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

BG3 is the best for me. I love the cinematic dialogue and full VO. That adds a lot to the game for me and is something that WOTR does not have. I also like that BG3 at least so far does not have harsh resting restrictions like WOTR does. In general BG3 feels more like a modern game with fast travel, etc. These things are important to me.

I haven’t played WOTR, but at least from reading about them the companions seem interesting. The character models I saw did not look good, but maybe it was an earlier build. I don’t like how WOTR gates romances so that a male character can pick any woman, but everyone else has their choices gated. I like how BG3 handles it much better where none are gated.

Shocking.

And this is not even remotely true.

I enjoy WOTR. At first I was a little confused with the map for some reason. So when my character would say, "I know the way", I was like "no you don't."

Also I need to read up more on the different classes.

Honestly I thought I was loving the WOTR beta, but the more I progress in it, the more I get genuinely annoyed about how OVERTUNED most of the encounters are when playing at "core rules".
At least playing in turn-based model it feels like basically any fight is designed to make you survive only if give 100% of what's in your arsenal AND if RNG is on your side.

Is this a similar situation to PF:KM where they bloated creature stats? Outside of the weak enemy AI, that was my biggest problem I had with PF:KM - I was hoping WOTR would fix that.

It didn't make the game impossible, but it did make a lot of standard play/build far less viable without the heavy support. I.e. armor-wearing martials in PF:KM literally melted in the endgame because their touch AC are way too low without heavy optimization. You had to lean very heavily on other control mechanics to even give them a chance.

i'm fine with difficult "core rules" IF there are other options. "Core rules" for me mean that you know the system very well and are able to create a team that takes advantage of the rules and it's still not an easy win. I've always seen the core rules option as most games hard option but that's just my opinion. I know some people see core rules in the middle and think it should be considered "normal" difficulty.

I'm fine with core rules as well. That's the only difficulty setting I'm interested to deal with.
My problem is precisely that THEIR "core rules settings" is NOT a proper implementation of the core rules. It's an example of stat bloat that would make BG3 blush in shyness.

WOTR is an amazing game ( I have the beta) It's nothing that I would compare with BG 3 since both are great and I don't have to CHOOSE one or the other, in time BG3 is released I already will have done all I want on WOTR. So, which one? silly question, get both, I mean, both are amazing and I can't wait to enjoy both stories, gameplay, and to romance Arueshalae in WOTR and then Shadowheart on BG3 when it's fully released.

agreed. They're both must buys for fans of the genre

Frankly I have no idea what people mean when they say "You can't really compare DOS 2/BG 3/POE II/WOTR".
Yes, you can. They are literally minor variation in the same exact genre.

I like both games but I am admit I am more excited about BG3 (but that mostly comes down me loving the Forgotten Realms as a setting and not so much Golarion).

Though, I really do not think that Wrath is so much superior, they are just very different games. On writing and companions, BG3 companions are much closer to my heart, than the Wrath ones who feel very lukewarm for me.

I really liked that Wrath improved upon Kingmaker with greater reactibility, but still I prefer the immersion of BG3.

About being woke, Wrath includes several queer characters, with a strong bisexual woman being the main authority figure of the campaign, so yeah despite being a Russian developer studio, Owlcat does do everything in its power to appear progressive. This is not a political thing though, both Larian and Owlcat companies and not human rights groups, they just simply want to make their product attractive to the greatest number of people possible.

So let's bury this brain-dead argument...

Are we really doing this? WotR has less in common with BG3 than Solasta did.

Also, if you really want to get into the whole stupid 'woke' argument, the Pathfinder games are probably the most woke cRPGs ever to exist, it's just very good at integrating what people would call 'woke themes' to the level where it's already treated as completely normalized in the setting, so none of it really feels any preachy at all. Like you really have to go out of your way to find it.


Actually, the more I think about it, the more I believe this thread was made in bad faith, given OP's posting history. Because oh boy, if they actually played WotR, this thread wouldn't be framed the way it was.

My two cents on the actual quality of both games? I've ended up liking WotR much more than BG3 currently, even as someone who highly favors turn-based over RTwP, but one is also three weeks away from releasing while the other probably won't be done until late 2022 at the very earliest.

The writing for the party members and supporting cast in WotR has really elevated it to the point where even in its unfinished beta state, it has quickly become one of my most favorite games ever. I also usually don't give a shit about romances, as the way most games handle them ends up being little more than juvenile sex scene gratification at the end of the day. But the WotR companions have been so compelling that I may consider pursuing one, after hearing about how incredibly written they are from the people in the beta that did chase after them.

So while BG3 might set a new standard in reactivity and maybe role playing, I feel WotR will absolutely set a new standard in how party members are written and designed around each other. Granted, I am someone who cares way more about overall world building and how the characters interact with the world and each other, rather than what the characters would mean to me on a personal level, and the way the WotR companions are structured appears to be as pieces of a bigger whole.

I think the big difference is that the characters in WotR have a defined sexuality independent of the player while in BG3, depending on your viewpoint, everything is bi or playersexual (meaning their sexuality changes to always be compatible to the player).

Di they? I never really bothered chasing romance with anyone so far, but as far as I could remember even in Kingmaker you could basically flirt with the entire cast.

I have not played Pathfinder newest one. That said I think the difference here is that in BG3 companion male Elf Astaron tries flirt with you from the very beginning despite if your main is a man character.

My thoughts Poland got right attitude and Witcher 3 and this Pathfinder have the right views.

They Larian had a news out that they are dissatisfied the majority of player in Early Acces create a white human character. Certainly raised a stong red flag with me and to think they spy on players even on that subject is a red flag indeed. That is not all they have made now so if you choose human the default is black human you must manually change the skin color in character creation.
That is not all when in character creation can choose your ideal partner the faces of women if you choose human race there is only one white caucasian face. Rest are Asian or black peoples faces not in skin color, but facial looks. I find this sick they have done so. Well though I must admit I find also Asian women can be beutiful and example in Smallville TV Series Kristin Kruek that has parents from China and Europe etnic background is super beautiful in an interesting exotic way. Thai people are genetically like Chinese when I was in Thailand I once by mistake thought two women to be Thai ladies, but they were tourists from China.

Well not that I let it me bother super much and not so fond of the green color of Wood Elves changed their skin color to that of typical Tolkien Elves.

However all things said will this stop playing me BG3? No and any gay adancement from Astarion or anyone else for that matter I will simply ignore them.
Well and I believe mods could provide more character models.

Nah, playing it right now and it seems like female PCs only have Tristian and possibly the twins as options, while male PCs get the twins, Octavia and Valerie.


Some encounters can get pretty hectic because of the sheer number of enemies involved, and because tanks(/Valerie) are utter shit before they get good, but to be fair the rules overtune the player too, past a certain point. My kineticist can pretty much one-shot anything ever since he got level 7-8, and mages/bards/clerics get completely busted too.

No comparision. At this point WotR is in another level. Confident, detailed, atmospheric, fun and deep fantasy game. Doesn't give two @#@ about slick boring mobile UI and consoles and stadia and wokeness...
BG3 is still in an identity crisis telltale monty python game designed for everyone and every systems. It lacks FOCUS.

Said it before, say it again...Larian shot themselves in the knee by making this 100% cinematics. Less LONG dialogues and choices, less interesting NPCs, less resources for more atmosphere/game content/classes...It effects EVERYTHING in the game. BG3 cinematics is turning into a MEMEs comedy heaven on youtube. Its getting quite hilarious.

Does everyone agree with this assessment? If so, Larian should really start to work on improving immersion. I haven't played P:WotR yet (I prefer to play a mature and bug free game), but so far my biggest problems with BG3 EA have to do with immersion breaking (e.g. fast travel without portals, send stuff to camp, 2D yellow outlines on 3D shapes, ...). In my point of view, it stands to reason to try to avoid breaking immersion in an RPG as much as possible. The better a players succeeds at playing a role, the more fun she/he is having, right?
But it is good news that the developers of P:WotR did manage to get immersion right.

I don't recall being able to flirt with the whole cast in Kingmaker, although you could probably have friendly banter with them all. But now that I think about it, I vaguely recall that you probably COULD flirt with some of the romanceable party members, only to have them declare that you're not their type if they preferred the opposite gender later on. About half of the cast weren't interested in pursuing a romance there either. Same case in WotR.

The known WotR romances are as follows.

Exclusively available to female characters:
- Lann
- Daeran

Exclusively available to male characters:
- Camellia
- Wenduag
- Sosiel

Available to both:
- Arueshalae
- Queen Galfrey (unsure about this one, she may be male-exclusive)

Non-romanceable:
- Seelah (she's THE iconic tabletop paladin for the entire Pathfinder franchise. Paizo would never allow her to be romanceable, same reason Amiri wasn't romanceable in Kingmaker)
- Regill (he's a hellknight and has zero interest in that shit)
- Greybor (already married and a proud father making ends meet for his family by assassinating the shit out of people)
- Ember (mentally a child, or at least acts like it)
- Woljif (actually underage)
- Nenio (absolutely zero social skills)
- Finnean (he's the talking weapon, but probably still counts as an actual companion as he gets party banter and a companion quest spanning the whole game like everyone else, and his story arc is quite serious)
- Delamere (not actually a true companion, she's exclusive to Lich mythic path, none of the other mythic path exclusives like the Azata dragon Aivu or suspected potential secret late-game companions are romanceable either)

I hope you also know that one of them is nearly finished and will be releasing next month, The other is still in development EA and have years to be finished. What you're doing or trying to do is finding a way to find a reason to get WOTR over BG3? I mean you feel really insecure if you need to come here BG3 forum to talk about other game that even if is amazing has nothing to do with BG3, the gameplay, quality, etc all are different.

And as for companions, if you actually played WOTR you wouldn't have most of those pics calling them interesting. PF Kingmaker had interesting companions, WOTR has maybe 2 or 3 that are actually interesting in their group.

About the woke thing that seems to be around. I don't know where this idea came from, but Yeah, Pathfinder has defined gender lock for some romances, but only 2 companions in KM and I think 2 in WOTR, the others can be romanced by any gender, hells, in PFKM my human duelist married the twins tieflings making a big happy lesbian family in the end. you can also have more gay/bi relationships in PF than most games I've played, so please don't talk about what is not known to you.

The only thing I agree with is immersion. Larian is amazing when it comes to gameplay, etc. But immersion is not one of their strong, DOS2 was terrible at this and broke immersion all the time for me, BG3 is suffering the same issue.