Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback This doesn't feel like a Baldur's Gate game (or D&D)

In what way?

Are you talking about things like Astarion mentioning Cazador before revealing that he's a vampire spawn? These are little bugs that need to be tweaked, not storytelling flaws.

Or are you referring to something else? Can you clarify?


This is not a great criticism. In a story, there should be a shift. It helps to relieve tension. It creates the sense of a big world, where there are good days and tragic days. Those things play off one another to elevate the experience.

If it were all one note beaten again and again, it would get overwhelming and monotonous and annoying. Instead, it strives for ups and downs in a balance that's meant to elicit an emotional reaction in the world.

And remember, for all the talk about decapitation... that's a choice. Your character chooses whether or not to do that, meaning you are the one bringing that mood to the game. Just like your character is the one who chooses whether or not to thunderwave Alfira off the cliff.

See what I mean? You are a part of the mood. You are a part of the shifting of that mood, because this is an interactive game, with options built in.



There's wonderful set up. There's wonderful explanation.

The game starts you off with an excellent scene. It shows a Mind Flayer putting a tadpole in someone's head while you watch from your point of view. Then it shows the tadpole going in your head. From there, the ship captures more people, engages in conflict with githyanki, hops about dimensions, ends up in the hells, and you are knocked free from your pod.

Now you make your way to the helm. You know you have a tadpole in your head and that you can transform into a Mind Flayer, which effectively means that you'll die as the Mind Flayer will be a new creature and not you. Very much like the birth of gnoll resulting from the death of a hyena.

The game even shows you what your facing with the "changed at the pull of a lever!" scene.

This thing that starts as an immediate worry about your immediate survival begins to turn into a mystery as you explore ways to heal yourself, specifically in the grove.

It gives you two options, roughly. One, help Halsin get free so he can help you. Or two, join Minthara so you can get close to the source and hopefully learn more.

And so on, the game continues from there. Revealing an underdark, revealing the history of Selune temple and Grymforge, hinting at some curse on the land above, all leading toward Moonrise Towers.

We understand what's happening in the game because there's clarity, because there's set up, and because there's explanation.

So you say there's a lack thereof. How so? I'm guessing you're saying there should be more explanation about Shar, and in that suggestion, it's like you're forgetting all the other amazing elements clearly on display, all the things that have clearly been put forward.

As for Shar and Shadowheart, I have my own thoughts about that, which is to say that I doubt we share the same concerns. But regardless, it's not a difficult fix, especially considering we're in early access.


Are you referring to Shadowheart revealing herself as a follower of Shar?

I agree. This could be stronger. And I don't think it's a difficult fix. Remove "Cleric of Shar" from her character sheet, for one. Have her lie about who she worships earlier, for two. And while I don't agree this is necessary, as some folks have suggested, have her use Disguise Self until the crucial moment comes. All of this would make the scene stronger.

But that said, seeing a scene that could be stronger doesn't mean you're looking at a story that's not decent. That's an enormous leap. From "this scene could be better" to "this whole story sucks and I want a decent story."


How exactly does the map design not support the story?

Because things are too close? Are you saying the narrative suffers because the player doesn't have to walk far enough to get to the village? Do you think that has anything to do with the writing of the story?


No, I mean it's a good story. It has interesting characters who are in an interesting situation. It has conflict. There's a goal and a sense of repercussions if the goal isn't met.

By computer game standards, it also works, especially considering how there are multiple ways to approach things. So many scenes have been discovered that are surprising, as in, "wow, I didn't think that could happen, and it's cool to learn that the game accommodates for that possibility."

Now, you might argue that the character's aren't interesting, and then you might try to twist your personal taste into an argument that further says that means the writing is bad. But I wouldn't agree with you.

Let's take Gale as an example. I don't like Gale as an NPC. His story seems ridiculous. The stuff of eye-rolls. But would he be fun to play as a character? Possibly. Then I wouldn't be listening to him, I'd be him, making decisions from his point of view.

Some might say his proclaimed relationship with a goddess is too much. But is it? I think back through the history of fantasy writing. Even going to someone like David Eddings, I see a setting where mortals and gods are very close.

Whether that aspect of the character appeals directly to me or not... it doesn't inherently make it bad writing.


Thank you. I am sorry that you are not. I hope you get a chance some day to see in it what I do, and thus find some more enjoyment for yourself.