Larian Studios
Posted By: Creslin321 Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 10/10/20 11:14 PM
I’ve read a lot of posts from people complaining about the combat in this game. They either feel to weak, or they feel like it takes too long etc.

Some of this is down to player education for sure, but I think a lot of it comes from the extremely high degree of variance in D&D as compared to game systems designed for video games.

For example, in a typical kind of PC RPG, a weapon might do something like 10-15 damage. So the max damage you can do is only 1.5 times the min damage. This makes it feel like you get at least a solid hit any time you do damage.

But in 5E, a typical damage cantrip will do something like 1-8 damage. The max damage here is 8 times the min damage. This means that you can hit an enemy, and basically do no damage, or you can get hit and the enemy can absolutely clobber you.

So in short, 5E has a much higher degree of variance than video game RPGs...especially at low levels.

I wonder if providing an option to “cut the edges” off of damage rolls might improve the experience for players that are confused by D&D combat. For example, it would make a d8 give a result from 3-6 instead of 1-8.

Personally, I would want to play with actual D&D rules because I understand and like them...I just think it may smooth things out for players that don’t get the system.
Posted By: Orbax Re: Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 10/10/20 11:16 PM
We could do wow damage
https://classicwarcraft.s3.fr-par.scw.cloud/44/85f21c27-5cf1-41c7-b3b1-20ad49b69d61.png
In regards to the player education part, this is a topic I posted about as well. I have experience with tabletop games (warhammer), but not D&D. When I first started playing BG3, I spent a good couple of hours reading the D&D 5e rules online, along with a couple of youtube videos. I actually found this very rewarding because I enjoy learning the intricacies of the game and it improves my play experience. BG3 really feels like I'm playing a virtual version of D&D now. That being said, it astonishes me that Larian did not provide these learning resources within the game itself. I imagine this is planned, but it really should have been present on launch, even if it is "early access."

Perhaps if players understood these rules more clearly, combat would be more rewarding to them.


Here's a copy-paste of the major frustrations I had with the game during my 30+ hours of playtime so far. All of this relates to combat in general.

1) Perks / abilities / passives / etc DO NOT appear in the character sheet. For example, at level 2 for warlock I chose "Agonizing Blast" and "Devil's Sight" as additional passives. However, NOWHERE in the character sheet (or entire game) does it display that I now have these for my warlock. I would only know I have them because I remember picking them. It is a serious oversight to not have ALL of the character progressions and advancements display in the character sheet.

2) Unclear status effects on spells, lack of a compendium. Many spells that cause status effects are unclear in what they actually do. For example, "Blind." The tooltip on this spell states it causes "Blindness" that can be shaken off with a saving throw, but it does not state what the actual effects of Blindness are. Does Blindness mean that attacks can't be made? Or does it mean they just have less of a chance to hit? The tooltip on the spell is incomplete in this sense, and the lack of a compendium means that I cannot look it up anywhere in the game. Another example is "Silence," which creates a sphere in which all creatures are "Silenced." What does Silenced mean? Does it mean they are literally silent, or does it mean they cannot cast abilities? Again, the spell tooltip is unclear. This is true for MANY spells. Either expand the tooltips, or create a compendium where the player can read about status effects and what they do.

3) Hidden details on spells / abilities that are not listed in the tooltip. One example here being "Hex." If the concentration of Hex is ever broken, Hex can be recast on another target without the use of a spell slot. This is not mentioned on the tooltip. Another example is "Shatter," which is an AoE spell, but nowhere on the tooltip is it actually listed as AoE. It makes me wonder how many other spells have hidden effects that I am unaware of.

4) Inconsistent rules. The example here being if I cast "Darkness," why is it that my warlock with Devil's Sight cannot see or attack in the zone of Darkness? If the rules are supposed to follow D&D, then my warlock SHOULD BE ABLE to see and attack in the Darkness spell effect. In this game, that is not the case, and it is unclear why. Furthermore, how does this make "Darkness" any different from "Fog?" Perhaps this is a simple oversight in game design and programming.

5) Lack of a rulebook. If the entire game is based on the rules of D&D and even plays exactly like D&D with dice rolls, why not include an in-game rulebook? It's easy enough to google all sorts of rules, but at least including the basics would make sense. This of course would simply be a quality of life change, and an optional compendium that exists for players that want it.
Posted By: Ugmaro Re: Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 10/10/20 11:33 PM
I fully understand what you're saying Creslin but I also actually LIKE D&D combat - along with the critical hits and critical misses, chance to hit and chance to miss and everything else. If it gets changed into 3-6 it might soon become 100% hit chance since people don't like missing and suddenly the game is undistinguishable from other RPGs out there - a fate I would very much like to avoid.
That being said, I can say that I watched a streamer play the game late last night that has never played D&D and the 50ish people that were in chat had to explain to him how spell slots worked along with some other things. End result? He absolutely LOVED the game due to it's intricacy.
To my mind this means the UI needs to be A LOT better - both in regards to tool tips, showing your ability score modifiers next to the actual ability scores as you increase them, making you instinctually understand the choices you're making upon level up etc... then you you don't get this effect (watch the first 35 seconds): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8A7qDItsGM


I fail to understand your point Orbax.


Edit: egrish hart
Originally Posted by Ugmaro
That being said, I can say that I watched a streamer play the game late last night that has never played D&D and the 50ish people that were in chat had to explain to him how spell slots worked along with some other things. End result? He absolutely LOVED the game due to it's intricacy.
To my mind this means the UI needs to be A LOT better - both in regards to tool tips, showing your ability score modifiers next to the actual ability scores as you increase them, making you guterally understand the choices you're making upon level up etc... then you you don't get this effect (watch the first 35 seconds): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8A7qDItsGM



Exactly this. I believe the vast majority of players WANT intricacy and enjoy it. If the intricacy is there but it's not clearly explained, then it merely becomes frustrating.
Originally Posted by Ugmaro
I fully understand what you're saying Creslin but I also actually LIKE D&D combat - along with the critical hits and critical misses, chance to hit and chance to miss and everything else. If it gets changed into 3-6 it might soon become 100% hit chance since people don't like missing and suddenly the game is undistinguishable from other RPGs out there - a fate I would very much like to avoid.
That being said, I can say that I watched a streamer play the game late last night that has never played D&D and the 50ish people that were in chat had to explain to him how spell slots worked along with some other things. End result? He absolutely LOVED the game due to it's intricacy.
To my mind this means the UI needs to be A LOT better - both in regards to tool tips, showing your ability score modifiers next to the actual ability scores as you increase them, making you instinctually understand the choices you're making upon level up etc... then you you don't get this effect (watch the first 35 seconds): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8A7qDItsGM


I fail to understand your point Orbax.


Edit: egrish hart



Yeah if something like making all rolls more "average" is ever implemented, I would want it to just be an option. If you ever played Pathfinder Kingmaker, that game had really good options that could let you tweak the difficulty of the game and how close its rules were to the PF tabletop game.

I think something similar for BG3 would be nice. I can definitely see a lot of strictly video gamers being shocked when their character gets one shotted by an imp that rolled a 20 and then got decent damage rolls. It would be nice to give them an experience closer to your typical video game RPG, while letting us still play with rules really close to the tabletop game.
Posted By: Burdock Re: Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 10/10/20 11:57 PM
Originally Posted by Ugmaro
If it gets changed into 3-6 it might soon become 100% hit chance since people don't like missing and suddenly the game is undistinguishable from other RPGs out there - a fate I would very much like to avoid.


I think we should be careful to dismiss new players feedback. Especially using slippery slope analogies. It is perfectly reasonable to seek a balance between complete randomness and complete predictability.

That being said, I think your general point is correct. DnDs intricate combat and moderate randomness makes it really engaging. Reducing it could cause it to become easier to plan "optimal" turns and make the combat less interesting.

Sadly, I think DnD suffers from the inherent disadvantages of a dice system at low levels. The randomness feels "just right" when rolling a 3d4 + 4 attack, but can be a bit overkill when hitting for 1d12. Since as the number of dice increase, the probabilities become more and more normalized. (SEE: https://anydice.com)

This could be subtly tweaked in the RNG at low levels to make a 1d12 distribute more in a bell curve. But I think that might cause more problems then it solves. Either way, this becomes a non-issue after low levels.

Posted By: Ugmaro Re: Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 10/10/20 11:59 PM
Sorry, never played Kingmaker so I can't exactly connect. Maybe the easier way to do it is to just have set difficulties when you start up the game? "Easy" basically meaning you always deal max damage and gain more hp on level up - the game should be a breeze and combat won't take long because you kill everything super quick
Posted By: Khorvale Re: Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 11/10/20 12:00 AM
Originally Posted by Creslin321
I’ve read a lot of posts from people complaining about the combat in this game. They either feel to weak, or they feel like it takes too long etc.

Some of this is down to player education for sure, but I think a lot of it comes from the extremely high degree of variance in D&D as compared to game systems designed for video games.

For example, in a typical kind of PC RPG, a weapon might do something like 10-15 damage. So the max damage you can do is only 1.5 times the min damage. This makes it feel like you get at least a solid hit any time you do damage.

But in 5E, a typical damage cantrip will do something like 1-8 damage. The max damage here is 8 times the min damage. This means that you can hit an enemy, and basically do no damage, or you can get hit and the enemy can absolutely clobber you.

So in short, 5E has a much higher degree of variance than video game RPGs...especially at low levels.

I wonder if providing an option to “cut the edges” off of damage rolls might improve the experience for players that are confused by D&D combat. For example, it would make a d8 give a result from 3-6 instead of 1-8.

Personally, I would want to play with actual D&D rules because I understand and like them...I just think it may smooth things out for players that don’t get the system.


I recognize that the low end damage output of many weapons and effects in D&D can be a bit trying at times, but I I'd rather have it rectified by in-game means, for example special gear, status effects and potential unique ability effects from, well whatever would make sense in a narrative context, and also better, easily accessible and readable information about how stuff works in the game in general.

I'm a long-term D&D player and the game confuses me too some times, because there's a fair amount of stuff to keep track of in D&D and the game does a poor job of providing that info to you in a convenient and understandable way. In terms of accessing mechanical information sometimes, like comparing 2 effects that relate to each other somehow (my weapon damage and my ability modifer to weapon damage for example) is 2 or more clicks away from each other. It doesn't sound like a lot but it gets really annoying when you're trying to remember all your numbers and traits, and is compounded by the fact some vital information from levelling up isn't available on the character sheet and essential information from the character sheet isn't available when levelling up.
Basically, any time a mechanical feature is displayed all the related stats/traits and the final "value" of that feature should be readily available information, in an unobtrusive and convenient way. No problem I'm sure laugh
Posted By: Ugmaro Re: Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 11/10/20 12:05 AM
Originally Posted by Burdock
Originally Posted by Ugmaro
If it gets changed into 3-6 it might soon become 100% hit chance since people don't like missing and suddenly the game is undistinguishable from other RPGs out there - a fate I would very much like to avoid.


I think we should be careful to dismiss new players feedback. Especially using slippery slope analogies. It is perfectly reasonable to seek a balance between complete randomness and complete predictability.

That being said, I think your general point is correct. DnDs intricate combat and moderate randomness makes it really engaging. Reducing it could cause it to become easier to plan "optimal" turns and make the combat less interesting.

Sadly, I think DnD suffers from the inherent disadvantages of a dice system at low levels. The randomness feels "just right" when rolling a 3d4 + 4 attack, but can be a bit overkill when hitting for 1d12. Since as the number of dice increase, the probabilities become more and more normalized. (SEE: https://anydice.com)

This could be subtly tweaked in the RNG at low levels to make a 1d12 distribute more in a bell curve. But I think that might cause more problems then it solves. Either way, this becomes a non-issue after low levels.



Yeah sorry, I tend to make my statements quite simple like that to really get my point across well. You're absolutely correct in everything you've said, the only problem is that low levels provide about 10 hours of gameplay and new players will not play for 10 hours if they don't like the game - as I said, I think it's extremely important that players understand what their choices mean in regards to how their characters will perform, which requires tooltips and more explanation. Mark has also pointed out that it is unacceptable that you cannot review what features your character already has and what they do. THIS needs to be fixxed before considering further additions IMO
Listening to the Vocal minority is always a terrible idea.
Attempting to make it "Better" for them always results in a worse product.
An optional "Tutorial" option for Character creation, or for "First time 5e" players might help smooth things out, as the game does feel like you need some "Basic" knowledge going into it.
The "Class Features" should be included, in the same section of the Character Sheet (N) that lists your Class Features, its a minor oversight and should be an easy fix (they already put level up info there, they just missed some).
Sure, a lot more "Help" could be handy, there are better examples of games Help linking EVERY mechanic on mouseover, variable difficulty is a nice option, but trying to "Fix" a D&D game because people don't know D&D feels wrong.
Posted By: Maximuuus Re: Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 11/10/20 12:25 AM
The game absolutely need more tutorial and clear explanations.
How do you want new players, I.E understand how spells works with the actual details ?
The game have to explain better the D&D mecanics. I'm sure it will come.
Posted By: Ryllharu Re: Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 11/10/20 12:34 AM
There's definitely not enough tooltips on what things do what, what effects they have, or how the system works. Heavy vs. Finesse vs. Light weapons? I have a 5e PHB, so I could look it up to remind myself. But it isn't obvious in the EA unless you already know the rules.

What proficiencies do I have? There's not exactly easy to find, and the non-combat ones are only inferred as far as I can tell after 20 hours.

That said, I'm very comfortable with D&D combat compared to DOS2 combo/exploit tactics, which I never really got a good handle on and struggled sometimes.

Low-level 5e is brutally hard, even in pen & paper, because you don't have a lot of the tools you really need to impact a situation in an optimal way. That said, the creativity allowed in BG3 really hits the mark for me in terms of translating the tabletop to here. Pushing enemies to their deaths, or at least forcing them prone? Yes please!

- Relentless seek advantage, and press your enemies into disadvantage.
- Moderate your spell and ability usage, but extensively use the ones that recharge frequently or have no limit. Cantrips are massively improved in 5e compared to previous editions, and should be a spell-caster's go-to abilities.
^ Except for Clerics, who should be right up in the fray with the fighters.
- Positioning constantly matters. Shove and Jump are great additions to getting those advantages or avoiding those reactions.
The only issue is that targetting is currently really picky and spells miss if you misclick slightly away from the target.

Originally Posted by DumbleDorf
The only issue is that targetting is currently really picky and spells miss if you misclick slightly away from the target.



Targeting yes lol...I just sneak attacked the sh!t out of poor Shadowheart LOL.
Posted By: Kr0w93 Re: Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 11/10/20 02:51 AM
I'm not really a DnD player, but it didn't feel so alien to me.

There are more similarities to the original series than I think people might realize.

Of course, I also played the OG unpatched BG1 CD and I doubt anything could feel as terrible as that.

People just may have a hard-time coming to grips that there's a sizeable luck factor with the DnD system the games are based off of. Anyone who's unfamiliar won't consider options they have to offset that.

This game may be D&D rules but not it's spirit. If combat was this difficult in D&D nobody would make it past level 1.
Posted By: Festival Re: Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 11/10/20 04:44 AM
after playing 2 hour in EA i refunded the game. reason? combat is very luckluster. its primitive and repetative and gets boring very fast.

i played both DOS and i have to say that this game is a huge step back. Devs pigeonhole themselves in this dnd mess of a system and i guess they couldnt do much after that/ but god why u dumped you own great combat system from DOS?

now all the strategy and tactics went out of the window. u cant really plan the combat if u have no idea what you ONE ATACK PER ROUND will hit for. it can be 1 or 6 or miss which is the case most of the time so here is that. we had 20 years of

gamedevelopment and you desided to go back to 1997?

The other big thing for me is this dice roll you have to watch through every dialog check. its just annoying, plz stop wasting players time with this. doestn do anyhting u just have to click through it every time
Originally Posted by Festival
after playing 2 hour in EA i refunded the game. reason? combat is very luckluster. its primitive and repetative and gets boring very fast.

i played both DOS and i have to say that this game is a huge step back. Devs pigeonhole themselves in this dnd mess of a system and i guess they couldnt do much after that/ but god why u dumped you own great combat system from DOS?

now all the strategy and tactics went out of the window. u cant really plan the combat if u have no idea what you ONE ATACK PER ROUND will hit for. it can be 1 or 6 or miss which is the case most of the time so here is that. we had 20 years of

gamedevelopment and you desided to go back to 1997?

The other big thing for me is this dice roll you have to watch through every dialog check. its just annoying, plz stop wasting players time with this. doestn do anyhting u just have to click through it every time


I think you just don’t understand the system. Even at level 1 and 2, I’m launching enemies off cliffs, making water surfaces then freezing them into ice, making huge fire surfaces enemies have to walk through...and a lot of this is just with cantrips.

Honestly, I feel like I have more options than I did at low level in DOS.
Posted By: Kr0w93 Re: Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 11/10/20 05:25 AM
Originally Posted by TheTrueObelus
This game may be D&D rules but not it's spirit. If combat was this difficult in D&D nobody would make it past level 1.

I haven't found it too unbearably hard yet. The DOS games and even the original series are a lot more unforgiving.
Posted By: Kr0w93 Re: Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 11/10/20 05:26 AM
Originally Posted by Festival
after playing 2 hour in EA i refunded the game. reason? combat is very luckluster. its primitive and repetative and gets boring very fast.

i played both DOS and i have to say that this game is a huge step back. Devs pigeonhole themselves in this dnd mess of a system and i guess they couldnt do much after that/ but god why u dumped you own great combat system from DOS?

now all the strategy and tactics went out of the window. u cant really plan the combat if u have no idea what you ONE ATACK PER ROUND will hit for. it can be 1 or 6 or miss which is the case most of the time so here is that. we had 20 years of

gamedevelopment and you desided to go back to 1997?

The other big thing for me is this dice roll you have to watch through every dialog check. its just annoying, plz stop wasting players time with this. doestn do anyhting u just have to click through it every time

Bonus actions and cantrips exist for a reason.
Posted By: Festival Re: Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 11/10/20 05:27 AM
i see no point in using all this/ if u have just 1 atack per round u gotta use the best one/ which for me was eltrich blast or smth like that. and there was no point whatsoever in using anything else. besides u can user othe spells like once per fight and that it. and that u have to waste time to rest. pretty dumb if u ask me
Posted By: Tzelanit Re: Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 11/10/20 05:37 AM
Originally Posted by Festival
after playing 2 hour in EA i refunded the game. reason? combat is very luckluster. its primitive and repetative and gets boring very fast.

i played both DOS and i have to say that this game is a huge step back. Devs pigeonhole themselves in this dnd mess of a system and i guess they couldnt do much after that/ but god why u dumped you own great combat system from DOS?

now all the strategy and tactics went out of the window. u cant really plan the combat if u have no idea what you ONE ATACK PER ROUND will hit for. it can be 1 or 6 or miss which is the case most of the time so here is that. we had 20 years of

gamedevelopment and you desided to go back to 1997?

The other big thing for me is this dice roll you have to watch through every dialog check. its just annoying, plz stop wasting players time with this. doestn do anyhting u just have to click through it every time


You refunded an unfinished product because you were unimpressed with combat after less than two hours of playtime that you found to be unrewarding because you were still level 1?
The DOS system was dumped because it's not DOS.
I don't believe that you're qualified to say that strategy and tactics went out the window when you didn't even scratch the surface of an early access product.
You very much appear to be one of those people who thought that this was going to be DOS3 and you're sad that it's very much not.
I don't believe that a good determination can be made of any RPG after less than two hours of playtime, especially a game that's in early access.

I'm fine with fair criticisms of the game because EA exists specifically for criticism, but none of these points are coming from a place of any actual experience outside of loading it up and wandering around for an hour and a half. If it's not what you expected, that's fine because not everything is for everyone, but to be upset that an early access game isn't a sequel to a completely unrelated series is just silly.
Posted By: Festival Re: Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 11/10/20 05:47 AM
you assume too much. no where in my post i demaned Dos 3 u have to pay attention. the post was about bad combat system. i am pretty sure that i didnt miss much bc i watched some vids with lvl 4 combat and it was all the same as my lvl 2 same repetative boring rounds. besides why am i supposed to suffer through boring content more then two hours if i am not interested from the start? to figure out that there is nothing different later? i told you i checked the vids of higher lvl content it was basicly the same. same 1 action per round with the same spells you get on lvl 1 aside from some aoe that u can pretty much use once per fight. wow thats a lot different when you have 20 mobs to go
Combat needs better visual feedback on what's going on.

Every time you "miss" it feels like you failed a simple task. You hit nothing but air and Larian even added a little laughter there from the opponent lol.

But in D&D a "miss" doesn't always mean YOU failed. It often means you hit, but the heavily armored opponent's armor or shield soaked the damage. You succeeded in hitting and the opponent succeeded in blocking or deflecting. You both did good. THIS needs to be visually represented, not only to give more accurate feedback and make tanks feel like tanks, but also to eliminate the feel-bads when the game tells you your attacks are super easy to dodge when it's not so.
Posted By: Jargoyle Re: Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 11/10/20 09:03 AM
Lot of characters die in early levels. (Table top)
Gives combat more weight when a well placed arrow can ruin you day.
I feel the opposite. I feel they captured the tabletop feel quite successfully

Except for those barrels


Originally Posted by TheTrueObelus
This game may be D&D rules but not it's spirit. If combat was this difficult in D&D nobody would make it past level 1.

Originally Posted by Jargoyle
Lot of characters die in early levels. (Table top)
Gives combat more weight when a well placed arrow can ruin you day.
I feel the opposite. I feel they captured the tabletop feel quite successfully

Except for those barrels


Personally I think combat should be a bit less deadly in a video game because dying in a video game means going back and redoing stuff you may have just done until you get it right, which isn't really fun. The game shouldn't by default be a cakewalk, but I think at this point the game is expecting more expertise off the bat than is reasonable for an average player. This definitely feels like playing hard mode as opposed to normal, for me at least. A baffling number of players are finding it easy and the more I dig into it the more it seems to be that they've just mastered the game and figured out how to take advantage of the systems far faster than me.
Posted By: Ryllharu Re: Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 11/10/20 09:37 AM
Originally Posted by Festival
i see no point in using all this/ if u have just 1 atack per round u gotta use the best one/ which for me was eltrich blast or smth like that. and there was no point whatsoever in using anything else. besides u can user othe spells like once per fight and that it. and that u have to waste time to rest. pretty dumb if u ask me

Honestly, combat for Warlocks is kind of boring in the tabletop as well. They're fun to role play, but just not to play in combat.
Posted By: Sven_ Re: Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 11/10/20 09:37 AM
Maybe the game could also have a small combat tutorial going through the most basic concepts in an entertaining way... (say with Volo, Elminster or a funny D&D creature from the bestiary acting as a guide)... maybe.

Step 1: Explaining AC and Attack bonuses (Volo/creature takes a couple different armors, shortly explains them and lets the player attack)

Step 2: Explaining damage and resistance/immunity (Elminster spawns a couple different creatures with different/no resistance / immunity and lets the player attack the creatures each)

Step 3: Explaining Advantage/Disadvantage (various scenarios explaining the most common ones, e.g. height advantage from ranged, player attacks)

Step 4: Explaining Saving Throws on Spells (Elminster turns it all around and attacks the player and his various attributes via different spells)

The Steam forums are an absolutely train wreck, but somebody actually did a pretty good post. Naturally, it won't be read. https://steamcommunity.com/app/1086940/discussions/0/2971771480498700109/
Posted By: Azazane Re: Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 11/10/20 09:47 AM
The problem there is that most people will ignore tutorials...

"It's not that hard."

"Eh, i'll figure it out on my own."

"I've played games like this before, i'm good"

Failure follows.. which lead to the rage threads.

(Admittedly i've ignored them as well.)

A tutorial with an image pop-up guide might be best in this case. One which you could turn off, of course.
Posted By: Durghan Re: Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 11/10/20 10:02 AM
So, then, can you explain to me how I'm supposed to be able to beat two minotaurs? Their first attack downs two of my party, their second downs a third. This leaves one character to to deal with nearly 150 hit points of bad guy. It's just not happening. If i'm extra lucky the Bulette will come along and distract, and possibly wipe out, one of them. But then I have a Minotaur and Bulette to deal with. It's extremely frustrating.
Posted By: Gaidax Re: Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 11/10/20 10:06 AM
Originally Posted by Loki the Cat
Listening to the Vocal minority is always a terrible idea.
Attempting to make it "Better" for them always results in a worse product.


This goes both ways you know.

---

I really think it's down to turn based combat Larian went with. Their turn based combat is brilliant in D:OS games because you can do a lot more in a single turn whether it's because of no outside factors spells limitation (slots etc) and whether it's because of surfaces and so on that give massively more options to keep greatly affecting flow of combat even outside your turn.

But when you slap on D&D 5e limitations, where every turn is practically "do one thing" most of the time (which often is just a shitty attack or cantrip) and then maybe one additional thing once in a while, top it off with d20 RNG and combine it with Larian's turn based where they throw horde of enemies at you, as if it was D:OS - it quickly becomes super frustrating slog.

Those Woads+Mephits encounter comes to mind or Goblin Temple outside, where you have 1-2 things that are an actual threat and then a sea of trash, so that every 1 round takes a good 2 minutes of time IRL before you can even act and when you do - you just miss half of your shit or simply do some pitiful damage and wait another 2 minutes until you can do anything. *groan*

It worked nicely in D:OS where you could easily mow down several weak enemies in a turn even early on, but in BG3 you just don't have that kind of firepower on top of that blasted d20 RNG.

I really think they should consider real time combat as an option, even if it's just to quickly deal with all that trash after you are effectively done with actual threat in the encounter or alternatively not have these bajillion mephits/goblins/spiderlings/whatever and instead combine them into 2-3 enemies that mean business, while the rest trash that does not stand a chance scatter to the winds in terror. Yes, I'm looking at you 8 HP Novice Bork that does nothing except burn another 10 seconds per turn.

That or they can make some sort of change to speed up all the NPC turns a lot, whether by adding combat speed slider or making some other tweak so that all enemy actors won't take 2 minutes to do their stuff.

---

I 100% think they need to come up with something to amend these pains, because it is often an unnecessary slog.
Yeah I got to the minotaurs and rage logged. Ridiculously overpowered with abilities they dont have in tabletop. Wiped my party in two turns. Trying to build up the will to fight them again.

Oh so I tried to be clever and lure the minotaurs back to the gate that shoots fireballs nearby only to discover that while combat is turn based for your characters it is not so for the gate. The fireballs from the gate just repeatedly shoot while you have to wait for your turn.
Posted By: Riovir Re: Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 11/10/20 01:51 PM
I really wanted to love the combat, being a Larian fan (D:OS 2 is my all time favorite game). But indeed, it was hard not to notice how much less the choices I made mattered when it was my combat turn. The limited spell slots wear out quickly (also I'm the gamer archetype who doesn't like to rely much on consumable / limited resources) and then it's cantrip / basic attack time. Unfortunately, the slow progression highlighted the reduced tactical options even more.

On "combat being a slog". Currently, needlessly using resources that require resting are discouraged by the IRL flow disruption of camping / loading screens. (Don't get me wrong, I love the option to reflect and chat with companions. But that's independent of what makes combat fun.) Often my thoughts were: "Do I really need to use that level 2 spell? Nah, just spend 2-3 more rounds of cantrips, then eat a zuccini-stuffed pighead with 7 potatoes after combat." Essentially, I feel rewarded for not playing with 70% of the goodies out there, ie for using repetitive / turtle / sneaking* exploit tactics.

On the note of not being a DnD player. I'm not sure it's merely an expectation management thing (ie. I know DnD and therefore I "get the system"). Most CRPG gamers (I think) pick up systems quickly. It's about how enjoyable the combat can be, once you are familiar with how everything works. (Neverwinter Nights I and II also didn't offer the most fun combat in the first few levels.)

What I hope to see more of:
- faster progression, extended level cap -> so that builds can become more diverse from their starting point
- more active skills / spells that change the way the game is played (as opposed to damage, but with a different color) eg. the perk that adds push to Eldritch Blast
- some ways to get around limited long rest slots (potentially tied to feats)
-- refill one slot if kills an enemy
-- chance for cantrip to refill slot on hit + successful ability check
-- once per combat use a spell without expending slot
- AI tactics to counter my pesky "rooftop - hit - move - hide - rinse - repeat tactics"
- +1: a sneak toggle button for the entire party

That said, I had fun climbing most rooftops and blasting the mobs off ledges for a hefty damage boost. smile


* Alpha-striking via sneaking and disappearing to the shadows could become AWESOME ^_^ or a cheesy exploit, well mannered gamers are not stooping down to. It depends on how hard it is to pull it off: ie how the AI reacts, investigates, makes my life hard after their member is suddenly replaced by a pile of ash. Dark is great for hiding... It's also great to see quite well where that fireball just came from.
Posted By: Khorvale Re: Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 11/10/20 03:15 PM
I feel like the game combat doesn't really do well with a "classic D&D party" (Fighter, Mage, Cleric, Rogue) setup, but my Warlock/Warlock/Cleric/Rogue which is all about versatility, maneuverability and massive damage is really fun to play. Probably because they're more grafting D&D onto the Divinity engine rather than the other way around, so the D:OS2 gameplay style is a lot more satisfying than approaching it as a D&D game
Posted By: Riovir Re: Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 11/10/20 03:48 PM
Originally Posted by Khorvale
I feel like the game combat doesn't really do well with a "classic D&D party" (Fighter, Mage, Cleric, Rogue) setup, but my Warlock/Warlock/Cleric/Rogue which is all about versatility, maneuverability and massive damage is really fun to play. Probably because they're more grafting D&D onto the Divinity engine rather than the other way around, so the D:OS2 gameplay style is a lot more satisfying than approaching it as a D&D game


Also, what's the point of all the deep character customization / build system if we use the cookie cutter classic party setup? If's fun to come up with a party using a unique playstyle, and keep replaying the game until I run out of gameplay changing ideas. On that note, I hope to see more companion customization. Again, D:OS 2 did a brilliant move by decoupling the origin character's story from they tactical aspects. (By letting you pick a skillset AKA preset they would focus on.) I understand that locking down the general archetype of each companion makes sense because of their story in BG3. Still, I'd love to be able to respec them / grow them in wildly different directions in subsequent playthoughs.
Posted By: Khorvale Re: Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 11/10/20 06:48 PM
Originally Posted by Riovir
Originally Posted by Khorvale
I feel like the game combat doesn't really do well with a "classic D&D party" (Fighter, Mage, Cleric, Rogue) setup, but my Warlock/Warlock/Cleric/Rogue which is all about versatility, maneuverability and massive damage is really fun to play. Probably because they're more grafting D&D onto the Divinity engine rather than the other way around, so the D:OS2 gameplay style is a lot more satisfying than approaching it as a D&D game


Also, what's the point of all the deep character customization / build system if we use the cookie cutter classic party setup? If's fun to come up with a party using a unique playstyle, and keep replaying the game until I run out of gameplay changing ideas. On that note, I hope to see more companion customization. Again, D:OS 2 did a brilliant move by decoupling the origin character's story from they tactical aspects. (By letting you pick a skillset AKA preset they would focus on.) I understand that locking down the general archetype of each companion makes sense because of their story in BG3. Still, I'd love to be able to respec them / grow them in wildly different directions in subsequent playthoughs.


Hopefully if things turn out an expansion with extra content isn't too much to hope for, but I'm pretty certain the plan was to only cover Players' Handbook so there's a very real limit to how much more customization we're going to see, I assume
Originally Posted by TheTrueObelus
Yeah I got to the minotaurs and rage logged. Ridiculously overpowered with abilities they dont have in tabletop. Wiped my party in two turns. Trying to build up the will to fight them again.

Oh so I tried to be clever and lure the minotaurs back to the gate that shoots fireballs nearby only to discover that while combat is turn based for your characters it is not so for the gate. The fireballs from the gate just repeatedly shoot while you have to wait for your turn.


If you thought that was hard, look forward to the
Spectator/Drow
fight
Posted By: _Vic_ Re: Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 11/10/20 07:22 PM
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost
Originally Posted by Jargoyle
Lot of characters die in early levels. (Table top)
Gives combat more weight when a well placed arrow can ruin you day.
I feel the opposite. I feel they captured the tabletop feel quite successfully

Except for those barrels


Personally I think combat should be a bit less deadly in a video game because dying in a video game means going back and redoing stuff you may have just done until you get it right, which isn't really fun. The game shouldn't by default be a cakewalk, but I think at this point the game is expecting more expertise off the bat than is reasonable for an average player. This definitely feels like playing hard mode as opposed to normal, for me at least. A baffling number of players are finding it easy and the more I dig into it the more it seems to be that they've just mastered the game and figured out how to take advantage of the systems far faster than me.


I have to say that dying in a tabletop means that you die for good and you have to make a new character (unless you have a high level party that has the spells or money to resurrect you). In a videogame you simply have to reload a save. Lower stakes.
Be killed in bg3 is not such a big deal in comparison. You just have to push F9 and try again so I do not mind the supposed difficulty of the combats or the missed rolls. I personally find walks in the park where you do not have the pressure of dying really boring. If you do not have the possibility of failure, I prefer to read a book or watch a movie.

Right now there are only one difficulty mode. I assume with the player´s feedback we would have more at full game release.
Posted By: _Vic_ Re: Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 11/10/20 07:31 PM
Originally Posted by Riovir
Originally Posted by Khorvale
I feel like the game combat doesn't really do well with a "classic D&D party" (Fighter, Mage, Cleric, Rogue) setup, but my Warlock/Warlock/Cleric/Rogue which is all about versatility, maneuverability and massive damage is really fun to play. Probably because they're more grafting D&D onto the Divinity engine rather than the other way around, so the D:OS2 gameplay style is a lot more satisfying than approaching it as a D&D game


Also, what's the point of all the deep character customization / build system if we use the cookie cutter classic party setup? If's fun to come up with a party using a unique playstyle, and keep replaying the game until I run out of gameplay changing ideas. On that note, I hope to see more companion customization. Again, D:OS 2 did a brilliant move by decoupling the origin character's story from they tactical aspects. (By letting you pick a skillset AKA preset they would focus on.) I understand that locking down the general archetype of each companion makes sense because of their story in BG3. Still, I'd love to be able to respec them / grow them in wildly different directions in subsequent playthoughs.

That´s more of a thing of D&D5e than the game. You cannot change shadowheart subclass because clerics chose their domain at level 1 for example. Skills, weapon/armour proficiences, race features and initial stats are already chosen at level one for the rest of the game ( with some exceptions) too, so the only thing you can do after choosing your subclass is multiclass (not implemented) or add either a feat or a stat every 4 levels.
The only option would be a total respec where you can change abilities, appearance, background, etc. I do not see feasible that larian would add that but maybe a mod?
Originally Posted by TheTrueObelus
This game may be D&D rules but not it's spirit. If combat was this difficult in D&D nobody would make it past level 1.



This. Most of the combat encounters seem to be designed by some DM that has never played or DM'd before. A bunch of archers on high ground and throwing bombs at you, creating surfaces and blast dmg that seems to avoid your AC, on top of lighting u on fire without rolling a dex save.
Posted By: _Vic_ Re: Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 11/10/20 09:12 PM
Combat is this difficult (or more) in D&D IMHO. Lvl 1 characters are very squishy.


The first goblin ambush in the module "Lost mines of phandelver" is a wrecked cart with some goblin archers hiding in brushes both sides of the road and attacking from height (from trees or a slope).
https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/lmop



And that´s for level one. You are level 2 in the game after the hell prologue. The bombs are a little overboard, that I agree.
Posted By: Libertine Re: Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 11/10/20 09:22 PM
Larian can't win. One group of players is whining that the interpretation of 5e isn't close enough to the book rules, another group is whining that they don't like D&D.
Posted By: _Vic_ Re: Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 11/10/20 09:24 PM
That´s what happens when your game goes so huge he attracts players of a wide array of types, all of them different.

I hope that, with the help of the input during EA, they will find a balance. Or create a lot of options you can switch on and off, like in Owlcat´s games. =D
Posted By: Stabbey Re: Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 11/10/20 10:24 PM
Originally Posted by Libertine
Larian can't win. One group of players is whining that the interpretation of 5e isn't close enough to the book rules, another group is whining that they don't like D&D.


This is not a "both sides are equally stupid whiners" thing.

Larian said that this was going to be a D&D game based on the 5e rules, not a hybrid mashup of D:OS and 5e. The people complaining about D&D rules shouldn't have bought a ame explicitly designed as a D&D game.

The 5e rules are not meant to handle all the extra damage and conditions from surfaces all over the place, nor are they meant to give free disengages to everyone as a bonus action.
Posted By: Ratherz Re: Non-D&D players frustrated with combat - 11/10/20 10:39 PM
I was resigned to combat being bad since D&D isn't designed or meant for a videogame at all. It was worse than I expected. Can't wait for full release which will probably have an easy mode to make the combat part less of a chore. Everything else I enjoyed despite the bugs.
There have been many D&D rulesets. 5e is just one of them. Nothing is set in stone. A good DM knows this. This game starts at level 1...which should be for beginners. This game is simply too punishing presently. If a really tough fight is coming you need to give players warning so that they can plan.

The only difficult combat so far (completed entire Act 1):

Spider Queen

Goblin Castle if going in hot to the warp stone (not ready for aggro) and without Horn


That's it.


Absolutely every other combat has been an utter face-roll / easy-mode encounter. This includes the Duegar slavers and ... nope. Memory isn't telling me any combat was that hard.
Originally Posted by Cat Badgerkin
The only difficult combat so far (completed entire Act 1):

Spider Queen

Goblin Castle if going in hot to the warp stone (not ready for aggro) and without Horn


That's it.


Absolutely every other combat has been an utter face-roll / easy-mode encounter. This includes the Duegar slavers and ... nope. Memory isn't telling me any combat was that hard.


Sorry, not buying it.
Originally Posted by TheTrueObelus

Sorry, not buying it.


Do you want Streamer videos or some other kind of arcane proof?

0.8% of players of D:OS2 have the "Technical Eggstsy" achievement. I have that, and the For Honour one. I also have the 0.1% POE / POE2 ones.



So, tell us all how to convince you. If you're not open to being convinced, then you're not actually worth talking to in EA.


Hint: very much have cleared the entire map, easily.

There's Poe: [Linked Image]



Just showing that it's not just abusing the D:OS1/2 engine here. Literally some people are better at games than you, factor that in while testing.

Here's D:OS2 (note: cropping the last two, since Larian actually knows the list of people who've done all of them): [Linked Image]


~


Trust me: even **NOT** abusing the stealth / hide / ranged AI bug, BG3 is an utter cake-walk at the moment.
© Larian Studios forums