now, my actual problem is with the throw action. my mage have 30 strength and even with the high ground, throwing a goblin on his friend has really poor range... I don't know what happened between 3.5 and 5 but things got ridiculously weak -_-'
How exactly are you throwing goblins? I presume you're using the default throw hotbar icon that's typically used for items? (rather than the Berserker Barbarian Enraged Throw?)
I think Larian changed the default Throw earlier in the EA process to limit throwing of creatures(?). I imagine that it's not calibrated to drastically/appropriately change with character strength, especially up to 30 str.
Does the distance one can throw items change with strength in BG3?
new entry "Throw_Throw"
type "SpellData"
data "SpellType" "Throw"
data "TargetFloor" "-1"
data "TargetRadius" "ThrownObjectRange"
data "AreaRadius" "1"
data "SpellProperties" "GROUND:DealDamage(1,Bludgeoning)"
data "SpellRoll" "Attack(AttackType.RangedUnarmedAttack)"
data "SpellSuccess" "TARGET:IF(IsLightThrownObject(context.HitDescription.ThrownObject)):DealDamage(1,Bludgeoning);TARGET:IF(IsMediumThrownObject(context.HitDescription.ThrownObject)):DealDamage(1d4,Bludgeoning);TARGET:IF(IsHeavyThrownObject(context.HitDescription.ThrownObject)):DealDamage(2d4,Bludgeoning);TARGET:IF(HasWeaponProperty(WeaponProperties.Thrown,context.HitDescription.ThrownObject)):DealDamage(ThrownWeapon, ThrownWeaponDamageType);TARGET:IF(HasWeightGreaterThan(context.Target.Weight/2, context.HitDescription.ThrownObject)):Force(2);TARGET:IF(HasWeightGreaterThan(context.Target.Weight, context.HitDescription.ThrownObject)):ApplyStatus(PRONE,100,1)"
data "TargetConditions" "not Self() and not (not Player(context.Source) and Item())"
data "ThrowableTargetConditions" "CanThrowWeight() and not Grounded() and not IsItemDisabled() and not HasAttribute('InventoryBound') and (IsMovable() or Character() or Dead()) and CanMove(context.Target, context.Source, false) and (not IsEquipped() or IsEquipmentSlot(EquipmentSlot.MeleeMainHand) or IsEquipmentSlot(EquipmentSlot.MeleeOffHand) or IsEquipmentSlot(EquipmentSlot.Boots))"
data "Template" "a82d0147-9ecd-455a-a9ef-c6d2b8119777"
data "Trajectories" "a82d0147-9ecd-455a-a9ef-c6d2b8119777,48362660-28e7-2af1-62fe-49fc4cb6cc70,bfd9fe10-124d-6b01-53e0-824346204638"
data "Icon" "Action_Throw"
data "DisplayName" "Shared_Throw_Throw_DisplayName"
data "Description" "Shared_Throw_Throw_Description"
data "ExtraDescription" "Shared_Throw_Throw_ExtraDescription"
data "PreviewCursor" "Cast"
data "CastTextEvent" "Cast"
data "UseCosts" "ActionPoint:1"
data "SpellAnimation" "b1befe57-ee3e-4126-8c9d-3b6cec7eb3f4,,;f2803838-31cf-471b-85d1-92fa2d0eb7c2,,;4be0751c-9fca-4c35-9337-6bf8a321c516,,;86b52093-596c-4054-bb1d-2dbdfcdc4347,,;5b4905be-03fd-42fb-9652-c2d1c772f4d3,,;9673b7c5-9928-44ce-ae4f-a85be2683981,,;e81ffae4-6be0-47fd-8502-48b9961004e9,,;,,;,,"
data "VerbalIntent" "Utility"
data "SpellFlags" "InventorySelection;RangeIgnoreVerticalThreshold;IsHarmful;HasHighGroundRangeExtension;IgnoreSilence;IgnoreVisionBlock;AddFallDamageOnLand;AbortOnSecondarySpellRollFail"
data "SpellActionType" "Throw"
data "HitAnimationType" "PhysicalDamage"
data "PrepareEffect" "ede0c318-7f5d-43b4-bc73-a50e0a528d55"
data "SpellAnimationType" "Throwing"
data "SpellSoundMagnitude" "Small"
data "Sheathing" "Sheathed"
so... there are a lot of parameters and conditions to take into account but the main thing is that goblins are small creatures and my elf is a medium one. had I tried to throw gale (throwing a spellcaster should be way better than just throwing one spell, don't you think ?)... bad example, there is a test for that...
well, you need to satisfy the "CanThrowWeight()" condition, which I don't have the specifics but a goblin is considered 35kg (a hobgoblin defaults at 50 as a humanoid) when a human is 65kg, which might be a bit outside of throwing range for a standard human.
you can also see that if the thrown object weights more than half the target, the target is pushed back two meters and if they are the same weight, the target is now prone. interestingly enough, this is consistent with how the shove bonus action behaves right now... for the damage... I'm not clear on who takes what, I'm just here for the shenanigans, if damage is what you are looking for, look at eldritch blast ^.^' (especially now that cantrips scale with level \o/)
the range is defined by the property "TargetRadius" as "ThrownObjectRange", which seems to indicate that it depends on some form of ratio between the weight of the projectile and the strength of the character. my earlier tests seem to confirm it but I can be wrong. also note the "HasHighGroundRangeExtension" and "AddFallDamageOnLand" spell flags.
also, bonus fun fact : I haven't tested since they changed how weight works but in early builds, the "force()" effect only took integers so, either 1m or 2m. for the non-standard-compliant people, the usual square of 5ft is 1.5m, which might explain why the push is either too much or too little.
BUT I think the distance is too far. It's a great tactic to shove people off the edge of a cliff or ledge, but they don't need to go flying across the screen (as satisfying as that is lol).
Exactly bcs for this we have Thunderwave and probably other similiar upcoming spells / skills like Fist of Unbroken Air or Gust of Wind.
Also Eldritch Blast+Repelling Blast (Warlock), Pushing Attack (Battle Master Fighter), Thorn Whip (Druid), Arrow of Roaring Thunder. Nearly any class has access to some kind of push effect, or can if using magical arrows, making it a pretty redundant system. In practice wider access - without shifting balance in favor of melee strength builds as is the case currently with overly buffed Shove and Jump.
This goes double for weapon dipping; another overly redundant system that can be replicated by a number of cantrips, spells and potions while adding little beyond needless complexity. Weapon skills (that I kind of like if opened up a bit) are another similar effect that adds more bloat.
For me the current implementation of Shove isn't satisfying nor funny. Well, it is ridiculous - but not in a good way.
but, think about the champion fighter, they have absolutely no button to press, how can they enjoy the fights ?
for a more more nuanced take, not all class in d&d can use magic and having mundane ways of doing things is good. d&d is the game where you can try anything and, more often than not, it's silly and dumb...
having a bit of unbalance on a solo game might be more fun ? It is definitely a matter of personal opinion, I personally never tried the dip mechanic since I mainly play spellcasters but I must admit that I've had way more fun than it should be allowed since I cloned "create water" to create wine, explosive powder, alien juice or lava (my favorite, who needs fireball when you can melt things ?). same thing with regular water, using shocking grasp, ray of frost or firebolt on it is fun... and most fire spells clearly stipulate that flammable stuff will indeed catch fire.
to go back to the topic at hand, here is the code for the shove spell :
Code
new entry "Target_Shove"
type "SpellData"
data "SpellType" "Target"
data "SpellProperties" "RemoveStatus(SLEEP);RemoveStatus(SLEEPING);"
data "TargetCeiling" "0"
data "TargetFloor" ".25"
data "TargetRadius" "1.5"
data "SpellRoll" "Dead() or SkillCheck(Skill.Athletics,math.max(context.Target.GetPassiveSkill(Skill.Athletics),context.Target.GetPassiveSkill(Skill.Acrobatics)), IsSneakingOrInvisible())"
data "SpellSuccess" "IF(not Ally()):Force(ShoveDistance,OriginToEntity,Aggressive);IF(Ally()):Force(ShoveDistance,OriginToEntity,Friendly)"
data "TargetConditions" "not Self() and CanShoveWeight() and IsMovable() and not Grounded() and not (not Player(context.Source) and Combat(context.Source) and Character() and not (Enemy() or HasStatus('SG_Unconscious')))"
data "Icon" "Action_Shove"
data "DisplayName" "Shared_Target_Shove_DisplayName"
data "Description" "Shared_Target_Shove_Description"
data "ExtraDescription" "Shared_Target_Shove_ExtraDescription"
data "CastSound" "Action_Cast_Shove"
data "PreviewCursor" "Melee"
data "CastTextEvent" "Cast"
data "CycleConditions" "CanShoveWeight() and not Grounded()"
data "UseCosts" "BonusActionPoint:1"
data "SpellAnimation" "0319ca29-4024-4649-9278-3c1f20c5f023,,;a71e11ca-95ab-463d-a4bf-fe8094126b61,,;352c3a89-f99c-4472-8424-58c0ffb15e55,,;a57fc614-ed20-4574-936b-bdcc6cebd36a,,;b24b3f23-6d3a-43ce-ae3a-abfb44d26082,,;200ab854-a989-4a6a-8ac9-4b20aecaccda,,;0b07883a-08b8-43b6-ac18-84dc9e84ff50,,;,,;,,"
data "SpellFlags" "IsMelee;AddFallDamageOnLand;IsHarmful"
data "SpellActionType" "Shove"
data "SpellAnimationIntentType" "Peaceful"
data "PrepareEffect" "c512042e-a04f-4a02-af7a-16f30e11ed95"
data "CastEffect" "3fdf3e73-59a3-4518-9521-35f40374d048"
data "TargetEffect" "5d8c64e3-f9ff-4ee0-b0b6-2a081c7244a8"
data "SpellSoundMagnitude" "Small"
data "Sheathing" "Sheathed"
as you can see (or cannot, I will try to explain anyway), it is an athletics check against the better of acrobatics or athletics with advantage if the character attempting the shove is sneaking or invisible. this is what the rules say. the conditions for it being possible in the first place are "CanShoveWeight() and not Grounded()" which might be subject to debate as to what weight can be shoved... and the distance is... "ShoveDistance" which doesn't help much... looking around, I found two values that might or might not be related :
Code
key "ShoveDistanceMin","1"
and
Code
key "ShoveDistanceMax","6"
I guess I found why godlike strength doesn't send people to the moon ^.^'
so, I guess the only thing that is not really consistent with the rules is that fighters should be the ones doing 4 shove actions in one round instead of here being the thief doing it twice... I haven't had the occasion to see how multiple attacks are handled because of all the resetting but I will eventually see it...
82 votes is a big enough sample size for this poll to be significant
You are joking right?
Why should he?
There are NATION-wide polls (with reliable margins of errors) made with a sample of 1000 participants. Having one or two hundreds opinions on a insular community is already a lot.
Last edited by Tuco; 13/03/2310:59 AM.
Party control in Baldur's Gate 3 is a complete mess that begs to be addressed. SAY NO TO THE TOILET CHAIN
The problem is that those 1000 participants are carefully weighted, they dont take every opinion as equal, and they dont tend to ask them in a specifically weighted enviroment, which this thread obviously is. If you had 200 votes, which you dont, collected carefully from a weighted sample of people who are likely to play this game, then the poll might be accurate. As it is you have 83 votes from an insular community of the people most likely to complain about everything in the game, as you can see from the vast majority off threads in the forum being 'i dont like x, can we change it'. Which is fine, becuase thats the point of feedback, but lets not pretend its in any way represenative of a general player base that doesnt even exist yet.
The problem is that those 1000 participants are carefully weighted, they dont take every opinion as equal, and they dont tend to ask them in a specifically weighted enviroment, which this thread obviously is. If you had 200 votes, which you dont, collected carefully from a weighted sample of people who are likely to play this game, then the poll might be accurate. As it is you have 83 votes from an insular community of the people most likely to complain about everything in the game, as you can see from the vast majority off threads in the forum being 'i dont like x, can we change it'. Which is fine, becuase thats the point of feedback, but lets not pretend its in any way represenative of a general player base that doesnt even exist yet.
It's contextually irrelevant. In this case a self-selected sample is for the better.
You shouldn't design anything around the the opinion of someone who - doesn't know or understand the system - doesn't play these type of games or games in general - was not given a significant amount of time to experiment with the game and form a valuable bedrock of understanding about what the implications of a mechanic are.
At best that type of audience can give you valuable data about ease of use.
This is an intrinsically technical inquiry about something that can be judged only through familiarity with the topic.
If you want a medical opinion, you listen to doctors, not the grocery guy. If you want an opinion about a game mechanic, you listen to people who played that game long enough to have an INFORMED opinion.
Last edited by Tuco; 13/03/2312:20 PM.
Party control in Baldur's Gate 3 is a complete mess that begs to be addressed. SAY NO TO THE TOILET CHAIN
There have been multiple threads and polls here. There have been discussions and polls on reddit and/or steam too. 2 and a half year later the sample is wide enough the result is pretty clear : basic shove action should be a full action.
If you want an opinion about a game mechanic, you listen to people who played that game long enough to have an INFORMED opinion.
As someone who played competitive multiplayer games a lot, this is untrue in a lot of cases. People who have experience in a game will have problems that are often at odds with people who are less experienced, leading to balancing issues that can kill a game in the long run. Not saying that this is the case here, but your statement is what has ruined so many games I love.
If you want an opinion about a game mechanic, you listen to people who played that game long enough to have an INFORMED opinion.
As someone who played competitive multiplayer games a lot, this is untrue in a lot of cases. People who have experience in a game will have problems that are often at odds with people who are less experienced, leading to balancing issues that can kill a game in the long run. Not saying that this is the case here, but your statement is what has ruined so many games I love.
There's a difference between listening to an user base familiar with a topic and isolating only the hardcore fringe.
Also, a common saying in game design is that your user base is often extremely reliable at identifying a problem and fairly terrible at suggesting solutions. Which is observable even around here, with a lot of cases where people come up with suggestions about overly-designed and unnecessarily complicated "improvements".
Last edited by Tuco; 13/03/2301:06 PM.
Party control in Baldur's Gate 3 is a complete mess that begs to be addressed. SAY NO TO THE TOILET CHAIN
Well in that case statisticaly 95% of people are Vegans ... Bcs i asked 100 people (sample big enough according to you) on fair with vegan products (sample that is interested in topic is better, according to you).
Doesnt feels right, does it?
I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings. Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!
Well in that case statisticaly 95% of people are Vegans ... Bcs i asked 100 people (sample big enough according to you) on fair with vegan products (sample that is interested in topic is better, according to you).
Doesnt feels right, does it?
I don't really have an opinion on whether this sample in this thread is accurate (my goal has already been accomplished), but you're producing a strawman. Asking a vegan forum if people are vegan is not comparable to asking a BG3-player forum whether or not to modify shove. A better example would be asking a vegan forum if plant-based meat substitutions are too similar to meat to warrant eating, as it still perpetuates carnivore normativity.
The sample on this forum is not "people who hate shove." It's also not "people who complain about BG3." The sample here is "people who are interested in BG3/Larian enough to contribute to BG3-specific discussion." Sure, it's skewed to people who are *opinionated* about how the game *ought* to be, but that is by no means uniformly toward hating every gameplay aspect of Larian's design, or toward having a particular opinion about shove.
We also need to talk about feasibility in figuring out what players think of the game. Outside of having a poll in the game itself, the only place to collect survey data from players about BG3 is either here or the subreddit. Or paid playtesters.
Remember the human (This is a forum for a video game):
Asking a vegan forum if people are vegan is not comparable
Well then i presume its good thing that i didnt compared anything, isnt it?
Originally Posted by Zerubbabel
The sample on this forum is not "people who hate shove." It's also not "people who complain about BG3."
that is by no means uniformly toward hating every gameplay aspect of Larian's design, or toward having a particular opinion about shove.
Look whos making strawmens ... Funny, isnt it?
I mean, yeah ... technicaly all those statements are corect ... But as far as i know nobody claimed otherwise so ... what was your point?
Originally Posted by Zerubbabel
The sample here is "people who are interested in BG3/Larian enough to contribute to BG3-specific discussion."
Yeah sure ... So, how many people around here "dont want to change anything"? (Hint: 0)
Conclusion: The sample here is actually "people who want to change something in BG-3". And that is what distorts your results.
You are asking people that want changes, if they want to support your wish for particular change ... and they do ... "how surprising". -_-
Really people ... statistic is not *that* hard ... :-/ I get that not everyone understands it, i mean i dont really to be honest, but im aware that is probably better word ... sigh ... you know what, let me tell you one simple rule that our teacher told us in first class: Do you know how to recognize suspicious sample? Too many people leans towards single option ... the more options you have, the more suspicious your sample is ... the more people leans towards same option, the more suspicious your sample is.
Take from it whatever you want. Im done ... i explained this more in depth in the past, if you wish to read more about it ... either use search, or join some statistic lectures.
I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings. Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!
Well in that case statisticaly 95% of people are Vegans ... Bcs i asked 100 people (sample big enough according to you) on fair with vegan products (sample that is interested in topic is better, according to you).
Doesnt feels right, does it?
I don't really have an opinion on whether this sample in this thread is accurate (my goal has already been accomplished), but you're producing a strawman. Asking a vegan forum if people are vegan is not comparable to asking a BG3-player forum whether or not to modify shove. A better example would be asking a vegan forum if plant-based meat substitutions are too similar to meat to warrant eating, as it still perpetuates carnivore normativity.
The sample on this forum is not "people who hate shove." It's also not "people who complain about BG3." The sample here is "people who are interested in BG3/Larian enough to contribute to BG3-specific discussion." Sure, it's skewed to people who are *opinionated* about how the game *ought* to be, but that is by no means uniformly toward hating every gameplay aspect of Larian's design, or toward having a particular opinion about shove.
We also need to talk about feasibility in figuring out what players think of the game. Outside of having a poll in the game itself, the only place to collect survey data from players about BG3 is either here or the subreddit. Or paid playtesters.
Jesus Christ. Thank you, it wasn't a hard concept to grasp.
Otherwise, I'm sure Larian is waiting with bated breath to know what any mid 40s housewife in New Mexico or 60 years old postal worker in London that never played a videogame in their life think of shove as a game mechanic.
Party control in Baldur's Gate 3 is a complete mess that begs to be addressed. SAY NO TO THE TOILET CHAIN
Asking a vegan forum if people are vegan is not comparable
Well then i presume its good thing that i didnt compared anything, isnt it?
Originally Posted by Zerubbabel
The sample on this forum is not "people who hate shove." It's also not "people who complain about BG3."
that is by no means uniformly toward hating every gameplay aspect of Larian's design, or toward having a particular opinion about shove.
Look whos making strawmens ... Funny, isnt it?
I mean, yeah ... technicaly all those statements are corect ... But as far as i know nobody claimed otherwise so ... what was your point?
Originally Posted by Zerubbabel
The sample here is "people who are interested in BG3/Larian enough to contribute to BG3-specific discussion."
Yeah sure ... So, how many people around here "dont want to change anything"? (Hint: 0)
Conclusion: The sample here is actually "people who want to change something in BG-3". And that is what distorts your results.
You are asking people that want changes, if they want to support your wish for particular change ... and they do ... "how surprising". -_-
Really people ... statistic is not *that* hard ... :-/ I get that not everyone understands it, i mean i dont really to be honest, but im aware that is probably better word ... sigh ... you know what, let me tell you one simple rule that our teacher told us in first class: Do you know how to recognize suspicious sample? Too many people leans towards single option ... the more options you have, the more suspicious your sample is ... the more people leans towards same option, the more suspicious your sample is.
Take from it whatever you want. Im done ... i explained this more in depth in the past, if you wish to read more about it ... either use search, or join some statistic lectures.
I have a degree in economics with a specialization in data science from one of the best universities in the world. I have had enough conversations like this with you Rag that I know it's not going anywhere, so I'm disengaging, but I think your desire to flip the script on anyone who disagrees with you doesn't express the points you wish to make. You brought up an example, I said why it wasn't comparable. I said the sample was about people playing BG3. You said it was about people wanting to change BG3 (NOTE: That doesn't mean everyone wants to change SHOVE). Now you are accusing people of not understanding statistics because they disagree with you about your particular take of a sample. It's not a perfect sample. But it's not as bad as you are making it out to be.
And there are certainly questions which would be uniformly one-sided that has nothing to do with the sample. Your position on that matter is actually absurd. Questions themselves can lead to a particular response, as opposed to the sample being nonsense. To appeal to an extreme, if I asked a random population if they want to die right now, they would probably give an answer that heavily leans toward one option. Is that a problem with the sample set? But if I asked people suffering in hospice if they want to die right now, they would lean in a considerably different direction. Is that a problem with the sample? Not if you are asking a question about whether or not people in hospice should be granted assisted suicide. Statistics is also more than judging if you have a "suspicious sample set."
Your example from your "teacher" is not a statistical rule. It's a suggestion. It's not even a lemma. And it doesn't universally hold.
Remember the human (This is a forum for a video game):
![[Linked Image from smbc-comics.com]](https://www.smbc-comics.com/comics/20120501.gif)
