Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Do YOU enjoy BG3's systemic design?

That's something I have been thinking for a while - as a RPG and immersive sim fan Larian's RPG should be right up my alley. It hasn't been quite as simple as that, though.

I decided to make this post after this Noclip interview with maker of Weird West, in which he directly referenced Divinity: Original Sin2:


I think there are couple reasons as to why I don't find enjoyment in Larian's systemic design:

1) BG3 systems don't make a goddam sense - a joy of immersive sims is that because their systems are so granual, you can find creative, logical and "immersive" solutions, rather then relying on a handful of options that devs came up with. That's not how systems in Larian games work - an example could be popular complaints: throwing healing potions at a floor will create a puddle which will heal characters who will step into it. Transitioning into combat doesn't include stealthed characters, allowing them to easily sneak into the backline as enemies are frozen in time. There has been a lot of argument about impact of those systems on games balanace, but I think the bigger offender is that they don't work as logic would dictate - this is anti-immersive design, favouring implemented game's systems over how they should work regarding their theme and function in the story.

2) BG3 quests rely heavily on scripting and don't acknowladge/reward systemic play - I just don't get many "cool" moments in BG3. Just recently I tried to use game's system to rob the body surrounded by goblin children, but game's script didn't allow for it - with kids immediately rasining alarm, even though they didn't witness the robbery. There are some cool things like an ability to poison Goblin's drink in the party, but I feel like it is deliberately set up by Larian, rather then an organic result of game's systems.

This relience on scripting leads to a problem, as players don't know what they actually can and can't do. They still are mostly allowed to follow the script set up by devs, like in more limiter RPG, except in BG3 it is not clear what path devs prepared for and for which they did not.

3) BG3 systems don't intersect - the most fun part of immersive sim is when logical, tracable but unpredictable chains of events take place. An example could be the story of father zombie the dev mentioned. I don't think BG3 has those - it has a lot of individual systems, but they don't get to speak to each other. This leads to a game that has a lot of tedium of immersive sim, but doesn't take advantage of their flexibility and doesn't generate memorable events. Lots of people complained about the amount of empty boxes in BG3. Has anyone found an interesting use for those (other then the recent Baldur's Crate).


What is your take? Do you have any cool stories to share, that resulted from game's systemic design? Do you think that tedium that comes with current design is well worth the creativity that it allows? Or do you wish BG3 were more streamlined, with more quality of life improvements, even if it would come at a cost of some systemic interactions?

EDIT: Immersive Sim is more of a set of principles then a genre. From those unfamiliar with the term, in this video Mark Brown tried to neatly define the term. Whenever BG3 tries or even wants to be an immersive sim is debatable, but I think at least some of the principles apply. Most of those titles quote Ultimas as their inspiration and I am pretty sure Larian's is also inspired by those games.

My intention of this thread isn't to discuss if BG3 is or isn't immersive sim (spoiler: it isn't), but simply what's your experience with the systemic design of the game. Changed the title to better reflect the intention.

Do you think it adds more to the game then takes away? And if you do have cool experiences that resulted from the systems, please share them.

What is your favorite immersive sim?

Some time ago it would have been a tie between System Shock or Deus EX, without a doubt.
With few strong contenders like Thief, STALKER, etc.

Among the recent ones very few can match Arkane's Prey.
While not a spotless game (especially in terms of lacking enemy variety) it does some many things just right.

"BG3" and "Immersive" placed in the same sentence together would create a magnetic repulsion turbine capable of generating enough energy to power a small country for years.

Larian have always struggled with this, but they seem to have struggled with it more and more as their game history has progressed, rather than less. As a development team, they do not really seem to 'get' the concept of immersion, or understand what its value is within a video game; they struggle with understanding that breaking what fragile sense of immersion they may have temporarily developed, for the sake of a cheap 'to the player' joke, or even just with intrusive or gamey systems and mechanics, is actively destructive for players seeking immersion in space.

The problem with this complaint - and why I'm well aware that it's of limited value - is that in order to actually address this Larian would need to shift their concept of game design somewhat, and any game they wished to actually pay attention to immersion value for would need ground-up attention... It's simply not practical or feasible to ask them to fix this for BG3 any more, and it may never have been so.

That would be more or less my list. Blasts from the past that come immediately to mind are: Systemshock2, Deus Ex, Thief1&2. From recent Arcane output Prey is easily my favourite - while I like Dishonored 1&2 a lot, I feel Prey just works better in encouraging taking advantage of the whole kit at player's disposal.

While I wouldn't describe them as Immersive sim, but I think are worthwhile when discussing BG3 would be Fallout1&2, Arcanum, Bloodlines: Mascarade - Tim Cain was very good in building robusts systems and then building worlds/questlines to be solved using those systems. There was a breakdown of one of the earliest quests in Fallout1 (rescue a girl from slavers) and depending on character's skillset there was about 7 ways to complete the missions mostly thanks to systemic nature of the game. My personal difference between Tim Cain's classics and Larian's games is that those options always felt like valid way of progressing - here is objective, and how you do it is up to you. In Larian games I feel like there is scripted, linear way of progressing, and then there are ways to break the progressions - which I just don't find nearly as appealing.

On boxes: As a loot hoarder, the one great thing about all the boxes are all the different types with various slightly different icons. I use to put one of each visually different icon box into my camp stash and sort all my loot into those.

Great video.
Whatsmore, I have a feeling that people nowdays don't even know what an "immersive" RPG is anymore; or even an RPG. Or have their own take on it. "Whats immersive to ME". Although there is a general consensus on that, based on over 40 years of RPG games.
Reminds me of Environmental issues, Flat earth, Vaccines, or COVID etc...there is a scientific concensus based on hundred of years of research, yet many people are "Whats the truth to ME", "MY opinion matters, although I have no fucking clue on whats going on....".

Well, that sounds like an issue with lack of gaming academic - unless one dedicates life to studying gaming as a whole, people use of terms will be very personal: I payed those games with community made RPG tag, so that's what I accociate them with. Actual RPGs have been rather nieche as they mostly disappeared from gaming during 7th generation. BG3 might be the first genuine RPG with enough production value to reach wider audience, which could result in something exciting later down the line.

I must admit I am disappointing to see no response from the positive side of BG3 forum. I hoped they found a way to enjoy the systems in a way I just didn't think of - you know, like people find their fun in Bethesda games and Minecraft while they bore me to death.

That is true. If Bethesda games taught me something, it is that a game, despite having all of its mechanisms deeply flawed, can be very fun to play and an overall critical success. While BG3 is nowhere near as broken as Skyrim is, I'm sure it will be highly regarded. Its overall presentation is appealing enough for everyone contrary to some more niche games who are more "faithful" to a veteran.

Thanks for the interesting vid and thought-provoking topic. I’ve been mulling it over. While I’m a long-term fan of many cRPGs, those that are described as immersive sims tend to be ones that either haven’t drawn me, or I’ve tried and abandoned. I obviously prefer my stories to be more individually crafted and less emergent!

But as the interviewee said, they ended up authoring more stuff with Weird West than they intended, so perhaps it’s a matter of finding a balance that suits the game. You’re spot on about the limitations of a purely scripted game, in terms of players butting their heads up against what the devs had time to create, and I can see the benefits of having immersive sim elements that can blur the edges and give the illusion of more content than there is, as well as potentially adding enjoyment for those who like that kind of thing.

Larian probably do have an opportunity here, to build out immersive sim elements of the game. I’ve been struggling to think of examples in BG3 where it’s outcomes of combining procedural elements that I’ve enjoyed rather than content that has been explicitly written. And I agree that the lack of consistency is a real barrier.

For example, when Speaking with Dead on the woman in Waukeen’s Rest in front of her husband, you get him asking a question which is a nice touch though it doesn’t actually lead to any info you couldn’t get another way. But if you then think, “I wonder if talking to Kanon might give me a way to avert Arka’s tragedy?” as per another recent thread, you then find she doesn’t react in any way if you communicate with her brother in front of her.

Thieving is another area where immersive sim elements could show up, but there I find the more procedural elements clunky, like anyone who happens to spot you being referred to as “the guard” and there not being clear logic as to when you’re going to get caught. I tried so many ways to steal the idol of Silvanus that I still feel should have worked, and it was so frustrating that either they didn’t for no clear reason or set off a massacre of tieflings with no opportunity to avert it and no evidence the tieflings were in any way involved. Though I quite enjoyed in my first playthrough when Nettie had a good grumble about thieves after trying to give me an antidote that I’d already pick-pocketed from her. With some work, there is some potential here I think. And I guess you could use the prison system to get into the shattered sanctum by stealing in the courtyard, bypassing the guards in the atrium but I’ve never tried. I’ll have to give it a go as part of my attempt as per another thread to find all the ways you can get to the goblin leaders.

One thing that might count is use of the disguise self spell. I’m sure there are tons of ways to use it I’ve not come across yet, but will certainly play around more. The fact you can disguise yourself as drow to get goblin cooperation, change your appearance to avoid consequences of criminality, and even to avoid the limitations on corpses not talking to their killers is a nice touch. EDIT: Even here, there might be some further development as you can only disguise yourself as default examples of the race, so no deep gnomes or duergar.

Use of familiars and animal companions is another potential source of immersive sim elements that doesn’t yet feel as though it’s been developed to its full potential. I like the fact that I could use NPC reactions to my animal, while currently OTT, to help me sneak around. But surely there’s more that can be done there. It’s one of the few areas where systems (sneaking and distraction) can be combined and I agree with the OP that there aren’t enough of these.

The bard’s performance ability seems to be something that has been purposely introduced as an immersive sim element, and it sounds as though some folk have had hours of fun playing around with it, but I’m afraid I lost interest quite quickly. Though it was nice to be able to jam with Alfira and Volo at the party, and I did try using it to distract NPCs.

Crafting isn’t fully developed in BG3 and generally isn’t something I’m particularly fussed with, but I enjoyed (belatedly) realising I could combine two parts of a broken spear to make a unique item. That probably falls on the scripted side rather than procedural, but there maybe is some potential here.

I guess another “system” that has story potential is use of feather fall and magical jump to reach places in unconventional ways. I saw use of feather fall to get into the Underdark in one of the early panels from hell and thought it was so cool. But then got put off experimenting with it in previous patches after finding various locations where it seemed I could jump to places that were otherwise inaccessible only to wake up dead. Not sure whether those have now been closed off, I’ll have to check. But it would be nice for the game to reward patient players with some fun secret locations.

I’d be interested in hearing from folk who do enjoy immersive sims what BG3 systems they think could be developed into compelling immersive sim elements, and how they’d need to be changed and combined to achieve their potential. What are some good examples from other games that BG3 could learn from? What have you tried to do but failed due to inconsistent implementation of principles in BG3?

EDIT: I guess other potential source of immersive sim elements are in the things you can throw and use as improvised weapons, but I’ve mainly played weedy characters so tend to forget they’re there. There’s also interactivity with the environment, but again I’ve tended to forget about that and haven’t paid enough attention to chandeliers or stalactites you can bring crashing down, or statues you can shove so am not sure what mileage there is there. Thus far, I have pretty much refused to engage with barrels and surfaces as I find them too much, but perhaps I should give them more of a chance.

To be honest as long as a game has a very specific story to tell or a very clear lore to follow I think keeping everything scripted ( even if you allow X ^10 permutations) is the way to go. Simply because as a dev it gives you control over what's going to happen and under what conditions.

I'm saying this as the best example of the genre OP specified for me is Kenshi. A game that is 100% built around those system. The amount of "scripted" events where the player has a set of pre-defined choices and not generic systems interacting with each other is close to 0 . And yet the game almost never ends.

Very cool topic OP. I will say more once I watch the video and had time to read everything from others.

@The_Red_Queen thanks for the great response I will start with:


As Niara eloquently put it:
So first and formost I would wish for Larian (don't expect at this point) to go through systems they have and make them "immersive" - have them make sense within the setting of the game - so no more sucking up spilled potions with your boots, give characters hearing range so sneaking behind them isn't that easy to do with character with 0 skill in stealth, dipping iron in fire shouldn't add extra fire damage to it, etc. If things work more or less the way one would expect them to work then it's easier to come up with creative solutions.

Couple things that I am trying to think of at the moment: does wood in BG3 burn? If i have a wooden crate, can I set it on fire to create temporary light source to help me in combat? What will happen if I put explosive materials into a container? If I cast a firebolt will it act as custom made explosive barrel? I actually never tried those things, might the next time I try.

But from my experience on a purely systemic level, I think BG3 lacks consistency and quest designs that would take full advantage of its many systems. I think part of the problem might be scope of the title and how it was created. For example:

That's actually the feature that made me think about this subject. I played as bard and was looking for ways to take advantage of performances but majority of time I tried to use it game scripted got in the way. I mentioned the goblin kids who were psychicly aware of the fact that I looted the corpse, even though they were busy watching my bard's performance. Or there were couple NPC who just seemed to be set in place and were blind/deaf to anything that was happening around. Running into stuff like that really discourages playing around with abilities.

Part of the problem is this odd development cycle were new systems are added to existing content. One would assume that Larian would first design the toolkit in some kind of vertical slice and then go on to create content build from the ground up to interact with that toolkit. That is not the case, at least for act1 and I worry what the end product will be. Naturally it must be hard to go back to already made content and make sure it interacts and works will all the new stuff they added. I hope they will be able to do that before release, but at the same time I remain sceptical.

I don't think BG3 needs to embrace systematic design - I am more then happy with a more handcraft and guided content, but with how many incoveniences BG3 has in name of systems, I am confused as to why the game doesn't embrace more of it - or rather why I am being so annoyed with it's systems, while other games like Arcane's output make me giggle with glee.


I am glad you mentioned this - this was the very first thing that discouraged me from being creative. I didn't mention it as I didn't try to steal the Idol for couple patches now (at least early on one could cheese it though container exploit) but on my initial run I bought potion of invisibility, stocked up on arrows of darkness, performed perfect heist - and guards run up straight to me. Very disappointing.

Pickpocketing in general is just odd to me. They make sure that all items are there in the inventory to be pickpocketed, they have scripted reactions for when you the characters should give you that thing and realized the thing was stolen, they even made a big deal of you being able to steal the explosive barrel in the forge - but none of it feels good to me. It's very meta. I don't think BG3 is good in giving an objective, and allowing players to use their toolkit to solve the problem. It's more like there is linear story progression, but then they allow you to break it. That's not fun. At least not to me.


Yeah, to me it's just what feels right. I don't mind if BG3 wants to embrace scripted quest design, or want to be systemic - at the moment as a player I feel I just feel very confused as to how can I play the game. On one hand BG3 does add quite a bit of tedium for the sake of consistent systems, but on the other hand I don't see those systems being utilised much. I think about Fallout2, stealing life support from one character or explosive planting. I can't really think of anything like that in BG3 - things that are made (like explosive barrel) just tend to feel very meme-y and off.

To end this lengthy reply, I think I can list one section that I almost enjoyed from systemic level - and that's goblin hideout. The objective is very simple - kill three leaders. Yes, there are scripted events to follow for each, but any kill will do. That gives a lot of potential space for creativity and roleplaying. I also very like the drums - if enemy reaches the drum the camp goes alert. But you can destroy them - in combat, outside combat. If you think ahead you can disable alarm system using your skillset to make combat easier later on. There are also multiple enterances - the upper one being made of bricks is resistant to many damage types, so whenever it is or is not available to you will depend on you party composition or weapons you carry - that's kind of handcrafted scenraio build using existing systems, is what I am looking for. Last time i played, though, I had some major issues sneaking on the rafters. I went through a lot of effort to disable light sources, but it just didn't seem to make any differences. That combined with having to navigate 4 stooges using the chaining system, just made me give up on the "unseen assasin" attempt altogether.

Edit: Oh, an awful systemic interaction that I remember: Grimforge, blowing up the rock => fire surface appears for some reasons => gnomes run through the surface on scripted pathway => take damage from the surface you created => become hostile and attack

Thanks for the reply - lots more food for thought.

As an aside, I *think* the Idol of Silvanus theft has changed. But while in patch 8 I managed to steal the idol during the ritual unseen and start sneaking away, the druids shouted about the idol having been stolen and started killing the tieflings, and though I was still hidden and not involved in the fight that just meant tieflings died all the quicker in real time and I gave up and reloaded in disgust. I did manage to successfully steal the idol after convincing Kagha to stop the ritual for the first time though, or rather I was challenged though I wasn’t sure why but talked my way out of it and the tieflings weren’t blamed. But that’s far less satisfying from a roleplay perspective as it removes stopping the ritual as a rationale for the theft.

When I did it one could just not get a reaction by moving Idol to container. Honestly, it makes sense for Druids to accuse tieflings of theft when the idol disappears. I don’t mind it that much, though it kills me to have an incomplete quest. Like it feels there should be a way to steal the Idol without initiating genoside. The whole thing is kinda pointless though, as there doesn’t seem to be a time limit on the ritual (how does it trigger? I know it is possible for the ritual to complete). If there was a more interconnectivity and actual benefit to delaying the ritual the whole situation could be far more interesting.

About systemic stuff I like: environmental fire sources like candles being fire sources - so one can light grease with a candle. Makes me think - are all items coded with properties? Does metal in BG3 conduct electricity? Is there a more practical use for various items in BG3? I know D:OS2 had one pressure based puzzle that could be bypassed in unorthodox ways.

"Do YOU enjoy BG3's systemic design?" Yes.
While I do enjoy some of your suggestions and understand your issues, it comes down to resources and time.
Would I rather have BG3 add a couple of years to get what you want? Pass.

It’s hard to evaluate the system design when it’s unclear which emergent features are due to bugs. As per OP’s request, some stories.


Overall, I’d say the most memorable and impactful systemic sequences involve fire and/or explosions. That seems in line with Larian’s philosophy.

It’ll be interesting to see how it pans out on release. Maybe attitude will do something besides impact prices. Maybe stealth and perception be tweaked. If any changes are made, it’s a safe bet that they’ll skew towards adding spectacle.

While I suspected what the answers will be my experiments were as follows:

Containers are just containers - you damage them enough and they break. How they were broken, with what, or what's inside doesn't seem to matter. Crates, barrels, backpacks - once destroyed will spill what's inside. Curiously, pouches seem indestrictable. Now that is a quality protection for you valuables.

Explosives I played with seem to work in a very simple way - if damaged they go boom. It doesn't matter if you attack it with a sword or a spell, they will explode nonetheless.

One can light torches with fire spells but that I knew already. Fire surface does illuminate the area around it - though visually it is very unclear how far the light reaches, an ever present problem in stealth. Might use it in the future when fighting in the underdark - throw fire chromatic orb at the enemy and he should be in clear view.

At least I think I found the answer to the question I was asking myself - why does BG3 systemic design not work for me. The answer would be cause it's just bunch of disconnected systems that don't speak to each other - not in a way that would lead to interesting interactions at least. At least, in that regards it is faithful to original BGs - with BG1 attempt at guards catching you when you steal, or occasional scripted applications of spells. Not really an issue in itself, but just seems odd to me considering how much Larian seems to be sacrificing on the systemic altar.

Yes, explosions, throwing/push and surfaces. Those seem to be the most fleshed out. I think it is fair to say that Larian is mostly interested in unexpected mayhem.


Ahh, cool systemic interaction - Sussur Flower. That's something Sven showcase as well - with pickpocket ability you can plant it on someone blocking their magic. That's something of Fallout quality.

I’ve not tried the idol > chest exploit in recent patches as it sticks in my craw, so not sure if it still works. And yes, it makes sense the the Druids suspect the tieflings, but not I think to immediately start wholesale slaughter. But I’ll stop banging on about this one instance now!



At the risk of spoiling your enjoyment, there is a way to jump up and down the rocks (to the right of the net as you face it on the lower level). I’m not sure if that was added or whether it just took me an embarrassing number of playthroughs to realise!

So I've watched the video from OP by now and to be 100% honest the dev speaking there already answered the most important question I think. He says himself " As a designer when I put those systems in the game, I don't know what story they will create. How they will work together. It could be very interesting or just fall flat in some situations".

TLDR: I don't think " systemic design" is better or worse. It's just different. And yes BG3 definitely didn't even stand next to a systemic design.

I don't have a single example to give about a story that was " written" or "created" by systems interactions in BG3. Simply because BG3 environment is a bit too small for this in my opinion in it's current state.


The main "system" generating situations on it's own is pickpocketing and Wormerine gave a quite good comment about that:

The way I see it stealing an object marked as " artifact" for a faction could/should branch to few outcomes once the AI realises the item is missing. Maybe the artifact could be sylvanas idol for druids but it could be just a very expensive item if you're stealing from a simply peasant.

A) Looking for the guy responsible( as in starting a patrol sequence).
B) Starting a "retrieve " quest.
C) Setting up more guards in the city due to the recent crime.

In some very specific situations like the sylvanas idol if " default" AI reactions don't give a solution it could lead to pre-defined/ scripted results like tieflings "vanishing" from the grove forever.

Thing is that's just the question of what happens if you steal an item. What about...kidnapping kagha? Or just killing her? A murder right now == fight. But what if you manage to kill someone and the culprit is never found? Ai should/could have some ways to deal with it and act accordingly " by default".



But all those "generic" AI systems create a story of it's own. You don't need to invest that heavily in branching dialogues and pre-scripting reactions for every NPC to every possible situation.

Simple example: I can't use revivify scrolls on NPC's. If BG3 was 100% based on systemic interactions I could use a scroll on a given NPC and the AI around would make a quick check. Let's see how it could work for Kagha:

" Spell used in line of sight -> Revivify -> Target == [X ] -> Relation to X? -> If enemy (girl being killed at the grove by Kagha) -> Relation to spell user == enemy's ally -> Choose reaction[kill, ban from city,force to 'reverse' action]".


You could have a decision tree like this created for each and every spell working together with the decision tree above. If user unknown -> Use existing solutions to try to find the user. Is spell reversible by using a different action?Force player to use it. Etc etc.



And then, on top of all those systems. Somewhere in between. Have a couple of scripted dialogues to the story you want to tell.
But here's the issue. Larian designers have a very specific story in mind. And they write an insane amount of them through branching dialogues trees and trying to predict every possible scenario. So naturally sooner or later those scenarios will be limited.


BG3 could very theoretically try to go in a "systemic" direction but with how heavily they went into scripting AI reactions per character and per quest it makes absolutely 0 sense to try to force those systems on top of it in my opinion.
It's just a very different philosophy to make games and it's not necessarily better. Especially in my Kagha example above it shows quite clearly that making close up dialogues for everything is the first major fuckup for a systemic design : You would now need recorded dialogues for everyone with a different voice so the entire "systemic " side of things goes to shit. You now need to predict every outcome for every character and record it making the entire ideology invalid. So yeah. There are some limitations to impose on yourself when it comes to game design if you want to make the game revolve 100% around systems and not situations you script yourself.


And that dialogue issues also points at a different "problem" systemic games might have. They kinda flatten out some characters to subjugate them to infinite possibilities to their behaviour. Possibilities no one bothers to predict since there's just too many permutations. The only way to make a character feel "unique" in those circumstances is by making him ignore those systems.

Simplest example: Player's party. They ignore those systems. Simply because they have a very specific goal to achieve.
Even better : In bg3 you have Halsim. He ignores the fact you murdered kagha. He just plainly doesn't give a single fuck simply because he has more important things to deal with like telling you the rest of the story. If he was present at the grove he should by all logic become your enemy if you killed everyone there. But no, he doesn't care. And he simply can't care.

I mentioned Kenshi in my previous post. It's a game relying 100% on existing systems creating a story for the player. It has a few unique characters thought. It's a very low budget game with it's own limitations but what point would there be in making all characters in this game fully voiced and have some kind of insane branching quests behind them if the systems make it so all of them can die in a random moment in time because of random spawns and attacks?
( For those who didn't play the game ... All factions in the game have leaders. Those leaders reside in cities and have unique[very short and simple] dialogues. Those cities get attacked on regular basis. The leader can die at any moment even if you never met him causing some massive changes on the world map. It's not very probable that it happens without player's interaction...but it can).

If Larian was making kenshi those leaders would be most likely killable by player's hand for instance but at no point they could die randomly without the player knowing about it. Simply because too much work would go into his quests.

Well put. I think this is a central conflic of Larian RPG that I find so frustrating. It is somewhere inbetween getting close, but failing to scratch either of my itches - neither a tight story with satisfying branching paths, nor emergent systemic sandbox.

Just to be clear, I don't think Larian should even aim at full on emergent sandbox with BG3. I suppose, my wish for final game would be for Larian to carefully look through their scripting and make sure it doesn't invalidate systems they put into the game. I had this very frustrating experience in D:OS2 where in act 3 there is a quest to either kill Mother Tree or Shadow Prince - I didn't like either so I killed both. The game didn't like that and as quest wasn't complete it didn't register the death of those characters. I don't want the same for BG3. My ideal would be something like Fallout1&2 - still purely handcrafted content, but it's content build to take advantage of player's toolset. As I mentioned Goblin Camp is a pretty good example. That said, the weird thing that I notices is that so far the only reactivity I encountered is with gobbo under the windmill. And that's a mechanic that have been around since day1. At the same time, in the game there is (are?) scripted fight where the combat doesn't end with death - like the gobbo with the ring. Wouldn't it make more sense to tie it to non-lethal attack? If you kill goblin straight up, camp goes hostile, if you knock him down you get to humiliate him without killing him?

If they can find more "gameplay" in the systems they already have then that would be even better. Stuff like inventory really bothers me - on one hand it's very granual system with every item being present in the inventory, and every character having their own inventory and weight limit. At the same time, any character can just access anyones else inventory at any time, and items can be just sent to unlimited stash, that you can access pretty much at any point by teleporting to the camp... so what is going on here?