Re: Spoilers...Omeluum and the Psyonic Ring
35 minutes ago
Of course, using the powers of the devil has it's benefits, you see a lot of things you could never imagine!
At least at the beginning, it seems nice ... Be it dreams, or whatever
That certainly applies to the powers
granted by the tadpole. If you use it, you get cool abilities; if you don't, you don't. Makes sense. But locking a significant portion of the game's content - the dreams, the companion discussions afterwards - behind its use isn't a good strategy because those things are not
tied to the deal you're making with this particular devil. It's just the devs deciding to develop one path more fully than another one. Not a great decision in a choice-heavy RPG.
You should still get dreams if you don't use the tadpole - different
dreams, ones where the tadpole is tempting or taunting or otherwise trying to convince you to use its powers. And you should be having appropriate discussions with your companions afterwards.
Also, I really think your companions should be making their own decisions about whether to use their tadpoles or not instead of following whatever the PC does, but I guess that's not going to happen.
Re: Community Update 11 - Inspiration, Freedom & Pacifism
2 hours ago
Larian for having listened to the fanbase and taking measures to change this.
You cannot plan this emotional response at the start of a game story writing. You got no data to base feedback on likeabitlity and where random people connect to.
the party has already been through a lot.
Not in terms if Baldurs gate storylines. You barely did the prequel.
The thing about Shadowheart shying away from the kiss pre-patch and shying away from intimate relations were quite offputting, the way it was addressed and executed made it seem like such childish behavior.
So you didn't care for her backstory at all and did go in form the tits all out right away? Sound like moronic sexdrive rather than romance to me. Correct me if I'm wrong but this wasn't in the game description.
BG3 isn't as creepy moronic as The Witcher where you unlock the ingame XXX scenes as rewards.
BG series has loads female players that pay for it and want to enjoy the storyline as well. They don't want to be looted like treasure as the mainly male The Witchers fans crave to do. Larian does on of the very few select titles that do attract a lot more of female players than hack and slay titles.
some kind of warped inferiority fetish
Interesting leap in context you make young Padawan. Revealing. Revealing this is.
the main character to get the respect of anyone who accompanies him throughout the act.
Each of their affiliations is mutually exclusive to yours for all but 1 companion by you player character choice. Who will jump ship first seems tio be the better question.
There's one thing that bothered me though, was the introduction with the (Archdevil?) Raphael. In that interaction is a shameless ' illusion of choice' no matter what you pick he answers the same way and even worse, you end up with the same result. If my decision won't matter, then just give Raphael a monologue. Don't give me false-belief that I have the power to make a decision where I can't, it's frustrating. I wanted to accept the deal and see what happens, but he answers exactly the same things and disappears. I understand that in terms of balance or plot they don't want us introduced to some kind of power granted by him at the start of Act 1, but then again if you introduce a character and implement a choice dialogue, follow up with it. Otherwise, bring him when the story is ready for us to accept his offer the first time he arrives. It can certainly be a long-lasting back and forth dance with him over several meetings, but should provide the choice to take him up on the offer immediately with meaningful consequences as well - as of now, that interaction is shameless and choice-wise meaningless.
Seceral people detect you very early and show questionable interest in your progress.
You simply assume wrongly there isn't any dire consquences in hidden stats by your camp. It's not +1 /-1 love heart on the romance scale.
The only thing you know it had no immediate negative effect in the visible stats that you checked. Each companion has strongly different opinions what types of evil are more manageable than others. This guy is part of the prequel and he challenges you to shop around. That's exactly what you do - compare prices for a cure around the bloc.
Also you believe a devil that he truly is the hidden power that keeps you running around with a tadpole longer? Maybe yes, maybe no. In the Blood War setting not unexpected that a devil apppears. I found troves of hidden clues on all corners I'm not going to spoiler. In my eyes the scene did serve it's purpose on you well introducing him. Depending on the context of clues the perception of it differs vastly.
His terms is subject to the Pact Primeval any devil is bound by. He just can't cut such a simple deal to trade your soul without corrupting you first. You need to approach him for it and propose it by your own choice. That's the lawful evil legal requirement for him to make a valid claim to your soul post mortem. That's what he wants in exchange for his help. The rest is bargaining.
It's a safe bet you bargain among competing devils and see some angry demons appear closer to Elturel area. You are in a landing zone or staging area of the next big battle.
All their usual gangland allies gather for a invitation only GB party in Baldurs gate next weekend around you. The sign is on the wall or in the stars. Did you really expect anything else in a BG number 3? After BG 1 % 2, Neverwinter Nights, Icewind Dale or Divinity: Original Sin titles? They stay true to their trusted concept for good her at Larian.
Re: The problems i am still seeing with warlock after the new patch.
3 hours ago
The suggestion to buff DC's in favor of the caster is interesting. I'm open to that idea and I'll explain more below.
This issue exists for any ranged caster, not just warlock. Currently there is a condition know as "threatened", which has ranged attacks roll at disadvantage when an enemy is near. I've been questioning why a condition like threatened is in the game. Is threatened in the game to entice the player to use more spells? Is it there to entice the player to bunny hop away with their wizard?
> For example, an enemy encroaches on a wizard and the wizard now becomes threatened. (Firebolt will now roll at disadvantage)
> You go to use Poison Spray and most enemies have enough constitution to evade Poison Spray. Now the option to use is Magic Missile because it's unaffected by threatened.
Threatened feels like an unnecessary complexity. It makes ranged attacks more likely to miss and exacerbates all the benefits melee classes have now. Why play a caster, when ranger can just use spell scrolls, has more AC/HP, and can deal better damage in melee range?
Threatened would be a lot less of an issue if spells like Sacred Flame and Poison Spray were available 65% (or higher) to hit in more encounters.
Also, threatened could also just be removed from the game.
Ranged attacks have the benefit of ... range.
To counter that, if you are in melee, there needs to be some disadvantage.
That you are asking yourself, why you should play a caster, when every class can use spells via scrolls ... Well, Larian, they implemented it this way.
Threatened makes sense, or else there would be no need for melee weapons.
DnD 5e already has rules in place to balance melee and ranged. (for example high damaging spells require spell slots, melee fighters usually get better armor).
In Baldur's Gate 3 ranged attacks already have disadvantage if the target is too close (within 5 feet, same as 5e rules). Threatened affects the character at roughly 3 meters, so if your caster just happens to be in a congested room, they will have disadvantage. It's a change from DnD's rules and one that negatively impacts casters.
Threatened is not the biggest issue in the game, it's just really annoying that you regularly deal with situations where you are incentivized to move casters to higher ground. In comparison to tabletop, if the opponent isn't within 5 feet then the caster will have most of their abilities to choose from without worrying about disadvantage. There is no, "oh a battle started from that conversation... my caster started in a position where they happen to be threatened... guess I'll misty step over there..." Caster movement can feel like a chore rather quickly, all because of threatened.
It's much more fun to start the battle off with "I'll hit that goblin with Eldritch Blast and take out that enemy, so I can keep my caster in good range to follow up on other enemies with spells".
Add in that melee attacks get free advantage from backstab and it's easy to see that casters are currently getting the short end of the stick.
In 5e rules, a ranged attack is rolled as a disadvantage if the target is right next to you (5 feet). Threatened is Larian’s version of 5 feet, I think. There’s no grids so it’s not as clear but it’s trying to match the rules.
Magic missile is auto hit so rolls don’t matter except on damage.
Editing because I missed your post the first time. Even if there are no grids, a radius from the character can be used. Also, Larian already has a status for "too close" at 5 feet. Threatened is an entirely separate status that affects a greater radius.
I'm very honest when I said that I don't know why threatened would be a status in the game while "too close" already exists (so we can't assume it's only Larian's version of 5 feet). I want to give Larian the benefit of the doubt as well. I've pondered it was added to the game for NPC combat AI (for example: If threatened move X meters away). It could be a bug that threatened is affecting player characters for all we know.
You have analysed the status quo very well, thank you for that. So we are on the same page, we both don't know, why Larian designed it the way it is.
At least in my opinion ( and I am very happy that there are so many people in the forum who are so much better in expressing their opinion than I am), DnD 5e rules have such situations covered quite well, but Larion failed to implement it.
I know I am repeating myself, but I am just advocating for a true conversion of DnD rules to a Crpg, giving it to the gamers, and then start itering changes from there.
Re: Reactions like Solasta!
3 hours ago
I dont think there is any reason to be so offensive. :-/
I also believe that i allready described example where optional alternative was proposed, and how it ended ...
I also believe that example should show my reasons to why i dont want this system to change the same way as the other one did.
I would also like to remind you that Larian have litteraly no obligation to follow our instructions, so even if people will write the word "optional" to every single sentence, there is litteraly no guarantee that final product will include that optionality.
So once aggain i repeat: Therefore i like it as it is and i dont want it change.
If you are afraid of change because the end result might turn out worse than you had hoped for, then I would advise you to copy the current EA version of the game to an offline environment and keep it there and never update the game ever again. Because chances are that one way or another the game will change quite a lot and if your best argument to any issue is "don't change anything" instead of activily finding a solution that works for (almost) everyone, you might find yourself on the "losing" side more times than you like.
So, I hear you. You like it how it currently is and say "f*ck the others". However I would like to find a solution that works for everyone, so once again I repeat: please ADD the option for manual reactions ON TOP OF having the option for automated reactions.
Exactly. He just doesn't seem to understand what people mean with making things optional. And I am NOT being rude here. It isn't easy to communicate ideas across any media or social platform, to be fair. I would prefer a reaction system that gives you player control and agency, he doesn't want that. Ideally, there would be options where you select what system you want.
Persi's early access feeback
4 hours ago
I finished my first playthrough of BG3 early access and am more than hyped for what's to come! The story is engaging and mysterious, you feel the stakes, the characters are fun and things look magical. I thought I would compile a list of things that might be helpful to the team, and some bugs I encountered . I'll keep it simple so people actually read it and because it's late
_The character name should be more prominent. Both me and my BF ended up being 'Tav' because we didn't notice where the name box was.
_When you level you can choose from abilities reference spells or abilities you might know or have a way of checking. For example the warlock feature Thief of 5 faces says: 'Once per long rest, you can cast Bane using a Warlock spell slot.' - it would be handy to be able to hover over Bane and see what Bane does.
_More customization is always better but I don't doubt that would come. The characters are beautiful, I love the textures. I only found the tattoos a bit 'meh'. Would be nice to have body ones or scars
_I chose the ponytail and it was often in VERU strange, gravity defying positions when you open your character sheet etc
_Love the voice acting!
_Please note - we tried to play coop multiplayer only for an hour or so. It was easy enough to play locally; however we didn't figure out how to swap control over our first companions, so it ended a little boring for the second person in line. I am not sure if it can be done at all. If it is, a pop-up window explaining could be good.
_Lyzaell was meant to come to my camp; she said she'll wait for me there, but instead I found her dead body. Is that intentional?
_Same with the owlbear cub; we rescued him from the camp; I actually had him in camp, but then reloaded a save and he was not there anymore. Shadowheart commented that she hopes he doesn't destroy the camp, so he should be there.
_The goblin leader (the dude) was bugged. When I killed him his body was stuck in mid-air and was unelectable; After saving and restarting the game it was fine, and I could loot him.
_The hag wouldn't always appear when we're in her den and about to fight her
_The characters drinking wine looks bizarre, even if they do have a glass - Shadow heart was holding her glass horizontal
_An annoying issue is if one of your character is in turn based battle and you select someone who isn't; the enemies stop being turn based while my other character is frozen in one place; perhaps all characters should go in turn based
_I used the mushroom guy we recruit to revive a hook horror; the horror looked extremely funny; also his buttons were messed up, one(help) was out of the button box, flying in mid air in the UI. He also looked funny when climbing stair as his model froze but it's not much of a bother to be fair XD
_Again with resurrecting a spore servent, I brought a druegar to life. After the battle he was just sitting there; he didn't aggro
_In one of the battles Wyll wasn't taking damage for a while, even though there were red numbers flying over his head. Seemed to last for a few turns only
_Enemies think for a while sometimes, and if you have a lot of them that slows things down quite a bit.
_If you've used acid or grease on the ground; and one of your companion walks over it, even out of combat, they ask if you did it on purpose. I found that annoying.
_My inventory was a mess... Would there be a way to add 'Sort' - it could be something in the lines of: First is money, weapons, armour, accessories, potions, scrolls, tools, gems, books, etc etc
_Is there an option to lock the map to North. I'll be fair, I didn't look for it too hard but would definitely prefer that
_Agree with general comments that you shouldn't be able to go to camp in all locations, for example if you're in the hag hut or in Underdark except in a settlement. Alternatively, you can have (similarly to BG2) occasionas where you are interrupted on your way - and the more dangerous the location, the more undesirable that would be. Imagine needing to rest and being attacked by some minotaurs XD
Hope it helps!
Gale’s reaction to WIS check
Yesterday at 11:42 PM
Very early on, there is a Wisdom check option in dialogue with Gale. He *reacts* to this check as if this was a psychic intrusion, however there is nothing indicating it should be anything of the sort. It’s not an Illithid Wisdom check and is available before the game opens tadpole checks; it isn’t a spell, though as I recall, choosing it *looks* like using tadpole powers. His reaction indicates it’s not Insight, but in context, it’s exactly when a character would use an Insight check.
Anyhow, maybe this bit of dialogue is mislabeled and should be a tadpole Wisdom check? Otherwise I don’t see why the MC and Gale are acting like an ordinary Wisdom check is intrusive mind-reading. Or why a human Ranger would even be capable of intrusive mind-reading outside tadpole powers with a simple skill check.
Re: The way Larian manages party movement is dreadful
Yesterday at 11:38 PM
No? I've played a lot of games of this genre.
Well, yes, actually?
You already proved in your previous posts to have a poor understanding about the limitations of the very system you are defending.
No, I just don't know english very well, so I can't explain it to you. Btw you are quite aggressive.
From some previous posts I believe we (you and me) have the same native language (Russian). So feel free to ask me for help with translation.
Re: Tadpole and its Removal
Yesterday at 11:15 PM
I think it would be satisfatory to not even bother with an excuse. PCs just get the privelege of being KO'd instead of killed so they can be pseudo-resurrected. PCs already have the privilege of "death saves". This would just be an extension of that because it's a video game and permadeath would just lead to save-scumming with most players.
You can create a narrative reason for the death privilege (eg your idea of deathproof tadpoles). But I think having an excuse is optional. Whether there's a narrative reason or not, they're not going to fool anyone into thinking it's not just a convenient video game mechanic.
Either way if we can avoid explicitly saying that player characters die, it would be better. I mean, setting aside the tadpole problem, I feel like literally dying several times a day would have to be quite traumatic.
Re: BG3 Resting discussion
Yesterday at 10:09 PM
This is one area where looking to the preceding games for guidence is tough. Since the resting mechanic in BG1/2 was always designed to be exploited and the whole game was built on the idea of saving constantly, because you'd be reloading constantly.
There were a lot of time sinks that made minor things take moderatley longer than they needed to, if the player was willing to just reload until they got the desired result. But it was never very strict. Resting without being ambushed, writing magic from a scroll, hitpoints on level up etc. Even rolling ability points for the character intitally. Most things were eventually handled via a game setting, like rest until fully healed or whatever.
Then you also had other stuff like the spell Haste, which was supposed to take a year off your life according to the handbooks, but which in BG became just a convenient way to boost movement speed and gain way more attacks per round than anyone should sensibly deserve, whenever you wanted, with no real downside.
Main point being, that if they want to make such exploits harder for a more hardcore game sensibility, it should be handled in the settings and built up from the launch menu. The default setting/mode should assume that the single player will save and reload frequently unless it is wildly inconvenient to do so. They can artificially slow the pace of the gameplay by making resting more difficult, but then the game needs to be designed in such a way that most encounters don't require a fully rested/buffed out party to manage. BG1/2 weren't like that at all. Pretty much anywhere and anytime you could save, you could find a way to rest, and the game assumed that the player would cheese and meta exploit encounters by resting or reloading constantly. It worked on a certain level because you couldn't save in combat. So you'd end up with choices like "oh shit someone just died, do I want reload to refight the battle? or just deal with the inconvenience of carrying the body to a temple?" But not too much beyond that. Pretty much every boss fight you'd figure on having to run it a few times, otherwise it wasn't much of a fight.
It seems BG3 is even more flexible and forgiving with its approach to saving, since you can save at any point, even in the middle of combat and death is just a knock down here, since nobody gets chunked. The combats themselves aren't nearly as fast paced or quick draw, and the load times are way slower. So reloading a boss fight in this one I think comes off as more of a chore.
I think they could explore ways to make resting a more engaging part of the gameplay, but I dont know if they should look to BG2 or the infinity games for that, since those games were built around easy rest at the ground floor.
Re: Click time threshold too high?
Yesterday at 09:35 PM
I can also confirm clicks are unresponsive in random occasions. Sometimes it’s quick and smooth, other times they don’t register.
This is obviously a top priority and I hope Larian is aware.
Re: endless roll for initiative after "escaping"(?) battle
Yesterday at 08:57 PM
Yeah , that can happen, especially in the courtyard fight. If you can exit into the interior of the temple, it should reset the initiative spam. Or you can just fight through it sometimes (sometimes it does indeed lock the game up)
Re: Priestess Gut
Yesterday at 08:53 PM
It's possible, and quite straightforward. The trick for the goblin encampment is
Re: Gale's ... Drinking Problem. (Spoilers)
Yesterday at 07:50 PM
I did the same in a recent play through and Lae'zel no longer had it. So this must be a very inconsistent bug.
But on the flip side, I never opened the locked caravan box, but Gale knew an artifact was in it so I gave it to him to "eat". Later I returned the box to it's rightful owner and she observes that the seal is intact and the box unopened.
BUG - Invisible [Big Underdark Monster] (Spoilers)
Yesterday at 07:32 PM
The monster is
This damn thing has attacked me 4 times and it keeps running away. I love it! I just wish it wouldn't fully heal between fights.
But in any case, the bug. I was exploring the underdark and the thing started to make its appearance in its trademark way, but during that animation, a fight triggered with the
. All of my characters climbed the tree, and we were doing really, really well in the fight. But then then bugged monster appeared ... except he didn't really appear, per se. He was not drawn on the screen, and he couldn't be targeted. The camera followed him around, his actions appeared in the log (and in the top-center of the screen). For his first few turns he didn't do anything but wander around, so I thought he just wasn't really IN the combat. But then he jumped into the tree, sending a mage to his death and knocking over Shadowheart. I could tell where he was standing because he chomped Laezel in half with a crit. He was standing on top of a dead enemy. I could target the enemy (like for looting), but I could not target the monster.
Anyway, I had to quit, there was nothing I could do against it. Very sad.
This may or may not be relevant from a debugging standpoint, but I also met the
, and they were also definitely bugged. I beat them last night, but like many bug reports say, I couldn't progress through the following dialog. So on this reload I just wanted to fight. I triggered the fight ... but the fight never happened, and the monsters never moved, the
never appeared, and their dialog was that they were lost in rapture and ignoring me ... even though their deity just told them to murder me. Not sure if that bugged encounter ruined the rest of the game or not.
In any case, I think this is enough BG3 for me until the next patch. Decent work so far, I'm definitely having a blast, except for these few bugs.
Re: Patch 4.0 Needed
Yesterday at 06:58 PM
No of course not, but sitting behind the anti-consumer practice of a full price EA and saying 'we never said we would do anything after this' is...farcical.
Its actually comical, that we used to get better products for free as a Beta, than this full price Alpha.
Re: What kind of companions would you like to see?
Yesterday at 06:52 PM
I'd like to have the heroes of the BG3 prequel (from the Infernal Tides comic) join the party. Minsc was one of them after all and Nerys Kathon in particular seems to be a super awesome and interesting character.
Re: [Feedback] Drath's report - Roleplay, story, immersion (part 1)
Yesterday at 04:52 PM
Then they give you one obvious solution; the Githyanki creche.
And i bet that would be another dead end ...
Githyanki have purification ritual that is working on regular tadpoles ... same as the Hag had the way that was allways working before.
But your tadpole is different, and you would need to go to Moonrise towers no matter who you try ... that is my bet. :P
From an in-character perspective, we have a character that knows far more than most people in the setting about the tadpoles presenting a definite way to get rid of them. It's not even like she's vague about the method, she describes a process of removal and and I didn't encounter any reason to suspect she was lying at all in my playthrough. So from an in-character perspective, her solution is as close to a guarantee as we get.
Then they give you another direct solution; Halsin the druid.
That is the problem in theese conversations, for some (unknown to me) reason people presuming that Halsin will be able to help you no matter what, but the only one who is recomending him to you is Nettie. The same druid that was trying to kill you, the same druid that was forcing you to swear her that you will comit suicide if anything goes wrong. Would she do that if Halsin would be bet for certain help? I dont think so.
And as far as i remember she told us: "Maybe
master Halsin would plucket it from your head." And that is important maybe! ... And a few dozen seconds we have here this confession: "You must find master Halsin, he might
be your only chance."
So as we can see, Halsin ... as well as Hag, as well as Volo, as well as Gut, and (lets be honest with each other) probably as well as Githyanki Creche ... its only possibility, nothing more. :P
I agree that they're all only possible, but they're possibilities that you have decent, clear reasons to think will work. I recieved no such reason to think the Absolute wasn't just a trap. The problem is that if the Absolute is a trap, then you go for it and you're almost definitely screwed because you're not likely to find out until it's too late. If you go for any other options, then you may have time to try another before it's too late. Going for the Absolute path to my mind has higher stakes for failure than any other path.
Then you have the Absolute and they give you a bunch of implied reasons
True ... but they are living proof of that solution you are looking for.
If they would be just possibility, same as everyone else who i named abowe, they would still start to change before you, since they werent on the same ship ... that is quite obvious, since they had enought time to gather goblin army and allready raid at least two settlements around.
So they can either work as your countdown, or are prooving that you are safe with them.
This is a good point, I can't and won't argue with it.
while also making your initial encounters with the group hostile
True ... but that is no rare around sword coast as it seems.
Shadowhearth is threating you to keep your distance, Astarion litteraly tryed to cut your throat, Nettie tryed to poison you ... why is killing few lowly insignificant goblins that no one care about any different?
Also a good point.
having no reason to think that the Absolute isn't some sort of Mindflayer trap
Sure it may be, no doubt about it ...
And if your character is ambicious enough, he might even plan to try turn it on them instead.
Just the same as Gale implies that you can try outsmart Raphael and beat him in his own game.[/quote]
At this stage that's still a stupid gamble because we don't know nearly enough about them, certainly not not enough to know if trying to turn it on them would even get us what we want. With Raphael at least, you know that he's almost certainly powerful enough to do what he says and you know what he wants. You don't know that about the Absolute so thinking you can turn their trap against them is kind of insane. Again, even though the other options aren't true guarantees (I still think that the creche is presented in a way that the PC would reasonably think that it is a guarantee though) the Absolute path is the biggest gamble because we're given so little and have to risk a lot even for just information.
I assumed so and it didn't cross my mind that it might not be the case until I read people thinking that here on the forums
Yeah, its nothing wrong about missing some clues, there is enormous amount of them after all ... i have found secret stash of Kagha on mine fifth playtrough.
and at no point getting a concrete incentive to work with them-in fact if you side with them I believe you lose Wynn, so that's an active disinsentive-it makes justifying siding with them hard.
I believe this is quite subjective ... i dont like Wyll, he seem to me like cocky brat ... so quite easy for me.
I can imagine only one way to adress this to player without breaking imersion of rest of the story, and its Narator ... something like:
"Once you look in her eyes, you can sence her parasite ... yet she dont display any signs of change, bad health, or even discomfort ... maybe if you stick around you also find a way to master your own tadpole."
But that would sadly break the secret about this whole option.[/quote]
I don't feel like it's meant to be a secret though. It's directly tied to one of the two main ways you can complete this part of the story. So something like what you suggested would actually be perfect because it doesn't seem to me that this is actually supposed to be a mystery. It's meant to be the "evil" path of this part of the game, while siding with the druids is the "good" path. If it were meant to be a secret then I feel as though it should be harder to even find the opportunity to join the cult. If it were meant to be a major secret then I would have no problem with having to untangle little dropped hints to learn about it. But to me, the structure of the game suggests that the Absolute is being presented as a second, equally viable option to the Druids and Halsin, so if that's supposed to be the case, then the information for why the cult is a good choice should be presented as clearly as the information for why the Druids are a good choice.
I think this may be the core of why I take issue with how it's presented thus far and the core of our different opinions. You're looking at it as a secret path to be unravelled, but I'm looking at it as a main path that should be as clear as the other main path but isn't, and so that lack of clarity is a failing rather than a purposeful feature in my eyes. For instance the fact that there are apparently shadow druids in the glade (whatever those are, I'm not really aware of the lore) is a secret that could very well impact how you interact with the group as a whole. The fact that that's something I completely missed in my playthrough to me signals that it's a piece of information that's purposefully hidden and that can impact roleplaying in a future playthrough. So I look at that and think "oh, that's a good, fun piece of design." This issue however feels like something is supposed to be an obvious so-equal alternative choice but they haven't given the same level of clarity as to why it's an equal choice. So if the Absolute path is meant to be a secret then I think it actually fails worse on that front because the option to join them is presented far too readily and easily.
To be completely honest it seem quite obvious, yet i like it isnt served under your nose ...
So there is at least chance that some people will miss it. The whole situation with Absolute cult seem to me like if DM create some plot, and then repeat for himself "Notice! Notice! Notice!" ... and if you dont, he will give you another clue, and another clue, and another clue ... until he gets tired and simply tells you.
The problem is that as I mentioned above, this seems to be one of the two main paths to complete this section of the game. The GM in this scenario is dropping hints while also giving you several far more attractive options to follow. If this were a real GM, I'd think that he was signalling me *not* to go that route.
Maybe the entity in your dream can say that she's something other than a Mindflayer, or mention that she can keep you safe from the transformation, just as an idea.
Dream entity is suppose to be mysterious ...
You have option to ask her what she is ... and she tells you "I think you allready know."
Come on! That is perfect!
And add, change, or remove anything would totally breat it.
When she said that, I assumed she was a manifestation of the tadpole trying to get me to use my powers more and hurry the process.
you have to give them at least one concrete point that they can latch onto and build logically from there.
I see what you mean, i just think that they are there ... you just need to search for them actively.
The problem is that every other option doesn't require you to search actively to find a reason why it's apparently viable. Which is why I take issue with the way the path is presented-when every other option is so clear, that's training the player to expect a certain level of clarity across the board. It's telling me "no option is truly guaranteed, but we're going to tell you what the options are and give you enough information to start weighing the pro's and con's." The information I get about the Absolute is so much more vague when it's being presented as the second major option in the game.
Because as it stands that path is all a bunch of "what if's" and "probably's" that rely on the character taking a lot on faith.
Yes, and that is good ...
If BG3-EA teached me anything, its that we cant take anything as grated and i love it, it keeps the story intensive.
This is why i loved so much Game of Thrones, (except finale -_-) since you have seen from the begining that every character is in existencial danger, it was much more interesting to watch their fates.
But again, the path is full of even more what-if's than any other paths, to the point that it becomes the least attractive.