Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback Still Too Much Cheese

The one addressed by a thread's title - the existence of cheesy gameplay in the game. Let me elaborate a bit on my first remark. I don't think that the mere existence of cheesy strats ruins the game or makes the whole game "a children's sandbox" or results in "it's over" moment. I think it all ties up into a player wanting reasonable challenge, but at the same time wanting the rules to be forced upon them by a system. Thats why I am more on the side of "if you don't like it - don't do it" argument than "it ruins the experience" argument. Because what really ruins the experience are the mental blockers in players' heads. BTW, a lot of people say that Larian loves cheesy strats, but when I watch PfH I always see the classic "game journalist gameplay" with two people using zero cheesing at all and getting a tough beating. I think the devs behind the game design are not "pro gamers" themselves, thats why they can't satisfy the demand for "fair system" that comes from those who are torn apart between being able to cheese and not wanting to. Those are the few that write those requests on forums etc, while I think the majority just enjoy the system as it is or set self limitations according to their preference. Thats why I pointed out that the issue is not that dramatic, in my opinion.

No need to apologize, you have the absolute right to express your thoughts and feelings about the game as you see fit! It is feedback after all

Okay, thanks. Wasn’t sure if you were talking generally about cheese or about specific examples.

Sounds like I’m part way between you and GM4Him.

For me, there are different levels of cheese. Or rather it’s a continuum through the following three points …

(1) Mechanics that can be exploited by a player either not acting in a realistic way or just wanting to explore weird and fun consequences of game rules, but which have a genuine utility for “honest” players who can avoid the cheesing potential without restricting “sensible” play. For example, if you’re going to have exploding, moveable barrels in the game, there’s almost certainly going to be ways you can use them to cheese, particularly if you’re going to include QoL features like magic pockets and send to camp that help avoid boring inventory shuffling and trekking around. Totally removing this sort of cheese could actually make the game worse for most people, as it would restrict their “honest” use of game features, and I don’t expect Larian to do so.

(2) Mechanics that can pretty easily be ignored by players that don’t want to cheese, but that don’t have a compelling “honest” use. I’d put hiding as a bonus action in battle here. Removing this sort of cheese would help overall game balance without negatively impacting “honest” players, and I really hope Larian will do it, but it’s not essential for me.

(3) Cheesy mechanics that impact on the play of even “honest” players who quite reasonably want to do something that in itself isn’t cheesy, but is cheesy given the way it’s currently implemented. Trying to sneak up and surprise enemies before combat starts, or shove enemies off ledges are the examples that spring to mind there, along with other aspects of the hide mechanic that don’t give NPCs a fair chance to spot my party. For me, these are high priority for fixing.

(Maybe I should have been referring to Lawful and Chaotic players, rather than “honest” and other ones. Which is different from the Lawful or Chaotic characters they might be playing . Personally, I’m generally Lawful as a player even if my PC is Chaotic, and want my story to be realistic, but do enjoy exploring the more Chaotic possibilities of the game engine in some playthroughs.)

100%. I think the majority here are very serious (and that's totally okay!), but larian is like the goofy DM for people who are playing D&D for making a fun story where anything goes and silliness is rewarded. Again, that's *clearly* a minority position, but I'm definitely on team silly-creativity-and-absurd-problem-solving-is-fair-game

I want to be creative and use all tools a game gives me.

But when it's this easy, you're just left with a stupid empty feeling afterwards. It's not rewarding.

A game by definition should be a challenge. BG3 is more like children's sandbox play where a kid goes "I use the barrel and blow Minthara up" and the DM just goes "Ok she's dead" and doesn't consider the how or the consequences. Its really bad DMing on Larians part.

That's not the issue I'm talking about here. Putting aside all goofiness, etc., this thread is about how the cheese destroys the gameplay for the player who is attempting to play an RPG (ROLEplaying game). I want to be able to become my character, and so I try to do whatever I can to survive. As I'm attempting to survive, I learn that simply by hiding, shooting, and hiding again, my enemies will not even try to look for me. Survival instincts (Character me) say, "Keep doing this because this means you won't be in as much danger. You can snipe your enemies until they die. Why would you do anything different?"

The player in me then says, "Because just sniping an enemy who never comes looking for me is boring. If I want to actually have fun with combat in this game, I need to MAKE myself no longer hide, shoot, hide so I actually have some sort of combat."

"Ah, but stealth is the only thing that makes sense for ANY character to try to do as much of as possible when mind flayers and intellect devourers and goblins and duergar and drow and gnolls are out there. Why would you do anything different?" says the character in me. "It makes no sense. If I can stealth, shoot and stealth and win every time - or just about every time - why would I do anything differently? That's stupid."

"Because," says player me. "Where's the challenge in that? Where's the excitement and thrill that comes from wondering if you might not actually succeed in combat? That's boring gameplay."

"I don't care about gameplay," says character me. "I care about surviving this whole thing. You're not the one who has to suffer through the consequences of taking damage, getting poisoned, etc. I do. Are you actually telling me I need to stop doing something that means automatic wins for me just so you can have some fun? Screw you, Oh-Ominipresent-Authority-Figure!"

"Sigh. But the D&D 5e rules say you can't Stealth as a Bonus action. It's an Action. That makes a lot more sense from a balanced gameplay perspective," player me says.

"I don't care," character me says. "If I CAN shoot a spider on a web and make her take tons of damage from a fall, and she keeps jumping up on the webs so I can do it again, I'm going to shoot the webs under stupid spider matriarch lady as many times as I need to until she dies and I win. If it's easy, sucks to be you and her. AND if I can stealth, shoot, stealth the entire time while I shoot the webs out from under her so she never comes and finds me, and it is even EASIER sucks to be you and her."

"No. I'm going to make you not do those cheese tactics so that I can enjoy maybe some challenging combat where enemies aren't morons who do nothing while I shoot them endlessly from hiding," player me says.

Then player me has to force character me to shut the frick up so I can enjoy some challenging, exciting combat. I have to limit character me and tell him to constantly shut up. "You can't drink potions as Bonus Actions even if the game allows it. If you drink a potion, I won't let you use an action afterwards."

"But I have to give up my bonus now as well, meaning I can't even drink a potion and use a bonus action," says character me. "And that hinders me WAY more than my enemies. You're essentially doing the opposite, now, by limiting me in such ways, Player. You're making it so that the enemy has even MORE advantages against me. So, instead of me having super easy cheese battles where I can snipe enemies from hiding and they never come look for me, now I have enemies super easy cheese battling me and sniping me from hiding or using potions as bonus actions while I can't, etc. You're LITERALLY killing me."

"Sigh. I don't know what the solution is, Character me," says player. "I want to enjoy the game. I want to become you and have the game only allow me to do what makes sense from a player and character perspective. Instead, because the devs want a goofy and silly game, I'm forced to now choose. Do I play as a character and utilize every possible advantage I can, making the game boring, or do I play as the player and force the characters to be at a disadvantage just so I can kinda sorta enjoy some challenging battles - all the while in the back of my mind knowing that I could, at any moment, start exploiting cheese to make my life easier and just win the fight?"

Again, this is not as serious for some cheeses. People realizing that they can teleport barrels across a battlefield using magic pockets and then dropping them on enemies and blowing them up is creative cheesing. Most players aren't going to think about doing such things. I'm not as upset by that kind of stuff. In most games, there is that kind of cheese where players who have been playing the game for some time will think of such things and have fun with it.

I'm talking about STEALTH here. Stealth is an absolute basic component of RPGs across the board. Assassin's Creed, Dragon Age, BG1 and 2, IWD1 and 2, Neverwinter Nights 1 and 2... the list goes on and on. You stealth so that you can sneak by or sneak up on your enemies, and then you get a surprise attack. Hopefully, you can weaken them a bit before they get an attack so that you have an advantage in battle. I have NEVER played an RPG that allowed me to just stealth, shoot, stealth my way to total victory with enemies never even trying to find me. Shoot! In the old Dark Forces video game, I shoot an enemy from hiding and they at least run around - even if it was like chickens with their heads cut off. They'd get shot and start searching for who was shooting at them, even if they couldn't find you because your hiding place was too good.

Not BG3. I was LITERALLY 10 feet from the devourer and just kept shooting it over and over again until it died because its sight cone was facing a certain direction and it never moved to find me. I just popped out from behind a pillar, shot it, dropped back into stealth and went behind the pillar again for ALL 3 devourers. I'm sorry, but no matter what way you look at that, that's WAY too broken.

I hate the current shove mechanics too, but quite honestly, I might play 50% of EA and never once try to shove someone because I'm using other tactics and just forget about it. Other newby players might do the same. But most players will certainly use stealth because it is a staple for the genre. Thus, it is far worse of a cheese than shove, web-shooting, barrels dropping, etc. Lots of Larian cheeses are experimental cheeses. You learn them as you experiment. Stealth is not such a cheese. And that is my point. Not having a proper stealth system completely ruins gameplay.

Only the problem solving here is not at all creative. And the game is not presented as Monty Python comedy style, so why are parts of gameplay like that?

Stealth cheesing - a normal gameplay tactic, just overpowered to the point of being completely broken
Stealing - obvious thing to do and just way too easy
Barrels and other explosives - a very obvious solution that's being shoved in the player's face since tutorial. The only surprise comes from the fact that the game lets you cheat in moving such heavy objects around and that even smart NPC's don't see an obvious bomb attack coming. So it just ends up being unrealistic and stupid in a game that's otherwise being presented as realistic and mature. It could actually be fun if you had to lure enemies into an ambush spot using Deception or Bard songs or something. Just teleporting barrels next to them and lighting them up is really dumb.

An example of an actually creative solution is using invisibility and snatching the Deep Gnomes runepowder while she's distracted so she can't blow it up. In combat the cheese tactics are not creative.

You know what is even more unrealistic?? Turn-based mode... there are no turns in real life!!

I just say that im glad i have easy button at my disposal. :P

And I'm sad that pushing ennemies, dipping weapon, jumping, sneaking, throwing (and other basic mechanics of BG3 and/or of other RPG/tactical turn based games) are so broken in this game.

I can't enjoy playing with 5 basic actions out of 10 because they are poorly designed / balanced.

In fairness, I don't think jumping is so much of an issue now. At least, I don't think it's really broken in combat terms. And dipping is just a really bizarre command that probably shouldn't exist anyway because it's just so bizarre and entirely ungrounded in...anything. I've never actually used it in any playthrough.

As a fan of the Thief Series, I like stealth play. It would be great if they improved how the AI deals with stealth etc.

That being said most of the complaints are choices. You have to choose to see stealth cones. You have to choose to re-stealth after an action.

I choose not to abuse stealth, use barrelmancy, dip, shove, etc. because *I* don't find those mechanics fun. However there are others who find those mechanics fun. Why would I want to impose my definition of fun on everyone by removing the things I don't like?

I agree with the OP. Larian should do some major work to remove easy exploits.

The worst exploits are the ones where you can:
- Attack an enemy without consequence (bonus action hide, darkness, fog, attacking from long range, etc.)
- Rig environmental hazards (barrels, create water, etc.) or have the environment pre-rigged by Larian (i.e., webs in Spider Matriarch fight, numerous NPCs placed close the edge of a cliff or under a falling object).
- Extra surprise attack rounds. Getting the first attack is enough of an advantage.

It is impossible for the devs to balance difficulty an encounter where there is an easy exploit that some players might not use. Even just getting a surprise attack round is generally enough to make any encounter trivially easy that is balanced for situations where the party does not get a surprise attack round.

Yeah I don’t think jump is mechanically a issue either. I would wish for shorten distance, but it would require too many redesigns map wise. I would be fine with less silly, quieter sound effect.

Dipping is mostly dumb (and so is healing potion splashing) but not that big of a deal. Potions more so, but it’s mostly how counterintuitive it is that annoys me.

Push/throw - yeah not well balanced.

Barrelmancy - eh, I think it requires enough of conscious player effort for it to not be an issue for me

Stealth though - it is less of a cheese tactics, and more of a half-baked system. It feels broken, in a buggy kind of way, even though I dont think it is. It’s like Larian had an idea what to do with it, implemented some systems, and then completely forgot about it.

Edit. And of course, there comes up tired argument that those issues are an issue only if player chooses to utilise it. That applies to dip and barrelmancy only. Others are core elements of gameplay that player will either have to work overtime to not use them, but even so you can’t avoid AI using them. That said push has been better in patch9 for me so far - I don’t know if they nerfed AI to play less optimally or if I was just lucky. The usual first push fest (goblin throne room) had suspiciously few push attempts made, and those that were made felt warranted. We will see how the push-hell in gromforge will go.

This would be great along with combat stealth going back to rogue only, but less of a priority for me than fixing the stupid shove. Forced myself to give melee one more try, Lae'zel got shoved somewhere that shouldn't have happened and now she and my paladin both use crossbows (it was either that or quit in disgust.)


I have found so far in this patch that the game is doing a much better job at bringing each character into initiative as soon as they have done their initial surprise attack. Haven't made it to Grymforge yet, but haven't had a single instance that I recall where I could constantly hit without being in combat.

The issue with fixing this in the current system is that stealth players in the single player mode will get screwed if all characters are forced to join the combat when one attacks. We would need them to add a proper pause function and ready attack before they even try to make everyone enter combat at the same time. Then those of us with multiple stealthy characters in the party can simply use TB with readied attacks and those who seem to have your issue would not have it.

I am curious though since several people have complained about one character getting beaten up, in what order are you attacking and how are you positioning? For the current party I am using, I attack with ranged rogue first so he can hide again, then with my more armoured character, then the others. Ranged characters are positioned at max range without disadvantage and separated if possible, more armoured characters are positioned a bit closer to the enemies, but just behind where I will put down an AoE spell. With my standard party of all ranged, I do the same but keep everyone at max distance and use more crowd control. Never had the problem with this strategy and wondering what I am doing differently.

Jump is broken but not because it is a bonus action or because you can magically jump really far.
It is because a common jump + usual movement allow you to move further target than when you're not jumping.
When you try to optimize your movement, you have to jump a lot too often !
It just doesn't make sense and it is boring => Jump should consume the proper speed. You jump 3 meters, you can move 3 meters less => Not 1 or 2.

Dipping is not a big issue for now because I don't use it but what will happen at higher difficulty levels ? We'll probably have to use it very often to optimize and it suck because optimize dipping mean carrying a candle in your bag to dip your weapon. I like the idea of dipping a lot but the current mechanic is just cheap.

Barrelmancy is not a problem to me. As Wormerine said it require a lot of effort / creativity. I don't use them but neither did the AI so I really don't care. That's not part of the game if you don't want it to be part of the game.

Sneaking is completely broken currently and as cheap as dipping. You can't even use it in combats except if you want to cheat (to hide a character, to have a free advantage,...).

Yeah, I've come around to agreeing with you, Maximuus. I've been in several combats where I've cast something like grease and the enemy just jumps right out of it when they stand up. So frustrating.

Highlighted is exactly how combat should work in D&D, and would fix this issue entirely. If combat is initiated, EVERYONE rolls initiative and enters combat. Combatants who were unaware are Surprised and cannot act in the first round.

There's no need to have everyone Ready attacks before starting combat -> this is covered by the existence of the Surprised Condition (effectively giving the party a surprise round if the enemies fail their Perception checks).

If a single enemy finds a stealthed party member, then I'd argue that only that enemy is automatically aware of the party. Other nearby enemies would still need to succeed their Perception check or be Surprised, making it very unlikely that you'd have situation where every single enemy can attack that PC before that PC (or the rest of the party) gets a turn.

I think I basically agree with the rest of your post, but on this particular point I’ve always thought of this as being a case of one enemy spotting us and sounding an alarm to their mates. Admittedly it would be nice to have each enemy type have a bark to reflect this, but I’m not in principle against groups of enemies getting the benefit of one of them spotting one of my characters, so none of them are surprised.

As long as all my party, including the stealthed ones, actually went into turn-based mode and got a chance to roll initiative to join in, that would be good enough for me. If my other party members were too far away to help in time then that’s my fault for not planning better. And if they are all just unlucky with initiative and my originally spotted party member takes a hammering as a result then them’s the breaks! At least it’s not as likely to happen as currently, and not a whole lot worse than what can happen in any battle.

I can see this might be a bit weird and end up in some jumping around and skipping turns if some of your party were a long way from the others, and you could even end up having two separate battles concurrently, with their turns mixed together, but I still think it would be better than the current setup.

Sure, that's a perfectly valid way to run it. It's a bit weird if, for example, the enemy that discovered you rolls extremely low on initiative but his buddies all roll high. So...he then warned them before being able to act himself...? But that's a general flaw of the initiative system, and possibly solved by simply allowing that NPC to act first in initiative.

The other way--where enemies don't get a perception check unless one of their own spots the PCs--would probably be way too OP in BG3 where enemy movements/AI can be exploited and entirely avoided. Nigh-guaranteed Surprise rounds every combat would be an incredibly OP tactic.

Your 2nd paragraph is exactly what I think should happen.