Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback This game is far too easy to cheese

I'm confused here...you and others say shove automatically succeeds from stealth but I am sure I have failed (not sure which patch version)...
So I think it has a high success chance...but not 100%. Am I missing something / not understanding the problem / mis-remembering?

While not ideal...its been used in a lot of games. Adding hearing checks, while more realistic and perhaps more faithful to the rules seems like overkill and complicated depending on the implementation.

You can and you can stealth in vision cones in heavy armor as long as you pass the checks with disadvantage or get a buff that nullifies it. So again I may be missing your point if you are saying wearing heavy armor outside a vision cone should still be an auto fail because you are heard...I disagree on many levels...reallity or DnD.

I use stealth a lot with my rogues and rangers and while I can cheese it if I choose to, I can choose not to cheese it and it works decently.

Curious, if NPCS had say a 9-meter circle around them as well as the vision cone, would that address the largest part of your concerns? So that if you are in their vision or their 9-meter (arbitrary number pulled out of rear-end) "perception area" you have to roll a stealth check?

Oh, maybe it can fail then? It's been a while since I attempted to shove from stealth for [multitude of reasons] so this is based on what I've seen many others say. If it has normal failure chances, that's better.

It should be fairly simple to code, since a stealth vs perception mechanic is already in the game. You even give a perfect example:
Yes it would. Honestly, I'd even be fine if the hearing circle was visible like the sight cone. That's a perfectly fine mechanic for a video game, where you can't ask the DM "hey how close do I think I can get before I might be heard?" Characters in heavy armor would have disadvantage on that stealth check in that hearing cone, due to their clanking.

Essentially, I want the stealth system to be robust and balanced enough that I don't feel like I'm either cheating by using it or that I'm restricting my available actions (from what I think should be reasonable options) in order to not cheese.

No, you're correct MrFuji, shove is 100% guaranteed to succeed without a check or save, if you are hidden from your target when you shove them (and providing that they are a target that can be shoved, and you re not attempting to shove them somewhere impossible - marked by a red line). This has been the mechanic across all patches and has not changed. Any report to the contrary would require some data, as it's far more likely that the reporter simply missed one of those other details.

For clarity, to RumRunner, no-one has, at any point, ever, suggested that heavy armour stealth should automatically fail. Please refrain from painting the people you disagree with in false or disingenuous lights.

Accounting for sound and using player's stealth scores to determine success and failure consistently is not difficult; a contemporary D&D video game does this with aplomb, in fact. It uses passive stealth and passive perception to generate a detection radius and an awareness radius - the lower your stealth score, the larger your 'ping', and thus the more easily you are discovered. The better the perception of a creature, the wider their detection radius (which you cannot see) is and the sooner they'll begin to take notice of targets sneaking around. Having disadvantage on stealth lowers your passive stealth by 5, which the game accounts for and uses correctly in this calculation. The game has a short leniency display that shows you when you're close to getting caught, and stepping into open line of sight in bright light results in automatic detection regardless of your stealth - no 'vision cones' are necessary for the game to convey this.

(Incidentally; this is an illustration of adapting an element of a PnP game's ruleset to a video game format and making changes to the way things work in that adaptation while still creating the spirit of the ruleset and respecting it. Again - not actually that hard to do, if you care about doing that.)

BG3's stealth system actively encourages you to circumvent the actual stealth mechanics - the tutorial literally shows you "avoid the big red vision cones and you'll never need to make a stealth check ever, no matter how bad your stealth is!" This, to the point that you can tromp about in a one-man-band rig, playing it with wild enthusiasm less than three feet from an enemy and know there is zero risk of them detecting you. They also make the parts that do engage with D&D's stealth rules so unfriendly in what can only be assumed to be a further effort to get you to ignore those rules and play their sight-cone mini game instead; by this I mean, when you do cross a sight cone, you don't just make one stealth check - you are spammed with them continuously every other second until you fail, even in turn based mode. They put stealth rules in, and then antagonistically brow-beat you into not engaging with them, so they can force you to pay attention to their Divinity stealth system instead. No-one should be defending this.

Well said Niara.

I think Hearing Rings should have a distance in feet equal to Wisdom score. If Wisdom is 10, the hearing ring is 10 feet, roughly 2 1/2 meters. You enter that ring and Stealth check against Passive Perception is required. Then have a second Hearing Ring. Same increment. Enter that ring and Stealth check is required against Passive Perception as well.

Basically, the reasoning is that you have to make 2 Stealth checks to get within melee range of someone. That's not easy. Passive Perception is a static DC, usually like 11 or 12 for NPCs. BUT, if there is a lot of noise in the area, the game should give you advantage on said checks. But, if wearing Heavy Armor or it's very quiet, you should get Disadvantage.

Not so long ago i had the same idea ... even remember suggesting something like that.

Now i wonder if it wouldnt just add another space players would walk on the edge being perfectly undetectable.
Imean 2,5m seems short ... especialy in PC game where that means that 2,51m you are perfectly fine in fullplate and no dexterity at all.

Im not sure if this wouldnt overcomplicate things unnecessarily ...
But i would preffer noise ring around character ... and hearing ring around NPC ... wich would also give some easy stealth check if one goes over another ...

You get me right?
Like even if you are quite far ... something can go wrong.

My suggestion is for 2 hearing rings. 1 is 2.5 meters radius around the target. The second is between 2.5 and 5 meters. And that is with Wisdom 10. Wisdom 15 would be 15 feet radius or roughly what... 4.5 meters, and the second ring would be roughly 4.5 to 9. The idea is that players would have to make 2 checks, 1 for each ring, to try to sneak up on someone.

Also, remove the ability for players to see sight cones and hearing rings. Then you have no idea if you are in a ring or cone or not. It's hard to exploit the system if you can't see the cones and rings.

But I'd actually be totally happy if they just removed our ability to see the cones.

I like the stealth system a lot, and I think it works better than most people here seem to be giving it credit for.

But I admit that it could be better.

I would be okay with hearing rings. That makes sense.

I also think characters should be noticed if they are stealthing in the dark while holding a light source, unless it's a check against someone or something that can't see, of course.

And I believe any weapon on fire, including the Everburn Blade, should count as a light source.

I did not read everything above, but my 2 cent:

- Yes, the game is far too easy to cheese.

- Fun fact about stealth: Pillars of eternity (1, 2 or both? not sure, its been ages) had vision cones and hearing rings.
Trying to sneak to somebody from the front would fail, from the back it takes longer to detect you the better your stealth skill is.
There were 2 degrees of stealth: First you are not seen at all. When you stay near NPC too long they notice something and look and move in your direction until they detect you or you move away
so they do not notice something any more.

Not a fan of making detection ranged invisible, unless they would be made more intuitive. As it is vision range can reach very far, and I think being able to determine whom you get spotted by is valuable.

I am also not fan of multiple hearing rings - it's just becomes too much. You could make it larger/smaller depending on enemies Wisdom modifier, but I think just difficulty of the steaking check is what should be changing.

My only issue (with the game as we have now - things make be different once we gain more levels and more proficiency in skills) is that at the moment I don't feel there is really a benefit to investing in stealth - there isn't a clear benefit from it. Avoiding vision cones is a way to go, and as such stealthing through is player skill based, not character skill based.

I would like for hearing coned to exist, not necessarily to block low stealth characters to not be able to sneak by enemy mobs, but to make certain actions more restricted to high stealth characters - like sneaking right up to enemies, pickpocketing them, or even: doing a guaranteed push. If for example making a stealth push was harder for non-dex, stealth experts I think it would erase a lot of OPness that comes with it - characters who would likely be able to utilize it regularly, wouldn't push very far, and those who can to push far, might need to outside assistance - like invisibility potions.



PoE1 had just detection radius, PoE2 added vision cone, making it far harder to sneak within enemies vision range. It worked really well, but also differently - D&D rolls make the system strictly binary, while PoEs used meter filling - so higher stealth would determine how long one can stay within enemies detection range, rather then if they can stay within that detection range.

Also not a fan of multiple hearing rings. That's making the system a bit too complex and punishing - essentially giving disadvantage to all stealth rolls.
Good point. That'd be a nice level of automatic balance to the game. Characters who can sneak well likely can't shove well. Characters who are shove experts likely can't sneak well. And the few characters who can do both have likely taken some serious penalties/suboptimal choices for others ability scores/skills.

There's no reason that BG3 can't implement a meter filling. Sure, it's not 5e RAW, but like the example @Niara gave, it'd be a valid adaptation to video game format that preserves the spirit of the rules: better stealth skill = more easily able to remain hidden.

Hmmm. Playing currently as a halfling ranger with Stealth proficiency. I am noticing some definite mechanical improvements for Stealth. I Stealthed the imps in the first fight. Stayed outside sight cone. Fired. Stealth check. Succeeded. Was able to fire again. Killed the first, but another Stealth check because the other two might spot me. Succeeded. Fired again. Stealth check. Failed. My MC was pulled into combat. Lae'zel wasn't in the fight. Sneaked her up to the edge of the sight cone. Fired. Stealth check. Failed. Pulled into the fight.

That's not a bad way of doing it. I mean, Lae'zel got her one surprise attack. My MC got surprise attacks until she was spotted -failed her Stealth check. By not sucking Lae'zel in right away, I was able to then navigate her into a decent position, which I wouldn't have been able to do if my MC had pulled them both into the fight as soon as the MC was spotted. So, in that regard, it's actually more realistic because I can't control both my MC and Lae'zel at the same time. It looks like they truly have done away with the sniping an enemy forever until they're dead. I mean, if you can keep stealthing it every time you fire, that's what Stealth skill is for. Enemies are just totally unable to find the sniper in the area. Granted, enemies should take cover as soon as the first is sniped, but cover doesn't exist in BG3 - which would make the game better, in my opinion, to have cover, but whatever.

I stealthed another fight too. As soon as the vision cone of one enemy hit my MC, I was spotted. So Stealth skill is for attacking outside of the cones. Also, I tried having Astarion rob Arron, the halfling merchant. Pickpocketing isn't as easy as it used to be. He failed every time.

So, the way I see it, the only real issue with the mechanics at present is that you can distract an enemy with one character and have a second sneak right up behind into melee range and knife the target in the back without a stealth check ever having to be made. Even if the person sneaking has heavy armor and has 0 Stealth, they can get up behind in melee range and hack the target in half with a greatsword. So, again, a single hearing ring would account for that, making it so that you have to make a Stealth check if you sneak up from behind and get within say Passive Perception in feet range. If Passive Perception is 13, you make a Stealth check when you get within 13 feet of the target. That's roughly 3-4 meters, I believe. If you're sneaking, you aren't moving fast, so that would prevent characters from getting into melee range before they are detected.

There's a proximity issue going on with stealth that I sometimes have to adjust for while playing.

What I mean is this:

Let's say you have one character in combat and one out of combat. You try to bring the out of combat character into combat by making an attack.

But unfortunately you're out of combat character didn't enter the initiative after the attack? What happened?

It's a proximity issue. Your out of combat character isn't close enough to your in combat character. Unless you want to take advantage of the system right now and "cheat" it by continuing to attack, you can just move your out of combat character slightly closer which will bring it immediately into the combat.

*

Another small issue I have with stealth is that I feel like it would work better if only the rogue got to use "hide" as a bonus action. Or if another class could use it as a bonus action as well if they had some sort of magic item, like the way dash works.

As it stands, anyone can go into hiding in combat and get advantage. I typically avoid doing that because I think it makes the game too easy.

Seems to me like, regardless of distance, if a PC makes an attack against an enemy (or applies a buff to an allied character) that is in combat, that PC *should* be brought into that combat. I'd prefer if said character was also automatically brought out of stealth, because, you know, they made a visible/audible attack which revealed their presence. But baby steps.

There 100% is a cover system in BG3. It's called "putting a solid object between you and the enemy, so they don't have a line of sight to you." Enemies, at the very least, should know where the attack came from, and either attempt to investigate or take cover (which can include running away to get out of your weapon/spell range).

"...which revealed their presence," doesn't follow. It may or may not reveal their presence.

"Where did that shot come from?" is a valid question. Someone may notice that the shot came from over there. And the more shots from over there the more obvious it becomes. But it's reasonable that someone may be disoriented and not see the person attacking. Or just fail to perceive because of camouflage or any reason.

"There 100% is a cover system in BG3. It's called "putting a solid object between you and the enemy, so they don't have a line of sight to you." Enemies, at the very least, should know where the attack came from, and either attempt to investigate or take cover (which can include running away to get out of your weapon/spell range)."

Yep - last bit is a critical failure for current system. It makes 0 sense for an enemy to stand there and let you muder them, as you pop into and out of of 'stealth' continually. Unless they're mindless, like a zombie. As Mrfuji3 notes, they should seek cover and draw *you* out. Also, if you attack from stealth (or invisibilty), an enemy can make a guess as where its coming from and investigate. Or just lob some AoE effects into the likely area...This kind of lack of reactivity from enemies is completely immersion shattering - no DM would allow their party to get away with it (well, none I've ever played with)

Let's change my phrasing to "revealing one's exact position to the enemy" as "reveal their presence" is vague. In that case, yeah I agree that an attack *might* not reveal your exact location. But I do think that an attack made from the open with line of sight (which was likely required for your sneak attack in the first place) then it should be trivial for the enemy to look up/around and see you. Unfortunately, this is where BG3's [lack of] cover system fails - there is no such thing as "partial/half/three-quarters" cover, which are the criteria I'd use to determine whether an enemy automatically sees you or still needs to beat your stealth check.

However, there IS darkness in BG3, which provides various levels of obscurement. If in bright light, imo attacking from stealth should automatically bring you out of stealth. But if you're partially obscured due to darkness, then it makes sense that you could remain hidden with a successful check.

And this is why I have a love-hate relationship with these forums... genuinely be interested in something someone said, ask for clarification, and get gaslit by a 3rd party.

Nope...I am mistaken. Just did a bunch of tests using an 8 STR shoving a 15STR from stealth and it seems to always succeed, so Niara is correct.

Based on these tests I have some other opinions.
1) We really need to see all rolls in the log.
a)For the shove...why can't we see the check and roll?
b)With a Character with +5 to stealth and advantage on stealth checks from Shadowheart, I still "lost hiding condition" a lot with no roll that showed me why.
2) I wonder (and hope) if stealth is already planned to be improved in at least one way in the future. When you stealth and move away, you frequently if not always leave a glowing halo behind. Whats the point of this? I would like to see AI path to that point to search for you instead of just staying in 1 spot like bozos.

+1000

The game being tactical turned based + D&D seems to do a very poor job in showing/explaining to the player what is going on. Where previous Larian games like this also?
This might just be a work in progress, but it has been nearly 2 years now? Surely the base systems are all in place by now, and being in EA this would be especially helpful knowing exactly how things are calculated and works for good feedback.