Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General What do you want to know before release … and what would you like to be a surprise?

To be clear and as I stated in my original post, I am fine with the 4 person party. But I would personally like it even more if it was 5-6.

And it is not without precedent for a game to change the balance with this type of change between early access and full release. I am blanking on the game, but there was at least one other early access I participated in where the initial party cap prior to full release was one thing and then expanded to another on release. I want to say NWN, but I am probably wrong about that. Certainly, there have been several games where expansions have increased the party numbers that was retroactive, allowing you to play the full game with the expanded party (NWN2 was like that).

Not saying it will happen, nor even that there wouldn't be challenges associated. Just that it would be something I would personally like to see.

Sure. It's, in its best form, a way to increase combat difficulty and complexity by adding passive scaling. An option for combat enthusiasts. It can also be another path of implementing an easy mode. However, it requires a clear vision to pull off. Merely increasing party size is not enough go get benefit out of the feature.

The diablo style enemy stat adjustments aren't necessarily popular, yet adding amount or "levels" comes with it's own problems. Still, any solution is better than none. Being stuck in default story mode combat /or/ elongating encounters for everyone are non optimized choices.

Since it increases complexity of fights, however, it has a lot of potential of being part of a hard mode. Enemies hit harder, /you/ hit harder, everyone gets to employ more complex strategy. Infinitely better than making every goblin a tank and calling it a day

who is to say that the vision doesn't already exist? that is part and parcel of it being a 'surprise release'.

Not saying that it is, just it would be nice (in my opinion).

I don't want to spam this thread unnecessarily. As I said, everything was covered in the Mega thread and the threads before it, and Larian knows the score.

Again, the emphasis is on what might have quietly happened since then for a surprise to even expect. We assume that "investing" has already been started at time X. I hope that was expressed more understandably by me.

Hope dies last!

I mean the easiest mode could easily accommodate 5-6 party members without rebalancing the whole game. That makes sense to me. But not higher difficulties... at all. Game is not built for encounters with large parties in the slightest. That would require rebuilding the entire combat experience from the ground up in a span of a few months.

I think this entire conversation is predicated on not enough information. If, as has been commented, this has been discussed before, we none of us know what Larian has (or hasn't) been doing in the background. it's best we don't get into an argument over something that we, none of us, have any facts about.

Yet another party size debate? For having played WotR, 6 man party allowed me to destroy the balance to a point BG3 "cheese" looked fair game. 4 strikes me as the good amount for a good balance overall.

A Genie Patron for the Warlock would also be a surprise. Recently I found a Genie's Vessel with a clue saying:

"An ordinary lamp. No trace of magic on it."

Why does that need to be emphasized? Perhaps because it might be possible later after all, maybe not.

How necessary will playing an Origin Character be for experiencing the whole story?

I'm not arguing? Having a larger party would be fun, but there are four things that have been consistently demanded by some members of the community to be met with absolute radio silence, which I consider the "Four Horseman of the Larian-Would-Never Apocalypse":
-Larger Party Size
-Day/Night Cycle (This one I am most upset about not having)
-Different party movement mechanics
-Real time with pause option

It's not that we don't have enough information. The fact that there are long-running megathreads going back for years without any attempt at implementation is evidence that these things are not being implemented (or are much lower priority). I'm happy to be wrong on release, but most signs point to "no." From an epistemological standpoint, there is much more reason to believe that we are not going to get these four things, and less reason to believe that we will. For those of us who have been watching the forum longer, there are facts to point to a lack of implementation, while there is no evidence towards any attempt at implementation.

Edit: Also, if Larian were considering rolling out a larger party, given how it would fundamentally change combat, they would likely want to test it on early access. The lack of the presence of something that would fundamentally alter combat at higher difficulties in the early access months before release date is evidence to non-implementation. Larian wanted to test reactions, so they put them in early access. Same with flight. And classes. But not a change in party size, even though that would fundamentally change the game balancing?

I would like everything from here on out to be surprise. I have looked at the various patches and played some new classes just to check them out.

Bcs Genies are part of this world? And therefore its perfectly normal for immersion to mention that none lives here? O_o

I don't know how much it does for immersion since this is the first time we're hearing mention of genies in any context, but I agree that it's probably just a throw away joke.

As for what I want to know before release; any major systems changes, what companions we're going to have (at least the ones we'll meet by the end of act 1) and confirmationon whether or not Tav is going to have any sort of special backstory.

Hopefully not. I didn't need this subclass, but in principle it would be a wasted chance... But maybe they already considered it for a later DLC.

I would love to see a new dev blog about better and more interesting motion captures for e. g. archaic weapons: slingshots, whips, blowpipes and hopefully bolas (https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Bolas_(5e_Equipment) --> my Bounty Hunter needs that to catch his prey alive).

The new sneak attack animation was a shot in the dark, unfortunately.


I would also be luckily surprised to see a Dire Raven familiar (for the Raven Queens' Hexblade) and melee sword'n'shield Skeleton Warrior familiar both for the Pact of the Chain. That could be a nice tribute to Ray Harryhausen. Much respect for his passion. It took him four months to produce his memorable and iconic skeleton scene, which runs, at most, three minutes. It's a timeless pleasure to watch it:

lamps in dos2 have the same description. however theres only one lamp with a genie in it.

It depends. So if there are multiple Genielocks, then everyone should also have their own oil lamp or another vessel that they have chosen. At least that's what I understand from this: http://dnd5e.wikidot.com/warlock:the-genie

With all the things you find, it would make sense to be able to give some of it more use, even as a Genie vessel.

I believe that you are making several assumptions here. Lack of testing in the wider open beta is not proof of anything other than that it isn't being tested in the wider open beta. Not that it isn't being worked on. And as for the impact on balance, there is a whole lot of data that can be extrapolated based on the gameplay as it stands, which could help with balancing issues for this type of change. As example, the entire 2nd and 3rd act are not being balance tested. Because they are using the balancing for act 1 to tweak it.

I am not saying that they are (or are not) working on a larger party. I simply do not know. Just pointing out that the assumptions you lay out above are not proof one way or the other either. I agree that they are compelling, and point to them not doing it. But that's an assumption.

Anyway, the thread was "what would you like to be surprised by". If they did that, and I am not saying they are, I would like to be surprised by that. I make no predictions, merely that it would be a nice surprise IF they did that. Well, it would be a nice surprise to me.

Yes, realism isn’t required here! Though for me a rebalancing of the game in favour of a party of six wouldn’t be a welcome surprise. I’d probably want to be forewarned so that I could have some time to reconcile myself to a change like this .

I suppose we can agree that it would be an interesting surprise.

Ah, if realism isn't required, I didn't get the memo. Sometimes I default into the "Pour cold water over it in the name of realism" guy. If realism is no big deal, here's my surprise wishes:
-D/N cycle
-Massive world to explore, complete with many dungeons, detailed towns, wide wildernesses, and interesting characters.
-More BG2 characters returning, including Edwin the Lich, Jon Irenicus (specifically whatever monstrosity remains of him), Viconia (original VA), Jan Jansen, etc.
-BG2-level companion quantity (like 15), with Dragon Age/Mass Effect level quality/depth, and current BG3 levels of permutations for interaction.
-Being able to use any spell, ability, or move on any character or environment and have it produce a unique response in some way.
--Z axis tilting and the ability to keep the camera zoomed in.
-Interactions with deities and patrons.
-Significant shades of grey in moral decision-making and the ability to have different flavors of neutral and evil.