Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback Why I Want More D&D 5e Rules

Edit: Added quote for convenience due to new page.

I feel that the odds are good for certain things like making shove/hide an action, most likely at best chance of happening along-side with reactions system implementation. I'd like to think that they're only bonus actions temporarily until missing systems are in place. At least that's my belief/hope that keeps me sane.

Stuff like Wizard being able to learn anything from scrolls is an easy fix too. That's just a matter of convincing the designers. Simple changes like those are very hopeful from a "easily doable from a technical PoV". I say that with confidence because I've worked with older versions of the engine for many years, and spend most of my time tinkering in the game files, than playing the game. I just cba doing anything with it until we actually have modding tools and compilers available. I stick with Dos2 until then.

However I used to view day/night cycle as a full hard impossibility due to the lighting system being similar to Dos2. I've made a day/night/weather system in Dos2, and I'm happy with the results for how I implement them, but it's limited to outdoor areas and certain circumstances due to limitations. However after lighting changes in patch 6, I'm more hopeful from a technical PoV, but still not convinced due to expense > pay (not economic, but manpower and time investment). Lots would really want it for atmosphere and a sense of immersion, time passing etc, so the convincing to be done there IMO is more at why it matters for the experience and adventure at this point.


Edit 2: I don't disagree with you, Mrfuji. There are many times where I daydream of being Larian's PR person; I have many ideas on how I'd do it both from a social media perspective, and community interaction. There are many things I'd have done / said differently.

Well. it wouldn't be the first time in these forums that I request that Larian hires you and the other mods to be just that

People make mistakes. I get that. They may have started out with the full intent of being 100% TT by the book and decided, "Ah crap! Budget, timing, the amount of work necessary, let's just DOS it for now and give them more D&D 5e later as time goes on."

Who knows?

I'm not out here trying to point fingers about what they promised, though I clearly remember my first time reading about the game. I remember the comments about true 5e adaptation.

BUT, I will say that what is hard to remember is whether Larian actually said it or someone else did. I will admit, with all the hype, it may have been a different source.

Regardless, the point still remains, BG3 is D&D-ISH right now. It can still be tweaked to be more D&D-ISH. I'm not expecting a full adaptation, but the more they make it 5e, the more honed and refined the game will get and the more Baldur's Gate it will feel.

In regards to "they have always said that they will adapt the rules to a version that works as a PC game": I think we all are fine with that. We know that there is no actual human DM, who can do stuff on the fly. We know some rules/abilities will not really work. So no one was really suprised that the GooLock did not have it's telepathy feature at the start of EA (and still does not have anything, sadly). This is a feature that is pretty useless in a computer game. But chaning up spells like chromatic orb? That is just changing stuff for the sake of changing it.

And in regards to things like reactions, bonus action economy and things like wizards learning all the spells: I will say it again and again. We NEED a roadmap. It is pointless to argue over these things while larian is just silent on all these issues.

But apart from all that, there is more to it than just the rules. Day/Night, animals roaming about; non-harmful ones like deer and rabbits.

Like in Neverwinter Nights. You walk around the forest and there's a stag, maybe a bear, etc. Right now, the Grove is where you encounter most animals. They don't have to be talkative. Just have them scamper off and squeak at you or something. BG1 and 2 didn't have talking animals. They just roamed the landscape.

It's about the little things. They all add up.

#4 is a thing that i hope they have already been working on as it would be good for depth and immersion. And if not its not too hard to add in if they have the time.

Everything else in the list if they haven’t already been working on its prob too late in development cycle now speaking from game software development experience.

I agree with those, who want a bit more faithful adaption of the 5e rules and the D&D world.
It's not about having the rules a hundred percent implimented, but have it feel more like 5e and less than a total homebrew.

I think it's within the scope still to make the game enough like D&D.


Mostly it has to do with stuff like...

- make Long Rest more restricted so it's actually a meaningful choice instead of a free ability and spell reset button

- nerf Jump height to 5e standards and add climbing as the main way to reach elevation

This is VERY important from a tactical point of view. Climbing should halve your movement and Athletics and Acrobatics need to matter. Terrain should be much more than just giving you a +2/-2 to attack.

- revert Shove and Hide to Actions, give Rogues their unique abilities back

- nerf Shove distance to 5e standards so combat doesn't turn into a ridiculous shove fest

- fix Wizards leaning other classes spells and every class using scrolls (and before anyone says it's more fun this way... that's what multiclassing is for and we don't have it yet)

- add saving throws to homebrew stuff like surfaces and bombs and whatnot, no inescapable damage

... instead of reading all oficial info properly and that is their misstake.

This could actualy be source of our disagreement ...
"As close as possible" ... do you even understand how loose frase that is?

One person could implement strictly every rule, as we say here litteral transcription of rules 1:1 ... and still feel that he didnt do good job in his effort to make it "as close as possible" since he didnt manage to imeplement something that would allow Illusion Wizard to create ilusion of anything he would like ...
Wich is possible in tabletop, but certainly not in videogame.

Other person cound implement only turn based combat, copy races and classes and that is it, and make everything else just they way he see fit, no matter what original rules say ... and yet feels like he did the good job, since in his eyes the game is "as close as possible", bcs making it more like 5e dont fit his idea of fun.

I mean ... its all about perspective ... "as close as possible" can mean both "as close as videogame system limitation would allow us" and "as close as we dare, while we still like the outcome" ... and neither of that is breaking any promises, its only matter of our own expectation. :-/

I think one of the things that need to be said is that Larian wants this game to also be accessible to people that have never played Dungeons and Dragons table top (which is why they may be using a lot of DOS mechanics). If you bombard a new player with rules and rules and more rules, you can wind up alienating them by making them feel like this is more for hardcore DnD 5e players. We all know that every company always wants new customers as many as possible. Which is why they will make changes in order to attract new customers/players even if the ones that have been there from the beginning may not like it. They should understand that in order for a product to remain popular the company needs to attract new people. In regards to wanting Baldur's Gate 3 to be RAW DnD game, you risk limiting access to players that have not played a DnD game but may be interested in this world setting. In order to draw someone into something, you have to gradually introduce them you don't want to bombard them.

You are comparing the numbers of a table top game to a video game. Those are two different fan bases with different numbers in different platforms. You say that the majority have not asked for 5e RAW which I agree, especially if you look at Reddit but there seems so be some here in these forums that do. I also agree that some may want more 5e type rules but there are those that want exact 5e rules at least in how I have seen it. If I'm wrong in that assumption then I'm wrong but as of right now that's how it seems.

Okay, I think you misunderstood my initial comment that you responded to. I wasn't referring to DOS players coming into DnD. I was referring to the general audience that may not have played a tabletop game. The reason why I mentioned DOS is because Larian is using those mechanics as its what made them popular. In terms of people coming into DnD, that has to do with the general audience and not DOS fans.

I think Larian implementing DOS mechanics is to attract the DOS players. Larian changing some of the 5e rules or reinterpreting them by maybe making them more easy in some way may be to attract the general audience that have not played the tabletop DnD game.

The 5e rules are not complicated. What we have now is 10,000 times more complicated.

Like Short Rest. Hit Dice is not complicated. You get unlimited Short Rest, but you have a number of dice to heal with based on level.

Instead, they homebrew it and limit you to 2 Short Rests. How many HP do you recover per Short Rest per character? I don't even know with their current system. 500+ hours and I have no clue. I just know I get some HP back, and usually a lot.

And only 2 Short Rests then force me to long rest more frequently, with a tadpole eating my brain.

And 1 year later, we're still trying to make the resting system make sense.

No. 5e is the least complicated D&D system ever made. It could translate so well to computer.

I do apologize if I misunderstand you but these two statements do seem to contradict each other:



In the first post you seem to think that DoS mechanics might be helpful for players that haven't played table top dnd. But when <Redacted> pointed out that DoS, atleast according to him, is an even more complex system than DnD, you think Larian use DoS mechanics to attract people used to that system, not to attract people that never played TT.

So...you don't agree with <Redacted> as to DoS being more complex, or you think the general audience is more used to DoS than DnD?

It certainly got my attention. But this is where I'm disconnected from the "make it more 5e" crowd, the version of DnD makes no difference to me. The first act states quite clearly that we are headed to Baldur's Gate from where we landed, and so, I'm not overly fussed about that. There's enough speculation floating around the internet about potential characters from the series showing up that I'm curious. First, and foremost, however, I want this game to be every bit as good as it's predecessors were. Yes, I very much want to love this game. In EA, I have no idea of what's to come later, and frankly, I like it that way. I intentionally limit what I do in game now, in order to prevent burn out before full release, including ignoring it for months. I don't care, for example, that some updates require me to delete my previous saves, and I don't need a way to prevent an update from installing. I want to see systems, I'm not fussed about story. I haven't done a lot this update because my processor is on the fritz. I got a new one, but my MB doesn't support it, so I'm waiting for a new MB to come in, likely today, I hope...

The problem with expectations is that they're all over the place. There are some players that truly do expect a 1 to 1 conversion into 5e, and to whom no homebrew is acceptable. There are others that profess a lot of knowledge about DnD, 5e in particular, but don't know how some of the monsters actually work. Someone, for example, pointing to Phase Spiders "teleporting". So even when they're presented with things that are actually in the rules, they're screaming "but homebrew". It doesn't do a lot for their arguments.

You're wrong. This is a strawman you have built in your head.

Heartbeats

Which is also why I pointed out to Rag why a single quote from Sven being able to be interpreted in different ways was important and why it mattered. Sven isn't stupid. he is purposefully vague when he speaks with journalists. A lot of spokesmen are. But that's not the best way to do it as it can, obviously, lead to misconceptions and expectations. And that somehow led to you claiming that I accused them of abusing the trademark. Which I never did, not even once. I several times claimed they wanted the trademark for the name recognition. How is that accusing them for abusing the trademark? Recognizing Larian Studios as a company with the goal to make money, and not just a bunch people really wanting to make the best game they can, is not calumny. Implying that someone is about to commit to calumny, is.