Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General I think I'm giving up on Larian

Tbh, I'm happy with the re-spec part of all this, specifically being able to completely re-spec the companions. It may be a rare Larian move I can get behind. As I've made quite clear, I can't stand the companions we've been given in their current forms, so if I can completely change everything about them, then that is at least something. I know I won't be able to change their ridiculous backstories or their fundamental bevahior, but I am at that stage now where grasping at straws is all I have left.

Haha thats a good one, but I haven't heard someone saying "Man, I think firebolt dealing 1d10 is too much, my character's firebolt will deal 1d2 instead"

Policing in terms of roleplay decisions, sure, but rules are written and only in some occasions are open for interpretation. And there is DM to help with any confusion.

Skyrim stealth archer is not an exploit. Any build relying on potions however, is an exploit and can surpass stealth archer by multitudes. The restoration loop was never fixed and so enchanting and spell buff are legitimately broken

It seems like that logic should apply to Elden Ring vs. BG3 as well, or am I missing something?

We don't know the EXACT budget of either, but no, they must be around the same "100 millions" ballpark, give or take.

Yeah, why not?
As long as there's a "proper" mode I wouldn't give a damn of what people do with their easy mode or even if they want to install cheats.

Great, that is a good place to start from.

Would you be okay with PHB rules only?

Okay...

*deep breath*

One final try. Why...do you think that is?

I think it is because the market for a strict DnD-based ruleset video game in the 2020s does not exist on a scale that allows for that production value.

Unfortunately, Larian seemingly *did not* invent a new system. Because of this, the speculation is actually precise from the right sources. TLDR: bard and sorc may as well be one class, as would cleric and druid. You'll have to use your brain a bit to count levels of half casters to see how far it gets your casting classes. The levels may as well be a in a big pool, though. You only want just enough levels of whatever to gain class features and make your subclass viable. Not branching out once or even twice is a heavy handy cap -- there is little point to pure classes.

My experience as a DM has shown me that most players care more about playing what they like and what appeals to them on an emotional level rather than what is numerically the most potent builds. That’s the very definition of policing yourself for game balance.

One of the players in my last game was a nerdy wild magic barbarian / wizard. I have a player in my current campaign who is a wizard trying to keep that a secret my lying to the party and pretending he is a monk. Everybody has the option to play coffeelock and hexadin, but nobody ever does in my games.

I think for me, I've come to a point where I've realized that Larian is going to be Larian, regardless of what I say. Because of that, I've decided to ignore the silliness I don't like, and try to enjoy the game for what it is. If there is an option to do something I think is ridiculous, I'm going to try to ignore it. Burying my head in the sand maybe, but I think it'll increase my enjoyment of the game.

That said, I can understand people being frustrated with where the game went, especially the more hardcore D&D players. I'm personally not a D&D person, Rifts by Palladium was my bag back in the day, and that system pretty much allowed any insane idea you could imagine lol.

The only thing you give a "final try" is stop making disingenous arguments.

You made a very specific implied claim at first, regardless of the fact that you want to recognize or not: that "dumbed down"and imbalanced mechanics would be a requirement to make this game a bigger seller.
You have yet to prove the point in any substantial way, and all your attempts so far have been a series of apples-and-oranges comparisons.

About "Why do I think that is", I implicitly already answered that question, as well. But let's go over it again:
It's because they invested heavily on production value with their previous products, gained a certain success and popularity with those, reviewed very well, obtained an INCREDIBLY POPULAR license on top of it (both because Baldur's Gate as a series is unversally welcomed as a timeless classic and because D&D in ITSELF has never been more popular before, especially since Critical Role exploded among a non-nerd audience), got a massive injection of fund from Google/Stadia AND then invested an unhealthy amount of money into making this the most expensive and ambitious title in the (sub)genre of "isometric CPRGs" so far.

So, in short, it's a culmination of SEVERAL factors, none of which is incidentally about the "necessity" of making the system dumber and more imbalanced, to apppeal to... whom, exactly?
Where is this imaginary demographic of people willing to go into a nerdy D&D turn-based game "...But only as long as they make the overall balance a lot worse"?

I think they may have ruled that coffeelock is not allowed.

Regardless, I think you are circling around the crux of the problem. No DnD table follows the exact RAW for every single thing written down through all of the official content. Ability rolls being able to crit is one of the most common house rules that I've seen. So much so that even a decent chunk of the Adventurer's League DMs I've played with just followed that rule rather than having arguments with players (or because they themselves didn't know).

So now we are here at BG3 and it is being house ruled to the high heavens and everyone has different levels of what they find acceptable when it comes to those house rules. Larian isn't going to be able to cater to everyone. What we can do via these forums is identify a common theme through the feedback we are sharing and provide a suggested solution that we feel can be implemented without requiring drastic amounts of crunch time in the 3 weeks we have left before launch.

Yup. Very true. If you look at DOS2, that game changed significantly from release ever after EA. I think it will be the same for BG3. I’m not sweating what the game will look like at launch, because I know this game is going to be an evolving chimera for next several years.

Its simple, if in PNP we have a DM to figure out the rules for everyone, then in BG3 we should get customizable ruleset to play with. In 2020 there was an interview where some Dev from Larian said we'll have more than two options for distributing our ability scores. The only thing we saw during the PFH were floating stats. The recent community update didn't mention this theme as well.

As I see it it is a bit like every new DM or Group you start playing D&D with as it is not an MMO, you can lay down some basic agreements with the people you want to play with. Some DM's are more forgiving with what they allow, some are less, some players are just Maximizers who want to be halfgods, some prefer a style that is more focussed on roleplaying. Myself I like to give my players some wiggling space for creativity even if it is against the rules, the rule of cool trumps the Book. So, as I see it, Larian caters to this possibilities, as the players can choose how they want to play the game. There's a certain possibility of conflict and discussion but letting the players "police" themselves is not necessarily bad quality, but, dare I say it, a more liberal approach to the fact that there are countless different type of players and styles of playing. A group of Teenagers new to the world are playing differently as a bunch of veterans who have decades of experience under their belly and that is ok as it is.
They allow flexibility to your style and that is not a bad thing.

So this Italian site picked up something the rest of the world failed to do so? It's confirmed, and not something misunderstood because of translation, and not regarding difficulty modes?

I guess we'll have to wait and see.

As i'm going to have to wait and see what did they do with plate armor models >.>

In an alternate universe, there's no respec system, but there's still a thread like this, only complaining the opposite, demanding a comprehensive respec option.

After years of watching the comments here, I've grown somewhat numb to the constant outrage, seemingly always coming from the same cast.

It's all half-facts, guesswork, and venom laced piss.

Worst case scenario: there's a respec system in the game that allows you to change everything so you make Lae'zel a half elf cleric of Shar and you make Shadowheart a githyanki fighter. Aw shucks! Now what? How could this happen? Shouldn't Larian have done something to save us from this tragedy!?!?!

There's no way they'll let us change more than hair and clothing. The animation is fragile. I'm not sure Larian won't force us to accept a minimum of one level cleric (SH) and fighter (Lae'Zel). This is completely in tune with their prior philosophy of only letting us customize characters after recruitment. You can reset your own choices, but you can't wipe the character. That's only possible with your Tav/Dark Urge. I suspect most people will appreciate the feature for hair and makeup edits. Got to adapt to your armour choices, you know?

Sure, at least for me it would work. Not sure if it could be done in time for release though...

I don't know why anyone would reject it. I don't want to constantly think about what actually is or isn't legit. If there's two game modes to create your world in, whatever.