Regular RPG??? I don't understand. D&D tabletop IS the original RPG. It is the RPG EVERY RPG is based on. How can you cross regular RPG with it?
I meant in terms of video game rpgs like Dragon Age, Fallout, Skyrim. Those types of mechanics. That’s what I meant about hybrid of video game rpg and tabletop. Those have different mechanics. One example of tabletop turned video game rpg is Cyberpunk.
???
Those are first person hack/slashers with dialogue options. Totally different mechanics and I don't think they're crossing tabletop with any elements of those games. What elements from those games says, "My character can jump 30 feet forward and 20 feet up and shove enemies 300 feet off a cliff and Rogues don't get Expertise but everyone can do anything so no class is special"?
None of the homebrew even closely says Dragon Age, Fallout or Skyrim. It's just changes to rules for the sake of changing the rules because they think the change is fun. I mean, seriously, what about stripping an Intellect devourer of its very signature Devour Intellect ability even remotely indicates they are crossing TT with any other VGs? Same question with stripping Rogues of their uniqueness... And clerics... And mages...
It sure doesn't seem to me that they are crossing anything. What it seems like is that they are trying to cater to players who just want more casual gameplay and not a challenge. Most who defend the "Larian Vision" don't seem to me to want their Rogues to be restricted from using scrolls and spells, Clerics from casting Magic Missile scrolls, etc. They want everyone to be able to do everything so nothing is special, and they want to fight super awesome monsters that are way beyond their characters' abilities because they are somehow gods, but in truth they aren't, the enemies are just extremely nerfed so that they only SEEM super tough when they're not. In no way ever should a party of less than 5 should face 3 even wounded intellect devourers at level 1 or a demon or cambions. Level 4 or less party of 4 or less should never face a Bullette or two minotaurs or a party of 4 githyanki or the mud mephits and wood woads...the phase spiders... SO many things.
Every encounter in the game is Deadly. Deadly! So they nerf them and strip them of their abilities to make them Easy or Medium Challenge Rating. Makes no sense. Why not make the encounters using different monsters that are legit Easy or Moderate? Why take Deadly monsters and extreme nerf them? And again, how is that even remotely a "video game" thing?
I'll tell you what that is. That's the DM at a tabletop session throwing a dragon at level 4 players and then flubbing the rules because he realized he is gonna kill his players. So he makes the dragon wounded and strips all of its special moves so that it doesn't wipe the party in one round.
Let me make myself clear to you and everyone else here. I do in fact, agree with what you want for BG3. After you explained earlier in the thread and your list of the things that would make the game better. I agree and that would make the game better. What I'm trying to explain in regards to what Larian has done is a mixture of rpg type storytelling like you have with Neverwinter MMO, that game doesn't utilize the mechanics of tabletop but real time fighting. That's what I mean. Plus, Larian seems to have used DOS2 as a base for BG3 with a twist of DnD tabletop mechanics. This seems to be where a lot of us are having an issue because it's either they make a tabletop video game or they make an rpg with no tabletop like Neverwinter.
