Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Starting area changes?

Just to be fair ... this idea was born here on forum ...
People wanted this ... people get it ...

Not exactly what we asked for. No. Closer to what we asked for, but definitely not. I am more of a fan of the new UI than the old, but it's not like what I was hoping.

I wanted something more like Solasta. Clear. Clean. Organized. Maybe smaller buttons and hotkeys because DANG Solasta's is huge buttons and no hotkeys. Definitely a flaw on their part.

But it was much more user friendly. If Larian took Solasta's basic concept and tweaked it by adding a hot bar set for people who want to add custom options, that would have been what I was wanting.

Want to pull up a list of spells you can do as an Action? Click Spells. Popup appears. Prepared Action spells pop up for you grouped by level in a nice clean list. Hover over for spell details.

Want to perform an Action? UI provides your Action options in one section and Bonus in another, side-by-side. Playing a barbarian, want to Rage? It's right there under Bonus options. Wild Shape? Clearly labeled right there. Cast Flaming Sword as Bonus? There's a Cast button for Bonus actions also, pulls up your list of spells that can be cast as Bonus actions. Flaming Sword is in that list.

Fighter. Want to Action Surge? Powers button. List of powers like Action Surge and Second Wind appears. Paladin. Wanna lay on hands? Same. Turn undead? Same. All under Powers. All well organized.

Want everyone to sneak? One button. Caution. Click it. Everyone sneaks. Click again. They stop. Want one person to sneak? Click on portrait. Click Caution. Simple. Easy. Well organized.

Want to Shove? Button under Action section. Just click Shove. Popup appears. Want to Knock Prone or Push Away 5 ft?

That's more like what we were hoping for, and that is not exactly what we got.

That is the difference you simply either are unable to get ... or are ignoring on purpose. :-/

"You" have only "yourself" and "your" wishes to care for ...
"Larian" have "all" their players ... that mean even people who "dont" like Solasta and "dont" want it "just the same" ...

So they either can try to make hybrid between both as at least partialy satisfy everyone ... or they can just decide to "screw" the one group and simply continue in their own work ...
IN your place i would be glad they decided to create hybrid.

I get it, Ragnarok. I'm not ignoring it. My point was that you said the current UI is what we asked for. No. We didn't. Me and others on this forum asked for something more akin to Solasta. We did not get that. We got something kinda like that, but nothing really all that close.

See. That's what you aren't getting or are ignoring. I'm not alone in this. Me and others are asking for a number of things, and instead of getting anything close, we get kinda sorta solutions.

Well, it's kinda sorta D&D, but not really.

It's kinda sorta the UI we were looking for, but not really.

I feel like Larian believes they are Obi-wan. If they just wave their hand at us and say, "These aren't the droids your looking for," we'll believe it and move on.

So yes. I fully understand that it's not all about me and what I want, but again, that's not the point. The point is that nobody got the UI they were looking for. You didn't. We didn't. What we have isn't the "idea was born here on forum ... People wanted this ... people get it ...". Nope. Not quite. Not even really close. If you look at it in just the right light at just the right angle you can kinda sorta see how they took some of the feedback and implemented it, which is nice, but at the end of the day, it's like everything else in BG3. It kinda looks like what we asked for, but it isn't.

You certainly dont make the expression of someone who gets it ...

Let me try to put it other way ...
You are asking for "something" ... and unless you get exactly that "something" you will never be satisfied ...
Larian is willing to adjust their "something" in the way we are suggesting, but still only so much so its still that "something" they created, just adjusted for our liking.

Therefore logicaly:
You cant "get litteraly exactly that, what you asked for" that would mean replace what they created for that you want ... and that was never an option.
And as long you will be complaining about that you "didnt get what you asked for" you dont seem to get it. :-/

You ask for something ... and if you are lucky enough, so Larian see wisdom in your suggestion ... they "adjust", i repeat "adjust" not "replace" their own creation so its closer to that suggestion ... but still true to its own purpose.

That is all you can get, nobody ever offered you more.

Ok. Whatever Ragnarok. You're right. You win.

Everyone got exactly what they asked for. Yep. Mhmm. Everyone's happy.

More and more i really wonder if you are incapable, or just not willing to understand what im telling you. :-/

Doesn't UI autofill the hotbar with discarded skills/spells on a reload though? That what happened to me when I tried to impose some order into the mess that is the hotbar. Or did they "fix" that in one of the hotfixes?

Yes and no.

Larian is adding expected functionality to what is fundamentally flawed idea. I definitely would have it rather then not, but one needs to look almost to any other cRPG to see UI done better.

The same way as they can add buttons upon buttons to add basic functionality to the garbage chain system, while that problem has been solved in elegant and efficient way years ago. Yes, we need finer control over grouping and chaining system. But need for those only highlight how inneficient and lacking the core design is.

What Larian is doing is creating complicated solutions to problems they have created themselves. The more complex the game, the better UI it has. D&D seemed to bring complexity to the title, that Larian wasn't quite prepared to deal with. I am just happy to see they are attempting to address it somewhat.

Well, its still work in progress ...
I tink we just moved A LOT to the right direction ... at least for my taste.

Also i dont envy Larian their position ... on one side there are people as Myself, who would like to have HUUUUUGE hotbar ... on other side there are people like, well there is several examples on this forum, pick yourself :P , who would rather not have any hotbar at all, and just open dedicated menus.
And to me it seems like they are really trying hard to satisfy both groups. :-/

I honestly dont know what is so wrong about chain system ...
And yes im aware that there is HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGE topic ... and no, im not going to read it. I would need to shorten that to two rows sentences top.

Sure, that's an easy one.

Games which make you control group of characters have tools that allow you to specify to what you want your characters to do. In short:
There is no way in Baldur's Gate3 to command multiple characters at once. That's is a horrific design for a game about commanding a group of characters.

Managing the party with chain system is tedius and unreliable. It only works (well somewhat, if companion AI won't get lost) if all you try to do is move entire party together. But try anything more sophisticated: like split them into two groups or have everyone set up in certain position where problems become clear. In traditional system, picking up couple individuals from the group and having them do something is quick and easy. An example of a very basic order:

You want to split your party, have melee fighters on the ground and archer spellcaster high top:

In the old system you shift click archer and mage and press the location you want them to go to. Then you can do the same, or what will be quicker box select remaining party members and give them their orders. That will literally be done in couple seconds. Want to reposition any of those two groups? Just select desired party member and tell them where to go - you can do this right after you have given first order - the unaffected party will continue the order, while the one you selected will go to a new specified place.

Chain system:

Use ungroup all. Drag portraits around and hope the chain will stick. Pick one in the group and tell them where to go. Group the other two and do the same. Doing just that will likely take more time then all of the above. Want to do anything more specific - either take them all one by one, or you need to wait until the first order is complete (doing anything will cancel whatever order was given) when seperate the two and then give a new order to the one you want to move. Esencially chaining is an extra step you have to do, that you don't have to do in the old system. And of course, in all that you pray that AI won't get confused, the folower won't go through the vision cone, or trap or hazard and force a reload. That can get improved with AI, but again it's all unnecessary complication, that wouldn't be needed if players had precise control over character's movement.

And that is a very basic example.

So Larian added chain/unchain all, stealth and unstealth all, which are great tools to have, but are far from matching an ability to command multiple characters. A traditional system works like that: you can select multiple characters and if there is skill they can all do you can order them all to do it. Larian would need to add a seperate button for each possible action and situation to match the same funcionality.

If you are new to those types of games, believe that is a big step back from what such titles tend to offer.

Here is an example. Imagine trying to do that with chaining system.

And you might say: well, that's real-time game, it's different. And yes you are right, but at the same time chaining doesn't add ANYTHING to the table, and takes away a lot. It is flatout a worse control system.

And you are hitting on my point. I get, Ragnarok, that Larian isn't going to create something EXACTLY as I might design it. Shoot. I don't even have an exact UI design in my head. I have a relative idea, but nothing exact.

I like the current UI better than the last. It's improved, to be sure, but it is in no way what we were hoping for.

Simple. Clean. User-Friendly. THAT is what we asked for - not just me but lots of people. Smaller icons. Less icons. Less mess and clutter. Things easier to find.

So, my point was that this statement is false. "Just to be fair ... this idea was born here on forum ... People wanted this ... people get it ..." This implies that we actually wanted and asked for what they gave us.

No. We didn't ask for what they gave us. It's like going to McDonalds and asking for a Big Mac, fries and a Coke, but instead we got a Chicken Sandwich, apple slices and an Orange soda. Then, we said, "Hey. I wanted a Big Mac, fries and a Coke," so they gave us a Quarter Pounder with cheese, chicken nuggets and a Diet Dr. Pepper. Hmmm. Well, in my opinion, that's better, and it's closer to what I asked for, but it is certainly not in any way what I asked for.

But, I get what you're saying. I do. You're equating it to something more group oriented. Everyone is ordering pizza. There are 10 people in the room. Some want pepperoni, some sausage, some just cheese, some veggie lovers, some meat lovers, some bacon cheeseburger and some Mediterranean. So, what do they do? How can they make everyone happy?

They can't unless they buy one of each. But then, that's too expensive because we're only talking 10 people. So, the people buying decide to do what exactly? They try to order a pizza that they feel will make as many people happy as possible.

Problem is, the end result is likely not going to make anyone happy. And that is what we're experiencing right now. I haven't read one person yet who has said they love the new UI and it's everything they were hoping for. Everyone seems to say the same thing, "It's better, but it certainly isn't great yet." Even you are saying you don't like the fact that they've pretty much shrunk the hotbar.

So, my point is, did the people want this? Did they get what they wanted? No. Absolutely not. They didn't want this nor did they get what they wanted. Nobody did. You have less hotbars. I have some organization, but it's still confusing and disorganized and jumbled. It is too easy to accidentally drop skills off the hotbars and have to manage them and remanage them and so forth.

See, the problem with Larian's approach IS that they are trying to make everyone happy. They're trying to order pizza for everyone by taking what everyone wants and trying to throw it into one pizza. "You wanted pepperoni, he wanted sausage, and she wanted just cheese, but he wanted veggie lovers, and she wanted all the meats while he wanted bacon cheeseburger and she wanted Mediterranean. So let's all have one big pizza with all those toppings thrown together."

And the only people really happy are those who just don't give a flip and think that a pizza is a pizza, so give them whatever. Jumble it all together and they'll eat it anyway. Ah! MMM. Pizza. Who cares what's on it?

Again, I think the UI is better, but it is a long way off from what "People wanted this." A long way off.

Isnt that by design?
I mean people were complaining a lot about ability to start fight with single character ... and then sneak by with another one and attack ... then sneak by with another one and attack ... and then sneak by with another one and attack ... (and it doesnt end here if you are moding )

Dont get mad, but i dont see much difference in the end between this "ugly and hated gimmick" and that "beautifull and purposefull, and who knows what else full function". :-/

I can understand why would you concider such function to be one of the most essential things engine HAVE to do in any real-time game ...
But in turn based? Im not really sure what do you need that for man. :-/

That is certainly one of options ...

OR you can force turn-based ... and send them one-by-one to their locations ...

OR you can press ungroup ... and send them one-by-one to their locations ...

I mean yeah you described the least effective way to move your party, but that doesnt mean its the only way. :-/
I dont quite see the reason for chaining them ... especialy if (concidering your own description) have problems with that (aka.: "hope the chain will stick")

In my opinion Backspace (ungroup) ... F1 > move mouse to position > Click ... F2 > move mouse to position > Click ... F3 > move mouse to position > Click ... F4 > move mouse to position > Click ... and voila.
I often set ambushes like this ... and it rarely takes me more than few seconds. :-/
(and yes sometimes i metagame when i do ... but some i set it even for first atempt back in Patch 1, so i dont count those ... for example Githyanki Patrol ... gosh i cant imagine how could Larian make them seem more dangerous and warn us, than post there huge neon sign saying "hard encounter, saving recomended!" )

I agree on traps and cones tho ...
But i dont think it is anyhow linked to chaining or not-chaining ... that is more like NPC AI movement problem ... and it would be just as shitty as if we were Shift-Clicking our microparty members.

I totally was going to.
Cant imagine doing something like that in turn based in first place.

Daffy Duck would call this pronoun trouble.

First of all, you should be clear about what is "this" before you start talking about "it".
And if i would not be so lazy ... i could find you the post that quite litteraly asked for "using the spellslot indicators as interactive buttons to decide wich spell-slot-level we wish to use for that particular cast we are going to use" ...

Wich is, to say it in your own words something we "actually wanted and asked for" and also "what they gave us".

So no, my statement is not false ...
You were just conecting wrong dots.

Yup ... that is much closer to what is actualy happening than the previous, completely off example.

Likely? That is certain my dear friend.

One old quote say:
"Democracy only works if neither stakeholder is satisfied with the outcome."
And that is something that certainly aply here aswell.

Yup ... that is one of reasons i believe Swen litteraly (and multiple times) warned us that this is just first build, that they are still working on it, and that it will change futher.

The point of testing this UI isnt to decide if it is allready perfect, based on Swens expression i would dare to say that nobody in Larian expected such outcome ...
But to tell them if this is movement in right direction, and concidering reaction you paraphrased ... it seems like most people agree on that it certainly is!

I dont think that is problem ...
And concidering how their UI looked in previous builds, i dare to say neither should you ... since the game is getting adjusted to come closer to your demands, not mine ... we were allready there.

You know ... this could theoreticaly be good example ...
Sadly it isnt, its closer than your McDonald ... but even tho i sometimes wonder why you keep insist on using food examples ... they will never be acurate, since this "pizza" if you demand to call the game UI that way, offers something that food usualy dont do ... and its that you can take slice, and in the moment you do, all ingredients that are on it, become optional.

So yes, you ordered pepperoni for one, salami for another, veggie for third one, and cheeze for last one ...
And none of them wants what the other one have.

But the charm of the UI is that it CAN (and im not even counting mods) be done that way that the person who wants pepperoni will simply take and use just those parts of UI that are pepperoni ... same goes with everyone else.
And the pizza in the end will ... to put it simply look like this:


You are simply generalizing too much ...
"This" never meaned "all and everything that is in this game".

So, what you're saying is, technically, THIS that you were referring to means specifically that people asked for this: it's pretty counter-intuitive and anew player is not going to discover it except by random frustrated clicking; you have buttons down the bottom that sort your hot bar tabs, and these are clearly marked. Your resource bar up the top shows your action, bonus action, and class resources available - these do not look like buttons, are in a different place and have a different visual appearance to the other buttons, and give no indication that they are also clickable things - they look more simply like a resource tracker..

And see THIS is not what people asked for. That's my point.

We asked for:

buttons down the bottom that sort your hot bar tabs?
resource bar up the top shows your action, bonus action, and class resources?
them to not look like buttons?
them to be in a different place and have a different visual appearance to other buttons?
them to give no indication that they are also clickable things?
that they look more simply like a resource tracker?

I don't seem to recall any of these things being requested or suggested. Ever.

I recall asking for something akin to Solasta. I select Action spells. A pop-up list of prepared spells organized by level appears. I remember asking for a well organized UI where you could hit Melee Attack, and a pop-up of Melee Attack options are listed for you - like Menacing Attack, Pushing Attack, etc. I remember saying the same for Ranged so you didn't fill hotbars with Menacing Attack Melee, Menacing Attack Ranged, two for each action.

Less buttons. More organization. Less clutter. Less random chaos.

I don't necessary mean attack at once, which I think this is what you are refering. Imagine BG3 where you wouldn't have to rely on auto jump and you could just group characters tell them to jump somewhere and they would do it. Imagine BG3 where you could tell your party to climb a latter and all but one woudn't start climbing it up and down trying to guess where you might want to go. Imagine BG3 where you wouldn't have to stealth everyone one by one afraid that they will step into line of sight like dummies becase you can tell only on of them where they want to go.


I do use turn-based combat system for initiation, assuming they are within one turns walking range. And yes I can send them one by one though personally I do find BG3 struggles to handle characters doing different things at different times - it's not as bad as D:OS2 but still unresponsive. I think it has something to do with character animations locking players ability to switch to other characters.

Still that are things one can also do in the classic system. This is the point - classic system is more elegant, requires less messy UI, allows to do what current systems allows to do and better. If that doesn't bother you, that's fine, but believe me once you tasted something better for over 20 years it is difficult to be satisfied with this thing.


Well, I am pretty sure I asked for this though, or at least applauded the idea. Not because it is the best solution, but because I doubted Larian will abandon it's D:OS2 oddities. So just like with chain system the best I hope is to get as much functionality to what Larian added, rather then ask them to design a more efficient and elegant system. This is not going to be a masterclass in design, it's just way past that point. I just want it to be as playable as possible at this point. What we have one is messy and busy as hell, but at least it is not just an incoherent uncontrollable icon vomit. I mean it is still incoherent icon vomit but now one can try to sort through it.

I admit ... sometimes it almost fascinate me concidering how hard you need to try to twist words:
Into litteraly anything else but what was said.

Sometimes ...
Mostly its just exhausting.

I really dont know how did you managed to turn the sentence from my quote into that sentence from your quote ...
Cant say it much clearer than this tho. :-/ So read at least twice i guess?

You know if you would invest 10% of energy and time you give to try hard to find some contradiction in my words ...
And invest 10% of that into actualy READ those words ... it would be much smooter for both of us.

Indeed ... but can you honestly imagine that people would be fine with option to do anything but attack while controling your whole party at once?
So i dont think we can avoid that function.

Well ... i feel a little lost once again. :-/

What is so wrong about autojump?
I mean yeah sometimes you hurt (or kill) your party members but that would not change by controlling them all and order them to jump at once ... on the contrary THAT would ensure it.
That is problem of that landing AoE our characters do ...

Climbing a ladder ...
That was also not a problem since that ugly xlimbing bug appeared.
The only other problem i can think off is specificaly in Blighted Village where our followers feels like jumping down from the roof is the best way to get down no matter how much ladders Larian added there. But im not sure that would solved by allowing you to control your party unless you would be specificaly leading them step by step.

And Stealthing ...
Well that is pure movement problem.
As long as our party will keep the same formation where is differences?
In my honest opinion it doesnt really matter if you controll them all and send thwm from point A to point B ... or if you control just one of them and the rest is following.
As long as there is hazard in the way and our party step right into it ... unless specificaly ordered to ... THAT is a problem ... but it would be the same problem in both scenarios.
And the problem is that they are unable to leave the formation ...

To be quite honest i believe that most of those problems would be solved if our characters would move in line instead of square ... but that would make different problem with possitioning at start of combats ... or prehaps option for tactical approach?
Keep squishy casters in back? O:)

Or there is ofcourse more complex solution that would need to include hazard detection.

Exactly!

For goodness sake, Rag, go a play a good game for a bit, and then come back arguing. Next you will start asking why BG3 journal is a pile of crap.

What's wrong is that it doesn't work well. As a player I am at a mercy of whatever goddamn algorythm will decide to do. I have no say as to what party followers will do. Sometimes I want to jump my party down - but AI will decide to take different path and walk right into enemy sight. Sometimes I want to just jump one or two people - again having to unchain everyone, while not as tedious as it was, is till more more work required as it should be. I have no way of specifiying of what all but one of my party members are supposed to do. Wherever they will do what I need them to do is up to the algorhythm. Fine if the game does what I need it to do. Not fine if it doesn't. You might be shocked what cool, slick things you could do in BG3 if the game let you control it.

sigh, you really should try to read and understand what people are complaining one of these days, instead of engaging strawman argument jumping blindly to Larian's defence. The problem with engaging from stealth is that the system is poorly implemented with whole surprise round being heaviy stacked in favour of the attacker. That is what makes the attack from stealth so explotable. Again, there are over 20 years of games with the classic system existing that don't suffer from that issue, becuse they have a better ruleset. Larian's engagement rules are shitty + party controls are shitty. It is not math, two "-" only add up, dont cancel each other. I tried searching for a link the thread, but unfortunately this forum is as poorly designed as BG3 party control system. No matter, I am sure someone will create a new thread about the issue soon.


Yes it is. Have your leader have a ladder behind him and the followers will keep climbing up and down like stupid leming. Again, not a problem if you just walk the party from point A-B. But try anything more sophisticated with enemies nearby and the stupid AI will mess things up for you. Chaining isn't a problem if you play BG3 like DA:O - essencially move a blob of people from point A-B. But BG3 allows for far more nuanced interactions and control scheme should support that.


A movement problem that comes out from being able to tell only one character where to go. There is no formation in BG3 - it's one person and AI tries to chaotically follow it. When you give your leader an order you can only predict one person's move. If there is a LoS, a trap or a hazard in any vacinity of that move AI will most likely trigger it. How many times did I select a party memeber to disarm the trap only to have another companion walk in front of him and stand on the trap. It is a bloody nightmare. This never happens in Baldur's Gate1&2, Solasta, Pillars of Eternity, Kingmaker. When you give the order to move, you know where everyone one of your characters will go to. you can move right up to any hazard knowing that AI won't fuck things up.

Funnily enough, BG1&2 on top of a precise control also had party formations - newer titles like PoEs even allow for custom party formation. There are definitely bits in BG2 where I did set my party control to a straight line for safer navigation. And you know what? I could actually do that. Because BG2 party controls had enough verbs at my disposal that I was able to easily specify what I want the party to do.

Sure, Larian can spent a lot of time creating solutions for each problem their "follower" system creates, like they did with stealth all button. Chain system has incredibly low amount of verbs available for the player - the only tool at your disposal is "follow this character". Any other possible action needs to be manually added by Larian - either by additional buttons, or by coding an AI to guess players intentions. That is poor and ineficient design- complex and difficult solution to a very simple problem.

I am experiencing a bit of that in Bayonetta now. When I first played it I didn't understand why long time DMC players complained about auto-target lock. But then I played DMC5, and now I returned to platinum bayonetta. And yeah, not being able to pick your target and hoping for AI to guess which of 5 targets you are trying to hit is a frustrating downgrade taking away control from the player.

I can’t wait to immediately put Lae’zel’s armor on my Dragonborn Paladin!

Did this thread just get high jacked promoting a mobile game ui?