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

Nope. Any organization is better than random chaos I have to play with constantly. At least if there is a method, I can learn it and adapt to it.

But, I will say, correct organization is standardly alphanumeric. So, what makes the most sense? First organize by number, aka spell level, then by alphabet, A-Z. Simple. Basic. Universal organization system.

Allow people to enforce their own order, if they want to.

Personaly im sorting spells by the usage ... first damage, then crowd control, then debuffs, then buffs, then heal, and finaly utility.
See? No levels, nor alphabet was used >> therefore its not "universal"

Hmmm. That could work. At least that's some semblance of order I could work with.

You know, I'm not saying to get rid of the hot bar completely. I'm saying to provide some level of organization outside the hot bar and leave the hot bar for users to be able to use it to put their most used abilities on the hot bar however they want.

But again, that's a whole different topic. This thread is about making things a bit more true D&D 5e. So let's not get sidetracked the whole hot bar issue.

Here's another analogy to explain how I feel about playing this game with such a loose rules:

One kid walks up to another kid with a ball and hands them the ball. He says, "Let's play football." The kid who handed the ball to the other is American. The second kid is British.

The American kid wants to play American football while the British kid wants to play British football which is soccer to Americans. As soon as the game starts, the British kid starts playing British football and starts kicking the ball around. The American kid then starts getting upset with the British kid because he's not playing football right. The American kid was expecting to play American football. The British kid was expecting to play British football.

An adult comes by and sees the two kids arguing about which kind of football they should be playing. The adult says, "You play it your way and you play it your way."

But American football and British football have two totally different rule sets. You can't really play both with one ball. Either you're going to play American football or you're going to play British football. If you actually try to blend the two, or you have each one trying to play football the way they think football should be played, the result is going to be a huge mess with neither party knowing the rules and both of them fighting over it. In the end neither is happy.

This is how I feel about bg3. It's like Larian is the adult in the story and they are just telling everyone to play the game however they want to play the game. Then they are blending both D&D and dos into some sort of weird mesh of rules. In the end, you get neither a D&D game or a dos game but some sort of weird mess in between. Larian is trying to solve the problem by keeping the rules more loose and less restrictive and then saying just play at the way you want to play it, as if that's going to solve the problem.

In the end, there's going to be a lot of unhappy people unless Larian makes the game so that it is either D&D or DOS. Either that, or they need to make it so that there are options for players to pick either D&D rules or dos rules. It's just like with the football scenario, either you have to play American football or British football or you need to provide both kids with their own ball and their own separate group of players.

Feel free to corect me since i never played american footbal ...
But when you say "You can't really play both with one ball." ... i cant help the feeling that you also cant play both with the same (type of?) ball, even if you dont want to play both simultaneously. O_o

Exactly. Now you get where I'm coming from. Both are called the same thing, but they are two totally different games. You can't really mesh them. They both have different rules and balls and are completely different styles of games. You can't really kick an American football around a field. It is an oblong ball. Both are sports and both have the same name, but they are so very different. They both have a totally different feel and experience because they have totally different rules.

This is how I feel about D&D and bg3. They call bg3 D&D 5e, but it does not play like D&D 5e. There are too many rules that are different and too many elements that are not the same for it to be called D&D 5e. It feels and looks more like dos. So just like American football versus European football, so is D&D versus Baldur's Gate 3. You can call it D&D 5e all you want, but the rules are two different and the stats are too different and the creatures don't act like they're supposed to. Therefore, is it really D&D 5e, or is it just some fantasy game based on the Forgotten Realms world?

The British kids a bit thick if he's trying to play round ball with an oval ball. But, we Brits have more than one game...

Rugby now, that'd almost work. American football evolved out of a number of European games, including rugby. So a rugby-playing British kid can play with an American kid who plays football, with both able to learn something from the other. Rugby players often play AF because it adds variety to their training. And both could play Aussie rules or Gaelic football too, maybe not as well as their own sport but they could still have fun togther.

Maybe that is what BG3 will become. Not quite either, but appealing to more because of it.

Ah, but here's the problem. I don't like soccer so much. I also don't like rugby. I came to play good ol' fashioned American football. And you know what? I'm not alone.

A lot of us bought the game thinking we were getting good ol' fashioned D&D with super awesome graphics and story. What we're getting is more like DOS because the rules aren't so D&D.

It's like the American kid coming to play American football, and the British kid and the adult are like "Tough. We like European football. Either play it our way or go home.". Or flip it. It's like the British kid wanting to play British football coming to the field because he was told he's going to play football, and the American kid is trying to force American football on him instead.

Would you agree, then, that the root of the problem is in Larian's marketing of the game and they should say that BG3 is only "inspired by D&D"?


From the BG3 page on Steam:

Evolved turn-based combat,
based on the D&D 5e ruleset. Team-based initiative, advantage & disadvantage, and roll modifiers join combat cameras, expanded environmental interactions, and a new fluidity in combat that rewards strategy and foresight.


I think "based on the D&D 5e ruleset" sounds to me like I should expect them to implement the D&D 5e ruleset. I can imagine myself feeling upset by this; tricked, even, if I was familiar with the 5e ruleset.

Why? Did you see the LotR movies? Did you like them? Have you read the books? The movies are based on the books, but they are not a 1 to 1 translation. Stuff was left out, stuff was added, stuff was swapped around, but they were still wildly successful.

As hands on as Hasbro/WotC are with this IP, if they weren't happy with how it was being translated to a video game, they'd be calling for corrections. They were being sued by the original creators of the Dragonlance series for breach of contract because of their hands on approach. If "well, you're not staying close enough to the rules" was how they felt about it, they could easily pull the plug.

In short, you are saying that the marketing is fine but some people have misconstrued the meaning behind the presentation, correct? This sounds like a valid argument.

Oh i think we bith understand this the whole time ...
The only difference is perspective.

I see it like:
Larian yelled LETS PLAY FOOTBALL!
And you were like HELLS YEAH and run towards them to play ... now you get there and find out that field is different, the ball is round, people are not wearing any protection, etc. (i dont know all the obvious differences) ... and then you realized that Larian said they want to play football ... but they mean Europian one.
But you wanted to play American one ... so you started to ask for that ... and while you are certainly not alone with such wish ... there is still the other group who want to play Europian one ... and they have few advantages over you: ball, field, judge, and enough people to play.

You tryed to play with them and since you are still here i dare to say you at least kinda enjoyed it ...

//Edit:
I wish to believe that by now you understand that you were never actualy promised American one and it was just your hopes and dreams ... at best you were told that americans play this one aswell but nothing more.

Yet you stay trying to persuate them to submit and play American fotbal with you, bcs you sincerely believe it would be more fun for everyone ... while using argument that while you have round ball you are unable to play American fotbal properly. O_o

I think what robertthebardis trying to say is that "based on" is purposely vague phrase ...
I mean i could easily make pokenom engine game (or more like old Final Fantasy) were you will be in Faerun instead of pokemon and will be fighting monsters instead ... and still call is "based on DnD" ...
Bcs there is same world, same races, same classes, same lore and SOME mechanics ...

Will that piss some people off? Certainly.
But was it false advertising? Not at all.

Its just not what people expect ... but as long as i as a Developer ... and Wizards of the Coast as owner of trademark ... are okey with final product no matter how many people dislikes it that game IS "based on DnD".

//Edit:
Let's take another example the Star Wars sequel trilogy.
Many people hates it some even say that this is not actually Star Wars it breaks My Rules which were set in universe ...
We dislike it.
We hate it.
We refuse to call it Star Wars.

And yet Star Wars it is because Disney owner of trademark said so.

In context with the post I responded to, based on and inspired by mean the same thing. In either case, you can take some creative liberties with the source material to produce something else. What we have here is something else. I mentioned "rules lawyer" earlier in the thread, and I sincerely believe that this is what is at play here.


Source.

As I said earlier, it's not limited to a sub-class of the GM class. Despite claims made in this thread, players do have to know the basic rules, at the very least. Now, as I have repeatedly pointed out, there are parts of this game that are broken in so far as mechanics go, such as "anyone can use scrolls". That takes creative license a bit too far, and needs to be corrected, the same with wizards being able to scribe any scroll, even for spells they shouldn't be able to learn. These need to be fixed, and likely will be. With these exceptions, we're pretty much getting what Larian promised, a game based on 5e DnD.

One problem with your scenario.

Larian yelled, "Let's play American football!". I came running expecting American football. Instead, I got European football.

See, Larian said the game would be based on D&D 5e. That means the rules, the setting, everything should start with D&D 5e. You might tweak the rules a bit because, well, everyone does if it's not the pros. Based on the field you're playing on, etc, you might need to adjust the rules to fit.

But I showed up and the whole game is based on DOS mechanics with a smattering of 5e. So, it's like I showed up to the field and they had a round ball and said, "We'll adjust soccer rules a bit to make it more like football. Um. You can throw the ball with your hands and tackle people. How's that? What? We said football. Didn't you know we meant European football?"

"No you said American football. The game would be based on American football."

"We said based on. See? You can pick up and throw the ball just like an American football. Therefore, we didn't lie. It is based on American football. We're still going to use a round ball, we're still going to kick into goals, and the game is still pretty much going to go by the rules of European football, but we're giving you a few American football rules so that technically we can say that it's based on American football."

The game still feels very much like European football and abides by more of the rules of European football, but because it has a few American football rules, they're saying that it's based on American football.

If you tell someone that you're basing a game off of D&D 5e, there should be more D&D 5e rules and stats and so forth then there are Homebrew rules and stats and so forth. If the Homebrew out weighs the base rules you are no longer playing a game based on the base rules. That is my point.

100% agreed with the post above.

This point is invalid. It can be shown to be invalid by the fact that the DnD logo is still present in the marketing. What you feel about the way it's developed, barring some items that we have agreed are in fact broken does not dictate what something is, or isn't. You can rest assured that, if Hasbro or WotC thought they were deviating too much from the source material, they'd pull the plug. It wouldn't be the first time. This is what's going on with the Dragonlance series right now, or maybe it's already been settled, since the original creators of Dragonlance were suing Hasbro/WotC for breach of contract over content in the new Dragonlance books not being up to the agenda Hasbro/WotC wanted to push, and Hasbro/WotC pulled the plug on it. Surely, if they'll pull the plug over their agenda, they'd pull the plug over violating the spirit of the IP.

Where?
And i mean it litteraly ... please show me at least single interview, promotion video, show, ... ANYTHING ... that would support this claim please.
Meanwhile i repeat to you few examples that supports otherwise:


Nah ...
That is just your opinion ... dont get me wrong, im aware that this part of forum litteraly exists so we can express our wishes ...
But that is all it will ever be. :-/ Just your wish, ask, demand, w/e ...

No matter how hard you will repeat it, no matter how other topics you start, no matter how many other inacurate examples you bring ...
The problem is still the same you *want* something you didnt get, nothing more. :-/

Please don't tell me my opinion is invalid. I could easily say yours is invalid. It's like saying, "You're stupid." We could sit here all day long and call each other stupid.

Dark Alliance also has the D&D logo on it. However, I know the game for what it is. It is a D&D hack/slash game that is in no way based even remotely on D&D 5e. They tell you that pretty much up front. There is no misconception about this. It may have D&D logo on it, but I don't expect it to be anything like 5e because they said so from the beginning and made it quite clear what type of game it is.

And just because WotC and whoever put their stamp of approval on it, that doesn't mean that it is the same game that they said it was going to be. Steam clearly says that BG3 is "based on D&D 5e." If I said, "This sport that we're playing is based on American Football," most people should expect that it will be nothing like European Football, which is soccer in America. If someone said, "We're going to play a game, and it's based on American Football," and I showed up to the field and found a bunch of people with a round ball and soccer shoes on with shorts and t-shirts and goal posts, I'd be like, "What the heck is this? I thought we were going to play some American football." If they respond with, "We said it would be based on American Football. We didn't say it WAS American Football," that would be totally misleading and would be upsetting, especially if I showed up in my heavy American Football gear complete with armored shoulder pads, helmet, mouthpiece, breastplate, groin cup, etc. Those European Football players are going to be a whole lot faster on their feet than I would in my heavy gear. I'd be very ill equipped or prepared to play their version of football.

Again, that's how I feel about Baldur's Gate 3. I bought it and showed up expecting a 5e experience with maybe a few tweaks because, naturally, it's a video game. I was prepared to fight monsters with proper D&D 5e stats and using their abilities like they normally would based on established lore and behaviors. Instead, I was completely thrown off because what was communicated was that the game would be "based on D&D 5e." They did not say, "This game is based on DOS mechanics blended with D&D 5e."

If they had told me that, then I'd have no issue whatsoever with this game. If up front they had said, "this is a blending of DOS and D&D 5e," I'd have been like, "Hmmm... Do I want to buy this game? What is DOS anyway because I've never played it? Should I try DOS first and see if I like it?"

And you can quote all those interviews all you like. That's not what they put on the descriptions of the game and not what all the media was advertising. I didn't watch all their interviews. Never had the time. I trusted the descriptions of the game provided by Steam and different media articles that were written to promote the game. Everyone everywhere was saying, "based on D&D 5e" and "At last, a true video game interpretation of D&D 5e."

And, finally, the point I'm trying to make is that this game in no way feels like D&D, yet that was even what Swen said they were trying to create. "We want to have that Dungeons & Dragons feeling." This does not feel like D&D. That's the point.

I also do not want them to slavishly obey every single D&D 5e rule. If it doesn't make sense, don't use it. Fine. I'm good with that. But, again, when the homebrew steers so much from the original rules that you are no longer playing a game even closely resembling the original rules, THAT is what I have an issue with.

Classes are stripped of just about any purpose. Monsters are stripped of their typical abilities and stats. Items reign supreme, and surfaces. The game looks like D&D, and the story is Forgotten Realms, but it in NO way FEELS like D&D. It feels like something else entirely.

You know what game FEELS like D&D? Pathfinder. Solasta. Those FEEL like D&D. I want BG3 to FEEL like D&D also, and I'm saying that until they start really implementing more true 5e rules and stats and so forth, it will never FEEL like D&D just like American Football will never feel like American Football if you don't play with an oblong ball and have an offensive team and defensive team with linebackers and tight ends and wide receivers, and the quarterback passes the ball to his teammates who then try to get it to the endzone to score a touchdown.

So you went to a soccer game all dressed up in your burden of expections. You don't have to strip it off and have fun with the other boys and girls.

It's EA, and it's already changed a lot. Of course it's still got a DOS feel to it, DOS is the house that Larian built. They're remodelling, but you don't pull your house down around your ears just because you want your staircase built to a different rule. I'm looking forward to more changes, and hoping that some things in particular are changed too (yes, classes and monsters. But, I'd be suprised if a lot of what we don't like doesn't turn out to have been placeholder after all).
But there's at least another year for a lot to change in.

By the way, I've still not read a review of Pathfinder or Solasta that convinces me to buy either. Because, once I've read past the drooling over the rules, the reviews aren't that great.