Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Class based quests

While I don’t think that Strongholds would be a good fit for BG3, your argument is a bit moot as the problem you are describing already exists in BG3. Class specific options already often represent a very specific stereotype and personality, rather then their class. You can of course not pick them, but you can also refuse a stronghold if it doesn’t fit your character. If anything, BG2 strongholds were less imposing then what we have now. Accepting a job relevant to your class doesn’t need to interfere with who your character is. Your bards ideal career might not be running a theatre, but he still is qualified to do so, and might decide to take up the job for variety of reasons etc. afterall, Stronghold is an external factor, not expression of your character like a class specific dialogue options.

Nobody is forcing you to do anything. In the same manner people have said of BG3 “don’t like explosive barrels or shove? Don't use them”. If you don’t like the concept of strongholds/class quests; don’t use them…but it’s irrelevant anyway because Larian won’t implement them.

Exactly.

Can you tho? :P
This is not rhetoric question ... since we dont really know how (or as the matter of fact even if) Larian would implement such quest chain ...
Can we really say it would be skippable with absolute certainity? :P

I think not.

It was in baldurs gate 2

If they didn't put in class strongholds I would be disappointed. The points for it; it was in Baldur's Gate II, it was wildly popular. The points against: it's work, it's not really an element of 5e.

I would be very surprised though if we didn't get some kind of base of operations, our camp has to morph into something interesting when we get to the city

Scary thought, the vast majority of the story won't be anywhere near Baldur's Gate.

I've been girding myself for something like that. They've maybe hinted at some globetrotting in the game, but if it'll be like BG:II's mid-story jaunt to the Underdark, or a Diablo-style, every act is a new locale; I can't say.

Yes, but while effective, they weren't substantial - they were essencially very short quest chaines specific to player's class unlocked after completing a relevant dungeon (which is available to everyone). I suspect Solasta's background quests were more expensive features then Strongholds in BG2. An equivalent in BG3 coud be Tav Druid being offered a role of chief druid after solving the local conflict, which would result is a brief quest chain.

Pointing to how small Strongholds really were isn't criticism BTW - if anything, later successors (NWN2, PoE1, Kingmaker) did a mistake by making a Strongold/Keep a more substantial presence - game systems tied to those are never fun, and having to go back to one place over and over again just doesn't fit a game about adventuring forward.

In BG2 having a base was rather meaningless - all Strongholds brought is reactivity to our choice of class, something that BG3 already invested many more resources through into then BG2 did.

That must be said, though, that Strongholds in BG2 really did work - it was smart, and I suspect a cost effective, way of giving played a different flavour based on their class. For them to work, though, some starts need to allign: They need to be accessible throughout the game and to not be prohibitivaly costly they need to utilise areas build for other purposes.

Still, something in spirit of strongholds (class specific quests, consisting of handful of nodes staggered over a period of time) could be a cool thing to have - however, so far I haven't seen Larian as very keen of giving unique content to classes - spells with potentially cool or unique features are made widely available thrugh items or scrolls, and in general their philosophy seems to be to allow for skinning a cat in multiple ways, rather then providing different cats for different classes, so to speak.

I've never played NWN2 but I've played both other games and really loved their stronghold mechanics. I think it's a personal thing, but for me having a stronghold is a great way to really anchor a PC in a setting. It makes them feel like they HAVE something, like they're immediately more planted in the setting. It doesn't suit every game for sure, but for me personally I think it's generally a positive and two out of three of those games were more engaging for theirexistence. Kingmaker in particular wouldn't make sense as a game without a stronghold, the stronghold is the point of the game. Though I will say I agree that the mechanics attatched to it could have been better and less reliant on randomness.

I think the arguments against class-based strongholds as well as strongholds themselves are very good. That's why I emphasize again that I prefer a faction system. Which you can join and which have not only one headquarters (stronghold), but several outposts or side(quests) at different times in different places in the game world.

In BG 2 The Shadow Thieves and Cowled Wizards were both found in Athkatla and Trademeet. (It is already known that the Zhentarim are in Waukeen's Rest as well as in Baldur's Gate). Something like that can be expanded. We ourselves don't necessarily have to be boss of a faction / stronghold, as we are wandering adventurers. For me, it would create more immersion to not just complete a specific larger questline of a faction, but to have several small encounters that remind me of my membership in this particular faction in the game world.

Sometimes it's the small details that leave a lasting impression. For example, in DA 2 I really liked that Hawke had to choose between the smugglers and the mercenaries. Unfortunately for me that was too short a membership and in the end just like any other quest line. And yes I also know that in this particular example a "temporary" cooperation was intended, but still found it a pity.

0% of BG2 was in Baldur's Gate...

Well, almost 0%, there may have been some dream sequences there. I forget.

Is it confirmed that we get to the city, and do we know in what act already?

0% of BG2 was in Baldur's Gate, but most of it was in Athkatla, and its surroundings including three of the strongholds. Unless you're making the point that we're presuming a lot when we say we'll be in BG. I think just based on the statements Larian have made, and the plot threads we've found in the EA, that we'll be spending a significant portion of at least the next act in Baldur's Gate.

I wasn't really making a profound point at all. Just commenting that a Baldur's Gate game set mostly outside of Baldur's Gate is not unprecedented. BG1 spent the first 4 acts (of 7) outside of the city too.

There are plenty of things that I dislike about BG3, but I mostly think that criticism for "not being in Baldur's Gate" is off the mark.

Strongholds as implemented in BG2 would be easy for Larian to put in the game, and the "complication" and "lack of dev time" is simply not a good argument against it.

In all of the stronghold quests in BG2 there is an elaborate quest that leads to the stronghold being offered. However, this quest is open to all!

For instance, Nalia De'Arnise will invite <charname> to liberate her family keep from invading trolls, regardless of <charname>'s class. After the liberation, she will ask <charname> to assume possession of the keep **IF** they are a fighter (or barbarian, monk, or blackgaurd). There are a few minor quests that ensue from this, but the bulk of the interaction with this keep is during the liberation, which ALL classes get to participate in.

Likewise, all characters have an opportunity to rescue Haer'Daelis from the planar prison, but if <charname> is a bard then they will be asked by his troupe to manage the Five Flagons playhouse, which again, leads to a number of fairly short quest interactions. Again, the bulk of the quest is the part that everybody can do.

This pattern repeats for all of the strongholds. The fact that these quests were quite popular with the players seems somewhat odd when you consider how little needed to actually go into making them... but that just stresses again that there is no reason that Larian could not do this.

most of the bugs stiil in BG2 after 20+ years relate to stronghold quests with random messager never showing up to tell you "return to keep" being number 1

i'm fine with getting a place to stay once we reach the gate; help Shadowheart drop off her D20 gets us in good with the clerics and let Lae'zel give it to her queen gets us in good with the Gith instead... i just don't see any real point to saying Fighters get a different spot to Wizards and we can still have quests to defend our new home from the other side trying to take the D20 back

And?
So was the Ranger, and i bet there are quite few differences between them. :P

Nope.

Yes well that proves it since rangers are different in bg3 , the quest that larian is theoreticaly adding will also not be skippable, yes your point could be true nothing has absolute certainty.

I feel like this chain of conversation is just arguing for the sake of it, so i wont be replying again sorry.

Im happy for you to think and believe what you want.


Thanks rag.

Yes, I am pretty sure it was mentioned how vertical city of Baldur's Gate will be - don't ask me to look for exact quotes. With almost every NPC converging on Baldur's Gate it would be very weird if it wasn't in the game anyway. I don't think it has been mentioned exactly in which act (or acts) we will be able to visit it.

My hope is regardless of if we get to Baldur's Gate in Act 2 or Act 3 - that when we get to it the city is 'normal'. As in people are going about their day to day lives rather than the city being in utter chaos due to a mind flayer invasion or something. If it gets to that point where things get crazy - that is great. But I'd love to experience the city before all hell breaks loose.