Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Pathfinder Wrath of the Righteous vs BG3

To me a good game with replayibility allows to approach the same content from a different perspective, but it doesn't prohibit players from experiencinf most of the content in each playtrhough. Fallout: New Vegas is the golden example for me - an order of doing stuff, whom we ally with and whom we destroy can change in each play through, plus each play through wil have different flavour based on the build we run. I prefer linear-ish, but complex and flexible game, over multiple exclusive, but rigid paths.

As long as I can replaying the game and do enough of the things differently, I will be happy. To me reactivity is there to create ilusion of choices, not to force players to do multiple play throughs. I don't think the player should feel like they are missing something major, if they don't do multiple playtheoughs.

I'm an older gamer (46) and I have some views on this. I played D&D when I was younger for many years. I played AD&D 1st Edition and 2nd Edition. I knew those games inside and out. This colours what I am going to say.

I played Pathfinder Kingmaker and I gave up in the first act. I found the combat far too hard for someone with zero knowledge of the tabletop game. I've read various guides and so forth and they all rely on knowing the mechanics inside and out. The game itself feels great but it really is a lot to get your head around if you don't play Pathfinder. If this had been based on AD&D 1st or 2nd Edition I think I would have been fine. I haven't played Wrath of the Righteous but I expect this to be similar.

BG3 on the other hand I have really enjoyed playing so far. The mechanics are as alien to me as they would be if I had never played AD&D but I never feel that I am being punished for it.


I've probably played BG2 more times than any other game. I must have played it through entirely maybe 20 times. It probably does what you say about F:NV even better. The core plot is the same each time and the outcome doesn't really change. The side quests though make a big difference and the party you choose makes a massive difference as well. I still haven't gottten around to an all evil party yet but that is on my list!

Oh, right. Obligatory other game update.

Solasta devs recently released an overview of their Bard subclasses.

https://www.solasta-game.com/news/165-dev-update-31-bards-are-singing-flowers-are-blooming

I'm a bit disappointed that there's no clear martial archetype, although they've openly said that they didn't choose one for the subclass contest design because it could have gotten them in trouble with Valor and Swords Bard being a thing in official DnD. Maybe they could get around it with feats though, and the new DLC is supposed to be adding in a bunch of new feats to the game which have yet to be revealed.

I played Kingmaker and I had and still have very little experience with D&D. I still enjoyed the game for the story and the kingdom management mainly, and played with the difficulty set low. However I don't think I ever truly comprehended the system while I was playing. However with WotR, not only do they do a better job providing tutorials to explain how things work, but the turn-based mode makes it a lot easier to see what individual things do and mean. So while it's still just as complicated, I do think those two things make the game a easier to comprehend.


They also actually said that the feats were specifically meant to make martial classes more interesting. So I think you'll be in for a treat there.

Since we're off-topic already, might as well say that Solasta would have been a lot better were it not to be rushed to the release. They may have actually had cobbled together a really good base campaign (with faction reputation actually mattering and there being more free-form exploration rather than just going to the next waypoint) instead of what they've got, and had all the classes available right out the oven. It is getting better (especially the module-making tools), but 1.0 was a very disappointing experience in many regards. Them adding in races and backgrounds now results in them having no campaign reactivity, so it's become even less about building an interesting party from a role-playing standpoint and more about min-maxing. The balance still remains out of whack, too, with the new subclasses they've added with the Lost Valley DLC making some of the older ones even more obsolete (like the new wizard with the shield proficiency. Them just giving away proficiencies like candy with backgrounds and subclasses is somewhat questionable. You could just make every caster and rogue a Sellsword or a Lawkeeper, which makes little role-playing sense, but allows you to bypass equipment restrictions without lifting a finger).

And I still am befuddled by their choice to replace the rather pretty 2D art of the races in the character creation with their utterly butt-ugly models. What concept art they share actually looks really neat, so their decision is... very strange.

I actually think that the Lost Valley DLC did a much better job than the original storyline. I do feel like the original storyline was rushed by budget. I liked how in the DLC you have more flexibility to either side with the ruler or rebels or try to remain neutral, helping both. I felt that the decisions in the DLC we're much more impactful.

Like one particular side quest was with a certain soldier. If you didn't handle that particular quest we'll, suddenly you were shut out from other quests for the local ruler - because you are caught trying to kill a local soldier. So, um, naturally, if you try to kill a soldier in broad daylight in the middle of the city, you might just become a rebel.

Anyways, the DLC has many more choices and freedom and isn't as linear as the original game. So, I enjoyed it much more.

But... That said... I can't help it. I still for some reason love BG3 WAY more. I STILL find myself wanting to create a new character in BG3 and play it yet again even though I've played the same content a million times.

This is how I feel about Solasta, and also both PoE and both Pathfinder games. But I just don't get that feeling from BG3 (noting that I haven't yet played BG3).

If Fallout New Vegas is your golden example (and it's a fantastic one), then I'd say the closest CRPG to that would be PoE 2: Deadfire. Have you played it?

It uses a very similar structure in terms of generating branches and reactivity via its faction system. You still ultimately do most of the same quests, but the context of how you approach the quest may change. I think it's slightly weaker narratively in that the faction quests and main plot feels a bit more disjointed compared to F:NV, but the gameplay/combat is some of the best. Really, it's a shame the game didn't have more financial success.

In even more other cRPG news...

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/ansharpublishing/zoria-age-of-shattering

There's about 2 days remaining to back this project if anyone is interested, they're fairly close to hitting the funding goal. The demo gave me slight DOS1 vibes. It's a bit janky as expected from a first ever project with only three devs behind it, but shows some potential.

And to add, the game is 80% complete and will be released no matter the outcome of the kickstarter because they have a publisher. The KS funds, asking for just around $33,000, are to add more polish and features to the game.

WotR is a great game. It took me a while to get into it (tavern fight... almost killed it for me, then I left it for a few weeks, then tried again, then I loved it and played about 600 hours so far).

From graphics / presentation BG3 is FAR superior, of course. While WotR is beautiful, too, it's by far not as polished and "high end" as BG3.

Gaming wise... I mean, the mythical paths (in my case especially Azata, the one I like best) and the very intense story of Arueshalae is something where I hope BG3 will have something on par with it. Also there is the option to get a dragon companion, hm...

So from what I can tell now is that BG3 will easily be among the 5 best games I have ever played. Together with Horizon Zero Dawn and D:OS2 (1600 hours on my steam account). Question is: will it be place 1? Will it be right in front or right behind WotR?

Depends on the intensity of whats to come. As I said - WotR has mythic paths with that certain "the boss music plays, but it's because of me, not of the boss", it has Arueshalae and it has Aivu (the dragon companion which made me go... "wow, seriously? I get a cute dragon companion who hits like a truck and is fun to talk to at the same time?").

However, Larian suprised me with D:OS2, too... I never thought that I would get into CRPGs again after the 90s, so I think Larian can pull something off that will champion WotRs special place in my heart.

Personally taking a brake of BG3 until it is released. I don't want to be spoiled any more WotR seems nice but overly convoluted in its system....??

So kicking back, cup of coffee, a few raw turnips with spicy sauce, coco biscuits and a game of Baldur's Gate 2!
In this day and age, it is refreshingly simple and down to earth non topical basic fantasy. The gameplay is half strategy/pre-casting and half unpredictable chaos...love this.

I am having loads of fun. Oh, and not the Enhanced Edition mind you, the original. I snatched it when GOG used to sell it before the EE edition replaced everything. Plays great via Wine (Macos). The UI looks so much more dark and dreadful, everything is snappier, like moving items around, loving it.
Its incredible to me that people are still making mods, updating mods for this game nearly everyday...the HUGE community is rock solid.

The community for the originals isn't huge, it's just dedicated.

Also my condolences that you're going through ToB. Worst thing to happen to the franchise before BG3.

Alright sir, the community is <hugely> committed. Not sure what the problem is? Is that somehow...bad?
Not sure what you mean there either for TOB. I am playing with all the classic mods that adds much to TOB story so thats maybe a difference? Ascension, Wheels of prophecy, Throne of Bhall revisited, all the banter packs, friendship stuff, more quests lines, more fleshed out companions etc...I would not dare play BG2 without all these amazing mods available Like fine turnips without the wine.

It's an important distinction. As of late, people seem to be under the impression that CRPGs rival large games in scale, but they simply don't. In the large scheme of things, we're a niche community. It's not some slight, I'm just saying that the community isn't large.

Mods improve ToB, yeah. I'm really only commenting on how awful it is without any editing whatsoever. ToB's writing was notoriously awful, though, and the expansion earned a pretty ugly reputation, thus how *many* mods there are dedicated just to 'fixing' ToB.

Huh.
People apparently hating on Throne of Bhaal is news to me, honestly. I always thought it to be a really solid conclusion of the Bhaalspawn saga that nicely ties together the mess that started because Daddy Bhaal couldn't hold himself back and concludes every companion's story in a satisfying manner. And you got to hang out with a certain someone as a party member if you so desired, which was a really cool detail. My two big gripes with it were the fire giant area and the monk battle, but otherwise I had even had enjoyment figuring out how to actually kill Demogorgon and the like with a suboptimal party.

I never particualrly cared what "people" think, but yeah my impression of ToB was always similar to "Return of the Jedi" - a bad campaign, which only saving grace is that it wraps up an otherwise great Trilogy.

That's also a self-fulfilling prophecy, with no really attractive cRPGs being made since late 90s/early 2000s. Larian is the first one to really attempt mainstream cRPGs, as other "competition" is working withing far too low of a budget to break into the wider market, or like Bioware/CDPR went more for narrative action games with a small touch of RPG. Most of cRPG audience will be people who play games since 90s and that will be a niche audience - most people move on with their lives and got different hobbies over time. I must say, within certain demographic whenever I meet someone in their 30s who used to game, Baldur's Gate 2 pops up very often as "the game". That said being Polish the demographic I know is also very specific and favourable to PC gaming and RPGs.

I also didn't care for ToB. It was obvious and felt tacked on. At times, it was too hard with RTWP, and romances glitched out and died (Jaheira). It was okay, but I didn't feel that it lived up to the rest. I actually liked the SoD better.

I disliked ToB only because of the fact that it was soooooo very high level. I don't like it when my character and the game gets to be such a high level that I and everyone else are super-powerful, Gods effectively, which makes the game boring and tedious at that point. But this is not just for ToB but true for any game for me.

Same, but also the entire story was so obvious to me. From the moment I met a certain character I knew who they were and why I was doing everything. I was literally pushing myself through the story even though I knew what the bad guys were up to.

I don't know. It just felt very underwhelming. And then, I couldn't even beat the final battle because it was so chaotic and I am already not great with RTWP games, so the final chaos was too much. I couldn't figure out who was dying and why and how to more effectively fight my enemies and so forth. I finally just gave up and YouTubed the ending.