Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General What's you biggest fear about the final BG3 release?

I think what Alix describes has more to do with complexity, then difficulty per-say. D:OS2 mechanics were very easy to understand and engage with - even D:OS1 resistances were simplified into simple binary armor system. I, for one, believe that those changes made D:OS2 a worse game, but it was definitely easier to understand and engage with. Winning a combat enounter without understanding exact mechanics doesn't make for engaging experience - and fun comes from engagement, not aimlessly clicking on things.

I am pretty sure, that is why Larian is sticking to Larianisms - like push, surfaces, barrels etc. Those are easy to understand concepts that can one use to bypass almost any encounter.

Though I think it is a wrong solution to the problem as:

Solasta is a very flawed title, but I strongly believe that where they succeeded is making DnD engagable. Yes, I played DnD RPGs since BG1&2, but I can't say I am well versed in them - mostly because most game do a terrible job engaging players with underlying systems - BG3 isn't no different. Solasta superbly communicates dice rolls both for hit and damage, what is happening during combat, and what effect each spell and ability. This is a first and only DnD RPG I played, where I don't have to dive and analyze the combat log - every thing is there, on surface, visible and understandable. The game doesn't even give us "to hit" chances, and our attack roll will tell us what we need to know.

BG3 on the other hand is afraid to be a DnD game - rolls are hidden, translated through a vague % translation. It favours visual flourish over clarity. By combining DnD and DOS it uses two different rulesets making things rather inconsistant. It tries to look like your traditional, modern XCOM inspired tactics game, but it doesn't work like one. I don't think this is a healthy approach in a long run.

When I heard Larian is making BG3 I knew what we will be getting - a Larian RPG first and foremost. But what I was looking forward to is Larian taking turn based system, and their budget to created most fleshed out, engagable DnD adaptation there is. I find it incredibly disappointing that they decided to hide and distract from the systems as much as they did. On top of that, combat log is so underdeveloped, I don't think one can get a graso on mechanics without foreknowledge, or personal determination.

Larian homebrew and gameplay - I loath them by now. There has yet to come one of their changes that I think benefited the game and wasn't just outright bad.

I already seem to not care at all about companions and most likely won't use them (would be a first for me, I always play with with original characters, but in this game I'm pretty sure I will switch to custom party out of the gate).

Story so far has been underwhelming by everything being over the top, but lets wait and see.



I must admit at this point I'm not worried about the game as much as I would end up surprised by really liking it.

I am not a fanatic DnD fan, but I am a fan of clear rules.
And established PnP systems such as DnD5E or Pathfinder have a clear rule set and millions of tabletop players prove that it works.

Solasta and Kingmaker/WotR are very faithful computer adaptions of PnP rules.
The rules are complicated (maybe it looks even more so when you come from DOS) but you can read the rules and the game follows those rules.
When you understand the rules and use them to your advantage you can feel very clever.
I did not have this feeling in BG3 because I am not sure about the rules.

There was a thread "Do you play the game as intended?".
I did not reply because I have no idea how the game is intended to be played.

The devs need to explain the rules better and they should do it in the game.
Especially when they make changes to the DnD rules, which they do a lot.
The game is called a DnD game but there are so many changes and many of them are not explained, so many features feel like a bug to me.

Minimum things that need to be shown:
- At character creation you can see what this class can learn later
- At character creation you can see what subclasses can be selected later and what they do
- It would be great if you could see the complete spell list somehow. Like if I select a cleric now, what spells do I get later
- Explain the game rules in game, especially when they changed DnD rules
For example "Each character has an action, a bonus action and a reaction per round. Here is a list and explanation of typical A/BA/R. For spells and special abilities read their description."

It is bad that you have to read a fan wiki to understand the rules and character progression of a game.

Back in the old days games came together with a huge printed manual. BG2 was my first big computer game and reading the manual helped me a lot.
Something like that (best in game or at least as official PDF) would help a lot.

Very true

I thought the topic name was "Do you play the game the way you want" ? O_o

Or was there another?

While Solasta is definitely very faithful, Kingmaker/WoTR is more like BG3 in that they take a lot more liberties - not that it's necessarily a bad thing. And I'm not even talking about RTwP vs. TB. A lot of the combat rules in KM/WoTR are pretty different from Table Top, which is why they have pretty different metas.

For example, flanking is extremely simplified in KM/WoTR which is why Sneak Attack is so strong. Ranged is also very different because Owlcat completely changed the Composite Bow rules (get 1.5x STR and no STR cap, etc). A lot of actions from PnP are just not implemented (i.e. grapple, readied actions, counterspell, etc).

The skills system is significantly overhauled and consolidated (i.e. WoTR Persuasion = Table Top Diplomacy + Bluff + Intimidate). Classes are have tons of changes, as are the enemy creatures and the WoTR Mythic system is completely different from the Table Top one. If you're curious, a good blog post from someone on the Paizo Forums explains it:
https://sagaofthejasonite.wordpress...rences-between-the-tabletop-and-pc-game/

I don't think WoTR did a bad job capturing the essence of PF1E though and is an excellent game IMO.



100% this - I think the current level up UI is very lacking. The lack of seeing future level abilities is a major issue for me too.

Also, not being able to see your future subclasses is a critical problem too. For example, I may hate the idea of a fighter, but LOVE the idea of the Eldritch Knight. Well, in the current UI, if I didn't know the 5E rules I wouldn't know Eldritch Knights are an option at all.

This is going to be even more necessary when they implement multi-class, because you'd want to know what abilities a new class brings, and the levels you break off on, etc. I.e. if I want to multiclass to a Druid, but what does a Druid actually give me? What are the subclasses available?

That you need to do things in one, single particular order in order to finish your quests or be able to get certain dialogue triggers, like romance options unless you pay unreasonable attention to doing things in just the one, right way.... like developers assuming the party will rest in camp before entering the grove and therefore cutting some camp dialogue because of it. Makes no sense.

DOS2: You can go anywhere in this Act, but the levels are arranged in a single viable path, with a heavily implied order for the story.

@topgoon:
Thank you for your reply.
I am not a PnP player, but for Solasta and Kingmaker/WotR reading the PnP rules helped a lot to play the game.
Solasta is very good in showing things clearly in game. (I admit DnD 5E is much easier to understand than Pathfinder 1E)

Doing lots of reading about the Pathfinder system was actually needed to finish those games. (on normal, no need for more inflated stats)
First I thought knowing DnD 3E should be enough (I played NWN 1+2) but I was wrong. Reading the PnP Pathfinder rules online was absolutely needed.
WotR is even more complex than Kingmaker (mystic classes, mounted combat, ...) but they also improved on showing things (you can better see differences between base class and archetype).
Plus having played Kingmaker before made the biggest difference.

Anyway: In those games reading the PnP rules helped me a lot to play the game, even if there are differences.
Its hard for me to judge this (because I have finished Solasta before playing BG3), but for new players without experiance it would be very hard to play BG3 by just reading DnD rules.
BG1+2 came together with a great manual, so I never bothered reading the PnP rules.

PS:
BG2 was my first big computer RPG, but I have never heared of PnP before.
I started playing the game and got completely confused.
Then I read the manual and I was able to finish the game. But I did not understand why the term "dice" was used so often in a computer game.
It was years later that I learned what PnP is and that BG was based on PnP.
My first contact with PnP was when I got the video "The Gamers" on GOG for free.

Reading?! RULES?! In a 2022 RPG computer games? Are you mad?! Everyone wants FREEDOM to do anything they want. No stupid restrictions. Sadly. Like playing with <cheat mode> on. Zzzzzzz.....
I like CLASSES to be HARD LOCKED with restrictions. Same for RACES. Same for EVERYTHING. Makes the world more interesting and challenging to play through, and adds atmosphere/risk. Its so much more fun (to me).

In these times of instant gratification, people are more and more SPECTATORS to RPG games than players immersed into the world. Just watch in another decade, all RPGs will be like Tell Tale <games>.

And yet you dont like it enough to simply play that way and gont give a damn about what other people do in their games.
Odd.

I imagine your criticisms would be taken more seriously if you weren't constantly insulting anyone who disagrees. And insinuating that your opinion is somehow the objectively correct way to make a game.

Try this: "I <insert name here> prefer games to have more rigid class systems. Unfortunately, this type game has fallen out of favor in recent years and I wish there were more of them. I will now attempt to convince you that this is would be a positive change to the game through sound reasoning and competent argumentation. <arguments go here>"

if(mr_planescapist == decentHumanBeing)(

message ="Congratulations! You evolved!"

}else{

message = " Wtf did I just witness"

}

Yea, i had to do a double take when I realized they were talking about mr_planescapist

Let's keep it civil, guys.

I would like to apologize for everyone I offended from my <?insult?> of my opinions of modern RPG gaming trends impacting on that BG3 final release.
BG3, it'S AMAAAZING!!!

Other stuff I fear the game needs not before release:

More cuty multicolered animals drenchend in blood.
One night stand hardcore foursomes.
Shove game pixels at enemies.
Larian+ account for even more ingame wet and wild mechanics.

my 2 cent:
- Games need rules. Without rules there cannot be a game.
- The game should explain the rules clearly to the player.
- Once the rules are established, the game must follow its own rules.

I am not just talking about complicated stuff like DnD.
There are many popular games with very simple rules, such as Tetris.
Right now BG3 is often not good in explaining its own rules, so I am not sure what is a feature and what is a bug.

The real problem is how often it feels that BG3 is not particularly good at UNDERSTANDING its own rules (or the rules of the system it is based on), let alone explain it to the others.

For example, there's a reason if D&D explicitly tells you that in no case you are supposed to be able to cast two spells in the same turn. And that reason was clearly lost to whoever at Larian applied it to the game.

That is one of my favorite changes they made!
I love casting 2 spells in the same turn!