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?

We were not given a full breadth on what EA would entail. And honestly, Larian's communication for DoS 2 EA was much more transparent than this. I suspect that was also because that was donor-funded, so they had to give updates and actually show their face.

Anyway, I expected EA was going to be something similar with regular posts and YouTube updates in between the big PFH and patches. Instead, it's been silence until a patch where we just shit and get forcefed whatever Larian spits out and then back to our cages we go.

There's no Q&A, no platform to know what it is they're thinking or how they're leaning on a certain issue. All we know is that someone aggregates stuff from here and sends it to them.

[MOVING ON]

Shove as a bonus action is broken. If only for the simple fact Larian put insta-death elevation on almost every encounter. You can do more damage with a Shove bonus action than with a spell slot or melee attack. You can even kill some of the hardest enemies in the game with just Shove.

Wet is beyond stupid. Giving the effective guaranteed critical for all Cold/Lightning damage is poor foresight. What happens when Lightning Bolt or Cone of Cold comes? Double damage dice just by using a L1 spell slot or water bottle? And then imagine if you actually roll a 20 on top of that.

Concentration still feels awful to use or risk unless you completely run off-screen after you get it off. It's constant rolls and checks that just remove investment of spell slots and makes the game not even fun. You can't even get through a round of Bless before it's removed by 1 DMG constant checks that you will eventually fail.

How can a low-level Goblin deal a max of 21 DMG to multiple targets by throwing 1 item? Why is this possible?

I was beyond done when they introduced DoS 2 shovel dig mechanics for chests and using Perception rolls to find them. This is just confirmation they're already planning DoS 3. There's no reason why that needed to be in the game. Who asked for that?

And why did hours need to go towards that instead of other things?

+1

How "you wish" is a preference.

How "it's supposed to be" is a prescription.

Very different things.

Yes ... "should be" and "is supposed to be" are same thing ... im aware.
But again, the name of topic is "the way YOU wish" ...

Dont you see the difference?
Or english dont make difference in unexpressed subject? O_o

I mean, translated to Czech the difference between those sentences is that in first case, you have set of rules you are oblighted to follow ... in second case you dont and you create those rules youreself.

//Edit:
Basicaly as JandK say.

Instructive.

Haha, which reminds me of:

lol, It's funny how in person, we don't take things people say literally, but somehow, online so many conversations comedown to "well, ACTUALLY". I have a feeling that non native language usage plays a part, especially on these forums, but it's funny how conversations online so often are a competition, not a discussion. It's more about "proving" someone wrong than actually trying to discuss the issue.

When someone expresses their opinion as the way things "should be," it's telling. Very telling. Anyone with a basic understanding of the English language knows that.

As for your non-native language comment, I assure you I have an idiomatic understanding of English. In fact, I would happily compare my degrees on the subject with yours.

Here's what's instructive: Say what you mean. Mean what you say.

This game objectively is not supposed to be played with enemies hurling 3d4 + 9 bombs at your party. This is my opinion.

It's splitting hairs - like REALLY splitting hairs.

If my friend comes up to me and says, "Dude. You should not wear that shirt." That's his opinion. But he told me I should! Yeah. So. His opinion is that he thinks I shouldn't wear the shirt I'm wearing. Doesn't mean I actually shouldn't wear that shirt. That's just his opinion.

Same thing with "supposed to be." If my friend says, "Dude! That lady is wearing a very low cut shirt. That's not how women are supposed to be. They should dress more modest. That's supposed to be how a lady acts."

It's all the same thing. That's his opinion. That's how he believes women should be and are supposed to be.

So, yeah. It's probably all coming down to translation and the nuances of certain cultures. It is VERY common where I live that people use both "supposed to" and "should be" interchangeably with "this is my opinion".

It’s telling that they have a strong opinion on the matter.

This summarizes well how I currently feel about BG3. After 2 years with the game, including 1 on this forum, I've formed a clear opinion of what I wish the game was. As I've spent time with my own fantasy of what BG3 could be, with sporadic and incomplete information from Larian as to what it will be, I've come to see my vision of the game as the correct one and Larian's deviations as heresies.

It's not Larian's job to turn my headcanon into reality, but I wish they had been clearer about their target audience because I'm slowly realizing that I'm not part of it : I don't want to figure out how to have fun. I want to figure out how to win; I expect the game's designers to make the most effective way to win also the most fun way to play. As is, players need to set their own goals and their own restrictions.

I used to be a proponent of experienced players setting restrictions to have more fun during EA, while waiting for v1.0 to fix issues. Now that BG3 is "nearly feature complete", I can see that my vision of BG3 will not come to pass. It will stay a game about spectacular consequences as opposed to interesting decisions.

*sigh*

In conclusion, no conclusion. I'm tired and burnt out and I've no idea what to say that might move the needle towards interesting decisions. I'm out of arguments and stamina; this post is self-plagiarism and it still took three hours (!) to formulate.

Yes, that's what I thought is generally accepted as good design. One can pick up two sticks and find a way to have fun with them. It doesn't make them a well designed game.

Yes ... "should be" and "is supposed to be" are same thing ... im aware.
But again, the name of topic is "the way YOU wish" ...

I cant believe im saying this again.

Maybe let me rephrase:
The way you "should play the game" or "the game is supposed to be played" is opinion of Larian ...
The way "you wish to play" is YOUR opinion ...

And that is the difference.

If you friend thinks you "should not" wear this shirt ... or this "isnt the way woman is supposed to be dressed" ... that are both his opinion as you say.
But they way "that woman wish to dress" or "the shirt you want to wear" are your (or hers respectively) decisions.

And that is the difference once again.

OH GOD.

I believe you are then in perfect state of mind for this topic.
Even tho its yours.

Tell us, are YOU playing BG3 the way you wish it could be played?

Wrong.

What about the people that are having fun playing now? Well, I'll tell you how that very subjective point is approached on these forums:


So, the takeaway is what, that they're too stupid to have fun? Oh, I know, "but Rob, you're missing context", or "you're unable to grasp..." Hey, all of that comes back to the same thing, doesn't it??? It's amazing, isn't it?

Here's a thought: Maybe they're actually enjoying themselves because they're not looking for 5e purism? Maybe a version number has no impact at all on why they bought the game? So, because others are laser focused on that aspect alone, everyone else is invalid? Why isn't it that anyone that's laser focused on rules is "too stupid to have fun, because the game's supposed to be about RP"? That's not my position, but a version number had nothing to do with why I bought the game.

Oh, the second quote in this thread is Copy/Pasted, because I don't want anyone editing out my context.

There are way too many ways to approach what's "fun". Some people are going to be rules lawyers, there's a lot of that on these forums. Others are going to be purely in it for the RP, there are some vids of that on YouTube. Some are going to be more interested in the story. Some people are going to be going for Min/Maxing to the nth degree, I'll likely be one of those, once I start getting into MP. There's a system that should drive the rules lawyers up the wall, since the whole idea is to bend the rules as much as possible to achieve a specific build. I know that they weren't exactly popular at TT sessions, and my RP group in NWN forbade Min/Maxing.

You know, now that I'm thinking about this, I suspect that I know exactly what's going on here: Rule Lawyer Paradise.

That makes sense. I also want to win and play as well as I can within the rules I've been given.

But I'm not enjoying Shoving things down a cliff for the millionth time, or cheesing with stealth or metagamed alpha strikes.

Correct implementation of the shove action does not interfere with RP, story or min/maxing. Care to explain how exactly "rule lawers" fun takes away from RP, story or min/maxing fun?

It's a strawman.
"Oh, you like for your game systems to make sense and not break apart at the slightest push? You must be someone who hates roleplay and fun".