ranged attacking from high ground, then you can do it while casting into shadows or being threatened by an attacker and still get the advantage that would otherwise have been negated. Foresight and most of the other abilities cited are still very good abilities to have.

This is currently in the game, albeit it's a bit buggy at the moment.

If so it is very buggy. I was just trying it about ten minutes ago and it definitely was not working with either ranged or melee attacks.

The problem seems to be with the Size class of the creature- Minotaurs, Hook Horrors, Ogres and so on seem to not allow flanking to work because the models may be too big. Its not a rule problem but a bug. This problem seems to be exacerbated with Halflings.

Other than the fact that those situations are MUCH farther few and in between than "You gain Advantage when in High Ground", which is EVERYWHERE in this game. So, why is Foresight useful if you can just find High Ground and get your Advantage? It's not, because why have Foresight that gives Advantage, when there is High Ground everywhere in this game that grants Advantage.

The fact that High Ground gives Advantage, it's ALWAYS better to build a character with any inherent +bonuses instead of Spells/Abilities that give Advantage because you can so easily find it with High Ground. And, any Spell/Ability that allows you get to High Ground easier, is automatically giving you Advantage and is thus the BEST choice, all the time, instead of a utility choice.

The only time where other Advantage giving abilities are equal or better is if the map is completely flat with no way to be on High Ground. Then, your right, but Larian has already said that verticality is a major part of this game (and we can already see this in EA), so your basically saying "I am not going to be playing to any major part of this game because I want to do Foresight." Does that sound like a good design to you?

This is the problem with High Ground gains Advantage is that it nullifies so many Spells/Abilities that give Advantage and makes combat so very one dimensional, always get +bonuses along with ways to get to High Ground, never take things that just give Advantage because you can just be on High Ground and gain it. And, now combat is ONLY ever about getting High Ground. You can't take other avenues because they are so much less effective (instead of only minorly ineffective) that it makes players always play a specific way.

DnD, and thus BG3, is meant to allow for your way to play. But with something that basically forces you do play along those lines, your not allowed to play other ways unless you want your entire game unenjoyable and harsh just because your not playing the way Larian wanted you to play. This is always bad design, especially in RPG games of this nature (based on DnD).

This is simply ludicrous.

1. Advantages stack.
2. Yes, getting height is a core aspect of combat. We don't have any disagreement on this point.
3. I am skeptical that ranged attacks from high ground constitute such a huge percentage of rolls, even attack rolls, that all other rolls are "few and far between." This sounds like a personal playstyle quirk, not a fact of the game.
4. Be that as it may, having no need to take the high ground (if you don't need the extra advantage) is still an advantage. Being able to make other kinds of attacks besides ranged attacks from height with advantage is still an advantage. Negating the disadvantage from shooting up is still an advantage. Even if you built your entire character as an archer who maximizes advantage from height, even your entire party, Foresight would still be an awesome spell to have in your arsenal.
5. Nobody is building their characters around a 9th level spell.

Just compare these two things as if they were written out as abilities.

1. You gain advantage with ranged attacks from high ground.
2. You gain advantage on all attacks.

It's pretty easy to see which one is still better, and the fact that they are not mutually exclusive only makes both abilities even more powerful. With Foresight you can shoot from a tree into a cloud with no disadvantage. You can shoot your bow at an enemy in your face with no disadvantage. Without Foresight, disadvantage. Even at level 4 I am seeing enemies with 3-4 conditions stacking to determine advantage. Imagine at level 18 or whenever Foresight becomes available.

I just cannot understand why stacking bonuses negate each other in your mind.

Also for the record I tested the sneak attack mechanic and it is in-game, but unreliable, just as reported.

Advantages do NOT stack. They cancel with Disadvantage for a net neutral roll (though I believe in BG3's implementation, 2 Advantages + 1 Disadvantage = net Advantage). However, in the absence of Disadvantage, 2 (or 1000) sources of Advantages is mechanically the same as a single source of Advantage. BG3's decision to calculate the difference in # of Advantages and Disadvantages (iirc) is the only saving grace for Height Advantage.
If you want height bonus to stack with other sources, it'd be better as a +2 bonus to your attack roll. Then this would always stack with sources of Advantage.

These points are contradictory, unless you're defining "huge percentage of rolls" as >50% of the total combat rolls. Which is way too strict of a criteria. Height needs to be present for only ~20% of rolls to be a significant gameplay factor, especially because those 20% of rolls will be rolled by only your 1 or 2 ranged party members. Meaning that for those characters, ~50+% of their attacks will be high ground attacks. Which is a lot. Larian has clearly developed BG3 so that height is present in almost every encounter, so 20% of rolls is probably an underestimate if anything. Don't forget, you also have to take into account the rolls where you get disadvantage from low ground.

Personally, I'd rather have to use characters' abilities to gain bonuses as powerful as Advantage. The great thing about D&D parties is the fact that they're a team and can work together to be greater than the sum of individuals. The basically ~free high ground Advantage in many cases overshadows this potential synergy.

Yeah, one of the bugs if if a spell was the last hit on the enemy. So for a workaround I'll ensure that the hit before the rogue was a melee weapon.

There definitely are other drivers behind the bug, which makes it hard to pin-point all conditions. So usually I'm making sure the enemy has been hit with a melee weapon, or I'm able to use bonus action hide for Sneak Attack.

Multiple sources of Advantage do not provide anything, only when trying to negate Disadvantage along with gaining Advantage is the only time it's useful.

Also, totally agree and keep forgetting to mention, being in Low Ground also should not be providing Disadvantage. Not only do High Ground gain Advantage, but also Low Ground gain Disadvantage is such a HUGE swing in roll percentages.

This is why individuals, including myself, have suggested Larian implement a Cover mechanic and then High Ground just provide a small +To-Hit bonus.

Advantage shouldn't stack - it doesn't according to 5E rules: even one source of disadvantage cancels N sources of advantage (and vice versa) ...may seem counterintuitive, but the rules sayeth thus:

"If circumstances cause a roll to have both advantage and disadvantage, you are considered to have neither of them, and you roll one d20. This is true even if multiple circumstances impose disadvantage and only one grants advantage or vice versa. In such a situation, you have neither advantage nor disadvantage."

This clarifying mrfuji3's point above for the rules lawyers out there

The main issue is that high ground shouldn't be as potent as it it.

YouTube

High ground literally trivializes this fight and it shouldn't. (also bonus action hide). Should these homebrew mechanics be this potent in every encounter?

No, they absolutely should not be. With how frequent verticality is in the game, high ground currently is a lower cost foresight. You don't even need another character to use it, you just spend movement or move before combat starts.

Should characters be getting free foresight because of where they start in combat? (Simply no, it makes no sense).