Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Poll: Are you playing BG3 the way you wish it could be played?

Holy Crap On A Cracker Batman! lol.

Seriously. It's all in the context, Ragnarok. Some things - maybe it's more English than other languages, I don't know - are implied and not spoken. When someone says on this forum, "Shove should be an action", or "Shove is supposed to be an action," they are implying, "In my opinion, I believe that shove should be/is supposed to be an action. I wouldn't be saying this at all if I didn't also wish that shove was an action. I am implying by merely stating that shove should be an action that I also wish that BG3 made it so that shove is an action. So, what do I wish BG3 would have in it? I wish it would have shove as an action."

The person's wish for the game is implied in the simple statement, "Shove is supposed to be" or "should be" an action because they wouldn't be saying it if they didn't wish that it was true.

But it's completely off topic and irrelevant to the topic. Ragnarok is actually right on this one, as much as you wanna play the but but but game. Continue and thread closes. The poll and title thereafter asks if the player is playing BG3 the way they want to (and nuances of how much the game incentivizes/goes against that, though sadly not a neutral option of just "Yes" which would be me.), not about anything else but whether or not I'm playing the game the way I wish I would.

Not every topic is about what you and I probably both would agree upon being unnecessary changes to 5e adoption to video game. That's not the thread's proposition. So stop insisting it is.

I've been reading through and have re-iterated my stance. Closing thread, and hope you guys will reflect upon why. I'm getting gradually stricter until you guys start respecting threads and avoid derailing them to personal "need to win arguments, semantics, but but but"-games.

Re-opening the thread after talking with OP to get the thread back on track, so I ask everyone to please stick to the thread's topic, not your injected interpretation of it. For other discussions, start new threads.



The thread meant to be subjective and open ended, a behavioural subject about how the game's designed may either positively reward your player behavior, or punish/disincentivize it compared to how you wish to play the game - And the buck ends there. There is no further nuance, other than "What do you personally want from a game, and does the game sway you towards or away from approaching the game the way *you* want to. It's not about what the game should be, design decisions, or anything like that. Just what you wish for in a game and if BG3 lets you play that way or not.

Keep it on topic please, otherwise it'll be closed again, and further action on individuals may be taken. Respect the topic the OP wishes to discuss and hear what others has to say about.

The topic is generally about the difference between hopes and the reality of BG3.

I wasn't going to bother voting but decided to go ahead.

I went with the last option myself. I will be heavily modding the game after release, but haven't used any yet and will wait till after the official toolkit is released. I will be an option 2 eventually.

Edit: reality vs desire?- I was really hoping for a more tactical game...Jagged Alliance/Fallout Tactics in a fantasy setting, something with more depth than we have here. BG3 is more of an action game than tactical game to me.

I would rather the game play a bit different, but it's still better than any other games that I've not already played to death so I'm looking forward to the final release and will play it however seems most fun to play then. I figure it will not be as close to how a wish it could have been, but will still be decent enough fun.

Thanks for asking! Short answer, no.

Long (winded) answer:

My previous answer to this question was number 3: I was resting as little as possible for fun but the game punished me by depriving me of camp content.

In those low-rest, low-loot runs I was having a lot of fun. I wasn’t using the common bonus actions, though. I didn’t like shove and had never really used hide or jump in combat.

I didn’t realize the impact these bonus actions have until patch 8. After a bard run mercifully ended in a game ending bug (pre hotfix), I decided to spice up the deep gnome wizard run by trying to explore common bonus actions more.

[What follows is a summary of points made a million times. Tl;dr I don’t like ‘em.]

I don’t have to use any of them, just like I don’t have to rest as often as the game wants me to. At some point, though, I’ve got to wonder how much this game is doing it for me if I have to write all the rules myself. And if trying to use common abilities to their full potential isn’t fun, that might be a sign for me to move on.

To robertthebard’s point, I’m not trying to take a deuce on anyone’s happiness. I know there are a million ways to have fun; none are any less valid than mine.

I think I’m a little sour because I’ve played BG3 to death. Anything new I find now lasts a few minutes at best across dozens of hours of gameplay, so I’m left with dialogue (95% skipped) and combat (with its issues).

The implementation of Bardic Inspiration also really sapped my confidence in Larian’s ability to present interesting decisions. That initial College of Lore bard run was torture (but for the perform action, which is really neat). I still can’t believe how Cutting Words works.

Funny story before I wrap up (actual spoilers ahead).
Unlike many on this forum, I don’t actually play CRPGs. Maybe I don’t get the codes of the genre. In my book, something simple, repetitive, and effective in achieving victory is called a gameplay loop. Common bonus actions are at the core of BG3’s gameplay loop, and I really wish they weren’t. Which is why the game won’t let me play the way I wish it could be played.

I need to learn how to install mods…

Sory if you answered this and i missed it ...
But if you want to ... and you can ... why you dont?

It seems to me you are overthinking ...
I never prepared any rules for myself, so i believe its not necesary, just follow your heart.

True ...
On the other hand it sounds like you dont actualy have much fun using your way. :-/

Feel free to corect me, but as far as i know exactly same scene could happen in Tabletop. O_o

Especialy bcs the part: "You can choose to use this feature after the creature makes its roll, but before the DM determines whether [it] succeeds or fails"
And: https://mobile.twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/695078050589859840

You tempter!
I wont say it, but i bet you know very well what i would like to say.

It's not like cRPGs work differently then other games - core gameplay loop doesn't have to be combat in a cRPG, but in all BGs it is. It's not like BG3 offers a crazy range of customisation either, with classes geting homogenized and as you mentioned a lot of powerful bonus actions being available to everyone.

I've avoided participating in this thread since I know the end result would be that I'd just get into semantics fights that will derail the thread, but I have to point out here, didn't The Composer just close the thread and then re-open it while warning everyone against replying to people in this kind of nitpicky way?

I think I should rule lawyer a bit in regards to that Cutting Words/Inspiration bit though before I slink back into the swamps. Most interpretations of that suggests that you’re allowed to know what the roll is before you can choose to use your reaction, you just might not yet know if that rolled number hits or misses depending on the situation (like, say, when you’re attacking an unknown enemy and the party hasn’t worked out what their exact AC is yet).

Though a video game such as this will likely take liberties with such things towards player convenience anyway.

+1

I don't necessarily have the same idea of fun as you, but we (and many people in this thread I suspect) are both hoping for a robust modding system. I'll admit, I'm a bit nervous with how cumbersome I've heard DOS2 is to mod. Larian isn't Bethesda in that sense with giving a creation kit designed to make modding relatively simple and easy, with also powerful possibilities.

As for what 'playing BG3 the way I wish I could', for me, I'm at a point in my life where I don't play most video games for the challenge. I enjoy killing things, having a good story, getting good loot, exploring and learning about the world, all without having to min/max my characters. That's part of why WotR was so frustrating for me. They did SO much right with the mythic paths. I got so pumped listening to those awesome narrative sections around the different paths, but the combat was just so hard for me in an already really crunchy rule system. It wasn't even really a matter of difficulty, everything was just too complicated for me. Being able to land on a decent build by accident is almost impossible in WotR (at least for me). So I'm stuck either spending tens of hours rebuilding characters, having a terrible build, or just copying someone else's build.

If I'm able to choose a playstyle and through options/mods, get through the content with little frustration, then that's really all I 'need' I guess. Obviously there are lots of nitpicks I have, but we've been over all of those ad nauseam at this point.

So, how do I want to play, where I can honestly answer the basic question of the OP with "Yes."?

I mentioned this in another thread, quite a while back, but I want to fire up the game, look at the clock and realize that it's 4 AM, and I have to be up in 2 hours. If this game can do that, it's going to be wildly successful, and in the early days of EA, it was doing that, to a lesser degree, since TB combat leads to time to actually look at the clock while you're waiting for your turn(s) to come up. I have been engaged, and I have enjoyed it. That is all I'm looking for.

I thought about this yesterday, when I fired up Steam to play FO 4 for a bit and saw that I had over 1200 hours in it. While FO 4 isn't the worst game I've ever installed, by a large margin, it's not the best game I've ever played either. The thing is, I can't put my finger on exactly how I got there. I had over 280 hours on Skyrim, hell, I had over 60 hours in Sword Coast Legends, a game which isn't all that great, by most metrics. These are the PC numbers, I have both Skyrim and FO4 on XBox too, and have lots of time in those as well. I don't spend a lot of time with the EA, mostly just around patches, to see what's new, because of the numbers listed here. I don't want to be burnt out on the game before it ever releases, so I deliberately limit my time. I want the experience to be as fresh as possible when the game releases.

TL;DR? The game has kept me engaged in it when I play. I wasn't, and am not looking for an edition number, I'm looking for a story that can pull me to the end, sometimes kicking and screaming because I need to be asleep instead. There are hints of that here, so yes, I can play the game the way I want to, because at the end of the day, just like with every other game I play, I'm not looking for all that much, get me out of my own head, and let me lose myself in the world.

That's such a good point. there's this unknown 'it' quality to some games that allow them to be so incredibly engaging. Fallout 4 was one for me as well. I was recently playing Yakuza 3 and realized that I was just going through the motions because it just wasn't enjoyable. The story, the combat, nothing was really hitting it, and so when I finished it, it was more of a relief of "finally, I can uninstall this" than wanting more. Having Baldur's Gate 3 NOT be that is the minimum I suppose.

I do, Rag

For context, Ragnarok’s comment is part of a long debate we’ve had, (of which this thread is an offshoot) so it doesn’t feel like nitpicking to me. His stance: why blame the game if your own behaviour is what’s unfun; my stance: why is the game encouraging unfun behavior?

Again, fun is subjective. When my heart is telling me to loot and rest as little as possible, to never use the camp chest or the ability to throw potions, to skip common bonus actions, to refrain from abusing real time stealth when enemies are stuck in combat, to avoid casting cleric spells with the wizard and to forget about bards altogether, when my heart is telling me all of this, maybe it’s just saying BG3 isn’t for me.

@Wormerine: It’s nice to find a kindred spirit. Let’s agree to agree!

@Saito Hikari: if I understand correctly, in the table top version of my Cutting Words story, the DM would tell me that the ogre crit before I use Cutting Words, at which point I’d choose not to use it because CW doesn’t work on crits. I agree that video games need some allowances; I disagree that the allowances afforded BG3’s CW are convenient.

All of those things sound great to me for a first playthrough. But I change as a gamer the second playthrough onward. What brings me back to a game is a desire to explore its mechanics. (Gone are the days of Pierre, the coast-dwelling hermit druid who’d rather cast Shillelagh on his salami than turn into a bear). Usually, further playtime means I engage with more systems more efficiently. In BG3’s case, it means deciding, for each system, whether its impact is a net positive for my fun.

What you describe with WotR is the reason I don’t usually play CRPGs, though I’m quite tempted to try Solasta. Fingers crossed for good mods!

My ideal experience with a CRPG is that it needs to sell me the idea of being on an adventure, doing adventurous things, going through the struggles that an adventure implies.

Which may include, among other things:

- dangerous but exciting and satisfying combat where a lot is a stake but the rewards are proportional
- highly reactive social encounters, where who I am, what I do and the consequences of my actions are acknowledged as much as reasonably possible
- finding and exploring new exciting and interesting places
- being troubled with the correct spots to rest and/or struggling for resources
- celebrating the finding of something valuable (loot or treasures) and benefitting from it.
- living through a setting that feels consistent with its own premise and doesn't attempt to take you out of it with 4th wall breakings at every step
- achieving some short term goals and some overarching big final one. Bonus points if the story feels personal rather than being about saving the world

Consequently I'm not particularly happy when a game in the genre keeps trying to "gamefy" and simplify things, when against any best judgement it tries its best to BREAK the sense of immersion reminding you constantly that it's not an adventure, just a silly videogame.
When you are rewarded for cutting through the curtains and laugh at/with the people moving the puppets behind the scene, etc.

I can't be a fan of the removal of "tedious" parts of the game experience like identification of items and attunement, that for me helped to sell that illusion of finding mysterious things and living the adventure.
I can't be excited about "shove" being a cartoon gag instead of selling the idea of a physical struggle during a melee engagement, when pushing someone down a precipice doesn't mean watching the bastard fall to the ground but trace a goofy parabolic arc mid-air, when shooting a bow looks like it's just missing a squeaky noise to be a Benny Hill skit, when resting is just a reset button that doesn't involve any actual decision of when and where, nor any potential risk.
I can't say I'm "living the dream" when the fictional virtual world I'm exploring can't be bothered with the notions of day, night, passing time, changing weather, urgency or what else.

And while this is not strictly related to the above rant about immersion and adventure, I also can't say that I'm going through my ideal gaming experience when the UI and controls feel like they are ANTAGONIZING me as a player, rather than supporting what I want to do.

So, NO, I'm NOT playing the game in the way I WISH it could be played.

It has nothing to do with being "married to the sourcebook" (I said even before in the past that I don't even particularly like D&D, among the few P&P I had a chance to actually play it may be my least favorite).
It's also decidedly NOT about being a "rule lawyer", no matter how some would attempt to frame it. I just wish to have something that would feel RIGHT to play, that could deliver that sense of immersion convincingly.
A lot of older, cheaper and far less ambitious games managed that just fine, especially considered their circumstantial limitations, so I don't really want to hear that I'm asking for something unreasonable or unrealistic.

Is BG3 allowing me to play the way I want?

Yes and No.

I was super excited about this game. I wasn't even going to buy it, because of the Mature rating and there was mention of sex scenes and basically content that I don't approve of. Whenever a game has such ratings, I hesitate. Is the content a must to play the game, or is it just available as an option.

In this regard, BG3 has hit the mark. It is a game that has the content available, but it is an option that I don't have to trigger, for the most part. (The comments of the duergar and a few others at points gets disgusting and raunchy, and I wish I could turn them off, especially because they repeat their comments a lot over and over and over again. I'm sick of hearing about someone choking on Nere's prick.)

Anyway, aside from that, I was SUPER excited about Turn-Based D&D 5e video game because every freaking D&D game since the old Pool of Radiance games have been RtwP, and I was UBER looking forward to a true D&D 5e interpretation into a video game especially because previous versions have always been so Feat-heavy and complex. I wanted no character scripts and no automated minions, full control over my party, etc.

Again, I got this... sorta. I got a D&D 5e-ish Turn-Based game with monsters that look like 5e monsters but don't exactly act like 5e monsters. And as discussed at great length, there are many mechanics that aren't 5e. Though I don't mind some minor tweaks to the rules and monsters in order to fit into a video game - or just because it makes the game better - the homebrew really ruins a lot of other elements for me and makes the game unbalanced. I won't go into details so as not to derail the thread. Enough's been said elsewhere.

But a big part of it is that I really want this to be a genuine Forgotten Realms story and setting with immersion and cohesive and intelligent characters and companions. I want to FEEL like I'm really in the Forgotten Realms world, and I want to NOT have to pretend that I'm just a naive fool MC and that my companions are NOT terrible liars and obviously evil. In many ways, they've done this, but in others they have fallen horribly short.

And I REALLY want companion growth and development to be something I can do simply by traveling with them, not because I slept frequently so I could trigger special dialogues. I want to be able to build relationships up with said companions based on what really matters to them as opposed to dialogue events that shouldn't affect the companions as much. (Lae'zel should like me more for completing her quest to get to the gith patrol, and if I do a few things in between that she maybe doesn't like as much, the amount of relationship points for doing her quest far exceeds the minor conversation choices I made on situations she really couldn't care less about - like saving Sazza in the tiefling prison.)

As far as combat goes, I am.


The mods I have used are true to 5e, and I have had a lot of fun trying out classes /sub-classes that I didn't get to play during online table-top.

RP-wise, this is a completely different experience from other BG games, but I wouldn't be putting in the hours if I wasn't enjoying myself.


Quote: (Lae'zel should like me more for completing her quest to get to the gith patrol, and if I do a few things in between that she maybe doesn't like as much, the amount of relationship points for doing her quest far exceeds the minor conversation choices I made on situations she really couldn't care less about - like saving Sazza in the tiefling prison.)

I was going to put her back in my party, when I discovered her at the Gith encounter (after leaving her in the cage).

After saving her she seemed grateful, but when I got to camp and talked to her I was reminded of why I left her in the cage...she stays side-lined.

Astarian keeps the number three spot, and that says something.


This will NOT be a game where I feel great comradery for the NPCs, but that is just the way this game chose to be. I am more like a foreigner in a strange land, with acquaintances who I may or may not be able to trust. It is what it is.

Sadly, no. Many of the design decisions and gameplay mechanics just don't make a lot of sense (or don't appeal) to me. Also, [currently] the world feels too small, too cramped, and too static for an immersive RPG.

I feel like this is the stance that I most closely align to as well.

I realize that a lot of the stuff listed here is actually why I ended up enjoying the Pathfinder games despite going into that series not really knowing what to expect, even though those games aren't anywhere close to BG3 from a graphical presentation standpoint and having a far more disjointed combat system (though I loved the theorycrafting behind character builds in that game due to what it lets you do, especially that it lets me become a proper arcane archer without any strings attached). There's something about the writing in that game series that really makes you feel like your character and the rest of the party are truly part of the world, rather than observers or a collective group of people trying to overpower the setting with their deeds, so to speak.

The latter is where I currently feel BG3's narrative is at, but it might be a consequence of not yet reaching any area that isn't in a state of perpetual conflict with their neighbors and that we were basically dropped into the overall situation in media res. Stuff like this is why I used to frequently advocate for fleshing out the companions and displaying their personalities and their place in the world in more indirect ways, like more party banter and unique lines in combat tailored to specific enemies they were fighting (the latter of which hasn't really been done in any RPG as far as I'm aware).

The concept of 'highly reactive social encounters' is probably the main thing that still keeps me interested in BG3.