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

Thanks for the details on how it works @Flooter and @Maximuuus.On the one hand, I like that the AI seems to be smart in this way.

On the other hand, this turns Extra Jump Movement into even more of an exploit. If the AI is coded to try to stay just outside of ranged/spellcasters, but you can bypass that too-far-distance by Jumping, then you're taking advantage of a limitation of the AI. Jumping every turn becomes mandatory, which is boring and silly.

This should be changed. You should be able to hover over an enemy with a ranged attack, and the game should use silhouettes to tell you how much movement you'd need to hit them (if you can). This should include extra movement from Jumping, as jumping--and the extra movement you get--seems like a core feature of the game atm. Alternatively, just make jumping cost 1 foot of movement per foot jumped so we can avoid this problem entirely.

Hey, if you do that, and you also make the jump button effectively free and cost no part of your turn (and so usable as often as necessary), then we're in line with actual 5e. Fancy that...

That's CRAZY talk, Niara. CRAZY! 😱

😂

I don't think I am explaining what I mean clearly enough. What I want to happen would be the tabletop equivalent of the party using hand signals or a countdown to ensure all their attacks go off at the same time. The enemies would not be making any perception check during the second or less that this would be occurring, if the party has made it up to this point successfully without being seen by the enemy then the ambush happens. Pretty sure multiplayer can do this already. Since we do not have ready attacks and a proper pause, in singleplayer we have to micromanage this one character at a time and our attacks do not go off at the same time due to the system.

How I am interpreting what you are saying, and there is a good chance I am misunderstanding, is the tabletop equivalent of having the party set up the ambush, but one person attacks before they are supposed to, which definitely would cause the enemy to make a perception check or be surprised, before any of the rest of the party gets to go. If there was a way to bring everyone into the combat once the first character has attacked, but guarantee the rest of our party got to attack first (to simulate all of us attacking at once) then I would be ok with that. I just feel like Larian would muck this up somehow and the rest of our characters would get stuck in initiative order wherever the dice puts them, forfeiting the ambush attack they would have had in multiplayer and tabletop.

Speaking of weak characters jumping, is there anywhere Gale can't actually follow you when exploring and jumping? I only remember ONE jump he can't make to use some minor shortcut in the Underdark. Does the auto-jump ignore the strength based distance?

Why would you introduce a system like that and then make it meaningless? Especially since weak characters have access to so many forms of Misty Step / Jump / fly / thrown with Giant Strength. Sometimes having to split the party can be an interesting dynamic, too. Or did they just make all the important jumps 5m to not inconvenience the player?

Of course you can just click on fast travel waypoints to ignore all obstacles. BG3 is a bit too convenient.

I’m not 100% sure on this. In some places companions tend not to follow even when the they should be able to, such as jumping back onto the path near where you find Astarion after finding the Harper stash under the rock, and back up from the Kua Toa area in the Underdark, which seem to cause me problems for various companions so it’s hard to be sure when Gale isn’t following due to strength restrictions rather than a bug in following.

But there are at least a couple more locations where this might be what is happening, such as getting to the Harpy nest and the big jump to the ledge overlooking the goblin camp that you can get to from near the gate where you find the githyanki. And there at least used to be a spot in the cave where Rugan was trapped by gnolls where Gale and other low strength party members could get stuck because they could jump down onto a platform but not back up again, but that may have been fixed. Oh, and perhaps a couple of spots in Grymforge, too.

I guess what would prove that auto-jump wasn’t properly taking into account strength based distance is a definite example where you can’t possibly manually jump Gale, but he follows if a higher strength character goes first. I don’t have such an example myself but someone might?

Though, to be honest I do think it’s right that maps are designed so that 8 strength characters can get to the vast majority of places, and areas that require longer jumping/misty stepping etc are there as a discoverable (optional) treat or to enable the odd shortcut that weedy characters can get to via another route. Speaking as a person who often plays wimps myself, it would be annoying if there were lots of places I couldn’t get to without magical intervention.

If I’m understanding the proposal right then I think it should accomplish this.

Say all your characters are in stealth, then one attacks the enemy and combat is started for all characters. Everyone throws for initiative and a combat order is determined, and some enemies might beat some of your party. BUT those enemies are surprised so they don’t actually get to do anything on their first turn, and as a result even your party members later in the action queue will get a chance to get in their first attack before any enemy can strike back.

EDIT: In fact, depending on how exactly it was implemented the character who attacked first might even get another shot in, if their initial shot is treated as happening before the first combat round. I think BG3 does this now. Or the attack they made to start the fight could be taken as part of their turn in the first round, so if if they used an action for the attack then they start the combat with (one of) their actions already used but can use any remaining actions or bonus actions. I think it should probably work the latter way, with the round then continuing from wherever the initially attacking character ends up in the initiative queue. As long as enemies remain surprised until every character in the combat has had a turn and we come back to that first attacking character, that should work I think.

Seems like we're understanding each other fine. We just disagree on how ambushes and surprise rounds should be done in BG3. Imo, a full surprise round for every singe party member is too strong, especially since the AI and stealth system are a bit broken/exploitable, making it theoretically easy (maybe even trivial) to launch an ambush for most combats. Also, I don't think real-time coordination should have that much of an effect in a TB combat game, or that a full pause should enable players to queue up actions in a TB game.

Tbf though, I don't feel that strongly about it. Your suggestion of a surprise round for all party members would be fine, though I would hope Larian implements enemy perception circles and maybe a bit more enemy patrols to make that more difficult.

I didn't realize that what you're suggesting could be done in multiplayer. So if all players ~simultaneously launch an attack, they'll all go through before combat starts and/or before any enemy gets a chance to react?

+1 that, at the very least, it should work the latter way. The combat initiator's initiative should probably be automatically set to be the highest, and they can continue using whatever actions they had left after the initiating attack. But their turn should happen in the first round of combat, not before the combat.

+1 to this


Yes, putting the initial attacker first in the combat queue would also work

What about if the surprise attack works only for any character in stealth? First hidden character attacks, then non stealthed characters get brought into initiative like normal, any others in stealth get to make their surprise attack first then added to the initiative order.

Thinking that using the reaction system might be better (maybe easier to code.) Once the first character has attacked, the optional popup would ask us if we wanted to fire off the surprise attack on whichever other characters it is set for. Once this is done, then initiative starts normally for everyone. Wouldn't affect anyone who doesn't use this tactic on more than one character.

I do wish they would make stealth more immersive, but I have resigned myself to probably playing on a higher difficulty mode just so the ambush doesn't trivialize the combat. I just can't enjoy playing a game by announcing myself to the enemy, makes me feel like an idiot with no sense of tactics. Will take the messy system we have now over having the tactical ambush ability removed, even though it is far from ideal. I don't usually play TB games and not being able to set up characters for simultaneous actions is extremely frustrating, this is why I want proper pause and queued/ready action capability, the latter of which is already in DnD rules.

As for multiplayer, I am only speculating that the proper ambush can occur because all characters can be moved at the same time during exploration as well as perform different actions. It makes sense that any coordinated attack actions can also be done like this. Hopefully someone who has actually played like this will confirm.

This would make sense. The first attacking character should definitely not get another whole extra turn on top of their surprise attack.

I’m not sure I’m understanding this suggestion. I suspect I may just not be getting your point.

But in case I am, let’s take the two alternatives in turn. We’ll assume that our whole party is in stealth, then one attacks, surprising the enemies.

At that point, their attention drawn, the enemy should have an opportunity to spot their attacker and anyone nearby, but for the sake of simplicity we’ll say any other party members forced to make a stealth check succeed, so the whole party remains in stealth except for the attacker.

So the proposal is that combat always starts at that point, and let's say that the “surprising” character always gets first spot in the initiative queue as per mrfuji3’s good suggestion.

We have suggested that all enemies and party members enter combat, roll for initiative and get slotted into the queue, then our initial character gets to complete any other actions and bonus actions (beyond their initial attack) before ending their turn. Any enemies would effectively skip their turns in this first round as they’re all surprised, so what actually happens in this first round is that the rest of our party get to take their actions and bonus actions, with the advantage of starting their turn in stealth as they were hidden when combat started. Our "surprising" character then gets to make their second attack, but by then enemies can take reactions and then combat proceeds as normal.

In summary, in the first round our whole party gets to take their actions and bonus actions with the advantage of stealth on their first attack, and the enemy gets to do nothing.

Is your suggestion that only your surprising character actually joins combat at first? If so, let’s work that through. If they then complete any other actions and bonus actions without you bringing in the rest of your party and you end the turn then all the enemies will get to complete a surprise round but you won’t have chance to bring the rest of your party into the combat as you need to do that on the turn of one of your party, when combat is paused for you. So instead of ending the first character’s turn, you have the rest of your party attack one by one. They get their initial attack with advantage of stealth, then roll for initiative and get slotted into the combat queue, but it’s still your first character’s turn so they can’t do anything else yet. Then once you have all your party in combat, you end the turn of your first party members, and in this first round all enemies just get to gape in surprise while the rest of your party get to make any remaining actions and bonus actions in turn.

What this means is, in the first round, your whole party gets to take their actions and bonus actions with the advantage of stealth on their first attack, and the enemy gets to do nothing.

That is, exactly the same as option one except that you have to manually bring the rest of your party in, there are questions that need to be addressed about whether your party members who stay outside combat are still in turn based mode aligned to the combat (and potential cheese if they’re not) and complications if you don’t bring all your party members in at once and instead bring one in, end the first character’s turn, bring in another and then they roll better initiative than the character you’ve already moved to.

That’s why I think I’ve misunderstood your suggestion! I think you might alternatively be suggesting that subsequent party members might be able to join the combat in later rounds and newly surprise the enemy, which sounds hard to implement in practice. Surely there shouldn’t be a whole other round with surprised enemies, and it’s not clear what it would mean for one enemy to be surprised (do just they miss their next turn?) or enemies to be surprised only by one of your party. And anyway, I would suggest that any “surprise” caused by later party members joining the battle is represented by the advantage they’re getting from attacking from stealth, so adding a surprise turn at that point would be double counting.

Or perhaps I’m still misunderstanding ….

Basically what @The_Red_Queen says above. This:
seems basically the same as But the first suggestion means that players must manually bring each stealthed party member into initiative. This is needless work and in multiplayer, this means that any players in TB mode have to wait even if it's their turn, otherwise they'll advance the turn order and enemies might be able to go before the stealthed characters make their surprise attacks to enter the initiative.

The main mechanical hurdle of the latter suggestion is making sure all enemies are Surprised for their first turn. But BG3 already does something like this, no? I've seen many reports that attacking from stealth leads to the PCs getting an entire turn or two before the enemies can go.

I really do think that what you want, in essence, is covered by the Surprised rules for 5e. It gives your party an entire turn to act before any** of the enemies can go.

**depending on the exact implementation Larian/the DM chooses: whether enemies automatically get a perception check once the first attack is made.

Yes, it's a bit hard to work out what's going on when the mechanics are so off, but I think what's happening when you successfully attack from stealth or distance and then an enemy spots you and your party (which is more likely if they're not in stealth!) then things work much more as we've been saying they should. At that point, everyone - the party and all nearby enemies - roll for initiative and combat starts. But because your party attacked out of nowhere the enemies are surprised and can't do anything on their first turn. The main difference between that situation and the one we've been discussing is that the initially attacking character doesn't automatically go first, they just get their turn wherever in the queue they end up, but they get another full set of actions and bonus actions, with their first attack that started the fight apparently considered pre-combat.

I just wish it would work in a similar way when enemies didn't spot some or all of my party!

I /wish/ the shot enemy would approach your general direction. This triggers combat and they have a bonus to Initiative. The rest of their group may be surprised.

But, I do think after attacking an enemy from stealth, non-rogues should still be able to hide from the alarmed enemy using a bonus action.

They just shouldn't have advantage, nor improved hit rate... /unless/ they move a significant distance away from their og hiding spot. Like 15m away. Enough to waste a turn to regain advantage.

I'm all for stealth tactics and playing cat and mouse, but we need /something/ to... raise opponents' cunning, really 😮‍💨

Yes. Combat needs to be locked, so that once the first stealth attack is made, the rest don't have unlimited movement to get Into position. Maybe a little extra, but not just... this. It's too awkward!

The rest of the party should roll for intiative with a big boost instead of getting a free round.

Are people still believing any of that will get changed? We are half a year from release and those issues existed from right when EA started.

Its much too late to make big conceptual changes and Larian obviously has no interest to de-cheese the game because its their style.

Well, I didn’t expect them to fix reactions either, so there is still hope. And better stealth would require tweaks to ruleset, not new UI or mechanics (I don’t think so, at least). Stealth specifically goes beyond being cheesable and is just an unwieldy mechanic, so I believe that some improvements need to happen.

Yes. The answer is Yes. It's the whole point of EA, and as I recall, Larian has asked us to continue to give our feedback - you know, the whole point of this forum... Isn't it?

Why do people keep harassing us for providing suggestions and feedback on a Suggestions and Feedback forum?

Yes, exactly. I may be extremely doubtful that we’ll see a significant overhaul of the game’s handling of real-time vs pause, though you never know, but stealth could be made much more satisfying to use in the game, if not perfect, with what feel like some relatively minor tweaks to existing functionality.

Just (a) making perception/stealth checks 360 degrees when close to an NPC, (b) making hide an action (with a cunning action for rogues), and (c) having all enemies and allies within a reasonable distance roll for initiative and join combat when it starts, even if they’re hidden, would I think go a long way to making stealth usable in combat for those of us not actively trying to cheese it, even if no other change were made. Okay, (c) in particular could have some bad unintended consequences if the characters to be brought into combat weren’t carefully defined, but I don’t think that’s insurmountable or would require huge changes to what the game already does.

(Though if hide is made an action I’m going to put in a request for a cloak of camouflage or similar, equivalent to the boots of speed, that could give one other character hide as a BA! I do think hide as an action is a necessary change, but would love the option of hide as a BA for my sneaky rangers before they get Vanish at level 14, which we probably won’t even get to. I don’t think it would break balance too badly if an item like that wasn’t found until, say, most characters were likely to be level 6 or higher, and it would anyway involve sacrificing the potential benefits of another item that might go in the same slot.)

I'd rather keep stealth as a valid gameplay option, but nerf it.

Honestly, there are worse ways to cheese at Level 2-4 than stealth. All you need is a portable explosive barrel and Astarion's fire arrow cantrip.

I threw a single barrel on the first pack of gnolls. Dead. All dead. Instantly. Portable fire ball at command. 3 barrels can decimate about anything, anywhere.

What gets me is that stealth is not fun to play. Too clunky. If the entire party has it, "surprised" needs to be changed to a mere boost to your Initiative.

Enemies also can't be sitting ducks. They need some way to locate you, not skip all their turns. They already do that just fine outside turn based combat 🙁