Larian Studios
Posted By: Passerby Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 03/04/21 03:08 PM
https://www.destructoid.com/stories...-druids-and-baldur-s-gate-3-624779.phtml

Pushing and shoving

Of course, there is combat, and Vincke says the team is working on that aspect as well. He says they think it's a little bit too random still, in cases where they'd like it to be more tactical. They're also tooling with the RNG in some areas, and are looking for ways of streamlining it to have a "more modern experience."

Martial classes are a particular area he highlights, as having a party full of just fighters can be tricky, which I found pretty interesting. In my own experience, I've been loving the ability to push, shove, and throw things to manipulate the world with my Githyanki Warrior, and those mechanics are something he says he's happy people are grappling with. He tells me in a recent meeting, some of the studio members were discussing ways in which they had defeated an encounter using their own ingenuity and exploiting systems in unexpected ways, something Vincke says is one of the core pillars of what Larian is trying to do.

"I mean, that's why we put those mechanics in there," Vincke says. "So the creative use of the mechanics for the players is the thing that we try to maximize. D&D is about your agency, your creativity. We're trying to give you the same tool set still, in a fairly accessible way."


Looks like the developers are doubling down on their cheesy tactics instead of allowing players to use class abilities and spells in creative ways.
They could increase A LOT players agency/creativity if custom mechanics weren't so overpowered.

If D&D is about player's agency and creativity, let us also only play with D&D rules and spells and class abilities rather than impose us a good way of playing.

I'm 100% fine with their will to add more things and even silly things I won't use (like throwing boots or ennemies)... But please let me play this incredible game how I want to play it...

A better balance between custom rules and RAW mechanics is the only solution so players can CHOOSE and use THEIR creativity rather than yours.
Originally Posted by Passerby
some of the studio members were discussing ways in which they had defeated an encounter using their own ingenuity and exploiting systems in unexpected ways, something Vincke says is one of the core pillars of what Larian is trying to do.

"I mean, that's why we put those mechanics in there," Vincke says. "So the creative use of the mechanics for the players is the thing that we try to maximize. D&D is about your agency, your creativity. We're trying to give you the same tool set still, in a fairly accessible way."[/color]

Looks like the developers are doubling down on their cheesy tactics instead of allowing players to use class abilities and spells in creative ways.

This worries me but I'm not sure what it means yet.

If he means "drinking a potion of hill giant strength and throwing a duegar on top of another" that's lots of fun and I think it's fully in spirit of 5th edition. If he means "teleporting a badger across a pit and then running to collect other party members who are sitting in some out-of-combat time loop" then yeah, you're right, and this is bad.

Ugh. Hope he means the first.
Posted By: Nyloth Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 03/04/21 04:27 PM
They speak about roadmap in this interview. How sad I cant see this roadmap. In general, a good interview. I like to think that release version will be completely different, it's great.
I knew they were going to double down on cheese after the latest panel from hell. Why would you think otherwise?

I’m not sure why they are messing with RNG so much. If it’s so bad in certain situations (according to Larian), just get rid of it in those situations.
Hmmm. Meh I'm not bothered. In fact, fuck it, I'm all in. Only because martials don't get much and I know how strong mages can be starting ironically at level 5 and level 7.

From what I gather from the article they seem to be focusing on more difficult things first. Martial classes being left behind is very noticeable moving from pnp to video game format. It relies more on player imagination which technically should have translated to animation, but it seems they opted for more practical application. You can see this in pathfinder really well for example. You are nothing more than meat under a mountain of spells between foes and allies casters, if you can even see your martial character and is not dead.

I'm very familiar with the spells in dnd so I know whats coming for casters. They eclipse the game more so than Larian cheese not including solidstealthgods and maybe barrelbros. I guess most just skim or skip.

They also admit that they are only adding things they feel need testing so EA is not even a useful measure of anything really. They also admit that people misunderstood many characters. I'm ok with all of this actually. Maybe it was a lowkey nudge to the Haslin/Astarion worshippers lmao.

I hope some more start to see the bigger picture. EA is skewed pretty much entirely I can only assume. Its not the full game. Just a playground to test things. How much can change is unknown, but what is known is that it has. I can't do anything with that info one way or another.

I think I'll stick to just browsing datamine.

5e phb puriest will probably raise hell though.
Originally Posted by Passerby
https://www.destructoid.com/stories...-druids-and-baldur-s-gate-3-624779.phtml

Pushing and shoving

Of course, there is combat, and Vincke says the team is working on that aspect as well. He says they think it's a little bit too random still, in cases where they'd like it to be more tactical. They're also tooling with the RNG in some areas, and are looking for ways of streamlining it to have a "more modern experience."

Martial classes are a particular area he highlights, as having a party full of just fighters can be tricky, which I found pretty interesting. In my own experience, I've been loving the ability to push, shove, and throw things to manipulate the world with my Githyanki Warrior, and those mechanics are something he says he's happy people are grappling with. He tells me in a recent meeting, some of the studio members were discussing ways in which they had defeated an encounter using their own ingenuity and exploiting systems in unexpected ways, something Vincke says is one of the core pillars of what Larian is trying to do.

"I mean, that's why we put those mechanics in there," Vincke says. "So the creative use of the mechanics for the players is the thing that we try to maximize. D&D is about your agency, your creativity. We're trying to give you the same tool set still, in a fairly accessible way."


Looks like the developers are doubling down on their cheesy tactics instead of allowing players to use class abilities and spells in creative ways.
Reminds me of what we have in Divinity: Original Sin 2. Warfare with a small dip into other schools is the optimal way to go, because spells have to deal with magic armor and elemental resistance, while physical damage only has to worry about armor. One knight who can teleport and nether swap, accompanied by a knight who can cast restoration, etc.

I don't mind buffs to fighter, but when shove overshadows whole other classes (because the game doesn't have reactions or readied actions, and spellcasters have to risk taking shots at disadvantage because of verticality). It's aggravating to think about every time I boot up the game. A lot of fun in D&D is seeing what each class brings to the table. It's designed for each class to be powerful and fun (ranger does have some issues, so as I said before I expected buffs for ranger). It's less bothersome in D:OS2 because the game was about the world and the characters, so it was okay to make a team of super fighters between Ifan, Sebille, etc.

That being said, if we do get more tools from the 5e ruleset, Larian's cheese isn't going to bother me at all. For example a lot of oil barrels should just be oil flasks you have to buy from a merchant. Creativity is native to D&D, it's currently an issue because spells are relatively weaker at the moment and we just don't have an appropriate implementation of 5e's rules as of patch 4.

Now let's take these thoughts into a vacuum:

-Start Vacuum-
For example if an IRL DM was buffing minotaurs by giving them multi-attack, I'd consider that lazy with a high chance to TPK.
If the DM said you have to declare all reactions within your turn...

Wizard, "Okay now the DM is just trying to kill us."
DM..."Oh but shove can launch a minotaur 5 feet! it's not just prone."

Wizard, "Wait, but Thunderwave does the same thing and requires a spell slot."
DM..."I want you to think creatively in this fight."

Wizard, "How is that creative? I would have to move my wizard in melee range of a minotaur."
"I cast scorching ray on the minotaur"
DM..."hmmm you're about 5 feet lower in elevation, roll at disadvantage."

Wizard, "Why?"
DM..."because I'm the DM."

DM..."On the minotaur's turn it leaps over the party directly at your wizard."
Wizard, "Don't my party members get opportunity attacks?"
DM..."Oh, I've been meaning to tell you all that jump is an bonus action that also acts as disengage"
"the minotaur moves next to your wizard."
Wizard, "......" cry

DM..."The minotaur shoves your wizard and you fall off the cliff"
Wizard, "I cast feather fall on myself"
DM..."Remember? I said you have to declare all reactions within your turn."
Wizard, "Why are we not using a lean towards rules-as-written?"
DM..."Because I'm the DM."

DM..."Your wizard is dead, you're now a Dwarf Battlemaster."
Former Wizard, "I shove the minotaur with the Battlemaster."
DM..."The minotaur didn't see or hear your Battlemaster walking up in full plate armor."
"The minotaur falls down the cliff next to the wizard."

DM..."See? I told you I wanted you to think creatively!"
Former Wizard, "I'm going to find a new D&D group".
-End Vacuum-

In Baldur's Gate 3 you get to reload with the foreknowledge that the minotaurs have been buffed, you can't react with spells at all, and would have been familiar with disadvantage from lower ground. It's anti-fun that you can't be proactive and use the spells that you would expect to normally use. I'll say it again I'm happy fighter and ranger got some buffs, but please stop punishing casters.

Quote
Reviews have been positive, and problems that are being flagged by players are things already being charted on the roadmap. So what does the road ahead look like, then?
I hope this means readied actions, reactions, better rule implementation, etc. are on the roadmap.

Quote
"So we still have quite some work ahead of us," Vincke says. "But we do know what we're making and when we're going to be… we'll know when we're at the end, so it is visible. It's just still a lot of work."
Originally Posted by Passerby
https://www.destructoid.com/stories...-druids-and-baldur-s-gate-3-624779.phtml

[color:#FF9966]
Pushing and shoving

Of course, there is combat, and Vincke says the team is working on that aspect as well. He says they think it's a little bit too random still, in cases where they'd like it to be more tactical. They're also tooling with the RNG in some areas, and are looking for ways of streamlining it to have a "more modern experience."

Jeez. It's their own changes that made 5e less tactical. Revert them!

Free Disengage for everyone! Always go high. Always hit from behind. Always eat a cheese wheel. Shove, shove, shove. Dip and poison. Stealth murder the entire encounter in heavy armor without being seen. Long rest after every encounter. They killed the gameplay with these no brainer OP things you can do without any resource management.

I mean... BG3 is great in many ways, but Larian seriously don't get what tactical gameplay means. 5e RAW makes for a good tactical game and you absolutely could spice it up with more hazards and some explosives. But Larian won't see this with their tunnel vision where only "modern" DOS mechanics exist.
Posted By: Icelyn Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 03/04/21 06:28 PM
Originally Posted by Aishaddai
They also admit that people misunderstood many characters. I'm ok with all of this actually. Maybe it was a lowkey nudge to the Haslin/Astarion worshippers lmao.
Team Halsin! grin
Originally Posted by Aishaddai
Hmmm. Meh I'm not bothered. In fact, fuck it, I'm all in. Only because martials don't get much and I know how strong mages can be starting ironically at level 5 and level 7.

From what I gather from the article they seem to be focusing on more difficult things first. Martial classes being left behind is very noticeable moving from pnp to video game format. It relies more on player imagination which technically should have translated to animation, but it seems they opted for more practical application. You can see this in pathfinder really well for example. You are nothing more than meat under a mountain of spells between foes and allies casters, if you can even see your martial character and is not dead.

I'm very familiar with the spells in dnd so I know whats coming for casters. They eclipse the game more so than Larian cheese not including solidstealthgods and maybe barrelbros. I guess most just skim or skip.

They also admit that they are only adding things they feel need testing so EA is not even a useful measure of anything really. They also admit that people misunderstood many characters. I'm ok with all of this actually. Maybe it was a lowkey nudge to the Haslin/Astarion worshippers lmao.

I hope some more start to see the bigger picture. EA is skewed pretty much entirely I can only assume. Its not the full game. Just a playground to test things. How much can change is unknown, but what is known is that it has. I can't do anything with that info one way or another.

I think I'll stick to just browsing datamine.

5e phb puriest will probably raise hell though.


Well... yeah. But you gotta understand, even though us "5e purists" will "raise hell", it's for a reason. There simply weren't any good DND 5e games out there. There weren't ANY. And we desperately want them. We do have Solasta now, but BG3 is so much higher budget and so much better in acting, writing and story and permutations and such. So, naturally, us purists are going to go nuts when we hear the game is 5e. To then find out they are hacking our beloved 5e to pieces and adding puzzle pieces that aren't matching is of course making us sad.

I am sure the game will be good in the end, and I hope I will love the heck out of it, I am just hoping it will be far more of a DND game in the end, or at least that it can be modded into one. <3
Originally Posted by 1varangian
Originally Posted by Passerby
https://www.destructoid.com/stories...-druids-and-baldur-s-gate-3-624779.phtml

[color:#FF9966]
Pushing and shoving

Of course, there is combat, and Vincke says the team is working on that aspect as well. He says they think it's a little bit too random still, in cases where they'd like it to be more tactical. They're also tooling with the RNG in some areas, and are looking for ways of streamlining it to have a "more modern experience."

Jeez. It's their own changes that made 5e less tactical. Revert them!

Free Disengage for everyone! Always go high. Always hit from behind. Always eat a cheese wheel. Shove, shove, shove. Dip and poison. Stealth murder the entire encounter in heavy armor without being seen. Long rest after every encounter. They killed the gameplay with these no brainer OP things you can do without any resource management.

I mean... BG3 is great in many ways, but Larian seriously don't get what tactical gameplay means. 5e RAW makes for a good tactical game and you absolutely could spice it up with more hazards and some explosives. But Larian won't see this with their tunnel vision where only "modern" DOS mechanics exist.


Hahaha! Exactly! laugh
Originally Posted by Aishaddai
5e phb puriest will probably raise hell though.
There is a game called Solasta that is implementing 5e rules pretty much as written and it plays amazingly.
I agree with the OP and I guess I just have to police myself not to cheat and be "cheap" when it comes to combat as best I can. What else can we do since the cheese is here to stay?
But, what I have a MAJOR problem with is the inside jokes and personal stories that this game is ABSOLUTELY POLLUTED WITH. I want to feel like I'm playing a fantasy RPG, not intruding on peoples' personal lives and memoirs. For example, there's a book you find often in the game called A Pleasurable Deal that talks about someone named Robert and how his wife/girlfriend cheated on him with one of his friends. That's f!@#king gross and I don't want that in my game. I'm sure Robert doesn't, either. There's another letter you'll find in the burned-out town of Waukeen's Rest on one of the guards that talks about a girl finding one of her boyfriends "snot rags" that he left on the table and how she wants to break up with him but he occasionally says some funny things so she keeps him around. And tons of things about playwriting, a dwarf named "Brian", etc., etc. This whole game so far has felt like I'm in the middle of someone's selfie. Clean this crap up and act like professionals who are selling a product to the general public, not making a memory book or forcing people to watch your Hawaiian vacation slideshow.
Posted By: rdb100 Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 03/04/21 08:10 PM
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
They could increase A LOT players agency/creativity if custom mechanics weren't so overpowered.

If D&D is about player's agency and creativity, let us also only play with D&D rules and spells and class abilities rather than impose us a good way of playing.

I'm 100% fine with their will to add more things and even silly things I won't use (like throwing boots or ennemies)... But please let me play this incredible game how I want to play it...

A better balance between custom rules and RAW mechanics is the only solution so players can CHOOSE and use THEIR creativity rather than yours.

Baldur's Gate II had several difficulty settings, with one being core D&D. It makes the game more enjoyable for players for different reasons. They included harder modes and the easier versions were often to fix the fact that it's a video game adaptation of a pen & paper game. I'm sure something like that will happen here.
@andreasrylander You have a lot of "I want" rather than "what is". You have to understand Wotc made expansions, rule changes, additions, etc. Which boils down to official homebrew. Larian are fully backed on this project by Wotc. Some how this is lost on many. Wotc are in this. Its official content. Hell some parts might be added to canon.

Have any actually played dnd 5e phb raw with no changes or expansions? Not even Wotc was fully happy with it. I don't DM, but it is important to keep the players in mind over being hardcore RAW. The goal is to have a fun experience. Wotc agreed some things need changing for the vision Larian, as a DM, has in mind.

Solasta is a different DM and are RAW mostly, but their vision is also quite different. Solasta is not perfect. Many 5e flaws are quite rampant. It depends on what you prioritize as fun. Again focus on what is not what can be.

Are some things crazy right now? Sure, but some people really go nuts and overboard. Completely missing the point of EA. Playground testing.

I've always wanted to ask: Are you a 5e purist if you are against official Wotc supported projects?

Not trying to pile on you personally. Just generally speaking semi rhetorically.

I am a huge dnd lore fan, but eventually I had to let some things go and focus on enjoying whats in front of me. It sucks, but eventually I'll get what I want. Just maybe not now with this particular project. Instead I focus on the chance to hunt squid monsters and maybe vamps, demons, devils, etc. Sounds good to me. Lol

If all things go smoothly I'll play both. I use to be a huge fan of gameplay over story, however I need purpose to my gameplay. These day's I need more stimulation. Just good gameplay does not cut it. Neither does just a good story. I need the complexity of both done well. I'm greedy like that. What I want/need is, for now, limited by what is.

Leash that expectation is what I'm saying.
Posted By: Ankou Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 03/04/21 08:19 PM
No no no no no nooooooooo
Originally Posted by Icelyn
Originally Posted by Aishaddai
They also admit that people misunderstood many characters. I'm ok with all of this actually. Maybe it was a lowkey nudge to the Haslin/Astarion worshippers lmao.
Team Halsin! grin

I get the feeling one day you will be the one to spoil the story for me. Lmao. I feel it.
Originally Posted by rdb100
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
They could increase A LOT players agency/creativity if custom mechanics weren't so overpowered.

If D&D is about player's agency and creativity, let us also only play with D&D rules and spells and class abilities rather than impose us a good way of playing.

I'm 100% fine with their will to add more things and even silly things I won't use (like throwing boots or ennemies)... But please let me play this incredible game how I want to play it...

A better balance between custom rules and RAW mechanics is the only solution so players can CHOOSE and use THEIR creativity rather than yours.

Baldur's Gate II had several difficulty settings, with one being core D&D. It makes the game more enjoyable for players for different reasons. They included harder modes and the easier versions were often to fix the fact that it's a video game adaptation of a pen & paper game. I'm sure something like that will happen here.

It's more about balancing the 2 layers of BG3 (D&D/Homebrewed) than difficulty levels but honnestly... I fear for higher difficulty levels...

If I'm able to solo'd the game pretty easily now because the basics of BG3 broke the balance (jump/disengage+backstab, highground godmode, dipping, verticality+shove,,...), what are going to be harder difficulty levels ?
My tactical skills and/or D&D knowledge and/or party build doesn't matter at all because as soon as you use Larian's homebrewed : you're a master of BG3.

So what ? Is that only going to be harder because ennemies will hit harder and because I'll miss them more ?
Will I still play the exact same as I was after 20 hours of gameplay but just die a bit more ?

Or maybe I'll have to stay in normal mode but completely forget about every cool addition because they're too powerfull ?

I like the game and I like many of their additions but something is really wrong in their balance.
The game lack of tactical depth and it's only because they impose us to use (some of) their mechanics in every combats... That's not what I call choices.
Posted By: fallenj Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 03/04/21 09:44 PM
Originally Posted by Passerby
https://www.destructoid.com/stories...-druids-and-baldur-s-gate-3-624779.phtml

Pushing and shoving

Of course, there is combat, and Vincke says the team is working on that aspect as well. He says they think it's a little bit too random still, in cases where they'd like it to be more tactical. They're also tooling with the RNG in some areas, and are looking for ways of streamlining it to have a "more modern experience."

Martial classes are a particular area he highlights, as having a party full of just fighters can be tricky, which I found pretty interesting. In my own experience, I've been loving the ability to push, shove, and throw things to manipulate the world with my Githyanki Warrior, and those mechanics are something he says he's happy people are grappling with. He tells me in a recent meeting, some of the studio members were discussing ways in which they had defeated an encounter using their own ingenuity and exploiting systems in unexpected ways, something Vincke says is one of the core pillars of what Larian is trying to do.

"I mean, that's why we put those mechanics in there," Vincke says. "So the creative use of the mechanics for the players is the thing that we try to maximize. D&D is about your agency, your creativity. We're trying to give you the same tool set still, in a fairly accessible way."


Looks like the developers are doubling down on their cheesy tactics instead of allowing players to use class abilities and spells in creative ways.

Panel from hell two should of been your clue to there intentions. They brought in Jeremy Crawford to talk about the druid class and give a thumbs up about tweaking 5e.
Originally Posted by Aishaddai
@andreasrylander You have a lot of "I want" rather than "what is". You have to understand Wotc made expansions, rule changes, additions, etc. Which boils down to official homebrew. Larian are fully backed on this project by Wotc. Some how this is lost on many. Wotc are in this. Its official content. Hell some parts might be added to canon.

Have any actually played dnd 5e phb raw with no changes or expansions? Not even Wotc was fully happy with it. I don't DM, but it is important to keep the players in mind over being hardcore RAW. The goal is to have a fun experience. Wotc agreed some things need changing for the vision Larian, as a DM, has in mind.

Solasta is a different DM and are RAW mostly, but their vision is also quite different. Solasta is not perfect. Many 5e flaws are quite rampant. It depends on what you prioritize as fun. Again focus on what is not what can be.

Are some things crazy right now? Sure, but some people really go nuts and overboard. Completely missing the point of EA. Playground testing.

I've always wanted to ask: Are you a 5e purist if you are against official Wotc supported projects?

Not trying to pile on you personally. Just generally speaking semi rhetorically.

I am a huge dnd lore fan, but eventually I had to let some things go and focus on enjoying whats in front of me. It sucks, but eventually I'll get what I want. Just maybe not now with this particular project. Instead I focus on the chance to hunt squid monsters and maybe vamps, demons, devils, etc. Sounds good to me. Lol

If all things go smoothly I'll play both. I use to be a huge fan of gameplay over story, however I need purpose to my gameplay. These day's I need more stimulation. Just good gameplay does not cut it. Neither does just a good story. I need the complexity of both done well. I'm greedy like that. What I want/need is, for now, limited by what is.

Leash that expectation is what I'm saying.


You come across as quite conceited and condescending there, but I am not sure you meant to do that, so I will give you the benefit of doubt.

As for your commentary on me spouting "I want" rather than "what is", you seem to not take into context that we *all* want things, but it doesn't mean I am not capable of grasping what the WoTC is, or their stance on things. Amazingly, I am fully aware of all the things you wrote. I am still free to have opinions, and I do. I have in fact written my opinions about these things in great depth frequently, and it is my belief that their homebrewing is not done for the betterment of this game at all.

I am not "against" anything. I would like things to be better though, and I would like your tone to improve too.

I have GREAT hopes for this game. This game is in fact the game I long for the most out of all games right now, and so I hope this game will be the best it can be. To that end, I do not believe their homebrewing so far is compatible with that outcome, and I always present arguments as to why I believe that is the case.
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Originally Posted by rdb100
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
They could increase A LOT players agency/creativity if custom mechanics weren't so overpowered.

If D&D is about player's agency and creativity, let us also only play with D&D rules and spells and class abilities rather than impose us a good way of playing.

I'm 100% fine with their will to add more things and even silly things I won't use (like throwing boots or ennemies)... But please let me play this incredible game how I want to play it...

A better balance between custom rules and RAW mechanics is the only solution so players can CHOOSE and use THEIR creativity rather than yours.

Baldur's Gate II had several difficulty settings, with one being core D&D. It makes the game more enjoyable for players for different reasons. They included harder modes and the easier versions were often to fix the fact that it's a video game adaptation of a pen & paper game. I'm sure something like that will happen here.

It's more about balancing the 2 layers of BG3 (D&D/Homebrewed) than difficulty levels but honnestly... I fear for higher difficulty levels...

If I'm able to solo'd the game pretty easily now because the basics of BG3 broke the balance (jump/disengage+backstab, highground godmode, dipping, verticality+shove,,...), what are going to be harder difficulty levels ?
My tactical skills and/or D&D knowledge and/or party build doesn't matter at all because as soon as you use Larian's homebrewed : you're a master of BG3.

So what ? Is that only going to be harder because ennemies will hit harder and because I'll miss them more ?
Will I still play the exact same as I was after 20 hours of gameplay but just die a bit more ?

Or maybe I'll have to stay in normal mode but completely forget about every cool addition because they're too powerfull ?

I like the game and I like many of their additions but something is really wrong in their balance.
The game lack of tactical depth and it's only because they impose us to use (some of) their mechanics in every combats... That's not what I call choices.


Precisely! Perfect summary!
Originally Posted by Running_Eagle
I agree with the OP and I guess I just have to police myself not to cheat and be "cheap" when it comes to combat as best I can. What else can we do since the cheese is here to stay?
But, what I have a MAJOR problem with is the inside jokes and personal stories that this game is ABSOLUTELY POLLUTED WITH. I want to feel like I'm playing a fantasy RPG, not intruding on peoples' personal lives and memoirs. For example, there's a book you find often in the game called A Pleasurable Deal that talks about someone named Robert and how his wife/girlfriend cheated on him with one of his friends. That's f!@#king gross and I don't want that in my game. I'm sure Robert doesn't, either. There's another letter you'll find in the burned-out town of Waukeen's Rest on one of the guards that talks about a girl finding one of her boyfriends "snot rags" that he left on the table and how she wants to break up with him but he occasionally says some funny things so she keeps him around. And tons of things about playwriting, a dwarf named "Brian", etc., etc. This whole game so far has felt like I'm in the middle of someone's selfie. Clean this crap up and act like professionals who are selling a product to the general public, not making a memory book or forcing people to watch your Hawaiian vacation slideshow.

I've always felt the game's portrayal of romance, some story elements and cheese mechanics had a juvenile vibe to it.
Originally Posted by spectralhunter
Originally Posted by Running_Eagle
I agree with the OP and I guess I just have to police myself not to cheat and be "cheap" when it comes to combat as best I can. What else can we do since the cheese is here to stay?
But, what I have a MAJOR problem with is the inside jokes and personal stories that this game is ABSOLUTELY POLLUTED WITH. I want to feel like I'm playing a fantasy RPG, not intruding on peoples' personal lives and memoirs. For example, there's a book you find often in the game called A Pleasurable Deal that talks about someone named Robert and how his wife/girlfriend cheated on him with one of his friends. That's f!@#king gross and I don't want that in my game. I'm sure Robert doesn't, either. There's another letter you'll find in the burned-out town of Waukeen's Rest on one of the guards that talks about a girl finding one of her boyfriends "snot rags" that he left on the table and how she wants to break up with him but he occasionally says some funny things so she keeps him around. And tons of things about playwriting, a dwarf named "Brian", etc., etc. This whole game so far has felt like I'm in the middle of someone's selfie. Clean this crap up and act like professionals who are selling a product to the general public, not making a memory book or forcing people to watch your Hawaiian vacation slideshow.

I've always felt the game's portrayal of romance, some story elements and cheese mechanics had a juvenile vibe to it.


Hmm... I certainly agree that a lot of the cheese mechanics are juvenile, and the romances... yeah, they sometimes come off in that way a bit, maybe. But I am not too concerned with those things, really. The juvenile or troll-like aspects of the mechanics are troublesome though. I feel it takes away a lot from the atmosphere, that should be a rather foreboding one.
@andreasrylander Huh?

Their is no "all" you speak for yourself and only yourself. I never said you don't grasp things. Opinions don't equat to automatically making things better. You don't have the latest build of the game, script, or list of mechanics for release. You have a playground of specific things that may or may not be in the final product.

You have no say on how I choose to speak. Ironically you are the one being extremely condescending and rude. What is best is for the game is up to Larian to decide and strive for.

Your entire argument is for how things "should" be. Thats a lot arrogance for someone elses vision. Hence focus on what they are doing and give feedback. From there Larian decides what's best. The extent is suggestion in a vacuum, but you come off as trying to give orders on the whole.

Cool your jets or the convo ends here. At least on my end.
Originally Posted by andreasrylander
Hmm... I certainly agree that a lot of the cheese mechanics are juvenile, and the romances... yeah, they sometimes come off in that way a bit, maybe. But I am not too concerned with those things, really. The juvenile or troll-like aspects of the mechanics are troublesome though. I feel it takes away a lot from the atmosphere, that should be a rather foreboding one.

BG3 is a mature rated game. But it almost seems like it wants to cater to the sensibilities of teenagers. I knew Larian had that tendency with what I saw in DOS games (I never played either version and only know of them through videos and reviews) but I didn't expect the same vibe with BG3 since it was a new IP for them with an all new game system. Boy was I wrong.
Posted By: Icelyn Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 03/04/21 11:53 PM
Originally Posted by Aishaddai
I get the feeling one day you will be the one to spoil the story for me. Lmao. I feel it.
laugh
it's strange, but the more "mature" they make games, the more immature it actually seems to me. I just hope I don't miss out on a lot of companion story/side quests just because I'm not interested in boning everyone in the party.
Originally Posted by Aishaddai
@andreasrylander Huh?

Their is no "all" you speak for yourself and only yourself. I never said you don't grasp things. Opinions don't equat to automatically making things better. You don't have the latest build of the game, script, or list of mechanics for release. You have a playground of specific things that may or may not be in the final product.

You have no say on how I choose to speak. Ironically you are the one being extremely condescending and rude. What is best is for the game is up to Larian to decide and strive for.

Your entire argument is for how things "should" be. Thats a lot arrogance for someone elses vision. Hence focus on what they are doing and give feedback. From there Larian decides what's best. The extent is suggestion in a vacuum, but you come off as trying to give orders on the whole.

Cool your jets or the convo ends here. At least on my end.


I am focusing on what they are doing and giving feedback accordingly. You are the one hellbent on using ad hominems, so I have no interests in your input anymore. So consider the "convo" very ended indeed.

Addendum: I still wish you well. I am not as angry with you as you probably imagine I am. I just don't have the energy these days to deal with drama and conflict, and so for that reason I am putting you on ignore so I can just focus on posts that have to do with this game.
Originally Posted by spectralhunter
Originally Posted by andreasrylander
Hmm... I certainly agree that a lot of the cheese mechanics are juvenile, and the romances... yeah, they sometimes come off in that way a bit, maybe. But I am not too concerned with those things, really. The juvenile or troll-like aspects of the mechanics are troublesome though. I feel it takes away a lot from the atmosphere, that should be a rather foreboding one.

BG3 is a mature rated game. But it almost seems like it wants to cater to the sensibilities of teenagers. I knew Larian had that tendency with what I saw in DOS games (I never played either version and only know of them through videos and reviews) but I didn't expect the same vibe with BG3 since it was a new IP for them with an all new game system. Boy was I wrong.


I have noticed the same, even though it still has improved. DOS 1 was *VERY* immature, and troll-like mechanisms and jokes basically bombarded you, almost completely pulling you out of the world and the setting completely. It was like playing a Monty Python game. I still found that amusing and I enjoyed it, and continued to play it but hoping that one day they would release a more "serious" game.

Then DOS2 came and it was *WAY* more serious compared to the first, if still very quirky, humourous and occcationally "trolly". Still, it was an AMAZING game, and still is, and I love it. I love Larian a lot! But... I wished they could make something far more serious still, and I also hoped that one day they would do a DND game.

So when BG3 by Larian was announced, I literally got tears of joy in my eyes. My dreams come true!

So far the game is certainly more serious and less "trolly" than DOS2, but .... I am just hoping it will be far more serious, true to the core rules and less "trolly" when it is eventually released. I honestly believe that would be the best route for them to go from both a PR/Marketing/Financial standpoint, and also a qualitative one. But we'll see. No matter what, I love the game a LOT even as it is now. I think it's brilliant. I just hope they fix a few things and change a few things. =)
Originally Posted by andreasrylander
So far the game is certainly more serious and less "trolly" than DOS2, but .... I am just hoping it will be far more serious, true to the core rules and less "trolly" when it is eventually released. I honestly believe that would be the best route for them to go from both a PR/Marketing/Financial standpoint, and also a qualitative one. But we'll see. No matter what, I love the game a LOT even as it is now. I think it's brilliant. I just hope they fix a few things and change a few things. =)

Now that I have heard Swen and some of the panels, I can see some of his personality in the games. Not a bad thing really, and obviously tons of people like it, but it's not for me.

And I still think you are hoping for some hybrid version. I say let it go. It won't happen, at least not as much as most 5e players want. People keep saying it's EA so things can change but I've watched some other games in beta (I mean, this is essentially beta) and you know what? The game system never changes. At least not dramatically. What we are seeing is pretty much what we are getting. We will get slight tweaks here and there but most assuredly a lot of systems like barrelmancy, shoving, backstabbling, height advantage, healing food is here to stay.

So cut me a bigger portion of that cheese to go with my whine. =)
Originally Posted by Aishaddai
They also admit that they are only adding things they feel need testing so EA is not even a useful measure of anything really. They also admit that people misunderstood many characters. I'm ok with all of this actually. Maybe it was a lowkey nudge to the Haslin/Astarion worshippers lmao.

I hope some more start to see the bigger picture. EA is skewed pretty much entirely I can only assume. Its not the full game. Just a playground to test things. How much can change is unknown, but what is known is that it has. I can't do anything with that info one way or another.

I think I'll stick to just browsing datamine.

5e phb puriest will probably raise hell though.

I would say that this is pretty much where I'm at too. Larian probably isn't very interested in giving us an accurate representation on what they're doing, they want us to test things while obfuscating things for the sake of keeping things a surprise. The gaming community as a whole is used to this kind of behavior, so Larian keeping up the image of being a now successful indie company that occasionally engages with the community compared to the big bad publishers gives them a lot of points among the wider community for... Basically doing the same thing as a fair amount of other larger developers out there. The only real difference is a very goofy company face, who to be fair is actually invested in the company and clearly not faking it.

Perception is everything, however true or false it may be.

That said, keeping things a surprise is a valid concern, especially for a huge project with this many eyes on it compared to virtually every other cRPG. But it also means everything gets tested in a vacuum, and the context of certain things gets completely changed when seen within the rest of the package - kind of like how blessed/cursed surfaces may have been a novel idea during the EA phase of DOS2, but in actual practicality, blessed surfaces were pretty much never worth the effort as soon as you stepped foot past Act 1 into Reaper's Coast. This was because the game's enemies got so many free ways to generate cursed surfaces, some even outright bleeding it when you hit them with a physical attack, while virtually every method of generating blessed surfaces to counter them that players had access to ate finite and precious source points that could otherwise fuel your strongest attacks in comparison. So instead of even engaging with the field effects system, most players would instead just turtle down and keep movement to an absolute minimum within those surfaces, or invest in the many mobility skills to immediately eject themselves from such a situation.

One should also note that with a project of this magnitude, actually changing core aspects of it like the combat becomes a lot harder as development progresses. So, the more analytical side of me recognizes that what we see is what we're getting, especially now that Larian is absolutely doubling down on everything with every communication we've had from them as of late. I'm still on this ride because I want to see how this turns out.

When you get feedback like this, you know what direction the community wants this game to go towards. But few have the foresight to consider the long term consequences. What one sees as 'rewarding creativity', I just see 'just use consumables and certain highly busted spells, don't even bother with martial classes on tactician/honor mode', and I would not be surprised in the slightest if that ends up becoming a very common phrase. At least DOS2 tactician was legitimately hard within the confines of its own rules when you were actually trying to play it with minimal cheese, because almost every skill in that game was busted when used properly. The effort of using raw cheese tactics in DOS2 outside of the standard stealth ambush was generally not worth the time it took to set them up if you had a well built party to begin with (unless you were really so bad at playing the actual game that you couldn't come up with ways to beat certain fights head-on). The big distinction is that BG3 in comparison currently is literally just a couple homebrew mechanics completely overshadowing everything else in the game, a lot of fights feel like they're straight up balanced around their existence (whereas no fight in DOS2 really felt that way at all aside from burning undead scarecrow lady for reasons that don't need an explanation), and the combined effect of every other action or ability cannot even compare to the effect that the homebrew mechanics have on the current encounter design. I mean, the complete context whiplash between both games despite their core similarities could make the more pessimistic among us start believing that DOS2's brilliance is looking more and more like an accident.

(I mean, really, I'm quite sure Larian at one point also even admitted that sticking a bunch of grenades into a basket and throwing it at the final boss of DOS1, with the combined effect resulting in a cascade of field effects spreading all over the map was an unintentional thing, but they applauded that person's creativity and decided they wouldn't do anything to rein it in. So expecting BG3 to take a different stance in the long term is, quite frankly, a futile effort.)

But for people like me, at least Solasta exists for the tactical turn based combat enthusiast itch, and that means I'm ultimately okay with BG3 being a game that I will undoubtedly enjoy for many reasons despite the combat design (especially the whole stealth ambush mechanic which basically means that BG3's combat cannot really be considered true turn-based, if your other party members that are sneaking around outside of combat can literally insert themselves into a fight anywhere there isn't an enemy sight cone at any point they want - BG3's current definition of tactical really just boils down to figuring out how much you can ignore the normal rules at the moment, because the implementation of everything that makes DnD tactical to begin with is either incomplete or straight up missing). As it will likely be for a big chunk of the community.

(On a different note, DOS2 ironically had a strange issue where the game was most arguably balanced during the level 4-8 phase of Act 1. After that phase, it quickly spirals into damage race rocket tag as a new tier of skills become available and every boss fight suddenly shifts towards 'nuke or crowd control them as hard as you can during turn 1 or else you were guaranteed to have a dead party member'. BG3 has the opposite problem of DnD in general feeling pretty awful at low levels, and one could think that the homebrew mechanics are an attempt to make low level combat livelier for the whole year that Larian insists on having the community suffer through being capped at level 4, while masking the lack of core mechanics like ready actions and proper reactions - but all that really did was throw conventional DnD strategy completely out the window.)
Posted By: Mat22 Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 04/04/21 06:24 AM
My 2 cents: I agree, i like that kind of cheese when i can cleverly connect certain actions/skills or use the environment or certain items to my advantage in certain scenarios but that should not mean i can beat most enemies and challenges in the game using the same tactic over and over again. Especially if you can do that with all party members. Especially if we are talking about a 100+ hour game with high replayability planned. For example as others mentioned as one example shoving is fun once in a while or jumping is okay to use celeverly once in a while but at the moment these can be abused heavily to win fights instead of cleverly combining unique class specific skills or teamwork actions.
I look forward to play bg3 full release as its already a really nice game with a lot of cool features but atm its not nearly as tactical to me as i expected it to be. Thing are changing though, its still EA, so fingers crossed
Posted By: Scribe Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 04/04/21 07:32 AM
Originally Posted by Danielbda
Originally Posted by Aishaddai
5e phb puriest will probably raise hell though.
There is a game called Solasta that is implementing 5e rules pretty much as written and it plays amazingly.

Larian would not know good gameplay if someone wrote the system for them.

Oh wait....
Basically DOS3 flavored D&D/Baldurs gate is here to stay. Deal with it.
I think what we are getting is the best that we can get close to prior BG games with a 300 development team AAA budget. Anything else just will not sell or be popular in 2021 aesthetics.
Cinematic dialogues are so bad though...just hate them. For me it just does not work...I find the cring to overwhelming. Like a very bad Z movie. Due to the way they are made, no options either for later mods to add stuff to the story like the prior games.
A good book doesn't need 100% cinematics to be better. Just a little for those impactful scenes. My opinion on the matter.
Posted By: gaymer Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 04/04/21 07:47 AM
Originally Posted by mr_planescapist
Basically DOS3 flavored D&D/Baldurs gate is here to stay. Deal with it.

I've been saying this. I'm a realist and prepared for disappointment, prepared for things to be wonky, prepared for things to be missing, prepared for cheese.

As I said before,
Originally Posted by Saito Hikari
Originally Posted by Aishaddai
They also admit that they are only adding things they feel need testing so EA is not even a useful measure of anything really. They also admit that people misunderstood many characters. I'm ok with all of this actually. Maybe it was a lowkey nudge to the Haslin/Astarion worshippers lmao.

I hope some more start to see the bigger picture. EA is skewed pretty much entirely I can only assume. Its not the full game. Just a playground to test things. How much can change is unknown, but what is known is that it has. I can't do anything with that info one way or another.

I think I'll stick to just browsing datamine.

5e phb puriest will probably raise hell though.

I would say that this is pretty much where I'm at too. Larian probably isn't very interested in giving us an accurate representation on what they're doing, they want us to test things while obfuscating things for the sake of keeping things a surprise. The gaming community as a whole is used to this kind of behavior, so Larian keeping up the image of being a now successful indie company that occasionally engages with the community compared to the big bad publishers gives them a lot of points among the wider community for... Basically doing the same thing as a fair amount of other larger developers out there. The only real difference is a very goofy company face, who to be fair is actually invested in the company and clearly not faking it.

Perception is everything, however true or false it may be.

That said, keeping things a surprise is a valid concern, especially for a huge project with this many eyes on it compared to virtually every other cRPG. But it also means everything gets tested in a vacuum, and the context of certain things gets completely changed when seen within the rest of the package - kind of like how blessed/cursed surfaces may have been a novel idea during the EA phase of DOS2, but in actual practicality, blessed surfaces were pretty much never worth the effort as soon as you stepped foot past Act 1 into Reaper's Coast. This was because the game's enemies got so many free ways to generate cursed surfaces, some even outright bleeding it when you hit them with a physical attack, while virtually every method of generating blessed surfaces to counter them that players had access to ate finite and precious source points that could otherwise fuel your strongest attacks in comparison. So instead of even engaging with the field effects system, most players would instead just turtle down and keep movement to an absolute minimum within those surfaces, or invest in the many mobility skills to immediately eject themselves from such a situation.

One should also note that with a project of this magnitude, actually changing core aspects of it like the combat becomes a lot harder as development progresses. So, the more analytical side of me recognizes that what we see is what we're getting, especially now that Larian is absolutely doubling down on everything with every communication we've had from them as of late. I'm still on this ride because I want to see how this turns out.

When you get feedback like this, you know what direction the community wants this game to go towards. But few have the foresight to consider the long term consequences. What one sees as 'rewarding creativity', I just see 'just use consumables and certain highly busted spells, don't even bother with martial classes on tactician/honor mode', and I would not be surprised in the slightest if that ends up becoming a very common phrase. At least DOS2 tactician was legitimately hard within the confines of its own rules when you were actually trying to play it with minimal cheese, because almost every skill in that game was busted when used properly. The effort of using raw cheese tactics in DOS2 outside of the standard stealth ambush was generally not worth the time it took to set them up if you had a well built party to begin with (unless you were really so bad at playing the actual game that you couldn't come up with ways to beat certain fights head-on). The big distinction is that BG3 in comparison currently is literally just a couple homebrew mechanics completely overshadowing everything else in the game, and the combined effect of every other action or ability cannot even compare to the effect that the homebrew mechanics have on the current encounter design.

(I mean, really, I'm quite sure Larian at one point also even admitted that sticking a bunch of grenades into a basket and throwing it at the final boss of DOS1, with the combined effect resulting in a cascade of field effects spreading all over the map was an unintentional thing, but they applauded that person's creativity and decided they wouldn't do anything to rein it in. So expecting BG3 to take a different stance in the long term is, quite frankly, a futile effort.)

But for people like me, at least Solasta exists for the tactical turn based combat enthusiast itch, and that means I'm ultimately okay with BG3 being a game that I will undoubtedly enjoy for many reasons despite the combat design (especially the whole stealth ambush mechanic which basically means that BG3's combat cannot really be considered true turn-based, if your other party members that are sneaking around outside of combat can literally insert themselves into a fight anywhere there isn't an enemy sight cone at any point they want - BG3's current definition of tactical really just boils down to figuring out how much you can ignore the normal rules at the moment, because the implementation of everything that makes DnD tactical to begin with is either incomplete or straight up missing). As it will likely be for a big chunk of the community.

As I said people, those links you posted to things is something Larian likes to see circulating around.
Reading further into the interview, it mentions that they are releasing classes based on complexity, which is an understandable stance to take. Druid was complicated in both wildshape mechanics and immediate story relevance.

Still, this has super unfortunate implications. If you really want to take this at face value (and defining complexity as difficulty in coding), then the longer the reaction based classes get pushed back, the more you should expect that proper reactions won’t be a thing in this game.
Originally Posted by Saito Hikari
Reading further into the interview, it mentions that they are releasing classes based on complexity, which is an understandable stance to take. Druid was complicated in both wildshape mechanics and immediate story relevance.

Still, this has super unfortunate implications. If you really want to take this at face value (and defining complexity as difficulty in coding), then the longer the reaction based classes get pushed back, the more you should expect that proper reactions won’t be a thing in this game.

Would be a damned shame.... then all we can hope for are modders making that work. smirk
Originally Posted by andreasrylander
Originally Posted by Saito Hikari
Reading further into the interview, it mentions that they are releasing classes based on complexity, which is an understandable stance to take. Druid was complicated in both wildshape mechanics and immediate story relevance.

Still, this has super unfortunate implications. If you really want to take this at face value (and defining complexity as difficulty in coding), then the longer the reaction based classes get pushed back, the more you should expect that proper reactions won’t be a thing in this game.

Would be a damned shame.... then all we can hope for are modders making that work. smirk
I would absolutely hate to have to rely on mods to get a BG3 that plays like D&D. Mods can only go so far if the core game is designed without a proper resting / resource management system or a reaction system.

Mods are also a bit of a hassle with multiplayer where everyone needs to agree and download the same mods. If it even works?

Is it really too much to ask of Larian to provide a true D&D 5e experience in a 5e D&D game?
Posted By: Zenith Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 04/04/21 01:45 PM
I'm glad they are aware of how much a turn off RNG is in the game.

Keep that crap for the troll tabletop. In my videogames, I want consistency of outcome.

In regards to Larian cheese, they just need to remove fall damage off shove and just make targets prone, and for stealth attacks to put all your group in combat.

Maybe reduce the impsct of verticality so it isn't completely mandatory for casters to take misty step.

Then fix the garbage concentration system that's making it so only one optimal spell is used while the rest never see the light of day.
Originally Posted by Zenith
I'm glad they are aware of how much a turn off RNG is in the game.

Keep that crap for the troll tabletop. In my videogames, I want consistency of outcome.


Should probably steer clear of games whose stated purpose is to adapt a table-top rule system to a videogame.
Originally Posted by Zenith
I'm glad they are aware of how much a turn off RNG is in the game.

Keep that crap for the troll tabletop. In my videogames, I want consistency of outcome.

In regards to Larian cheese, they just need to remove fall damage off shove and just make targets prone, and for stealth attacks to put all your group in combat.
And the last thing I want is combat where you can calculate the outcomes. Combat should be chaotic and unpredictable.

Why would they remove fall damage? The whole point in pushing someone off a ledge is to hurt them. And the world needs to feel real when you're telling a grown up story. If the gameplay is a total meme it's hard to take the story seriously.

I'm not buying the "RNG is bad in videogames". It's not about the platform. You can design tabletop games without RNG too. It's a choice.

Maybe action RPG's are more your thing if the RNG is so hard to swallow?
Originally Posted by rdb100
Baldur's Gate II had several difficulty settings, with one being core D&D. It makes the game more enjoyable for players for different reasons. They included harder modes and the easier versions were often to fix the fact that it's a video game adaptation of a pen & paper game. I'm sure something like that will happen here.

Hope is spring eternal. I've been vocal about wanting a difficulty setting with a D&D mode, both for my own peace of mind that the gameplay won't be ruined by the excessive cheese, and for more accurate feedback given there's a subsection of players with fragile egos who are exceedingly intolerant of RNG and advocate easier gameplay because missing/failure is never fun (which in turn incentivizes Larian to continue their cheese/homebrew).

Honestly though, at this point I'm not sure the ginormous ego of the Larian heads is even willing to risk being wounded with metrics possibly telling them the average gamer will reject their entire gameplay design philosophy - discarding both their cheese *and* their origin characters as player characters.
Originally Posted by 1varangian
Originally Posted by Zenith
I'm glad they are aware of how much a turn off RNG is in the game.

Keep that crap for the troll tabletop. In my videogames, I want consistency of outcome.

In regards to Larian cheese, they just need to remove fall damage off shove and just make targets prone, and for stealth attacks to put all your group in combat.
And the last thing I want is combat where you can calculate the outcomes. Combat should be chaotic and unpredictable.

Why would they remove fall damage? The whole point in pushing someone off a ledge is to hurt them. And the world needs to feel real when you're telling a grown up story. If the gameplay is a total meme it's hard to take the story seriously.

I'm not buying the "RNG is bad in videogames". It's not about the platform. You can design tabletop games without RNG too. It's a choice.

Maybe action RPG's are more your thing if the RNG is so hard to swallow?

Could be. Action RPGs are designed to work well with the medium for which they are created. Not all have good mechanics, but they are usually more appropriatly paced than tabletop rules if you are intending to create an engaging computer-based RPG.

What you seem to want is something more akin to an computer-based emulator for the tabletop 5e experience with a BG3 game module attached. I don't know what made you think that was what Larian were making, but it is certainly not anything I would expect from what was shown before EA kicked off.

They could do better in some respects, and they could certainly offer more options for how the game plays ( which they may do before release ), but forcing a 5e emulator on an audience that mostly don't want it, is unlikely to be a winning strategy.
Originally Posted by etonbears
What you seem to want is something more akin to an computer-based emulator for the tabletop 5e experience with a BG3 game module attached.

Can we stop with these straw man arguments, maybe?
But a large amount of people want the game to move toward 5e though? And 5e is an already constructed system that they can reference. We don't want another Fantasy Grounds or Roll20 where it is just 5e rules set and can apply to different games, but a game that does what it claimed to set out to do, and this is translate 5e like how BG1+2 translated AD&D2e.

Many changes are good and I like some of the changes, but also many of Larian's changes have proved to be contentious at best and game-breaking at worst, and EA makes it our job to give feedback and say what we believe about these mechanics.
Originally Posted by Seraphael
Honestly though, at this point I'm not sure the ginormous ego of the Larian heads is even willing to risk being wounded with metrics possibly telling them the average gamer will reject their entire gameplay design philosophy - discarding both their cheese *and* their origin characters as player characters.
Leave the insults at the door, please.
Posted By: Dexai Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 05/04/21 11:16 AM
Originally Posted by Zenith
the troll tabletop.

What's this even mean
"Many changes are good and I like some of the changes, but also many of Larian's changes have proved to be contentious at best and game-breaking at worst, and EA makes it our job to give feedback and say what we believe about these mechanics." <--- Totally agree with this statement. They are making a DND 5th edition game, and so it does make sense that they mostly stick to those rules, which is something they claimed they would do as much as possible, which is clearly not the case. I certainly don't mind homebrewing, but some of the homebrewing that's taking place just seems to screw too many things up, balance-wise and for many; entertainment-wise. I would also argue that their homebrewing so far actually gives us fewer options, rather than more options, as some classes lack features, or some features don't work as they should, and the distinct lack of a proper reaction system and such.
Posted By: Zenith Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 05/04/21 01:12 PM
Originally Posted by 1varangian
Originally Posted by Zenith
I'm glad they are aware of how much a turn off RNG is in the game.

Keep that crap for the troll tabletop. In my videogames, I want consistency of outcome.

In regards to Larian cheese, they just need to remove fall damage off shove and just make targets prone, and for stealth attacks to put all your group in combat.
And the last thing I want is combat where you can calculate the outcomes. Combat should be chaotic and unpredictable.

Why would they remove fall damage? The whole point in pushing someone off a ledge is to hurt them. And the world needs to feel real when you're telling a grown up story. If the gameplay is a total meme it's hard to take the story seriously.

I'm not buying the "RNG is bad in videogames". It's not about the platform. You can design tabletop games without RNG too. It's a choice.

Maybe action RPG's are more your thing if the RNG is so hard to swallow?

Maybe the tabletop is your thing, and you can stop telling people that you have ownership over a game, which you do not. I'll save chaotic and unpredictable for movies, I'd much rather have my known outputs to any input I make in the game instead of reloading a save because I rolled second in initiative and Bulette proceeded to slam half of my group dead on the first turn and by the time I get them up it's the third turn and he burrows out. Or having Baretha get first turn and 2 shot a member of the team through action surge while dodging the next 3 attacks from the party.

They should remove fall damage because taking out one third of the Phase Matriarch's HP by just breaking the webbing under her is absurd and trivializes the encounter, and the same goes for the Minotaurs.
Posted By: JJRX5 Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 05/04/21 01:39 PM
I can’t imagine anything worse than taking RNG out of the game. Sometimes the dumb kobold manages to plant an arrow right between your eye. It is the uncertainty of each encounter that breeds replayability. I don’t think you are going to find many people that want to do away with that aspect of the game.

It is also worth noting that many of the brutal encounters are hard because we are level capped at 4. There is a huge increase in power at level 5 and that will completely change the nature of these harder battles. I don’t expect Larian’s core design philosophy to change. I would prefer a closer to TT experience because I think it will make the game less arcade-y, but I do enjoy the opportunity to resolve fights in different ways. Should shove be an action? Probably. Should I be able to eat a pigs head during combat? Probably not. It breaks immersion, and for me, that is why I play RPGs.

Unlike many here, I suspect that Larian is listening carefully to the feedback from its early access consumers. Many things will not be implemented because of cost or time constraints, but the final iteration of these game will likely make the DND and BG 1/2 traditionalists happy. I am not stressing it.
Originally Posted by etonbears
What you seem to want is something more akin to an computer-based emulator for the tabletop 5e experience with a BG3 game module attached. I don't know what made you think that was what Larian were making, but it is certainly not anything I would expect from what was shown before EA kicked off.

What nonsense is this?

I want a video game with a great story, a cinematic experience and good tactical combat that doesn't devolve into using the same cheese tactics in the name of "creativity" or "player agency". I want to be rewarded for smart resource management and effective teamwork, making the most of the class abilities of my party. The combat gameplay in BG3 is simplistic and boring. A clear downgrade from 5e as Solasta so effortlessy proves.
Kindly stop this drift into bad-tempered argument and remind yourselves that, just because someone doesn't share your view of what you want the game to be, it does not give you the right to start insulting, belittling or getting snarky with them.

No more calling suggestions 'nonsense', and no more suggesting that 'XYZ is not their thing' and that they should play a different game.
Honnestly I'm not interrested in BG3 "because it's a D&D game" but trying to learn what I was talking about here lead me to this conclusion : D&D has a stronger, deeper and more consistent system than the hybrid system we have in BG3.

I don't understand why a video game couldn't have a strong, deep and consistent system and a few "fun" homebrewed additions at the same time.

Again, it's only a matter of balance not to drive players in a way more than in another.

Let's hope patch 5 will answer a few questions.
I'll be strongly dissapointed if the game was only designed to for this kind of "fun".
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Honnestly I'm not interrested in BG3 "because it's a D&D game" but trying to learn what I was talking about here lead me to this conclusion : D&D has a stronger, deeper and more consistent system than the hybrid system we have in BG3.

I don't understand why a video game couldn't have a strong, deep and consistent system and a few "fun" homebrewed additions at the same time.

Again, it's only a matter of balance not to drive players in a way more than in another.

That approach would have required Larian to start with 5E rules, and then modify change those rules, but that's not what happened. They started with DOS, and then tried to add in 5E, found it too difficult and/or didn't really understand 5E rules well enough to balance changes to them, and what we have is the current gobbledygook of DOS with a smattering of 5E.
I'm not a game designer but I'm not sure it's a bad idea to show everything first then try to understand what people like, what they don't and make adjustments.

I don't have the datas but reading many feedbacks it looks like players like those homebrewed possibilities a lot but not the too huge impact it has on the game balance, on combats and on D&D possibilities.

Ofc I hope they won't missunderstood their data and focus more on them than on feedbacks.

If people don't use bless it's not because it's not fun... it's because they don't know what it's usefull for and because there's something better in their homebrewed.
If they don't use faery fire, it's not because it's not fun... it's because there's something better in their homebrewed. That kind of things.
Originally Posted by Zenith
Originally Posted by 1varangian
Originally Posted by Zenith
I'm glad they are aware of how much a turn off RNG is in the game.

Keep that crap for the troll tabletop. In my videogames, I want consistency of outcome.

In regards to Larian cheese, they just need to remove fall damage off shove and just make targets prone, and for stealth attacks to put all your group in combat.
And the last thing I want is combat where you can calculate the outcomes. Combat should be chaotic and unpredictable.

Why would they remove fall damage? The whole point in pushing someone off a ledge is to hurt them. And the world needs to feel real when you're telling a grown up story. If the gameplay is a total meme it's hard to take the story seriously.

I'm not buying the "RNG is bad in videogames". It's not about the platform. You can design tabletop games without RNG too. It's a choice.

Maybe action RPG's are more your thing if the RNG is so hard to swallow?

Maybe the tabletop is your thing, and you can stop telling people that you have ownership over a game, which you do not. I'll save chaotic and unpredictable for movies, I'd much rather have my known outputs to any input I make in the game instead of reloading a save because I rolled second in initiative and Bulette proceeded to slam half of my group dead on the first turn and by the time I get them up it's the third turn and he burrows out. Or having Baretha get first turn and 2 shot a member of the team through action surge while dodging the next 3 attacks from the party.

They should remove fall damage because taking out one third of the Phase Matriarch's HP by just breaking the webbing under her is absurd and trivializes the encounter, and the same goes for the Minotaurs.
Those encounters are not an RNG problem.

It's about pitting power jumped level 5 enemies like the Gith patrol against a lower level party. The Bulette is also an overpowering enemy, designed for a level 5 party.

In D&D you won't be at peak performance if it's your second or third encounter after a long rest. In BG3 such concept doesn't exist - every encounter is your first encounter after rest and enemies have to be beefed up to match that. So of course overpowering enemies winning the initiative is a problem. The 5e system is designed more for attrition where you aren't as likely to get one shot by a lucky higher level enemy. It's more of a question how far do you push your luck. BG3 needs to incorporate that attrition through a meaningful resting system that isn't always available or has some cost attached to it. And tone down the power spikes of enemies and the importance of environmental gimmicks. Then the game will play better.

The Matriarch is another good example how an overpowering encounter is designed around one particular environmental gimmick. She always jumps on the web bridges and for some reason takes massive damage from falls, much more than anyone else. And she doesn't learn from the first fall either. If she teleports in melee range she eats two PC's for a snack in one turn. Why doesn't she just do that right away? That's what Phase Spiders are supposed to be doing with the teleport anyway, catch their prey. But here in the Larian version they are just bouncing around spitting gallons of poison and waiting for you to figure out the gimmick to defeat them with. I don't really understand the talk about player agency when an encounter is designed to be won in one very particular way. The Matriarch could be a little less overpowering without such an obvious and overpowered trick to killing her. It could be more a fight of attrition without an exploitative gimmick where you would use spells like Blindness, Grease and Ray of Enfeeblement and drink some healing potions while fighting her in melee.

Larian are trying to make D&D 5e play like another game and that's why it's not as a good as it could be. Yet, hopefully.
Originally Posted by Grudgebearer
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Honnestly I'm not interrested in BG3 "because it's a D&D game" but trying to learn what I was talking about here lead me to this conclusion : D&D has a stronger, deeper and more consistent system than the hybrid system we have in BG3.

I don't understand why a video game couldn't have a strong, deep and consistent system and a few "fun" homebrewed additions at the same time.

Again, it's only a matter of balance not to drive players in a way more than in another.

That approach would have required Larian to start with 5E rules, and then modify change those rules, but that's not what happened. They started with DOS, and then tried to add in 5E, found it too difficult and/or didn't really understand 5E rules well enough to balance changes to them, and what we have is the current gobbledygook of DOS with a smattering of 5E.

Technically, from what I remember, Swen mentioned that they started out with very strict rules but internal testing showed that they didn't work well.
Believe it or not, it doesn't matter.
Originally Posted by Rhobar121
Originally Posted by Grudgebearer
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Honnestly I'm not interrested in BG3 "because it's a D&D game" but trying to learn what I was talking about here lead me to this conclusion : D&D has a stronger, deeper and more consistent system than the hybrid system we have in BG3.

I don't understand why a video game couldn't have a strong, deep and consistent system and a few "fun" homebrewed additions at the same time.

Again, it's only a matter of balance not to drive players in a way more than in another.

That approach would have required Larian to start with 5E rules, and then modify change those rules, but that's not what happened. They started with DOS, and then tried to add in 5E, found it too difficult and/or didn't really understand 5E rules well enough to balance changes to them, and what we have is the current gobbledygook of DOS with a smattering of 5E.

Technically, from what I remember, Swen mentioned that they started out with very strict rules but internal testing showed that they didn't work well.
Believe it or not, it doesn't matter.

I don't want to call someone a liar, but Swen is not telling the truth, and that's obvious from the current state of the game that they started with a DOS framework, and have been attempting to add in a few 5E concepts that don't really jive with all of the DOS holdover.

Dipping in candles.
Barrels of burning liquid everywhere
Nearly every enemy having a ranged attack that causes a damaging surface.
Weapons that give characters access to abilities like cleave or trip.
Originally Posted by Rhobar121
Originally Posted by Grudgebearer
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Honnestly I'm not interrested in BG3 "because it's a D&D game" but trying to learn what I was talking about here lead me to this conclusion : D&D has a stronger, deeper and more consistent system than the hybrid system we have in BG3.

I don't understand why a video game couldn't have a strong, deep and consistent system and a few "fun" homebrewed additions at the same time.

Again, it's only a matter of balance not to drive players in a way more than in another.

That approach would have required Larian to start with 5E rules, and then modify change those rules, but that's not what happened. They started with DOS, and then tried to add in 5E, found it too difficult and/or didn't really understand 5E rules well enough to balance changes to them, and what we have is the current gobbledygook of DOS with a smattering of 5E.

Technically, from what I remember, Swen mentioned that they started out with very strict rules but internal testing showed that they didn't work well.
Believe it or not, it doesn't matter.
Or they just have a really narrow vision on what "works". DOS gameplay doesn't work for me at all, so it's all subjective in the end.

I would argue that BG 1&2 gameplay works, and so does NWN, Pathfinder and Solasta as other implementations of D&D for a CRPG. But based on the changes to D&D rules in BG3 it seems the folks at Larian think only DOS works out of that bunch.
Originally Posted by Rhobar121
Originally Posted by Grudgebearer
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Honnestly I'm not interrested in BG3 "because it's a D&D game" but trying to learn what I was talking about here lead me to this conclusion : D&D has a stronger, deeper and more consistent system than the hybrid system we have in BG3.

I don't understand why a video game couldn't have a strong, deep and consistent system and a few "fun" homebrewed additions at the same time.

Again, it's only a matter of balance not to drive players in a way more than in another.

That approach would have required Larian to start with 5E rules, and then modify change those rules, but that's not what happened. They started with DOS, and then tried to add in 5E, found it too difficult and/or didn't really understand 5E rules well enough to balance changes to them, and what we have is the current gobbledygook of DOS with a smattering of 5E.

Technically, from what I remember, Swen mentioned that they started out with very strict rules but internal testing showed that they didn't work well.
Believe it or not, it doesn't matter.
I don't believe it. First because they've clearly reused DOS engine and adapted to d20 rolls and might've simply thought that some features are too much work to implement.
Second, Solasta is a very strict adaptation and it works well, in fact it is scoring higher than BG3.
Originally Posted by 1varangian
Originally Posted by Rhobar121
Originally Posted by Grudgebearer
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Honnestly I'm not interrested in BG3 "because it's a D&D game" but trying to learn what I was talking about here lead me to this conclusion : D&D has a stronger, deeper and more consistent system than the hybrid system we have in BG3.

I don't understand why a video game couldn't have a strong, deep and consistent system and a few "fun" homebrewed additions at the same time.

Again, it's only a matter of balance not to drive players in a way more than in another.

That approach would have required Larian to start with 5E rules, and then modify change those rules, but that's not what happened. They started with DOS, and then tried to add in 5E, found it too difficult and/or didn't really understand 5E rules well enough to balance changes to them, and what we have is the current gobbledygook of DOS with a smattering of 5E.

Technically, from what I remember, Swen mentioned that they started out with very strict rules but internal testing showed that they didn't work well.
Believe it or not, it doesn't matter.
Or they just have a really narrow vision on what "works". DOS gameplay doesn't work for me at all, so it's all subjective in the end.

I would argue that BG 1&2 gameplay works, and so does NWN, Pathfinder and Solasta as other implementations of D&D for a CRPG. But based on the changes to D&D rules in BG3 it seems the folks at Larian think only DOS works out of that bunch.


I would say that they are right, at least in a way.
They certainly know how to reach more players.
If you compare DoS2 sales to its competitors, it doesn't look too cheerful. Overall, DoS2 sold better than most of its direct competitors combined.
You can argue whether they were better or worse games than DoS, but it doesn't really matter.
If you look at it this way, Larian does know "what works".
It is not without reason that WoTC was chosen by Larian and not for example Obsidian, which had to be rescued by Microsoft after the last mishaps.
Originally Posted by Danielbda
Originally Posted by Rhobar121
Originally Posted by Grudgebearer
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Honnestly I'm not interrested in BG3 "because it's a D&D game" but trying to learn what I was talking about here lead me to this conclusion : D&D has a stronger, deeper and more consistent system than the hybrid system we have in BG3.

I don't understand why a video game couldn't have a strong, deep and consistent system and a few "fun" homebrewed additions at the same time.

Again, it's only a matter of balance not to drive players in a way more than in another.

That approach would have required Larian to start with 5E rules, and then modify change those rules, but that's not what happened. They started with DOS, and then tried to add in 5E, found it too difficult and/or didn't really understand 5E rules well enough to balance changes to them, and what we have is the current gobbledygook of DOS with a smattering of 5E.

Technically, from what I remember, Swen mentioned that they started out with very strict rules but internal testing showed that they didn't work well.
Believe it or not, it doesn't matter.
I don't believe it. First because they've clearly reused DOS engine and adapted to d20 rolls and might've simply thought that some features are too much work to implement.
Second, Solasta is a very strict adaptation and it works well, in fact it is scoring higher than BG3.

Comparing the ratings of the two games is completely irrelevant.
Solasta currently has 3,000 reviews and BG3 over 37,000.
However, let's ignore this fact.
The mass of negative BG3 reviews (I recommend reading reviews on steam) was due to the fact that it is not a BG2 clone.
Posted By: mrfuji3 Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 05/04/21 04:33 PM
Originally Posted by Rhobar121
Comparing the ratings of the two games is completely irrelevant.
Solasta currently has 3,000 reviews and BG3 over 37,000.
However, let's ignore this fact.
Solasta having less reviews than BG3 doesn't mean that much. 3000 is still a pretty good sample size. In fact, even having only 500-1000 reviews would be fairly representative of the true population. So yes, let us ignore this irrelevant fact. Sample size links:
https://www.surveymonkey.com/mp/sample-size-calculator/ Population of 10 million, confidence 99%, margin of error 5% gives sample size of 666
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sample_size_determination
http://www.tools4dev.org/resources/how-to-choose-a-sample-size/ "A good maximum sample size is usually 10% as long as it does not exceed 1000"

Originally Posted by Rhobar121
The mass of negative BG3 reviews (I recommend reading reviews on steam) was due to the fact that it is not a BG2 clone.
This is both an exaggeration and a strawman. Reading the most recent 100 negative reviews for BG3, maybe 1 or 2 of them are negative because it's not a BG2 clone. And that's reading their reviews in the worst light.
Most reviews are negative because of bugs, the fact that it's a full price EA game, high miss chances, too much DOS3 and not enough D&D (D&D, not BG1 or 2), bad pathfinding, too much micromanaging of party+items, the pace of combat, UI, controls, etc. Which are all (except for the whining about it being full price) are reasonable complaints.
Posted By: JJRX5 Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 05/04/21 05:19 PM
I will be honest here. I am not sure that we would have been better served by a BioWare or Obsidian implementation of 5e. The flavor would be different, but I think BG3 is probably best served with Larian. Their management and team seem passionate about the project. I think we will see more diversity in combat and more balanced mechanics. As someone that has completed two play throughs, I don’t think the combat is poorly thought out. In my recent play through I used barrels once, just to make the ogre by the door to the temple go down quicker. I don’t rely on shove or surfaces. It does occasionally annoy me that there are few encounters where verticality or surface effects don’t come into play, but I can live with it. It will get better.
Posted By: Scribe Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 05/04/21 05:38 PM
If a small indi can implement 5e, then no we didn't need Larian cheese to make the game work.

This is a SP dating sim, based on a DOS mod.

That's it. The team isn't passionate about d&d, they actively look for ways to avoid it!

I have zero hope currently for this game. Modders are the only shot at saving it from just being a flash in the pan meme.
Originally Posted by Rhobar121
I would say that they are right, at least in a way.
They certainly know how to reach more players.
If you compare DoS2 sales to its competitors, it doesn't look too cheerful. Overall, DoS2 sold better than most of its direct competitors combined.
You can argue whether they were better or worse games than DoS, but it doesn't really matter.
If you look at it this way, Larian does know "what works".
It is not without reason that WoTC was chosen by Larian and not for example Obsidian, which had to be rescued by Microsoft after the last mishaps.

Speaking as someone who learned of DOS2 around release period, it had absolutely insane word of mouth. It was released during a period of time where turn-based was seen as a gameplay format that was dying out and a relic of the past with open hostility towards most games that had it, so tons of turn-based enthusiasts flocked to DOS2 and began to champion it as a revolutionary game in tactical thought. Which, it pretty much was at the time, for field effects and so on were a really novel idea. The multiplayer helped a lot too, which was another huge factor - and no other modern cRPG that I am even aware of has had it due to the massive budget and coding framework needed to support such a thing.

It was kind of a phenomenon, one that any other cRPG would be extremely lucky to have that kind of attention.

BG3 now is benefiting from Larian's 'brand' and the DnD branding at the same time. Look at how much attention the gaming press is giving this game, while they won't give any other cRPG developer the time of day nowadays. Admittedly among the more hardcore cRPG enthusiast sites that I've been observing, there is a bit of resentment over this, that while there's a lot of new cRPG fans, the majority are only fans of Larian games rather than cRPGs as a whole. Otherwise, projects from even a celebrated developer like Obsidian's Pillars of Eternity 2 wouldn't have completely died in the water, and most other cRPGs still wouldn't be struggling to get any kind of audience at all. Even Solasta isn't really taking off even though one can easily argue that it can stand up there with DOS2 and the XCOM games in tactical thinking, largely because the graphics and lack of multiplayer are big stains on it. Things that a low budget cRPG can't have, and cRPGs in general have been inherently lower budget for a while.

The only other cRPG to come close in attention lately are the Pathfinder games, and that's largely because we're now seeing an opposite effect of RTwP being seen as the archaic gameplay format that's in danger of dying out, because DOS2 changed everyone's perceptions so much. Kingmaker also turned out to be an unexpectedly good game in a year where people thought PoE2 would dominate, with a unique premise and more grounded writing than what Larian is famous for. So those enthusiasts are attempting to champion that series to simply keep that style of gameplay alive. As time goes on, DOS2's success is looking more like a flash in the pan or branding thing that's not benefiting the rest of the genre as a whole - if anything, it's potentially done more to benefit jRPGs that are starting to utilize similar ideas to what DOS2 had, like the recently announced Triangle Strategy.

That said, absolutely none of this means that BG3 should be free from criticism though. It's really an irrelevant side topic at the end of the day. If there are flaws that are this noticeable during EA, they're all going to be stressed by the final release if the systems in place remain the same as is. The most contentious topic that I've heard of that existed during DOS2 EA was the armor system, and even the flaws for that did not really become that disruptive to someone like me who came in after the EA period, until it became obvious that it was the primary reason for the massive stat bloat and bosses being designed with rocket tag tendencies towards the second half of the game.

The best one could hope for by final release is that the higher level features and spells somehow swing the mechanical balance of power back towards DnD (which it inherently should, yet it would also depend on the encounter design for the rest of the game as well). But with us unable to test level 5 as is and all communications pointing towards the devs keeping everyone in the dark on this front until final release, one can only guess.

All I can say is that I hope a bunch of people here don't end up with surprised Pikachu faces if height advantage/backstab advantage/shove mechanics end up remaining completely dominant throughout an entire playthrough of a 80+ hour cRPG, and majority opinion on the game's combat starts to sour after release for it because half of the other mechanics are seen as irrelevant in comparison (except for some super niche situations that will undoubtedly be brought up in an attempt to defend the combat design). DOS2 managed to avoid that kind of perception for the most part, because very few base skills in that game really had niche applications, the cheese was actually not very obvious in actual practice, and the cheese wasn't worth the time it took to set up (though a lot of the source skills could have been balanced a lot better, the issues with those were really more about the source cost being tied to them than anything else, especially in regards to Bless). This, when a bunch of people here that are sometimes outright demonized by a certain content creator and the BG3 subreddit have been trying to warn everyone of the long term concerns with those exact systems, for perhaps an entire year or longer beforehand.
Originally Posted by Scribe
If a small indi can implement 5e, then no we didn't need Larian cheese to make the game work.

This is a SP dating sim, based on a DOS mod.

That's it. The team isn't passionate about d&d, they actively look for ways to avoid it!

I have zero hope currently for this game. Modders are the only shot at saving it from just being a flash in the pan meme.
Scribe, you have been warned before for the unconstructive negativity nature of your posts, as well as insulting others. Keep to constructive criticism.
Posted By: Scribe Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 05/04/21 06:57 PM
I insulted nobody. I'll avoid further negativity. smile
Originally Posted by Sadurian
Originally Posted by Scribe
If a small indi can implement 5e, then no we didn't need Larian cheese to make the game work.

This is a SP dating sim, based on a DOS mod.

That's it. The team isn't passionate about d&d, they actively look for ways to avoid it!

I have zero hope currently for this game. Modders are the only shot at saving it from just being a flash in the pan meme.
Scribe, you have been warned before for the unconstructive negativity nature of your posts, as well as insulting others. Keep to constructive criticism.
I sincerely would like some clarification here please. Insulting others should certainly be off the table. But what I have always loved most about this forum is that negative posts about this game and/or Larian have been accepted, and even defended by the mods. Is it new forum policy that negativity about this game and/or Larian is no longer allowed?
Constructive criticism is fine. Occasionally expressing more generalised and unconstructive negative opinions is fine.

However; some posters here feel the need to post almost nothing but unconstructive moans and negativity. This adds nothing to the forums and gives nothing back to the Larian team that they can take onboard for possible changes.

The tone of your posts affects the tone of the forum, and one of the tasks of the moderation team is to maintain a certain atmosphere. If this involves removing a poster's right to post then it will be done.
There was something in Solasta testing that is probably worth bringing up here. Right now, one of the biggest criticisms of the latest period of testing is that magic equipment is far too common, when they were very rare in the earlier phases. But the devs went out and said that they're only this common now for testing purposes, and that they'll be scaled back to their intended rarity in the actual release.

What if the same is happening in BG3 EA? That stuff like barrels and magic arrows/food/thrown flasks are this common because EA is seemingly strictly a testing environment? After all, the rarer something is, the more likely a player will just engage in packrat behavior and just... Not use them at all. If so, we can expect an overall reduction of those in the final game... Hopefully. But if this is the path Larian is going towards, they aren't making that clear at all.

Still, this doesn't really explain things like height/backstab advantage though.
Posted By: gaymer Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 06/04/21 07:47 PM
Originally Posted by Saito Hikari
There was something in Solasta testing that is probably worth bringing up here. Right now, one of the biggest criticisms of the latest period of testing is that magic equipment is far too common, when they were very rare in the earlier phases. But the devs went out and said that they're only this common now for testing purposes, and that they'll be scaled back to their intended rarity in the actual release.

What if the same is happening in BG3 EA? That stuff like barrels and magic arrows/food/thrown flasks are this common because EA is seemingly strictly a testing environment? After all, the rarer something is, the more likely a player will just engage in packrat behavior and just... Not use them at all. If so, we can expect an overall reduction of those in the final game... Hopefully. But if this is the path Larian is going towards, they aren't making that clear at all.

Still, this doesn't really explain things like height/backstab advantage though.

Yeah, no. That might be true for Solasta, but the abundance of scrolls and items has been true for Larian in DOS1 and DOS2. There is always excess and overflow of consumables and impactful items in their games.
Posted By: gaymer Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 06/04/21 07:50 PM
Originally Posted by Scribe
I insulted nobody. I'll avoid further negativity. smile

Dating simulator being used always makes me howl. I think someone else used that, too.
Originally Posted by gaymer
Yeah, no. That might be true for Solasta, but the abundance of scrolls and items has been true for Larian in DOS1 and DOS2. There is always excess and overflow of consumables and impactful items in their games.


Yeah, this is true. The DOS games had an extreme abundance of that, and by having a million scrolls that ANYONE can use, independent on class, you are essentially making player classes feel FAR less special. frown
Posted By: mrfuji3 Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 06/04/21 10:00 PM
Originally Posted by andreasrylander
Originally Posted by gaymer
Yeah, no. That might be true for Solasta, but the abundance of scrolls and items has been true for Larian in DOS1 and DOS2. There is always excess and overflow of consumables and impactful items in their games.
Yeah, this is true. The DOS games had an extreme abundance of that, and by having a million scrolls that ANYONE can use, independent on class, you are essentially making player classes feel FAR less special. frown
No need to worry, this is a Baldur's Gate and not a DOS game!
Posted By: gaymer Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 07/04/21 04:06 AM
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
Originally Posted by andreasrylander
Originally Posted by gaymer
Yeah, no. That might be true for Solasta, but the abundance of scrolls and items has been true for Larian in DOS1 and DOS2. There is always excess and overflow of consumables and impactful items in their games.
Yeah, this is true. The DOS games had an extreme abundance of that, and by having a million scrolls that ANYONE can use, independent on class, you are essentially making player classes feel FAR less special. frown
No need to worry, this is a Baldur's Gate and not a DOS game!

grin grin grin
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
Originally Posted by andreasrylander
Originally Posted by gaymer
Yeah, no. That might be true for Solasta, but the abundance of scrolls and items has been true for Larian in DOS1 and DOS2. There is always excess and overflow of consumables and impactful items in their games.
Yeah, this is true. The DOS games had an extreme abundance of that, and by having a million scrolls that ANYONE can use, independent on class, you are essentially making player classes feel FAR less special. frown
No need to worry, this is a Baldur's Gate and not a DOS game!
But that's exactly the problem here, isn't it? Despite being a D&D Baldur's Gate game, it is all about annoying cheesy gimmicks from the D:OS games.
Originally Posted by Saito Hikari
There was something in Solasta testing that is probably worth bringing up here. Right now, one of the biggest criticisms of the latest period of testing is that magic equipment is far too common, when they were very rare in the earlier phases. But the devs went out and said that they're only this common now for testing purposes, and that they'll be scaled back to their intended rarity in the actual release.

What if the same is happening in BG3 EA? That stuff like barrels and magic arrows/food/thrown flasks are this common because EA is seemingly strictly a testing environment? After all, the rarer something is, the more likely a player will just engage in packrat behavior and just... Not use them at all. If so, we can expect an overall reduction of those in the final game... Hopefully. But if this is the path Larian is going towards, they aren't making that clear at all.

Still, this doesn't really explain things like height/backstab advantage though.

I've had that thought / held out that hope myself. But isn't consistent with the communications. While I don't have the patience to go through the panel from hell and find time stamps but you watch the panel you find Sven expressing annoyance at the DnD ruleset on multiple occasions. At one point he complains about the concession we got -- the removal of surfaces from cantrips. The statement was kinda weird and possibly revealing -- "and now I can't do that anymore since they removed surfaces from cantrips" At the time I remember thinking "they"? Aren't you "they"?

So I hold out hope that we are seeing test balloons but I think the answer to "can these be changed" will depend on how much control the CEO has over the creative process and if any of these new hires are fans of the 5th ed ruleset.\

Now to confuse matters some. I have ambivalent feelings -- there are somethings I like about Larian's vision and some things I do not. I'm annoyed at the DOS combat and the breaking of the action economy but I am also happy that Larian got the project because I agree with them on two important issues: alignment and magic items. Alignment is just fun to play and I like finding magical items. "Let's see what the boss dropped" is just fun.

I ended ToB with something like 3 scroll boxes and two potion bags full of unused potions. I had enough spare weapons to arm a legion.

TL;DR --An abundance of scrolls won't threaten the game's status as successor to Baldurs Gate 2. The deviations from the ruleset will. I hope that the cheese tactics are test balloons but it's getting harder to hold onto that hope.
Adding to my large tangent above after giving it some thought...

I actually feel like Larian has been taking the wrong lessons from the success of their DOS games. They perhaps believe that the potential for cheesiness is the primary reason why those games became successful, when most people would actually argue that the DOS games were successful despite that. In actual practicality, the overall design of the cheese in DOS was rather insignificant in comparison to what you could already do with your core skills in those games.

Indeed, the community attitude to the same types of cheese mechanics in DOS is mostly just a 'neat, it's nice that we can do this', and then people go on with their day afterwards. People in the DOS communities generally don't have a weird sense of pride in abusing them like some people have done in the BG3 subreddit, besides maybe stacking a bunch of barrels at the bridge troll, because that troll deserves it and killing it early into Act 2 like 4-5 levels earlier than intended is a massive chunk of EXP. They're not treated as the only viable options in those games, because what matters a lot more is how you use your base skills, because the environmental design actually doesn't point at a cheese solution at every possible opportunity it gets. Some may actually find it almost insulting if Larian actually does genuinely believe that the DOS games are purely defined by the potential for cheese, because turn-based enthusiasts are much more sophisticated than just wanting explosions and finding ways to bend the rules. Indeed, I believe the DOS games are more defined by how the skills interact with the environment, not by how much of the rules I can bend and outright ignore.

The balance of the homebrew in BG3 has veered way too far from 'environmental interaction' into straight up 'bending/ignoring the normal rules', and that's what makes them so contentious. Stressing the cheese so much in BG3 to the point of making it really obvious that entire encounters are designed and balanced around them has only resulted in diminishing the viability of everything else. Which is to say that inserting fringe mechanics from DOS into a DnD environment has exposed how low level DnD at its core is either a much more imbalanced experience than DOS, or lower level DnD is a lot more grounded in tactical variety and can't really hope to compare with the DOS mechanics until maybe past level 5. That's when we actually get double attack and spells that might be able to actually compete with the cheese in overall viability.
Posted By: Zenith Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 07/04/21 10:31 PM
Originally Posted by Saito Hikari
Adding to my large tangent above after giving it some thought...

I actually feel like Larian has been taking the wrong lessons from the success of their DOS games. They perhaps believe that the potential for cheesiness is the primary reason why those games became successful, when most people would actually argue that the DOS games were successful despite that. In actual practicality, the overall design of the cheese in DOS was rather insignificant in comparison to what you could already do with your core skills in those games.

Indeed, the community attitude to the same types of cheese mechanics in DOS is mostly just a 'neat, it's nice that we can do this', and then people go on with their day afterwards. People in the DOS communities generally don't have a weird sense of pride in abusing them like some people have done in the BG3 subreddit, besides maybe stacking a bunch of barrels at the bridge troll, because that troll deserves it and killing it early into Act 2 like 4-5 levels earlier than intended is a massive chunk of EXP. They're not treated as the only viable options in those games, because what matters a lot more is how you use your base skills, because the environmental design actually doesn't point at a cheese solution at every possible opportunity it gets. Some may actually find it almost insulting if Larian actually does genuinely believe that the DOS games are purely defined by the potential for cheese, because turn-based enthusiasts are much more sophisticated than just wanting explosions and finding ways to bend the rules. Indeed, I believe the DOS games are more defined by how the skills interact with the environment, not by how much of the rules I can bend and outright ignore.

The balance of the homebrew in BG3 has veered way too far from 'environmental interaction' into straight up 'bending/ignoring the normal rules', and that's what makes them so contentious. Stressing the cheese so much in BG3 to the point of making it really obvious that entire encounters are designed and balanced around them has only resulted in diminishing the viability of everything else. Which is to say that inserting fringe mechanics from DOS into a DnD environment has exposed how low level DnD at its core is either a much more imbalanced experience than DOS, or lower level DnD is a lot more grounded in tactical variety and can't really hope to compare with the DOS mechanics until maybe past level 5. That's when we actually get double attack and spells that might be able to actually compete with the cheese in overall viability.


The argument can be made that in DOS, the cheese can be marginalized because the base class kits are strong and reliable. In BG3, with the additional restriction of a single action per turn, hit % modified by several terrain and spell factors, on top of the concentration system makes you feel like an absolute wimp unless you play a fighter/rogue or rely on certain spell+magic item combos to not be completely awful (Wizard would be hot trash in EA if it didn't have access to Magic Missiles+Sapphire Spark necklace; the Wizard cantrip spells in particular are awful). Moreover, racial power differences were not as wide as wood elf/general elf/shield dwarf and the rest of the races. I could pick any race in DOS2 and not feel significantly gimped as I do playing a Tiefling druid or Tiefling Wizard compared to an elf/shield dwarf. The gap in racial power is humongous.

If you don't make use of the Sunwalker's Ring in the Underdark with your human casters, they essentially gimp themselves horribly by having to use up their concentration spell to make up the deficit, missing out on the Hex bonus damage and attack/save roll debuff, or CC capacity with any of the CC spells that require concentration.

I didn't have to cheese in DOS2 because I never felt like wet toilet paper in DOS2 if I was playing a certain class. All classes felt powerful from the early game and we didn't have this asinine power curve concept where "your character sucks at XYZ levels throughout the game". That never makes for a good experience. You want your class to feel good at all points of the game, not just some.
I'd argue the cheese just fits DoS. It's built with it in mind, it's a main mechanic of the setting. Everything covered in future is the standard and everything constantly escalates.

But dnd is meant to be more tame, ramping up more slowly and with less extremes. If everything is on fire, you are either doing tomb of horrors and are going to die, or you really messed up with a fireball.
Posted By: gaymer Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 08/04/21 07:36 AM
The main issue is that DOS realm is Larian-originated and no one has anything to compare it to. They had 100% control and IP over what they did and built what they wanted to build. As shown by numerous videos and streams from them over the years, the personalities that work there seem very jovial and playful.

They crammed a lot into DOS, sometimes too much, at the expense of losing some of the cohesion. The adage Less Is More does not really exist for their way of thinking.

With BG3, it is based on an exist set of rules which are very restrictive and defined. There is a little room for some homebrew, but I think the conflict comes because Swen always talks about how he has to sometimes curve ideas because they go down rabbit holes often wanting to add, change, and experiment with things.

As Saito Hikaru has said before, they are serving two masters. There is a part of the player base who wants almost pure DnD 5e rules. There is a part of the player base who does not want dice rolls, hates all the RNG, hates the restriction of some of the 5e confinement.

So they are never going to make everyone happy with whatever they do. I can only hope there is a lot of things in the Options menu to turn certain things on/off and it be a one-time thing at the beginning of the game that does not toggle.

If Story Mode or whatever wants no-effort advantage and all of that, cool.

But whatever Larian will call Tactician should definitely not have a lot of the stuff placed in EA.
Well, I don't think the argument really is as simple as 'DnD VS DOS style'. From my own point of view, I'm only really arguing as such not because I may be a purist (I'm actually not), but because the changes Larian actually did implement basically interact with each other in a way that has resulted in a massive feedback loop undermining all of the core DnD mechanics.

And it seems people are waking up to this. Even the BG3 subreddit today had someone come out saying that BG3 doesn't have to be like DnD, and it instead resulted in a ton of detractors coming out in droves to say that they kind of agree, but they also weren't really trying to say that they actually want it to be a strict interpretation of DnD to begin with, they only take issue with the specific changes that Larian made for very valid reasons that can't be summed up as 'lol purist' at all and would be a problem in ANY tactical turn based game. It is actually making me think that majority opinion on the game's combat design is shifting, and I think part of it is that people are starting to think a lot more about it with each subsequent playthrough they make.

And again, if that many people feel this strongly about it now, imagine this spread out into an 80+ hour game at official launch.

https://old.reddit.com/r/BaldursGate3/comments/mmd1ms/baldurs_gate_3_shouldnt_be_exactly_like_dd_5e/

If people haven't figured it out by now, I am the user 'Alilatias' on Reddit. And I will repost something I said from there that fully encapsulates my thoughts on Larian's changes. For the past few months, I felt there was something off, but I never really understood why I felt that way until it came to me while reading those comments today.

Part of it is that [the mechanics] also inherently work to mitigate or outright ignore the RNG as much as possible - choosing not to use them means you're dealing with an exercise in frustration in comparison, and the RNG may be balanced the way it is purely because of those mechanics existing to begin with. So instead of trying to come up with changes to make the combat in general more interesting from a tactical standpoint or the RNG less frustrating, they came up with systems that basically tell you to utilize them, or else you'll be punished by facing more severe versions of the absolute worst aspects of the base DnD mechanics, precisely due to how the changes work (like damaging field effects not allowing you to roll a saving throw to avoid them, which cascades into triggering concentration checks, of which stuff like height/backstab advantage makes concentration spells like Faerie Fire inherently worthless in most situations already).
Originally Posted by andreasrylander
I am focusing on what they are doing and giving feedback accordingly. You are the one hellbent on using ad hominems, so I have no interests in your input anymore. So consider the "convo" very ended indeed.

Addendum: I still wish you well. I am not as angry with you as you probably imagine I am. I just don't have the energy these days to deal with drama and conflict, and so for that reason I am putting you on ignore so I can just focus on posts that have to do with this game.

Just wanted to say you were totally the dick in this conversation. The guy even specifically said he wasn't directing what he said specifically at you and you went nuts. I agree with their point that there seems to be a lot of entitlement in these forums. People seem to think the game needs to be exactly how they want it and complain about stuff they could avoid by not using it.
I really don't know how Larian could deal with this grin

https://ibb.co/5GByJ9R

Just a joke, the reality is way more nuanced as Saito explained very well (here and on reddit).

There's only a few players that want a 100% D&D game.
There's only a few that wants something totally different.

Many just want a good tactical TB game in which you have many meaningfull choices and possibilities.
A better balance between D&D/Larian's homebrew is all we need.
Posted By: Rack Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 08/04/21 12:30 PM
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
I really don't know how Larian could deal with this grin

https://ibb.co/5GByJ9R

Just a joke, the reality is way more nuanced as Saito explained very well (here and on reddit).

There's only a few players that want a 100% D&D game.
There's only a few that wants something totally different.

Many just want a good tactical TB game in which you have many meaningfull choices and possibilities.
A better balance between D&D/Larian's homebrew is all we need.

I think that's one of the purposes of early access and something we can expect to see, we just can't expect to see it quickly. It's not like Larian want a wildly imbalanced shallow game either so the question is going to be how they will strike that balance and how successful they will be. Unfortunately Larian have kind of settled on the "not communicating at all" style of communication so really we're going to have to be very patient.
Originally Posted by wellgoodmorning
Originally Posted by andreasrylander
I am focusing on what they are doing and giving feedback accordingly. You are the one hellbent on using ad hominems, so I have no interests in your input anymore. So consider the "convo" very ended indeed.

Addendum: I still wish you well. I am not as angry with you as you probably imagine I am. I just don't have the energy these days to deal with drama and conflict, and so for that reason I am putting you on ignore so I can just focus on posts that have to do with this game.

Just wanted to say you were totally the dick in this conversation. The guy even specifically said he wasn't directing what he said specifically at you and you went nuts. I agree with their point that there seems to be a lot of entitlement in these forums. People seem to think the game needs to be exactly how they want it and complain about stuff they could avoid by not using it.


Please refrain from personal attacks, ad hominems and insults. Why even attack me? Why write a specific post with no other content than to attack another person on the forums? A person you do not know? Rude. Very rude. I hope you get a warning for that. I am pretty sure this kind of behaviour is not OK in these forums. If you keep harassing me, I will put you on ignore aswell.
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
I really don't know how Larian could deal with this grin

https://ibb.co/5GByJ9R

Just a joke, the reality is way more nuanced as Saito explained very well (here and on reddit).

There's only a few players that want a 100% D&D game.
There's only a few that wants something totally different.

Many just want a good tactical TB game in which you have many meaningfull choices and possibilities.
A better balance between D&D/Larian's homebrew is all we need.


I think most are completely OK with the game not being 100% DND, but I think that if you've made the choice to base the game on DND rules, set in Forgotten Realms, it's kind of weird to then not use the system you are supposed to use and market that you use? Now, obviously, Larian *DOES* use the DND rules to a large extent, and I don't think most people mind homebrewing, myself included. It's just that so far I think the majority of those who are not satisfied are merely such because the homebrewing isn't really done well so far. Or not well enough. In many instances the Larian homebrewing is either making things unbalanced, or they give too many options, while in other cases they give too few options. Things could certainly be finetuned, changed, added and fixed so far.

But hey; that's why we're in EA! =)
Just a reminder that this forum is not the place for attacks and insults. If that's the style of argument you are looking for then the internet has many sites to cater for your tastes.

This includes, by the way, snarky little digs and snotty little comments designed to rile other people. The moderation team are not stupid and we can usually spot when you are being insulting or dismissive but trying to be subtle about it.

If you think you are being insulted or have any other issues with a post then Report it. Let the moderation team deal with it.
Thanks! smile
Posted By: gaymer Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 08/04/21 03:37 PM
Originally Posted by Rack
Unfortunately Larian have kind of settled on the "not communicating at all" style of communication so really we're going to have to be very patient.

I also think this is a major contributor to the unrest on here and Reddit. No one knows what is going on at all.
Originally Posted by gaymer
Originally Posted by Rack
Unfortunately Larian have kind of settled on the "not communicating at all" ......

I also think this is a major contributor to the unrest on here and Reddit. No one knows what is going on at all.

I do agree with this! I get that it is bloody hard to communicate everything when you are making a game and they have plenty things on their minds, but as of now it feels like we only get occational glimpses every now and then in interviews or their videos.

It would be lovely if they could have a Q&A or something where they state what they have been reading and where, what their thoughts are and basically what is unnecessary for us to communicate or not. I am sure they do have some things they refuse to change and it would be nice to know about those. Also what they feel is possible or not to implement.
Originally Posted by andreasrylander
Originally Posted by gaymer
Originally Posted by Rack
Unfortunately Larian have kind of settled on the "not communicating at all" ......

I also think this is a major contributor to the unrest on here and Reddit. No one knows what is going on at all.

I do agree with this! I get that it is bloody hard to communicate everything when you are making a game and they have plenty things on their minds, but as of now it feels like we only get occational glimpses every now and then in interviews or their videos.

It would be lovely if they could have a Q&A or something where they state what they have been reading and where, what their thoughts are and basically what is unnecessary for us to communicate or not. I am sure they do have some things they refuse to change and it would be nice to know about those. Also what they feel is possible or not to implement.

I do not expect there will be any direct exchange of views. Unlike a small indy with a tightly focussed target audience ( e.g. the Solasta dev team ), Larian are now a well-known studio, making a game with a broad audience, and need to balance the views of their entire player base.

With 1 Million+ EA players, even the subset that hang out on forums is too large to engage with directly, and inevitably will contain a cohort of toxic players that would be counter-productive to communicate directly with.

If I were Larian. I would do exactly as they are doing. Solicit information from any sources that they can ( including actual player behaviour that they obtain from the game ), assess overall sentiment and adjust where necessary.

It would be interesting if they were to offer another AMA, because at least they can prepare their position for expected questions, and not need to engage in a potentially hostile two-way exchange.

However, it would be incorrect to think that they are not listening, because thay do attempt to put forward their position in their videos. The whole reason behind Jeremy C's appearance on Panel From Hell 2 was to have him sanction changes to the 5e desktop rules for a product that is not desktop-based ( if you didn't understand this "sub-text" in the video, you should watch it again ). This is not a revelation, WotC have said it before, and even their own digital products are not 5e compliant.
I completely understood the "sub-text". I still have hopes they will communicate more and better with us so we can find out what they might be listening more or less to. What concepts are set in stone and which ones aren't. Some pointers at least. Also with some luck, they might change their position on some of their homebrewing.
Posted By: Sordak Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 12/04/21 12:53 PM
Good.
You know what? larian cheese is good.

If you played any older DnD editions youd probably run into very much the same stuff.
"Im gonna flood the dungeon"
"Im going to set everything on fire"
"I use a ten foot pole to inspect EVERY SINGLE FLOOR TILE IN THE DUNGEON"

I cannot understand how this is "not DnD" to you. What is DnD? Just playing the rules with no roleplay and no trying to gain an upper hand? DnD doesnt play like that.
it never did.
Hell i remember two years ago everyone as PSYCHED about Goblin Slayer and how cool it was that the characters in that series improvised like an actual DnD party instead of just running up tot he monsters and beating them up.
And now its suddenly bad because larian is doing it?

And im not even going into the absolute cheese you could do in the infinity engine with absoluteley rule breaking stuff like kiting
Originally Posted by Sordak
Good.
You know what? larian cheese is good.

If you played any older DnD editions youd probably run into very much the same stuff.
"Im gonna flood the dungeon"
"Im going to set everything on fire"
"I use a ten foot pole to inspect EVERY SINGLE FLOOR TILE IN THE DUNGEON"

I cannot understand how this is "not DnD" to you. What is DnD? Just playing the rules with no roleplay and no trying to gain an upper hand? DnD doesnt play like that.
it never did.
Hell i remember two years ago everyone as PSYCHED about Goblin Slayer and how cool it was that the characters in that series improvised like an actual DnD party instead of just running up tot he monsters and beating them up.
And now its suddenly bad because larian is doing it?

And im not even going into the absolute cheese you could do in the infinity engine with absoluteley rule breaking stuff like kiting

Welcome back Sordak.
Looks like you missed a lot of discussions because your exemples are not at all what's usually considered as "cheese" in BG3.

Kitting and cloud / fog of war abuse are exploit of the system, not the basics of the system.
Posted By: Sordak Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 12/04/21 01:24 PM
well it doesnt realy matter if they were the basics of the system if they were basic in actual gameplay does it now?
Entire genres were defined by "exploits"
Originally Posted by Sordak
well it doesnt realy matter if they were the basics of the system if they were basic in actual gameplay does it now?
Entire genres were defined by "exploits"

It doesn't really matter if everyone can choose to exploit the game or not.
It's not really what it's about here.
Posted By: Sordak Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 12/04/21 01:53 PM
so what is "larian cheese" according to the new state of discussion
Originally Posted by Sordak
Good.
You know what? larian cheese is good.

If you played any older DnD editions youd probably run into very much the same stuff.
"Im gonna flood the dungeon"
"Im going to set everything on fire"
"I use a ten foot pole to inspect EVERY SINGLE FLOOR TILE IN THE DUNGEON"

I cannot understand how this is "not DnD" to you. What is DnD? Just playing the rules with no roleplay and no trying to gain an upper hand? DnD doesnt play like that.
it never did.
Hell i remember two years ago everyone as PSYCHED about Goblin Slayer and how cool it was that the characters in that series improvised like an actual DnD party instead of just running up tot he monsters and beating them up.
And now its suddenly bad because larian is doing it?

And im not even going into the absolute cheese you could do in the infinity engine with absoluteley rule breaking stuff like kiting


Is it DnD for players to be able to jump clear over the head of the enemy he has engaged to land behind him, and as the enemy watches you helplessly (due to it being turn based and it's not his turn to move) as you stab him in the back?

Is it DnD to be able to go invisible and then push an enemy that is twice your height and weight to his death with 100% chance of success?

Is it DnD for a character with 17 STR to be able to pick up an enemy, with perfect acquiescence from the latter, and then hurl him clear across the room? Mind you, the enemy cannot even do anything to stop you from lifting him up. Is this how DnD is played?

Is it DnD for low level goblins to shoot fire arrows that, even when they miss you, light the ground beneath you on fire and do guaranteed unavoidable 2D4 damage?
Posted By: Sordak Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 12/04/21 02:18 PM
>Is it DnD for players to be able to jump clear over the head of the enemy he has engaged to land behind him, and as the enemy watches you helplessly (due to it being turn based and it's not his turn to move) as you stab him in the back?

Yes, DnD is also turn based. you can do both of these things in DnD. Tho the first one is probably a difficult acrobatics check that either lets you land on your face or get an opportunity attack, but its still something you absoluteley can do with the apropriate skillset.

>Is it DnD to be able to go invisible and then push an enemy that is twice your height and weight to his death with 100% chance of success?

i dont know where you get the 100% chance of success but tripping a troll of a bridge probably happens in every second campaign.

>Is it DnD for a character with 17 STR to be able to pick up an enemy, with perfect acquiescence from the latter, and then hurl him clear across the room? Mind you, the enemy cannot even do anything to stop you from lifting him up. Is this how DnD is played?

a character with 17 STR is jacked as shit, have you never watched wrestling as a kid? or done Judo?

>Is it DnD for low level goblins to shoot fire arrows that, even when they miss you, light the ground beneath you on fire and do guaranteed unavoidable 2D4 damage?

onward to my goblin Slayer example.
Dont roll the dice, play smart. sounds pretty much in line with that.


I dont have much time right now to dedicate to play Baldurs Gate 3 or any video games for that matter. So id like some concrete examples how to get to those outlandish situations.
Originally Posted by Sordak
>Is it DnD for players to be able to jump clear over the head of the enemy he has engaged to land behind him, and as the enemy watches you helplessly (due to it being turn based and it's not his turn to move) as you stab him in the back?

Yes, DnD is also turn based. you can do both of these things in DnD. Tho the first one is probably a difficult acrobatics check that either lets you land on your face or get an opportunity attack, but its still something you absoluteley can do with the apropriate skillset.

In BG3, EVERYONE can do this. Is it still DnD?

Originally Posted by Sordak
>Is it DnD to be able to go invisible and then push an enemy that is twice your height and weight to his death with 100% chance of success?

i dont know where you get the 100% chance of success but tripping a troll of a bridge probably happens in every second campaign.

This game makes your Shove 100% success if you're invisible. Is this DnD?

Originally Posted by Sordak
>Is it DnD for a character with 17 STR to be able to pick up an enemy, with perfect acquiescence from the latter, and then hurl him clear across the room? Mind you, the enemy cannot even do anything to stop you from lifting him up. Is this how DnD is played?

a character with 17 STR is jacked as shit, have you never watched wrestling as a kid? or done Judo?

So, in DnD, you don't even have to roll a check to pick up an enemy and hurl him 18 metres away? All it takes is 17 STR and the desire to throw the enemy?

Originally Posted by Sordak
>Is it DnD for low level goblins to shoot fire arrows that, even when they miss you, light the ground beneath you on fire and do guaranteed unavoidable 2D4 damage?

onward to my goblin Slayer example.
Dont roll the dice, play smart. sounds pretty much in line with that.

You don't get a choice in the matter. If a goblin with a fire arrow wishes to set your ground on fire and do guaranteed 2D4 damage to you, he automatically succeeds. Is this DnD?

Originally Posted by Sordak
I dont have much time right now to dedicate to play Baldurs Gate 3 or any video games for that matter. So id like some concrete examples how to get to those outlandish situations.

You can do and see all the above in BG3. These aren't examples I pulled out of thin air.

Edited to fix the formatting.
Originally Posted by Sordak
I dont have much time right now to dedicate to play Baldurs Gate 3 or any video games for that matter. So id like some concrete examples how to get to those outlandish situations.

Whatever it is D&D or not, those "cheese" have a huge impact on combats and our valuable choices.
Here's a few exemples.

- Jump/disengage = ennemies don't ever have any AOO and their melee haven't any control on the battlefield.
- Backstab = easy advantages leading to many useless spells/features/(bonus) action.
- Backstab = huge bonus over the AI
- Highground = easy advantage leading to many useless spells/features/(bonus) action.
- Highground = easy disadvantages for your ennemies. Combined with the advantage it's a god mode.
- Surfaces created by items break your concentration way too often (and if you dodge the arrow, the fire will still spread and break your concentration)
- Eating pig head in combats as a bonus action (looks ridiculous and) heal more HP than healing potion
- Dipping your sword in candle (looks ridiculous and) give players free additionnal damages over the AI.
- Shoving is so easy and OP that it's like an "instant win button" rather than a tactical choice.

There are real balance issues in the game and many choices (i.e faery fire) become bad choices because of those easy/cheesy mechanics.

Your class / party composition / "skills" / or your D&D knowledge doesn't really matter.
Synergies between classes doesn't really exist and as soon as you know BG3's basics you're gonna play the same over and over again because this is how devs "wants" you to play.
Originally Posted by Sordak
>Is it DnD for players to be able to jump clear over the head of the enemy he has engaged to land behind him, and as the enemy watches you helplessly (due to it being turn based and it's not his turn to move) as you stab him in the back?

Yes, DnD is also turn based. you can do both of these things in DnD. Tho the first one is probably a difficult acrobatics check that either lets you land on your face or get an opportunity attack, but its still something you absoluteley can do with the apropriate skillset.
It takes two attackers to get the flanking bonus though. So jumping over someone in a 1v1 situation wouldn't benefit you in any way, unless there was a ledge behind you and you become the shover instead of the shovee.
Posted By: mrfuji3 Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 12/04/21 03:42 PM
Originally Posted by 1varangian
Originally Posted by Sordak
>Is it DnD for players to be able to jump clear over the head of the enemy he has engaged to land behind him, and as the enemy watches you helplessly (due to it being turn based and it's not his turn to move) as you stab him in the back?

Yes, DnD is also turn based. you can do both of these things in DnD. Tho the first one is probably a difficult acrobatics check that either lets you land on your face or get an opportunity attack, but its still something you absoluteley can do with the apropriate skillset.
It takes two attackers to get the flanking bonus though. So jumping over someone in a 1v1 situation wouldn't benefit you in any way, unless there was a ledge behind you and you become the shover instead of the shovee.
Honestly, if a rogue in my party asked to flip over an enemy and make a strike at their unprotected back, I'd probably allow it...with a DC ~25-30 acrobatics check (maybe 20+enemy CR+enemy Acrobatics bonus?).

That's the important part: it'd require a very difficult check. And failure would mean the enemy gets an AoO against the rogue, probably after the rogue trips over the enemy and lands prone. I wouldn't allow the rogue (let alone a fighter in heavy armor) to get a guaranteed backstab for free.
The issue is that these things aren't base part of dnd rules, they'd be things you would ask your dm to do using some stat or specific situation. And most of the time these things could fail like the aforementioned rogue flipping. But BG3 doesn't give any of these a fail, they are all autosuccesses with big advantages that shove the other rules out, which DnD combat was constructed around those rules. OAs are very important, and being able to disengage for a bonus action is super rare. But these changes, the cheese, makes it common and easy to ignore 5es core and play the game too similar to DoS.
Posted By: fylimar Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 12/04/21 05:07 PM
I was about to say the same thing as CJMPinger. I have mos texperience with D&D 3e but I doubt, that has changed. You can try those things, but there is a skill check and often a compelmenting skill check from the opponent and dice luck involved.
Posted By: JJRX5 Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 12/04/21 05:34 PM
I am ok with the cheese because I understand that some people will want to play the game that way. I may occasionally shove and seek high ground, but I would prefer if the events that allow for those types of tactics were rare and special. What I do not want is for the game to be balanced around having to use cheese tactics to beat a battle. I would hate it if a dev looked at a battle and said to themselves, “we will make this battle near impossible, but if the player goes invisible and drops 6 barrels he can defeat this op boss.” Please balance assuming the player will only use their class abilities.

I want to feel like I am growing as a character. I want to use my abilities and experience the differentiation offered by each class. I don’t want to feel like my most powerful ability is to pick up an enemy and toss him into a pit. My 2 cents.
Originally Posted by Passerby
Originally Posted by Sordak
Good.
You know what? larian cheese is good.

If you played any older DnD editions youd probably run into very much the same stuff.
"Im gonna flood the dungeon"
"Im going to set everything on fire"
"I use a ten foot pole to inspect EVERY SINGLE FLOOR TILE IN THE DUNGEON"

I cannot understand how this is "not DnD" to you. What is DnD? Just playing the rules with no roleplay and no trying to gain an upper hand? DnD doesnt play like that.
it never did.
Hell i remember two years ago everyone as PSYCHED about Goblin Slayer and how cool it was that the characters in that series improvised like an actual DnD party instead of just running up tot he monsters and beating them up.
And now its suddenly bad because larian is doing it?

And im not even going into the absolute cheese you could do in the infinity engine with absoluteley rule breaking stuff like kiting


Is it DnD for players to be able to jump clear over the head of the enemy he has engaged to land behind him, and as the enemy watches you helplessly (due to it being turn based and it's not his turn to move) as you stab him in the back?

Is it DnD to be able to go invisible and then push an enemy that is twice your height and weight to his death with 100% chance of success?

Is it DnD for a character with 17 STR to be able to pick up an enemy, with perfect acquiescence from the latter, and then hurl him clear across the room? Mind you, the enemy cannot even do anything to stop you from lifting him up. Is this how DnD is played?

Is it DnD for low level goblins to shoot fire arrows that, even when they miss you, light the ground beneath you on fire and do guaranteed unavoidable 2D4 damage?
Perfectly stated, @Passerby. A huge +1.
Originally Posted by Sordak
so what is "larian cheese" according to the new state of discussion

There are two layers of cheese in this game, I find. It would probably help to split everything between those two.

Cheese baked into non-core mechanics (largely optional and can be ignored, though there may be problems with enemies being balanced around the idea of being able to exploit some of them against you):
- Barrels
- Food healing
- Dipping
- Healing another character by throwing a potion at them (almost indistinguishable from the role of a Healing Word spell)
- Shove 100% success rate when invisible
- 'Time Bubble' effect where a player character engaged in combat can purposefully stall their turn, to allow stealthed party members currently considered out of combat to sneak around and alter the battlefield conditions as they wish, and insert themselves into a fight whenever they want (arguable, some encounters are difficult enough that it feels like they're balanced around the idea that you'll be doing this exact thing, which would shove this into the bottom category)

Cheese baked into core mechanics (which I personally find to be FAR more problematic as a player simply CANNOT ignore them, due to how the majority of encounters appear to be balanced around their existence):
- Height advantage (and the simultaneous disadvantage to enemies)
- Backstab advantage
- Jump and Disengage being coupled together, and Disengage being a bonus action
- Shove bonus action
- Field Effects (arguable, I only place this here based on the fact that damaging field effects have no saving throw against them and will force a character to roll for concentration twice for the same attack, for the initial attack and then for the field effect. A DM in tabletop DnD will never do this to you, anything similar there will just combine the damage together and force you to make one roll. Fix that, and this can be thrown into the upper category instead.)

Most complaints generally center around the bottom category. Fix those, and the upper category would in theory suddenly become a lot less problematic.

On the topic of field effects in general, I just realized that the vast majority of Paladin's spells require concentration. If field effects remain the same as they are, we're going to have a lot of angry Paladin players in the future talking about how much harder it is to actually get any mileage out of their spells in BG3 due to factors completely out of their control, with no real counter besides counter cheesing so that there's less enemies around (if any) that can do something unavoidable. But at that point, it may not even be worth using those concentration spells to begin with...
Originally Posted by Saito Hikari
There are two layers of cheese in this game, I find. It would probably help to split everything between those two.

Cheese baked into non-core mechanics (largely optional and can be ignored, though there may be problems with enemies being balanced around the idea of being able to exploit some of them against you):
- Barrels
- Food healing
- Dipping
- Healing another character by throwing a potion at them (almost indistinguishable from the role of a Healing Word spell)

Cheese baked into core mechanics (which I personally find to be FAR more problematic as a player simply CANNOT ignore them, due to how the majority of encounters appear to be balanced around their existence):
- Height advantage (and the simultaneous disadvantage to enemies)
- Backstab advantage
- Jump and Disengage being coupled together, and Disengage being a bonus action
- Shove bonus action
- Field Effects (arguable, I only place this here based on the fact that damaging field effects have no saving throw against them and will force a character to roll for concentration twice for the same attack, for the initial attack and then for the field effect. A DM in tabletop DnD will never do this to you, anything similar there will just combine the damage together and force you to make one roll. Fix that, and this can be thrown into the upper category instead.)

Most complaints generally center around the bottom category. Fix those, and the upper category would in theory suddenly become a lot less problematic.

I agree with most of what you've stated here, and how you've stated, except for Dipping. I'd stick Dipping into the problematic category, because of the impact it has on damage at early levels, and the fact that it can be done, with a candle. If it were a scenario, where you had alchemists fire, and "dipped" a blade in it to cause it to light, using up the alchemist's fire and an action to dip, then it would add a cost that would balance out the benefit.

As it is now, if you are within range of anything alight, it's a no brainer to dip.
Originally Posted by Grudgebearer
I agree with most of what you've stated here, and how you've stated, except for Dipping. I'd stick Dipping into the problematic category, because of the impact it has on damage at early levels, and the fact that it can be done, with a candle. If it were a scenario, where you had alchemists fire, and "dipped" a blade in it to cause it to light, using up the alchemist's fire and an action to dip, then it would add a cost that would balance out the benefit.

As it is now, if you are within range of anything alight, it's a no brainer to dip.

True, but you can just not dip, which is why I consider it a non-core mechanic. All you gain are some damage points. That said, it's a lot of extra damage points at low level, but it doesn't force you to formulate your tactics around its existence like everything in the bottom category does.

Defenders of the current system like to argue that you can just simply ignore the cheese. That argument immediately falls apart when you simply rub two brain cells together and realize there is no way to play where you can ignore using height advantage and disadvantage, because you'll be affected by one or the other in most given situations no matter what. There's a huge difference between ignoring an option, and having to go out of your way to avoid a mechanic entirely.
Posted By: Ankou Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 12/04/21 07:01 PM
Originally Posted by Saito Hikari
Originally Posted by Grudgebearer
I agree with most of what you've stated here, and how you've stated, except for Dipping. I'd stick Dipping into the problematic category, because of the impact it has on damage at early levels, and the fact that it can be done, with a candle. If it were a scenario, where you had alchemists fire, and "dipped" a blade in it to cause it to light, using up the alchemist's fire and an action to dip, then it would add a cost that would balance out the benefit.

As it is now, if you are within range of anything alight, it's a no brainer to dip.

True, but you can just not dip, which is why I consider it a non-core mechanic. All you gain are some damage points. That said, it's a lot of extra damage points at low level, but it doesn't force you to formulate your tactics around its existence like everything in the bottom category does.

Defenders of the current system like to argue that you can just simply ignore the cheese. That argument immediately falls apart when you simply rub two brain cells together and realize there is no way to play where you can ignore using height advantage and disadvantage, because you'll be affected by one or the other in most given situations no matter what. There's a huge difference between ignoring an option, and having to go out of your way to avoid a mechanic entirely.
Right, the enemy AI seems to have it cooked in that they at minimum will seek the high ground. To at least remain on even footing, figuratively and literally, you therefore have to try to do it too not be disadvantaged at worst.
Originally Posted by Saito Hikari
Originally Posted by Grudgebearer
I agree with most of what you've stated here, and how you've stated, except for Dipping. I'd stick Dipping into the problematic category, because of the impact it has on damage at early levels, and the fact that it can be done, with a candle. If it were a scenario, where you had alchemists fire, and "dipped" a blade in it to cause it to light, using up the alchemist's fire and an action to dip, then it would add a cost that would balance out the benefit.

As it is now, if you are within range of anything alight, it's a no brainer to dip.

True, but you can just not dip, which is why I consider it a non-core mechanic. All you gain are some damage points. That said, it's a lot of extra damage points at low level, but it doesn't force you to formulate your tactics around its existence like everything in the bottom category does.

Defenders of the current system like to argue that you can just simply ignore the cheese. That argument immediately falls apart when you simply rub two brain cells together and realize there is no way to play where you can ignore using height advantage and disadvantage, because you'll be affected by one or the other in most given situations no matter what. There's a huge difference between ignoring an option, and having to go out of your way to avoid a mechanic entirely.

I can't be sure but honneslty the difficulty of a few encounters let me think that the game is also balanced for you to use it a lot.
Can't say for higher levels but +2D4 (weapons) + 1D4/turn (burning) is a lot of damages. These additionnals damages are the difference between one/two/three (depending the opponents) more or less turn.
If you're playing the game with this mechanic even the hardest encounters are way easier and our weapons are way more effective than those of our ennemies.

You can also avoid shoving. The buttons are right next one of each other.

I never used it on normal playtrough because highground/backstab/jump+disengage are more than enough to beat the game easily but in a solo playthrough you really realize how powerfull it is.
Without dipping I think it would way harder. A lot of solo playthrough are also made in dual wield and dipping is probably a reason.
Posted By: Ankou Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 12/04/21 07:29 PM
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Originally Posted by Saito Hikari
Originally Posted by Grudgebearer
I agree with most of what you've stated here, and how you've stated, except for Dipping. I'd stick Dipping into the problematic category, because of the impact it has on damage at early levels, and the fact that it can be done, with a candle. If it were a scenario, where you had alchemists fire, and "dipped" a blade in it to cause it to light, using up the alchemist's fire and an action to dip, then it would add a cost that would balance out the benefit.

As it is now, if you are within range of anything alight, it's a no brainer to dip.

True, but you can just not dip, which is why I consider it a non-core mechanic. All you gain are some damage points. That said, it's a lot of extra damage points at low level, but it doesn't force you to formulate your tactics around its existence like everything in the bottom category does.

Defenders of the current system like to argue that you can just simply ignore the cheese. That argument immediately falls apart when you simply rub two brain cells together and realize there is no way to play where you can ignore using height advantage and disadvantage, because you'll be affected by one or the other in most given situations no matter what. There's a huge difference between ignoring an option, and having to go out of your way to avoid a mechanic entirely.

I can't be sure but honneslty the difficulty of a few encounters let me think that the game is also balanced for you to use it a lot.
Can't say for higher levels but +2D4 (weapons) + 1D4/turn (burning) is a lot of damages. These additionnals damages are the difference between one/two/three (depending the opponents) more or less turn.
If you're playing the game with this mechanic even the hardest encounters are way easier and our weapons are way more effective than those of our ennemies.

You can also avoid shoving. The buttons are right next one of each other.

I never used it on normal playtrough because highground/backstab/jump+disengage are more than enough to beat the game easily but in a solo playthrough you really realize how powerfull it is.
Without dipping I think it would way harder. A lot of solo playthrough are also made in dual wield and dipping is probably a reason.

Psychologically it's very hard to not take advantage of it as well. A friend and I played the first play-through together and we definitely had complexity. The second time through it was way easier because, without even discussing, we were Hulk jumping everywhere and abusing every Larianism remarking, without analysis, "Wow this is so much easier!"
Originally Posted by Ankou
Psychologically it's very hard to not take advantage of it as well. A friend and I played the first play-through together and we definitely had complexity. The second time through it was way easier because, without even discussing, we were Hulk jumping everywhere and abusing every Larianism remarking, without analysis, "Wow this is so much easier!"


That's the primary reason why the "just don't use it" argument is without merit, Larian has designed the encounters, enemies, and the environment itself around those game mechanics.
Posted By: Sordak Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 13/04/21 10:33 AM
>is it still DnD

first i wanna adress this quesiton: yes.
Why is it still dnd? because DnD is not as rigid as you might think. Essentialy RAW are guidelines. The Dungeon Master used to be called the Referee and this is still what is job is. Dungeon Master is a marketing term.
At the end of the day DnD isnt played RAW. If theres no intentional houserules, theres bound to be unintentional ones. or rulings.
Basically saying any deviation from RAW causes it to be less DnD is fundamentally misunderstanding how DND is played. Its a game of rulings, not a game of rules.
If you play DnD and dont consider it that way, i would advise you to DM a oneshot for your group once. You probably just havent noticed that your DM has been giving "rulings" opposed to following rules for quite some time without you noticing.

>throwing people in dnd
It would require a grappling attack which im pretty sure Baldurs Gate doesnt have implemented (hopefully yet, grappling is fun)
As for actually throwing anyone: i dont think there has ever been a concrete rule for this. Maybe in 3.5 but no edition ive played for longer periods of time had any rules for that.
That of coruse doesnt mean it doesnt exist in the world. It means its a DM ruling.
Id personally count it as a grappling attack and a subsequent improvised weapon ranged attack.

>You don't get a choice in the matter. If a goblin with a fire arrow wishes to set your ground on fire and do guaranteed 2D4 damage to you, he automatically succeeds. Is this DnD?

Yes.
If the goblin sets the ground you happen to stand on on fire, you take damage. Theres plenty of spells in DnD that make you take damage no matter what. Theres plenty of damage attakcs you cannot save against.
Maybe you SHOULDNT have let the goblin set the ground on fire should you? Maybe you shouldnt have let the goblin notice you in the first place.

>you can do all of that in BG3
ill see that when i have more time. But somehow i think these sound like cherrypicked situations. Repeating "Is this DnD" after every poitn doesnt make you believe you more, it makes me question wether or not you care about wether or not it is "DnD" or wether you just assume that i do.


>Maximuus
now theres a more usefull post.

First up
>synergies between classes dont exist
thats sadly a 5e problem. i dont know why but somehow i think Mearls was to blame for this descision. People wanted their character to stand on their own after beeing forced into mandatory teamplay in the previous edition.

>- Jump/disengage = ennemies don't ever have any AOO and their melee haven't any control on the battlefield.
- Backstab = easy advantages leading to many useless spells/features/(bonus) action.
- Backstab = huge bonus over the AI
- Highground = easy advantage leading to many useless spells/features/(bonus) action.
- Highground = easy disadvantages for your ennemies. Combined with the advantage it's a god mode.
- Surfaces created by items break your concentration way too often (and if you dodge the arrow, the fire will still spread and break your concentration)
- Eating pig head in combats as a bonus action (looks ridiculous and) heal more HP than healing potion
- Dipping your sword in candle (looks ridiculous and) give players free additionnal damages over the AI.
- Shoving is so easy and OP that it's like an "instant win button" rather than a tactical choice.

Another issue that was solved in the previous two editions that had Disengage by default.
honestly jump irks me but mostly because its animation is ugly and because i dont see why it doesnt get an AoO, personally i think jump should be seperate from a disengage and it should provoke AoO as its reach is too high.
now on jump into backstab, actually RAW you can move AROUND an enemy in DnD without provoking AoO unless you leave the range of another enemy while doing so.
I personally never understood this ruling but flanking requires two characters anyway so its not like its particulary usefull to jump behind your enemy, at least RAW it isnt.
From what i understand the point of contention is that BG3 does backstabs while keeping this rule.
I see my issue with this, but i dont hate backstabs, i always figured DnD does backstabs weird (or more to the point, i never understood why DnD doesnt have a rule for facing, which is pretty much a staple of tile based combat systems).
The easy solution is to make Jumping vulnerable to AoO, keep disengage as a 5 foot step and change the ruling of AoO to be "leaving a threatened space" opposed to "leaving the range of the triggering character"
Should be a relativeley simple fix that alleviates about half of your concerns.

>surfaces
i dont mind.t hey are good.
the only reason people dont like them is because the Original Sin games had them
>break concentration
good. Positioning should be extremeley important for casters and quite frankly they are incredibly overtuned in 5e anyway.

>eating pig heads
well theres a video game issue where any food is the same, but i agree that eating food shouldnt count as a bonus action, it doesnt bother me much tho.
>Dipping a sword in the candle.
im more concerned into dipping your bow into a candle but admittedly id prefer a system where you actually have to apply oil to it.
its strange that this isnt already a thing since lighting oil on fire is.
>Shoving
i like for honor so im not complaining about cheesing by ledging. Or actually i did because one of my players finished the boss i was hyping up for half a year by throwing her off a cliff.
but for what its worth. 5e doesnt do "combat as sport", it does "combat as war".
Logically throwing someone off a high cliff should probably kill them, and doing so isnt very hard. Positioning matters.


All in all i agree with some of your points. But i think a few of them like the eating stuff is not that big a deal and other things could be fixed very easily, either by larian or by a mod that probably wouldnt be a lot of work to do

EDIT:
On height advantage. i simply cannot agree with you on that one. i think thats a good ruling and it mirrors the rules for concealment.
Now cover tends to be an AC bonus, i dont realy like how 5e does these thigns anyway. but at the end of the day shooting someone wwho stands on a ledge on top of your is bound to be harder than shooting someone whose profile is fully visible to you.
Likewise, shooting someone from a highground where its harder for the other to cover himself with a shield, duck behind cover or generally to reduce their target area.
I dont care if its balanced as long as it makes sense which it does in this case.

EDIT:
>Just dont use it
i dont agree with "Just dont use it"
and i understand the point of people not seeing that as an excuse.
Its a game created to take advantage of what the game world gives you. Therfore any option given to you should be a sound one.
i just dont see most of them as that bad.
My primary issue would be with AoOs and Jump, especialy jump i suppose.
I think ruling AoOs to trigger on leaving a threatened area (wether or not they enter another threatened area) would do a lot to mitigate larians problem with melee stickyness (OS2 had very much a simmilar problem).
It would of course also not be RAW dnd, but stickyness in general is something that 5e struggles with hence why the infamous Tunnel Fighter Sentinel Polearm Mastery build is considered "OP" despite only doing what your average Fighter could do in other editions.
Originally Posted by Sordak
>is it still DnD

first i wanna adress this quesiton: yes.
Why is it still dnd? because DnD is not as rigid as you might think. Essentialy RAW are guidelines. The Dungeon Master used to be called the Referee and this is still what is job is. Dungeon Master is a marketing term.
At the end of the day DnD isnt played RAW. If theres no intentional houserules, theres bound to be unintentional ones. or rulings.
Basically saying any deviation from RAW causes it to be less DnD is fundamentally misunderstanding how DND is played. Its a game of rulings, not a game of rules.
If you play DnD and dont consider it that way, i would advise you to DM a oneshot for your group once. You probably just havent noticed that your DM has been giving "rulings" opposed to following rules for quite some time without you noticing.

Are you stating for the record that it is DnD for any character, with any stats, wearing heavy armour, to automatically succeed in jumping over an enemy and then land behind him and then backstab him? Is this what DnD is to you? It's a simple question that only requires a yes or no answer. Yes, we know that the DM can adjudicate individual instances and decide on the DC to pass. But that is not the case here. So, I repeat, automatic success with jumping over enemies and landing behind them to backstab them. Is this how DnD is played, yes or no?

Originally Posted by Sordak
>throwing people in dnd
It would require a grappling attack which im pretty sure Baldurs Gate doesnt have implemented (hopefully yet, grappling is fun)
As for actually throwing anyone: i dont think there has ever been a concrete rule for this. Maybe in 3.5 but no edition ive played for longer periods of time had any rules for that.
That of coruse doesnt mean it doesnt exist in the world. It means its a DM ruling.
Id personally count it as a grappling attack and a subsequent improvised weapon ranged attack.

Is it DnD for the DM to say that every grappling attempt automatically succeeds as long as he has 17 STR?

Originally Posted by Sordak
>You don't get a choice in the matter. If a goblin with a fire arrow wishes to set your ground on fire and do guaranteed 2D4 damage to you, he automatically succeeds. Is this DnD?

Yes.
If the goblin sets the ground you happen to stand on on fire, you take damage. Theres plenty of spells in DnD that make you take damage no matter what. Theres plenty of damage attakcs you cannot save against.
Maybe you SHOULDNT have let the goblin set the ground on fire should you? Maybe you shouldnt have let the goblin notice you in the first place.

There are some spells that cause damage that you can't save against, such as Magic Missiles or Heat Metal, but even those can be Counterspelled, once level 3 spells are available. These fire arrows cannot be dodged with AC or with the Shield spell, or Counterspelled. The vast majority of spells in DnD give the target a chance to avoid it or halve it. Not these fire arrows, which are also ubiquitous among the goblins. You seem fine with such cheese tactics, but many aren't, and the proliferation of surface effects is among the chief complaints even among those who love the game.

As for not being seen, you can use it to justify any number cheap tactics, so I'm not surprised you reached for this excuse. If an invisible goblin sneaks behind you and shoves you to your death. You should not have been seen, then, should you? A goblin has a weapon that kills you on the spot, no saving throw, bypasses your AC. Should have stayed hidden then. Let's proliferate these weapons so that every goblin has one. Shouldn't be a problem, just don't be seen. Is this how you play DnD?

Originally Posted by Sordak
>you can do all of that in BG3
ill see that when i have more time. But somehow i think these sound like cherrypicked situations. Repeating "Is this DnD" after every poitn doesnt make you believe you more, it makes me question wether or not you care about wether or not it is "DnD" or wether you just assume that i do.

I didn't have to assume, since you already came right out to claim that cheap and cheesy tactics are what DnD games are. I quote,

Originally Posted by Sordak
Good.
You know what? larian cheese is good.

If you played any older DnD editions youd probably run into very much the same stuff.


I'm merely putting your claims to the test. And you're right that I cherry-picked these examples, because if I didn't and had to include each and every Larian cheese in the game, it'll be a long long post.
Originally Posted by Sordak
>is it still DnD

>Maximuus
now theres a more usefull post.

First up
>synergies between classes dont exist
thats sadly a 5e problem. i dont know why but somehow i think Mearls was to blame for this descision. People wanted their character to stand on their own after beeing forced into mandatory teamplay in the previous edition.

>- Jump/disengage = ennemies don't ever have any AOO and their melee haven't any control on the battlefield.
- Backstab = easy advantages leading to many useless spells/features/(bonus) action.
- Backstab = huge bonus over the AI
- Highground = easy advantage leading to many useless spells/features/(bonus) action.
- Highground = easy disadvantages for your ennemies. Combined with the advantage it's a god mode.
- Surfaces created by items break your concentration way too often (and if you dodge the arrow, the fire will still spread and break your concentration)
- Eating pig head in combats as a bonus action (looks ridiculous and) heal more HP than healing potion
- Dipping your sword in candle (looks ridiculous and) give players free additionnal damages over the AI.
- Shoving is so easy and OP that it's like an "instant win button" rather than a tactical choice.

Another issue that was solved in the previous two editions that had Disengage by default.
honestly jump irks me but mostly because its animation is ugly and because i dont see why it doesnt get an AoO, personally i think jump should be seperate from a disengage and it should provoke AoO as its reach is too high.
now on jump into backstab, actually RAW you can move AROUND an enemy in DnD without provoking AoO unless you leave the range of another enemy while doing so.
I personally never understood this ruling but flanking requires two characters anyway so its not like its particulary usefull to jump behind your enemy, at least RAW it isnt.
From what i understand the point of contention is that BG3 does backstabs while keeping this rule.
I see my issue with this, but i dont hate backstabs, i always figured DnD does backstabs weird (or more to the point, i never understood why DnD doesnt have a rule for facing, which is pretty much a staple of tile based combat systems).
The easy solution is to make Jumping vulnerable to AoO, keep disengage as a 5 foot step and change the ruling of AoO to be "leaving a threatened space" opposed to "leaving the range of the triggering character"
Should be a relativeley simple fix that alleviates about half of your concerns.

>surfaces
i dont mind.t hey are good.
the only reason people dont like them is because the Original Sin games had them
>break concentration
good. Positioning should be extremeley important for casters and quite frankly they are incredibly overtuned in 5e anyway.

>eating pig heads
well theres a video game issue where any food is the same, but i agree that eating food shouldnt count as a bonus action, it doesnt bother me much tho.
>Dipping a sword in the candle.
im more concerned into dipping your bow into a candle but admittedly id prefer a system where you actually have to apply oil to it.
its strange that this isnt already a thing since lighting oil on fire is.
>Shoving
i like for honor so im not complaining about cheesing by ledging. Or actually i did because one of my players finished the boss i was hyping up for half a year by throwing her off a cliff.
but for what its worth. 5e doesnt do "combat as sport", it does "combat as war".
Logically throwing someone off a high cliff should probably kill them, and doing so isnt very hard. Positioning matters.


All in all i agree with some of your points. But i think a few of them like the eating stuff is not that big a deal and other things could be fixed very easily, either by larian or by a mod that probably wouldnt be a lot of work to do

EDIT:
On height advantage. i simply cannot agree with you on that one. i think thats a good ruling and it mirrors the rules for concealment.
Now cover tends to be an AC bonus, i dont realy like how 5e does these thigns anyway. but at the end of the day shooting someone wwho stands on a ledge on top of your is bound to be harder than shooting someone whose profile is fully visible to you.
Likewise, shooting someone from a highground where its harder for the other to cover himself with a shield, duck behind cover or generally to reduce their target area.
I dont care if its balanced as long as it makes sense which it does in this case.

EDIT:
>Just dont use it
i dont agree with "Just dont use it"
and i understand the point of people not seeing that as an excuse.
Its a game created to take advantage of what the game world gives you. Therfore any option given to you should be a sound one.
i just dont see most of them as that bad.
My primary issue would be with AoOs and Jump, especialy jump i suppose.
I think ruling AoOs to trigger on leaving a threatened area (wether or not they enter another threatened area) would do a lot to mitigate larians problem with melee stickyness (OS2 had very much a simmilar problem).
It would of course also not be RAW dnd, but stickyness in general is something that 5e struggles with hence why the infamous Tunnel Fighter Sentinel Polearm Mastery build is considered "OP" despite only doing what your average Fighter could do in other editions.

Disengage wouldn't be a problem if it was an action rather than a bonus action. As an action it would be a tactical choice or a meaningfull decision.
The only problem is that it's a bonus action. Being engaged in melee doesn't really mean something even for casters and ranged because even if you suffer a "threatened" status"... you just have to disengage as a bonus action to perform your action without any malus. Ennemies won't ever trigger any AOO and being engaged never really matter because you can disengage for free.

Untie disengage and jump would be a good first step but it's really not enough.

Flanking doesn't exist in BG3. I won't argue about moving behind ennemies for free in D&D or the advantage you would have (or not...) but what's call "backstab" is the advantage you have on your attack roll when you're behind an ennemy. It means that your melee characters always have advantage on their attack roll for free and that you'll always use the same tricks again and again.
The flanking optionnal rule would increase the synergy between characters, it would create conditions (2 characters in melee) and it would create consequences (you can be flanked).

It's the same about highground. I'm 100% fine with "bonuses" due to highground - better range, even a small flat bonus to attack roll -...
But now you have an advantage on your attack rolls. Combats are really uninterresting in long term because you can have the best bonus to your %to hit for free. Backstab for melee, highground for ranged/casters.

I'm not really sure I read someone saying "remove backstab and highground as source of bonuses"... But a lot ask Larian to remove them as "source of advantage" (the advantage of D&D).

It's a bit the same about shoving. Shoving someone is really a cool feature but as a bonus action, once again it becomes very powerfull because you can do it at each turn + perform your usual action.
If you struggle in combats, you don't have to think and try to understand how it works, what you could have done better, where to position your characters or something... Just press the shove button and you'll win. Again, the main problem is that it's a bonus action and that you can shove creatures way too far (distance is not related to your strenght) .. not that you have the choice to shove your target.

About surfaces I'm not going to talk about DoS... I don't care but you're wrong according to me because it completely break the concentration mechanic. Your concentration is broken all the time so all those spells are close to useless.
When you dodge the arrow or the potion, the fire surface is still created under your feet so you always take damages. This is a problem for concentration spells but not only...
Except if your cleric concentrated on bless is 200M away from combats, your position DOESN'T matter because ennemies always have arrows or surfaces potions. They can throw them very far/high, hitting you with the fire surface even if the attack fail.

It looks like Larian want to create new/additionnal mechanics and that's very cool to me.

The problem is that those mechanics are too powerfull. They usually say in interviews that D&D is about players agency and choices but in combats their decisions completely lead to the opposite.
There are tons of possibilities and spells and actions and classes features and so on in D&D but in BG3 only Larian's homebrew really matter. If you use them, you'll win. If you don't, you'll die.

And it's not a matter of exploit or OP build (like I heard it was in DoS with necrofire / the armor system or something). These rules completely overshadowed everything else and whatever your class, your skills, your knowledge of the rules... You'll always play the same after a few hours because there's only one good way to deal with BG3's combats.
Originally Posted by Sordak
...
>surfaces
i dont mind.t hey are good.
the only reason people dont like them is because the Original Sin games had them
>break concentration
good. Positioning should be extremeley important for casters and quite frankly they are incredibly overtuned in 5e anyway.
Adding in some clarifications to help the discussion.

Surfaces are native to D&D, you can create surfaces in 5e with oil flask + produce flame. The issue is that surfaces are massively buffed by borrowed code from Divinity: Original Sin. Surfaces need to behave more like rules-as-written. Oil Flask

On positioning though, with high ground Advantage and low ground disadvantage casters rarely get to choose their positioning. That's the other side of the discussion. The player could be safely positioning their casters, but the game is incentivizing them to do otherwise.
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
About surfaces I'm not going to talk about DoS... I don't care but you're wrong according to me because it completely break the concentration mechanic. Your concentration is broken all the time so all those spells are close to useless.
When you dodge the arrow or the potion, the fire surface is still created under your feet so you always take damages. This is a problem for concentration spells but not only...

It's very much a rule implementation issue. Surfaces shouldn't be breaking concentration.

EDIT: Also, where's our DC 10 dex check to extinguish the flames? Alchemist's Fire
Baldur's Gate 3 needs a patch just for rule implementation.
Posted By: Sordak Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 13/04/21 04:39 PM
>Passerby

id like if you would represent my arguments fairly.

>Are you stating for the record that it is DnD for any character, with any stats, wearing heavy armour, to automatically succeed in jumping over an enemy and then land behind him and then backstab him?

No but im saying any dnd character regardless of stats, armor or class can walk around to the opposit side of his enemy with no roll required. This is RAW.
But thats not even my point. No particular rule or ruling IS or ISNT DnD.
DnD has had tons of editions, erratas, optional rules, third party content, homebrew and forks. Wether or not something is DnD isnt decided by wether or not it follows one particular ruling.
Otherwise very few genuine DnD parties would actually be DnD.

>Simple yes or no answer.
which i gave you at the very start of the post: yes to all. all of these things are DnD. Stranger things happened at gaming tables.
But the fact that you want a simpel binary answer tells me that you think in terms of a video game where such interactions are hard coded. We are talking about a video game. But DnD isnt a video game. Baldurs Gate is a video game adaptation of DnD.
In DnD, absoluteley all of those things can happen at any given table under a number of given circumstances.
>Is it DnD for the DM to say that every grappling attempt automatically succeeds as long as he has 17 STR?
Yes.
Its still dnd, its just not an overly smart ruling.
but i prefer this over not beeing able to throw anyone because grappling hasnt been implemented like in any other DnD adaptation quite frankly.


>Save against damage.
Some things can be counterspelled. Some cannot. Theres guranteed damage from AoEs and auras and there have been for many editions.
If youre caught in an explosion theres also nothing you can do about it. Likewise, if youre standing in the middle of a barn filled with very flammable hay, and a goblin shoots a fire arrow into it, the only thing you can do about it is kill the goblin before he can fire the arrow.
This is the only logical conclusion to that scenario.
In my last session, the Priest killed a ghouls imply by standing next to him while surrounded by a fiery aura, which together with the ghouls weakness to the damage type resulted in its immediate disintegration without any save or AC allowed. I was quite bummed about it but it made sense.
> Is this how you play DnD?

Yes.
This is how you play DnD.
I dont know if youve read my post in full but id like to direct you again to the paragraph about the Ten-foot pole.
"Cheap tactics" is how you play DnD. its how you survive. If you play by the rules, you die. Low level characters are weak and prone to getting knocked out before they can even get close to an enemy if they have low initiative.
Getting the drop on the monsters, surprising them, trapping them or otherwise neutralizing them without having to pray for Nuffle the dice god is exactly how you play DnD.
Your enemies will do the same. Honor is for noble knights jousting, not for mercenaries scrounging through half forgotten caves duking it out with the dregs of monsterous society.
In case youre wondering, google Tuckers Kobolds.

Or in case youre a weeb, watch Goblin Slayer.


>Maximuus
>5 foot step action vs bonus action
it worked as a minor action in 4e and 3.5 so clearly thats not the issue
However in 5e the primary issue is that warriors arent sticky at all. 3.5 also had no solution for this mostly, pathfinder came up with some ways to do it.
Generally i think larian ought to copy the Mark mechanic from the Cavaleer class and give it to all martials (and battlemaster maneuvers too for good measure) thatd be a start. AoOs are a terrible way for melee characters to project threat especialy since withotu feats they are limited to one per round(rather than one per turnas in older editions, another stupid descision they should go back on)
>Flanking
im with you, flanking should be there, i still dont hate backstab because its somethign that i never understood why it isnt there to begin with. I think both of these should exist but as i said before, AoO should trigger upon leaving any threatened area opposed to leaving the reactors reach.
>Flanking optional rule
i forgot thats "optional" too in 5e. man i sure dont understand how people can play this game RAW. its so barebones.

>remove as a source of advantage
im not against that.
a flat +2 would be fine, thats how the previous edition did it.
The entire reason why advantage exists is because focus groups told WOTC that players were too dumb for basic math and that "players love rolling dice so let them roll TWO DICE"

>Shoving as a bonus action
i think its fine as a bonus action, implement proper grappling rules and the problem is gone.

>if you break concentration spells are close to useless
a matter of design.
I personally dont hate it because i think casters SHOULD be vulnerable. they used to drop in one hit by a goblin and for good reason.
If frontliners had better stickyness, casters getting mogged by weak enemies wouldnt be an issue.

So all in all i understand your points.i agree with you on some of them, not so much on others.
I think these dont need to be adressed one at the time, i think a good set of changes would make all of these points go away

>untangle disengage from jump (and give it a non retarded animation)
>Change how AoO works
>Implement proper melee rules (grappling, marking, one reaction per turn)
Honestly, the only problem I have with "backstab" (that is to say, advantage on attacks against an enemy that is not facing you) is that you can achieve it without allies, or rather, more than one enemy of the enemy. If two individuals face each other in combat and no allies or enemies are in similarly close range, it's just stupid that you should be able to simply walk around the opponent (or worse, jump over them) and then stab them in the back with advantage. Why would an enemy let you do that? It's just silly. Now, if there's more than one enemy close to an opponent, it makes more sense as they can't keep track of too many at a time.
Posted By: Dexai Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 14/04/21 12:18 PM
Sordak, of you could use the
Code
[quote][/quote]
tags, that would make your posts much easier to the eye
Originally Posted by andreasrylander
Honestly, the only problem I have with "backstab" (that is to say, advantage on attacks against an enemy that is not facing you) is that you can achieve it without allies, or rather, more than one enemy of the enemy. If two individuals face each other in combat and no allies or enemies are in similarly close range, it's just stupid that you should be able to simply walk around the opponent (or worse, jump over them) and then stab them in the back with advantage. Why would an enemy let you do that? It's just silly. Now, if there's more than one enemy close to an opponent, it makes more sense as they can't keep track of too many at a time.
There seems to be a fine line between silly and "player agency" these days. Or a gross overlap.

I actually wish Larian would do a pass on BG3 to remove or tone down a lot of the "silly" parts.

Eating pigs heads in combat. Excessive shoving, throwing and jumping in combat. "Helping" PC's up repeatedly without any magical healing while enemies continue to pummel them back into the ground. Smashing a healing potion into someone's armor to heal them. Dipping a metal weapon in a candle. Metal burning without a flammable substance. Explosions looking for any excuse to happen. Jumping into crazy heights like a Marvel superhero rather than climbing like humans do. These things belong in a tongue-in-cheek platform game and not in an RPG trying to tell a grown up story. One that also has a responsibility of continuing an existing franchise where silly things can exist in writing but never as part of the game mechanics.
Originally Posted by 1varangian
I actually wish Larian would do a pass on BG3 to remove or tone down a lot of the "silly" parts.


Oh god I completely agree so much. The silly stuff, which Larian is fond of, just doesn't fit the tone of the game, which so far is bloody amazing in sooo damn many ways... I think it ruins the mood, sadly, and I would cry from joy if they toned down stuff like that, for sure.
Originally Posted by 1varangian
Originally Posted by andreasrylander
Honestly, the only problem I have with "backstab" (that is to say, advantage on attacks against an enemy that is not facing you) is that you can achieve it without allies, or rather, more than one enemy of the enemy. If two individuals face each other in combat and no allies or enemies are in similarly close range, it's just stupid that you should be able to simply walk around the opponent (or worse, jump over them) and then stab them in the back with advantage. Why would an enemy let you do that? It's just silly. Now, if there's more than one enemy close to an opponent, it makes more sense as they can't keep track of too many at a time.
There seems to be a fine line between silly and "player agency" these days. Or a gross overlap.

I actually wish Larian would do a pass on BG3 to remove or tone down a lot of the "silly" parts.

Eating pigs heads in combat. Excessive shoving, throwing and jumping in combat. "Helping" PC's up repeatedly without any magical healing while enemies continue to pummel them back into the ground. Smashing a healing potion into someone's armor to heal them. Dipping a metal weapon in a candle. Metal burning without a flammable substance. Explosions looking for any excuse to happen. Jumping into crazy heights like a Marvel superhero rather than climbing like humans do. These things belong in a tongue-in-cheek platform game and not in an RPG trying to tell a grown up story. One that also has a responsibility of continuing an existing franchise where silly things can exist in writing but never as part of the game mechanics.

Could not of put it any better. +100.
Larian is too full of themselves. Little Larian'esk touches if perfectly fine. What we have right now is "we wanna be with the BIG BOYS!" identity crisis. So stuff is Larianized everywhere.
I forgot collecting and plopping down huge barrels from magic pockets.

They are called a Bag of Holding in D&D and even that rare and powerful magic item doesn't make it possible to use potions from someone else's inventory, or the entire party using the same Greatsword +1 to attack while also using a shield during enemy turns.
Originally Posted by 1varangian
I forgot collecting and plopping down huge barrels from magic pockets.

They are called a Bag of Holding in D&D and even that rare and powerful magic item doesn't make it possible to use potions from someone else's inventory, or the entire party using the same Greatsword +1 to attack while also using a shield during enemy turns.

Oh god I keep forgetting those things exist. It always makes me depressed when I consider the fact that those are actual things in BG3 -_-
Originally Posted by 1varangian
I forgot collecting and plopping down huge barrels from magic pockets.

They are called a Bag of Holding in D&D and even that rare and powerful magic item doesn't make it possible to use potions from someone else's inventory, or the entire party using the same Greatsword +1 to attack while also using a shield during enemy turns.

Also with a Bag of Holding, in 5E it holds 500 lbs. A barrel in 5E is 70 lbs, and holds 40 gallons of liquid. If that liquid were water, that barrel would be ~400 lbs, meaning that you could only get one barrel of water in a bag of holding with about 100 lbs left over.
Originally Posted by andreasrylander
Originally Posted by 1varangian
I forgot collecting and plopping down huge barrels from magic pockets.

They are called a Bag of Holding in D&D and even that rare and powerful magic item doesn't make it possible to use potions from someone else's inventory, or the entire party using the same Greatsword +1 to attack while also using a shield during enemy turns.

Oh god I keep forgetting those things exist. It always makes me depressed when I consider the fact that those are actual things in BG3 -_-
Better yet, when fighting spiders and ettercaps everyone in the party can equip Visions of the Absolute for that extra 2d6 dmg before attacking and then pass it along to the next attacker in the initiative order. While eating a pig's head.

Is that considered a "creative solution" and "player agency"? Right now I just really need Larian to come out and say "of course not, but it's a low priority fix". Because I'm not sure they see any problem there.
Posted By: JJRX5 Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 15/04/21 05:15 PM
I think many people in this forum are stressing out too much about battle mechanics. I agree with many of the above points and have highlighted areas for improvement in previous posts, but we need to keep perspective. I would wager that Larian has a laundry list of things to fix before release. Many of these items will be addressed, or we will have to wait for a mod to give the game the flavor we are looking for.

Let’s give these guys a little credit for what they have made. This game, even in its raw and unfinished state, is very fun. It’s story, so far, is the best I have seen in a cRPG since KOTOR. Larian’s CEO dresses in armor and is passionate about the project. Honestly we just need to give them a chance.
Originally Posted by JJRX5
I think many people in this forum are stressing out too much about battle mechanics. I agree with many of the above points and have highlighted areas for improvement in previous posts, but we need to keep perspective. I would wager that Larian has a laundry list of things to fix before release. Many of these items will be addressed, or we will have to wait for a mod to give the game the flavor we are looking for.

Let’s give these guys a little credit for what they have made. This game, even in its raw and unfinished state, is very fun. It’s story, so far, is the best I have seen in a cRPG since KOTOR. Larian’s CEO dresses in armor and is passionate about the project. Honestly we just need to give them a chance.

It would make zero sense from a development standpoint for Larian to spend the time and resources necessary to design the combat around DOS-type mechanics, with the intention of going back and moving more towards 5E and negating the work that has been put in to the project.

Not to mention, that every statement from Larian, has indicated that including DOS-style gameplay, was intentional, because they don't actually understand 5E rules very well, and have struggled to adapt them.
Originally Posted by Grudgebearer
It would make zero sense from a development standpoint for Larian to spend the time and resources necessary to design the combat around DOS-type mechanics, with the intention of going back and moving more towards 5E and negating the work that has been put in to the project.

Not to mention, that every statement from Larian, has indicated that including DOS-style gameplay, was intentional, because they don't actually understand 5E rules very well, and have struggled to adapt them.
I'm annoyed as well that we haven't seen any major changes other than improved dice rolls. But it is still logical that Larian wanted to get as much done to get the game into early access and the hold off onto other aspects for later. So there are some Divinity hold-overs.

I don't know why RNG was the main focus, when disadvantage while attacking enemies on a higher elevation than you can confuse the player and result in a miss. (Note, this is not RNG's fault but a poor design choice).

That being said, where's a hotfix for rule implementation? If we can get a hotfix for different RNG, why not one to address backstab? etc.
Originally Posted by DragonSnooz
I'm annoyed as well that we haven't seen any major changes other than improved dice rolls. But it is still logical that Larian wanted to get as much done to get the game into early access and the hold off onto other aspects for later. So there are some Divinity hold-overs.

I don't know why RNG was the main focus, when disadvantage while attacking enemies on a higher elevation than you can confuse the player and result in a miss. (Note, this is not RNG's fault but a poor design choice).

That being said, where's a hotfix for rule implementation? If we can get a hotfix for different RNG, why not one to address backstab? etc.

Except that's not how Early Access works, what you are describing is Alpha level development where major design decisions are still in flux. Beta software is feature complete, Early Access, would be Beta or later level, core feature design is complete, even if they haven't released the content into Early Access.

I wouldn't expect major changes to anything at this point, what we are seeing, minus some tweaks, is what we are going to get at release.
Late into Divinity: Original Sin 2's early access backstab was changed, for similar reasons to player complaints now.

Alpha, Beta, and Early Access don't have to be restrictive.
Originally Posted by DragonSnooz
I'm annoyed as well that we haven't seen any major changes other than improved dice rolls. But it is still logical that Larian wanted to get as much done to get the game into early access and the hold off onto other aspects for later. So there are some Divinity hold-overs.

I don't know why RNG was the main focus, when disadvantage while attacking enemies on a higher elevation than you can confuse the player and result in a miss. (Note, this is not RNG's fault but a poor design choice).

That being said, where's a hotfix for rule implementation? If we can get a hotfix for different RNG, why not one to address backstab? etc.

For the record, there actually *is* a visual bug right now where your ranged attacks can actually roll for advantage, even though the preview tooltip doesn't show that you're high enough in elevation to get it. We think this might be evidence that Larian is tweaking some aspects of high ground advantage/low ground disadvantage... Or that literally no one cared enough to investigate closely until about a week after the latest patch.

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/810002093250838551/814781578205986865/unknown.png

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/810002093250838551/814781901491142686/unknown.png
Originally Posted by Saito Hikari
For the record, there actually *is* a visual bug right now where your ranged attacks can actually roll for advantage, even though the preview tooltip doesn't show that you're high enough in elevation to get it. We think this might be evidence that Larian is tweaking some aspects of high ground advantage/low ground disadvantage... Or that literally no one cared enough to investigate closely until about a week after the latest patch.

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/810002093250838551/814781578205986865/unknown.png

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/810002093250838551/814781901491142686/unknown.png

I'm still hopeful changes are coming. grin
Man, I spent the past half hour looking for your thread because it finally occurred to me that you were the one who first noticed it to begin with. Of course I couldn't find it because it got merged into another thread for some reason.
Posted By: Van'tal Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 16/04/21 12:45 AM
Originally Posted by Danielbda
Originally Posted by Aishaddai
5e phb puriest will probably raise hell though.
There is a game called Solasta that is implementing 5e rules pretty much as written and it plays amazingly.
Originally Posted by 1varangian
Originally Posted by Passerby
https://www.destructoid.com/stories...-druids-and-baldur-s-gate-3-624779.phtml

[color:#FF9966]
Pushing and shoving

Of course, there is combat, and Vincke says the team is working on that aspect as well. He says they think it's a little bit too random still, in cases where they'd like it to be more tactical. They're also tooling with the RNG in some areas, and are looking for ways of streamlining it to have a "more modern experience."

Jeez. It's their own changes that made 5e less tactical. Revert them!

Free Disengage for everyone! Always go high. Always hit from behind. Always eat a cheese wheel. Shove, shove, shove. Dip and poison. Stealth murder the entire encounter in heavy armor without being seen. Long rest after every encounter. They killed the gameplay with these no brainer OP things you can do without any resource management.

I mean... BG3 is great in many ways, but Larian seriously don't get what tactical gameplay means. 5e RAW makes for a good tactical game and you absolutely could spice it up with more hazards and some explosives. But Larian won't see this with their tunnel vision where only "modern" DOS mechanics exist.
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
They could increase A LOT players agency/creativity if custom mechanics weren't so overpowered.

If D&D is about player's agency and creativity, let us also only play with D&D rules and spells and class abilities rather than impose us a good way of playing.

I'm 100% fine with their will to add more things and even silly things I won't use (like throwing boots or ennemies)... But please let me play this incredible game how I want to play it...

A better balance between custom rules and RAW mechanics is the only solution so players can CHOOSE and use THEIR creativity rather than yours.


This game is so very beautiful, so it disheartens me to see all the wheel spinning.

I predicted that the modders would be transforming the game back to RAW, and that's what is happening.

5e tabletop is the most popular PnP game, and should have easily translated to this venue when they made the decision to adopt D20 turn based. The problem is that they never had the faith to try the RAW in the first place.

I had faith that if they didn't they would waist a lot of time and money.

Stop fighting it. I mean modders are pushing out unfinished classes, and making plenty of customization...efficiently.

I hear a lot of the same echoes from other posters:

Add a first person view option and let us look around.

The bug fixing is necessary.

Work on the character system...specifically get rid of petty drama and find ways to pull a diverse party together, rather than DISAPROVE, DISAPROVE, DISAPROVE.
The npcs should react to player decisions, not the other way around.


Avoiding the word "good" like the plague...give us characters with...erm...more character. The noble sort of NPCs, for those of us, who enjoyed feeling the atmosphere of working with the Harpers. Getting recognized by Elminster. Meeting simple Drama free folk that made the game feel like a living world going 'bout its business.

Figure that out fast, so you can make the story itself something very enjoyable to finish.
Posted By: Sordak Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 18/04/21 09:13 AM
well ive made a pretty lenghty post on how id figure id come to a solution on this.
but the subsequent replies in the thread are just 7 pages of these three things:

1. demanding to remove "silly" things opposed to "gritty and realistic" things while failing to define what these are
2. demanding to return to RAW, posts clearly made by people that dont know RAW 5e and how it is too barebones to be a video game
3. congratulating each other on beeing upset about it


and man one thing i just cannot leave uncommented.
5e RAW is a good tactical game! hahahha oh dios mio!

You cannot even flank in 5e RAW, you cant do it!
you cannot flank, you cannot charge you cannot distract an enemy.
None of these thigns are possible in RAW outside of feats (which are not in the standard RAW mind you) or class features.
5e is a TERRIBLE tactical combat game.
Originally Posted by Sordak
well ive made a pretty lenghty post on how id figure id come to a solution on this.
but the subsequent replies in the thread are just 7 pages of these three things:

1. demanding to remove "silly" things opposed to "gritty and realistic" things while failing to define what these are
2. demanding to return to RAW, posts clearly made by people that dont know RAW 5e and how it is too barebones to be a video game
3. congratulating each other on beeing upset about it


and man one thing i just cannot leave uncommented.
5e RAW is a good tactical game! hahahha oh dios mio!

You cannot even flank in 5e RAW, you cant do it!
you cannot flank, you cannot charge you cannot distract an enemy.
None of these thigns are possible in RAW outside of feats (which are not in the standard RAW mind you) or class features.
5e is a TERRIBLE tactical combat game.

You can distract an ennemy with the help action

(+you can dodge, you can "ready", you can grab, you can prone target,... Nothing of this is possible in BG3).

Looks to me that D&D could lead to a VERY GOOD tactical video game. BG3 is not far from being a very good tactical game with WAY MORE possibilities than in any other games, thanks to D&D + Larian's imagination.

Balancing their homebrew rules would give us all D&D possibilities in addition of theirs - verticality, explosions, dipping etc...

The only thing that won't ever happen is the cover mechanic and to be honnest, I wouldn't missed it if the whole game wasn't only balanced arround their limited and sometimes WTF custom mechanics.

But I'm more a tactical TB game player that know D&D's rules than a D&D TT player.
Originally Posted by Sordak
well ive made a pretty lenghty post on how id figure id come to a solution on this.
but the subsequent replies in the thread are just 7 pages of these three things:

1. demanding to remove "silly" things opposed to "gritty and realistic" things while failing to define what these are
2. demanding to return to RAW, posts clearly made by people that dont know RAW 5e and how it is too barebones to be a video game
3. congratulating each other on beeing upset about it


and man one thing i just cannot leave uncommented.
5e RAW is a good tactical game! hahahha oh dios mio!

You cannot even flank in 5e RAW, you cant do it!
you cannot flank, you cannot charge you cannot distract an enemy.
None of these thigns are possible in RAW outside of feats (which are not in the standard RAW mind you) or class features.
5e is a TERRIBLE tactical combat game.

Hey, I actually did reply to your inquiry about defining cheese purely from a game balance standpoint, and then you conveniently went and ignored me after I categorized everything into ‘optional’ and ‘core mechanic’, while going after everyone else arguing from a direct DnD comparison standpoint.

I would not be too quick to think that people are *actually* arguing above all that 5E is a good tactical game. Nothing I’ve seen in these posts really seems like that’s what they’re trying to argue unless you’re really stretching it.

The real point that I’ve come to understand is that most of the grievances center around how Larian didn’t really make it better, their apparent solution was to replace it with a system that’s even more fundamentally broken than what was already there. Stuff like shoves having 100% successful rate while in stealth and the huge emphasis on free advantage makes everything feel like they’re deliberately designed to make engaging with the base mechanics feel as awful as possible.

There’s always several different levels of nuance to unpack here. Like, people typically love homebrew within reason. None of this is even remotely within any reason. They’ve transformed the game into an adventure of extremes.
Posted By: Sordak Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 18/04/21 10:32 AM
>Nothing of this effect is possible in bG3
see my previous post, i want all of that stuff in, especialy grappling.
But saying things like 5 foot step makes it less tactical when editions that were clearly more tactical than 5e did these thigns is ridiculous, the problem is how to handle it, or more correctly to not copy the MORE tactical approach to opportunity attacks that other editions had
Posted By: Nimja1 Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 09/05/21 03:20 AM
Personally, I don't mind a little homebrew at all but most of Larian's homebrew is extremely gamebreaking. Thief is just borked in general.

  • Everyone getting use item, disengage and hide as a bonus action. Completely breaks the point of going Rogue or Thief, plus game balance action economy.
  • Scrolls used by any class. Another jab at Thief's class feature of using any magical item or implement (this includes scrolls) regardless of class.
  • Thief getting a second bonus action. To compensate the class by letting everyone use their features, they can now get a second off hand attack. But wait, off hand attacks still get full bonuses without any feats. So, 3 full attacks and Sneak Attack bonus (easily procc'd just by being behind) where a fighter using a greatsword just chills at 1.
  • Second Story Work just being fall damage resistance. No jump distance or anything. I get that there is no climbing (there should be) but the obvious bonus that WOULD work is right in its description but nope.
  • Why cant I sneak attack off thrown weapons like daggers or on bonus attacks? It should just auto proc when applicable. If you miss the sneak attack then you are SOL where as RAW you could get it on any attack action once a turn.


And thats just on Thiefs. Not to mention problems with the other classes. Namely Wizards. Chief problem is that they can learn ANY spell with a scroll, regardless of it being in their class spell list. Healing word after you Fire Bolt? Check. On that note, using 2 spells requiring spell slots in a turn is a big no no and a horrible balance issue. Namely Misty Step plus any other powerful spell (think Misty Step + Fireball shenanigans). I guess that last point is a bit moot seeing as playing this game is like playing turn based Mario, with everyone bunny hopping around everywhere....


Quote
You cannot even flank in 5e RAW, you cant do it!
you cannot flank, you cannot charge you cannot distract an enemy.
None of these thigns are possible in RAW outside of feats (which are not in the standard RAW mind you) or class features.
5e is a TERRIBLE tactical combat game.

So uhhh, flanking is a provided optional rule in the DMG. The Help action can be taken to give an ally advantage on an attack. The description upon doing this is that you distract the enemy. You wanna talk about knowing RAW but clearly haven't read all the source books. Feats may be "optional" but I challenge you to find the one DM that doesn't allow them. Adventurer's League allows it, and that's the official DnD League.
If a DM didn't allow feats, I'd walk.
Originally Posted by footface
If a DM didn't allow feats, I'd walk.
I left a campaign after the DM told us the lucky feat was banned because of our halfling using lucky. The DM wanted to consider lucky unfair for combat.

Every encounter in the campaign was deadly and we had been barely scraping by. (Had been losing 1 character per session, the DM rolled all Death Saving Throws behind the screen). We also weren't allowed to use the Help action because that would be "the easy way out".

Banning lucky broke my patience.
Posted By: Ankou Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 09/05/21 08:47 PM
Sounds like a garbage DM all around.
Posted By: Merlex Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 10/05/21 04:03 PM
If I was still DMing the only thing I'd ban, is some of the broken sub-classes from Tasha's and Wildemount.
Posted By: Ankou Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 10/05/21 04:37 PM
There are no broken subclasses.
Posted By: Hachina Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 10/05/21 05:31 PM
while shoving is extremely strong right now, its comes down more to the IA than the mechanics:

If enemy start shoving you as well, such as the goblin priestess, battle become extremely hard . This may be enabled on harder difficulty setting or later in the adventure. Maybe they wanted an easier start with ''dumb'' enemies , goblin being traditionally low int, and would make smarter enemy use the shove mechanics more liberally.

Second, the enemy position badly , making shove easy to land. If enemy moved smarted the mechanics wouldn't be nearly so overpowered. This is definitly a decision of game design to make the game not too hard and enable use of the mechanics (its fun to drop goblin off a cliff).


Overall, I think the mechanics is nice, and will be adjusted later in the adventure / in other difficulty mode.

However, if its stay as it is, its definitly too strong imo, its an instantkill button in most cases.
Originally Posted by Hachina
while shoving is extremely strong right now, its comes down more to the IA than the mechanics:

If enemy start shoving you as well, such as the goblin priestess, battle become extremely hard . This may be enabled on harder difficulty setting or later in the adventure. Maybe they wanted an easier start with ''dumb'' enemies , goblin being traditionally low int, and would make smarter enemy use the shove mechanics more liberally.

Second, the enemy position badly , making shove easy to land. If enemy moved smarted the mechanics wouldn't be nearly so overpowered. This is definitly a decision of game design to make the game not too hard and enable use of the mechanics (its fun to drop goblin off a cliff).


Overall, I think the mechanics is nice, and will be adjusted later in the adventure / in other difficulty mode.

However, if its stay as it is, its definitly too strong imo, its an instantkill button in most cases.

There's literally nothing from Larian that indicates they have any inclination of changing the mechanics from their current state, quite the opposite given the statements they made in the panel from hell 2.

None of us should hold our breath for a final release of BG3 that isn't inundated with DOS mechanics, and Larian's game-breaking homebrew rule changes.
agreed, the core mechanics of the combat as based around jumping/shoving/etc. There's no way they're going to just remove those things. The only possibility is to allow difficulty settings to remove the reliance on those features players don't like. I personally hate the constant jumping, so I'd like to lower the difficulty to the point where it's still fun to play without jumping at all
Posted By: Merlex Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 11/05/21 12:41 PM
Originally Posted by Ankou
There are no broken subclasses.

Oh please, Peace Domain Cleric, Twilight Domain Cleric, and the Chronurgy Magic Wizard are way way op.
Posted By: gaymer Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 11/05/21 03:31 PM
Originally Posted by Grudgebearer
None of us should hold our breath for a final release of BG3 that isn't inundated with DOS mechanics, and Larian's game-breaking homebrew rule changes.

QFT
Originally Posted by Merlex
Originally Posted by Ankou
There are no broken subclasses.

Oh please, Peace Domain Cleric, Twilight Domain Cleric, and the Chronurgy Magic Wizard are way way op.

They are strong but not OP? Nothing listed in them are gamebreaking or make any other subclass irrelevant, they are just different with consistently strong abilities and flavor.

Peace Domain gets a skill proficiency, a d4 buff to the party as a class feature, a channel divinity that helps heal allies, enabling of a tank to take hits, wuisdom mod to cantrips, and bettering the earlier buff.

Twilight Domain gets darkvision, the ability to give others darkvision, proficiency in martial weapons and heavy armor, advantage on initiatives for one creature, an aura with temp hp or mental effects, flying only in darkness, Extra damage on melee strikes once per turn, and giving of half cover when in aura.

Chronurgy Wizard gets a slightly weaker version of lucky, better initiative, a version of hold creature that is lost on damage, a single spell mote a short rest, and their ultimate level 14 ability allows them to fix a result at the cost of being much closer to dying outright and now being worse at everything cause exhaustion.

Overall they are not crazy OP in any way? Chronurgy gets some similar stuff to divination in a different flavor with being able to manipulate a dice result, and its first feature is already something in the game with the lucky feat and halflings. Twilight domain has a cool aura but most clerics get something big, and its role seems to be a little more selfish than other clerics even with the aura. On the other end, Peace Domain is selfless and is based around your party being cooperative and peaceful, but honestly coupld be broken really easily by party conflicts or someone being controlled/out of control. They are all strong and on the upper end of dnd 5e power, but they seem in line with everything else to me and just fill their roles nicely. Even then, I like to pick classes based on theming and not so much power.

Besides, most subclasses can become OP in the right hands or with the right strategizing from a party. A conjuration wizard can genuinely fuck everything up with his level 2 Minor Conjuration if he is creative enough, and a Life Cleric can ensure no body int eh party has a chance to die to damage. Its all in how one uses them.
It would really be a dumb decision not to remove/rework "some" cheese.

They could please anyone (yes, I said anyone) just by rebalancing their homebrew.
I.E : it's not necessary to reduce our creativity and break the advantage system of D&D to give players better chance to hit if they're higher/behind.

There are only PRO and they're professionals. They'll do something about combats. That's pretty obvious.
Posted By: OcO Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 11/05/21 07:32 PM
I bought the EA day 1 with the hope and intention of modding the hell outta this game, especially after seeing the EA FAQ mention modding would be supported for release.
Honestly I don't really care what "cheese" ends up staying in for the full game as I'll just grab the best RAW mod the community puts out. I do feel for those who will not have the option to mod however.

Edit: I'm not modding the game till it is released though and the full tools are out for the modders to do things right. For now I'm suffering through with the rest of you. crazy
Posted By: Ixal Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 11/05/21 09:54 PM
Originally Posted by OcO
I bought the EA day 1 with the hope and intention of modding the hell outta this game, especially after seeing the EA FAQ mention modding would be supported for release.
Honestly I don't really care what "cheese" ends up staying in for the full game as I'll just grab the best RAW mod the community puts out. I do feel for those who will not have the option to mod however.

Edit: I'm not modding the game till it is released though and the full tools are out for the modders to do things right. For now I'm suffering through with the rest of you. crazy

You should care because modding will not be able to get all cheese out of the system when it is too integral to the game.
Posted By: OcO Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 12/05/21 03:42 AM
Originally Posted by Ixal
Originally Posted by OcO
I bought the EA day 1 with the hope and intention of modding the hell outta this game, especially after seeing the EA FAQ mention modding would be supported for release.
Honestly I don't really care what "cheese" ends up staying in for the full game as I'll just grab the best RAW mod the community puts out. I do feel for those who will not have the option to mod however.

Edit: I'm not modding the game till it is released though and the full tools are out for the modders to do things right. For now I'm suffering through with the rest of you. crazy

You should care because modding will not be able to get all cheese out of the system when it is too integral to the game.

There is certainly a lot that will need to be tweaked but there is already 1 or more mods for it on Nexus. There is even a modder currently working on casting touch range spells through familiars. After release and with mod tools released, I'm fairly certain we'll see some kind of multiple choice rules options mod that will allow people to pick and choose what if anything they wish to swap to RAW.

That said, maybe saying "I don't care" wasn't quite the correct thing to say since I DO care enough that I'm going to be modding most of it RAW 1st chance I get.
Can you help me?
It would be usefull in many other threats.

I would like to know why do you mind it.
Yes, Larian homebrew rules, and as you say "cheese" is in the game ... personaly i simply dont use most of it (i shall not claim i dont use any, since im not allways even sure what is and what isnt 5e or Larian), so it dont bother me at all ...
Yet it seem like some people here started holy crusade against those things, since "simply dont use it" is not good enough. Could you please explain me why?
Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD
Can you help me?
It would be usefull in many other threats.

I would like to know why do you mind it.
Yes, Larian homebrew rules, and as you say "cheese" is in the game ... personaly i simply dont use most of it (i shall not claim i dont use any, since im not allways even sure what is and what isnt 5e or Larian), so it dont bother me at all ...
Yet it seem like some people here started holy crusade against those things, since "simply dont use it" is not good enough. Could you please explain me why?

Larian's rationale is also not using their cheese if you don't like it. However, Larian seems to consider their cheese as the core mechanic D&D is fitted around instead of the other way around. Simply not using cheese, still is knowingly engaging in sub-optimal gameplay...in a game where everything is geared towards optimization. It is a conscious self-nerf in a game balanced around the cheese.

The cheese is circular; it screws over D&D balance and becomes an excuse to further neglect the issue. It sacrifices balance for literally a barrel of laughs. From completely broken, virtually non-existent resting mechanics (D&D is wholly balanced around it) - which benefits certain classes/subclasses immensely. To overpowered bonuses for height and flanking, where the flanking mechanic is so rudimentary it cheapens the tactical combat it is supposed to incentivize. Further exacerbated by the AI failing to exploit it like the player easily can. In turn, all this makes certain character creation selections hugely superior to others, which in reality diminishes (viable) choice.

Not many mentions pickpocketing as part of the cheese, but it very much is. In DOS2 and BG3, once you know the mechanic, it becomes a legalized exploit that is risk-free, quick and the by far best source of near infinite wealth and gear. It alone destroys any semblance of risk vs reward mechanic in the game. Be an amoral kleptomaniac, or be punished for it! It's downright anti-roleplaying, but who cares when some have fun abusing the system and others are free to kind of ignore it - right? Also ignore there's no law & order system which manages to be a direct downgrade from the two decade old predecessor.

Consider "weapon dipping". Larian's cheesy core mechanic manages to become a chore mechanic as it's both clunky and micromanagement-intensive. It also comes with its own balance issues and is a significant early-game damage bonus for particularly dual-wielders - "balanced" around the player's "boredom threshold". On top of that it manages to be immersion breaking in that it can be a normal candle that is everburning and can set even steel weapons ablaze. A fire that somehow does not burn the wielder. It lacks any internal logic. It is also wholly unnecessary, as most of the cheese really is. D&D has tons of ways to set "weapons on fire" using cantrips, spells or magical or alchemical resources. The D&D implementations has none of the many issues of Larian's cheese.

Much of the same criticism can be directed towards the "shove" or "throw enemy"-mechanics. Alongside "tadpole jump" these are some of the numerous strong boosts to Strength-based characters (again more balance issues). It is situationally an instant win mechanic, simplistic in a way that does not consider relative body mass, or indeed multiple legs. A tiny invisible halfling could push the huge oblivious/stupid phase spider matriarch queen with 100% success. Again, D&D has cantrips, spells and magical items that could do the trick (i.e. Repelling Blast, Thunderwave, Ring of the Ram, homebrew wild shaped Bull with knockback charge) without messing with balance or immersion. Hell, I wouldn't complain as much if Larian bothered to even attempt giving their cheese legitimacy by providing some "internal logic". I.e. by making it a "tadpole" kinetic, more balanced power where willpower+dexterity could give a ranged option to willpower+strength melee.

The barrelmancy is fine, just scale it back and give it "internal logic". What is it, and why are there so many barrels of "wildfire"? Why aren't the enemies reacting to explosives in their midst? Why aren't the enemies using it to their advantage? I would like to see the BG1s "kobold commandos" make a comeback with BG3 goblins using these things against the player. This would be a direct homage to the classic and a type of "cheese" people would appreciate.

Over-emphasis on homebrew/cheesy magical items. When everything is "special", nothing is special. Scale back and give D&D players more of the classic items. Better balance please.

Once you move beyond the "if you don't like it, don't use it"-mindset and actually bother to analyze the issues, you realize this is about much more than a handful of easily ignored implementations. BG3 is supposed to live up to the legendary title, but Larian is dropping the ball gameplay-wise. Larian could give us their fun gameplay elements without sacrificing balance and immersion, just by respecting D&D a little more. Larian (writers AND programmers) and Wizards of the Coast (D&D experts) could benefit immensely from a sit down focusing on making the gameplay congruent with the 5e setting and BG3 story.
I started to compare BG3's bestiary with D&D Monster manual. Early observations : combats are way too challenging for our party.

Why ? Probably because the game assume you'll use those cheese.

While many players complained about missing, it seems Larian has often increased créatures AC.
This mean you'll miss more often than you should... That's probably also why they give us easy advantages (what's the cause, what's the consequences ?), breaking at the same time a lot of spells, features, tactics,...

They also increased dexterity, consequences for ST.

Cheeses have many conséquences whatever you use them or not.

On another recent feedback thread someone is even saying that playing a caster makes no sense.
I disagree because there are many pro but I understand him... With dipping it's like 2 additionnal arms wielding fire daggers for melee characters.

This is just an exemple but every melee characters are more powerfull than they should. Dual wielder are even more. How could the game be balanced for every players with such huge gap ? (Dipping can also burn the targets).

On the other hand is that fair to ask players not to use fun/usefull basic mechanics because they're too powerfull ?

It's all about balancing D&D and BG3's additions and nothing else. This would lead to a better game for everyone especially if they created mechanics that can easily be tweaked by options.

Flat bonus for highground/backstab is easy to tweak (0/+1/+2/+5), advantage can only be a ON/OFF button.

With the actual combat setting higher level of difficulty will just suck and only increase player's frustration (more miss, more death). BG3's most powerfull mechanics are cheap and there are close to nothing to learn about this game except a few cheeses.
Yeah there are so many damn examples of the cheese breaking balance and immersion that it's kind of ... depressing.
So ... to put it simply ...
IF monsters would have proper HP, and AC, and spells, and spellslots, and equipment, etc.
You would not mind that game would provide you backstab/high ground, or abylity to push someone off the cliff, or surround him with his own barrels of Blackpowder, etc. ?

Bcs this sounds like quite easy thing to manage. O_o
Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD
So ... to put it simply ...
IF monsters would have proper HP, and AC, and spells, and spellslots, and equipment, etc.
You would not mind that game would provide you backstab/high ground, or abylity to push someone off the cliff, or surround him with his own barrels of Blackpowder, etc. ?

Bcs this sounds like quite easy thing to manage. O_o

Not at all what I said.
Combats are balanced arround those cheese. "You may not use them" doesn't work for all the basics cheeses. To put it simply that's what I said wink
Im not quite sure how to tell it differently, but i try bcs you clearly dont understand me.
Mainly bcs i was not talking about what you said ... but i was giving you a question. -_-

Lets try it this way:
You say that *NOW* combat is balanced arround cheese.
And that is problem.

Correct?

Therefore i ask:
What *IF* combat would *NOT* be balanced arround cheese?

Lets use your example:
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
While many players complained about missing, it seems Larian has often increased créatures AC.
This mean you'll miss more often than you should... That's probably also why they give us easy advantages
*NOW* Higher AC
using cheese = game as it should be ... not using cheese = game harder than it should be
-> Therefore combat bad.

Correct?

*IF* Regular AC (read as: Same as in monster manual for DnD)
using cheese = game easier then it should be ... not using cheese = game as it should be
-> Therefore combat good.

Correct?

So i try to repeat myself:
*IF* monsters would have proper HP, AC, spells, spellslots, equipment, consumables etc.
(Read as: If everything about monsters would be coppied from monster manual, nothing added by Larian)
Would you still mind cheese being there?
And if so, why?
Posted By: zamo Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 12/05/21 02:38 PM
Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD
*IF* monsters would have proper HP, AC, spells, spellslots, equipment, consumables etc.
(Read as: If everything about monsters would be coppied from monster manual, nothing added by Larian)
Would you still mind cheese being there?
And if so, why?

I am not Maximuuus, but I would mind.

Advantage/disadvantage from high/low ground is still very impactful and AI takes advantage of it all the time. Enemies will still advantage over you while you have disadvantage, no matter if their stats are original or not. Also AI occasionally will get advantage from backstab too.
Posted By: grysqrl Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 12/05/21 03:42 PM
Some of the joy in games comes from learning the boundaries of what you can do within the rules and then pushing on those boundaries. I think that Larian wants to give players that "I'm clever - I came up with a workaround that just skirts the rules" feeling, but the problem is that they give it away for free.

Blowing up barrels, for example, isn't clever - it takes work to get through the game without having barrels blow up. And once you learn that trick, it's easy to use it again in any fight. Gaining Advantage by getting to high ground isn't clever - it's almost trivial and creates a huge swing in battles; and you can use it in every fight. And even if you don't intend to use it - even if you try not to use it - it's still baked into the system and it will be used, both by you and against you.

The challenge of coming up with clever tactics isn't there - it's too easy because they are given to us for free. We need to be pushing against the rules to earn our victories. Saying "just don't use the cheesy stuff" leaves us pushing on a rotten wall that collapses under our weight. It's not gratifying.
Posted By: gaymer Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 12/05/21 03:50 PM
Originally Posted by grysqrl
Some of the joy in games comes from learning the boundaries of what you can do within the rules and then pushing on those boundaries. I think that Larian wants to give players that "I'm clever - I came up with a workaround that just skirts the rules" feeling, but the problem is that they give it away for free.

Blowing up barrels, for example, isn't clever - it takes work to get through the game without having barrels blow up. And once you learn that trick, it's easy to use it again in any fight. Gaining Advantage by getting to high ground isn't clever - it's almost trivial and creates a huge swing in battles; and you can use it in every fight. And even if you don't intend to use it - even if you try not to use it - it's still baked into the system and it will be used, both by you and against you.

The challenge of coming up with clever tactics isn't there - it's too easy because they are given to us for free. We need to be pushing against the rules to earn our victories. Saying "just don't use the cheesy stuff" leaves us pushing on a rotten wall that collapses under our weight. It's not gratifying.

Agreed. What Larian perceives they are doing by creating this environment in the game is not actual reality.
OFF-TOPIC (apologies mods): I don't mean to be offensive, but you mentioned "Im not quite sure how to tell it differently, but i try bcs you clearly dont understand me." and so I wanted to maybe help you understand why I at least have difficulty understanding you.

You have a very unique posting style, with lots of elipses (...), lots of single ideas separated by spaces instead of in a single paragraph, abbreviations for words that aren't normally abbreviated in English ("Because is bcs"), and to be honest, you often end your posts with a slight jab at the poster you're responding to while adding in smiley face emotes to make it seem like you're being friendly.

All that adds up to posts that can be difficult to follow, at least for me.
Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD
Im not quite sure how to tell it differently, but i try bcs you clearly dont understand me.
Mainly bcs i was not talking about what you said ... but i was giving you a question. -_-

Lets try it this way:
You say that *NOW* combat is balanced arround cheese.
And that is problem.

Correct?

Therefore i ask:
What *IF* combat would *NOT* be balanced arround cheese?

Lets use your example:
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
While many players complained about missing, it seems Larian has often increased créatures AC.
This mean you'll miss more often than you should... That's probably also why they give us easy advantages
*NOW* Higher AC
using cheese = game as it should be ... not using cheese = game harder than it should be
-> Therefore combat bad.

Correct?

*IF* Regular AC (read as: Same as in monster manual for DnD)
using cheese = game easier then it should be ... not using cheese = game as it should be
-> Therefore combat good.

Correct?

So i try to repeat myself:
*IF* monsters would have proper HP, AC, spells, spellslots, equipment, consumables etc.
(Read as: If everything about monsters would be coppied from monster manual, nothing added by Larian)
Would you still mind cheese being there?
And if so, why?

AC is just another exemple to show how bad the game is balanced and how strange Larian is thinking about "the missing issue" they created.

Of course I would mind of cheeses even if the AC/abilities and any other statistics were "true" to the MM.
Those cheese reduce our creativity A LOT and the tactical value of this tactical TB game.

There's 0 valuable tactics in BG3 except cheesing - from highground/backstab, to dipping, to the WTF consummables.
And I'm not talking about "choices for fun" that have 0 consequences on the game's balance like barrels... I'm talking about all those basic mechanics that are way too OP compared to the rules Larian's trying to use.

Don't use any cheese and the game is so hard. Use all of them and it's so easy. How couldn't you consider this as a problem ?
The best tactics in BG3 are cheap, easy and repetitive. There's close to nothing to learn about the game except jumping, dipping, going higher and shoving.

Those chesses create issues to the class balance, to the game's difficulty, to the variety of meaningfull choices a D&D game should offer us.
D&D is supposed to be about "freedom". BG3 is all about using the same tricks with every class at every encounters.

Oh yea of course you CAN use sleep, fog cloud, blindness, fairy fire, try to hide during combats and so on... But it's always a sub-optimal tactic.
Thinking inside Larian's box is the best and the more valuable tactic. Not what I want in a D&D game where it's supposed to be "my choices".
Originally Posted by grysqrl
Some of the joy in games comes from learning the boundaries of what you can do within the rules and then pushing on those boundaries. I think that Larian wants to give players that "I'm clever - I came up with a workaround that just skirts the rules" feeling, but the problem is that they give it away for free.

Blowing up barrels, for example, isn't clever - it takes work to get through the game without having barrels blow up. And once you learn that trick, it's easy to use it again in any fight. Gaining Advantage by getting to high ground isn't clever - it's almost trivial and creates a huge swing in battles; and you can use it in every fight. And even if you don't intend to use it - even if you try not to use it - it's still baked into the system and it will be used, both by you and against you.

The challenge of coming up with clever tactics isn't there - it's too easy because they are given to us for free. We need to be pushing against the rules to earn our victories. Saying "just don't use the cheesy stuff" leaves us pushing on a rotten wall that collapses under our weight. It's not gratifying.

I would get more satisfaction from the simple action of engaging enemies with a Fighter to hold them in place than the high ground backstab help jump around nonsense. But even that basic tactic isn't available since Larian gave every enemy some form of teleport. Minotaurs - teleport, Hook Horrors - teleport, Bulette - teleport, Phase Spiders - teleport, Githyanki - teleport, Mud Mephits - teleport, Hag - teleport... bla bla bla everything teleports to pounce on your squishy party members.

And all the battlefields are wide open spaces where you are just dashing for high ground. Even underground every fight is about high ground.

The OP homebrew mechanics override all interesting class ability combos like Hold Person and Inflict Wounds. Or even just shoving something prone so your team mates can use some powerful attacks with advantage would be fun, but you can't even shove prone. Just get to high ground and you'll win.

I'm surprised the combat is so terrible I don't feel like playing this otherwise amazing game.
I for one wish combat was a little more challenging. I took out the ENTIRE Zentarim hideoout (with Asterion) in a single turn by 1) showing a person off a cliff and 2) shooting a barrel.

It was epic --- and also very boring. Sort of like a summer blockbuster movie with lots of explosions. No depth, big boom.

I have no idea about DnD rules and what would be better/worse in those terms of getting it closer to 5e. The upside of some of these mechanics (like shove and backstab and throw) is that newbs can have a more accessible experience because they don't have to know every little nuance of party building and strategy in Dnd to survive --- ie, they can make it work with whoever ended up in the engagement and can go for a party of folks they actually like story-wise. Hell, I can even say that this game has made me want to play *actual* tabletop DnD, which I have not done for many, many, MANY years. So being accessible is great.

On the downside --- being able to take out a whole hideout in a single move? I don't know...I gotta call that cheese. The stinky kind.

Would be great to have "newbie version" and "advanced version" settings in game, with the advanced being more challenging and true to 5e (ie, no barrels, less surfaces, disengage separate from jump, and all the others raised by DnD old-schooolers).

Maybe in the next game?
Originally Posted by timebean
I for one wish combat was a little more challenging. I took out the ENTIRE Zentarim hideoout (with Asterion) in a single turn by 1) showing a person off a cliff and 2) shooting a barrel.

It was epic --- and also very boring. Sort of like a summer blockbuster movie with lots of explosions. No depth, big boom.

I have no idea about DnD rules and what would be better/worse in those terms of getting it closer to 5e. The upside of some of these mechanics (like shove and backstab and throw) is that newbs can have a more accessible experience because they don't have to know every little nuance of party building and strategy in Dnd to survive --- ie, they can make it work with whoever ended up in the engagement and can go for a party of folks they actually like story-wise. Hell, I can even say that this game has made me want to play *actual* tabletop DnD, which I have not done for many, many, MANY years. So being accessible is great.

On the downside --- being able to take out a whole hideout in a single move? I don't know...I gotta call that cheese. The stinky kind.

Would be great to have "newbie version" and "advanced version" settings in game, with the advanced being more challenging and true to 5e (ie, no barrels, less surfaces, disengage separate from jump, and all the others raised by DnD old-schooolers).

Maybe in the next game?

Everything is possible and that's why some of us here are trying to make suggestion that could suit all kind of players from newcomers to D&D or any other tactical TB game fans.

There are not a lot of problem but there are many solutions. Of course the balance between D&D and Larian's additions/changes have to be reworked... but that's for the sake of all of us whatever they'll change or not.
Ok, thanks for answers. smile
You were all much helpfull. smile
Posted By: Blacas Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 14/05/21 02:02 PM
@Maximuuus
I admire your efforts to make this game better.
However I am not sure the reason why things are not moving, comes from Larian's view on what is balanced.
I am convinced that the combat AI desperately needs those "larianisms" to show some activity. From there it's not that much about providing the player with some "cheese", it's more about giving the AI some elements to demonstrate some abilities and to show a pseudo intelligence. That is not tactically impressive but its adaptative nature allows players to play and replay several fights with a different experience (potentially boring) each time.
In the whole EA part of the game, I am not aware of any fight where the AI would perform well on a flat ground with no interactive object, just relying on the DnD features of the npcs. If they don't do it at low levels, I am afraid they won't do it at higher levels when the number of combinations explode.
Posted By: JJRX5 Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 14/05/21 04:16 PM
Originally Posted by Blacas
@Maximuuus
I admire your efforts to make this game better.
However I am not sure the reason why things are not moving, comes from Larian's view on what is balanced.
I am convinced that the combat AI desperately needs those "larianisms" to show some activity. From there it's not that much about providing the player with some "cheese", it's more about giving the AI some elements to demonstrate some abilities and to show a pseudo intelligence. That is not tactically impressive but its adaptative nature allows players to play and replay several fights with a different experience (potentially boring) each time.
In the whole EA part of the game, I am not aware of any fight where the AI would perform well on a flat ground with no interactive object, just relying on the DnD features of the npcs. If they don't do it at low levels, I am afraid they won't do it at higher levels when the number of combinations explode.

I think the above comment says it all. The AI is completely built around the arcade “cheese” mechanics. Start a battle from the top of the tower in the goblin camp and sit back and watch as several goblins just stand around and talk trash while you fill them with arrows round after round. I am pretty sure that every battle needs to be planned in advance for it to not completely break the AI. If you do something truly unexpected, such as retreat to the other side of a bridge instead of rushing head long into the throng or seizing the high ground, the AI doesn’t seem to know how to respond. I don’t think there is any fixing this I am afraid.

In many ways this game is Baldurs Gate: Monty Python. It seems to me that Larian has adopted the concept that fantasy games are not meant to be taken seriously. The original Infinity Engine games often had adolescent humor in the dialogues, think of the Melium the Masterful encounter or two psycho girls on the ship in the city, but the combat was always deadly serious. Cheese tactics were possible, i.e. wand of cloud kill and project image, but they were certainly not core to the experience. Larian seems to have taken the opposite approach. Conversations are all deadly serious with little humor, but the battles are meant to look like a Michael Bey film.

I have spent the last few weeks playing Pathfinder Kingmaker and I am struck by how it is superior in so many ways (although I think the devs were kind of a prick at times). For instance, there is no need to click 50 times in a room to loot things. This is so nice from a quality of life perspective. There is no eating of pigs heads for healing. Rest is regulated by supplies. There is an actual sense of urgency. Last but not least it is actually fun to use character abilities. I have enjoyed playing BG3, but I think they are going to lose people by about mid game if the mechanics and immersion aren’t improved. Once people realize that there are abilities (such as throw) that produce instant victory, they won’t be able to stop themselves from using it. It would be like giving a kid a test with the answer sheet and telling them not to use the answer sheet until it is time to grade it. Once you know the optimum way of getting from one point to the other, it is almost impossible to not take advantage of it.
I would second the above.

I'm all for moments of levity to lighten the sombre undertaking of what should be a grand fantasy adventure but Larian remind me of someone who is constantly trying too hard to be funny; after a while it can become rather exhausting.
Originally Posted by timebean
I for one wish combat was a little more challenging. I took out the ENTIRE Zentarim hideoout (with Asterion) in a single turn by 1) showing a person off a cliff and 2) shooting a barrel.

It was epic --- and also very boring. Sort of like a summer blockbuster movie with lots of explosions. No depth, big boom.

I have no idea about DnD rules and what would be better/worse in those terms of getting it closer to 5e. The upside of some of these mechanics (like shove and backstab and throw) is that newbs can have a more accessible experience because they don't have to know every little nuance of party building and strategy in Dnd to survive --- ie, they can make it work with whoever ended up in the engagement and can go for a party of folks they actually like story-wise. Hell, I can even say that this game has made me want to play *actual* tabletop DnD, which I have not done for many, many, MANY years. So being accessible is great.

On the downside --- being able to take out a whole hideout in a single move? I don't know...I gotta call that cheese. The stinky kind.

Would be great to have "newbie version" and "advanced version" settings in game, with the advanced being more challenging and true to 5e (ie, no barrels, less surfaces, disengage separate from jump, and all the others raised by DnD old-schooolers).

Maybe in the next game?
A lot of folks have advocated for this.

Honestly I believe a healthy middle ground can be achieved. For example characters shouldn't be able to carry so many barrels, but oil flasks are native to D&D. If the fire arrow misses, the fire surface should too, etc.

I think shove would remain in the middle ground. But if that's too much work, I'm okay with pure D&D and Larian's D&D light mode.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: Looks like Larian cheese is here to stay - 16/05/21 05:37 AM
Originally Posted by Seraphael
completely broken, virtually non-existent resting mechanics (D&D is wholly balanced around it)

overpowered bonuses for height and flanking

Not many mentions pickpocketing as part of the cheese, but it very much is.

Consider "weapon dipping".

Much of the same criticism can be directed towards the "shove" or "throw enemy"-mechanics.

Why aren't the enemies reacting to explosives in their midst?

Over-emphasis on homebrew/cheesy magical items.

Once you move beyond the "if you don't like it, don't use it"-mindset and actually bother to analyze the issues, you realize this is about much more than a handful of easily ignored implementations. BG3 is supposed to live up to the legendary title, but Larian is dropping the ball gameplay-wise. Larian could give us their fun gameplay elements without sacrificing balance and immersion, just by respecting D&D a little more. Larian (writers AND programmers) and Wizards of the Coast (D&D experts) could benefit immensely from a sit down focusing on making the gameplay congruent with the 5e setting and BG3 story.

These are all great examples of major balancing problems im BG3. It is frustrating to hear so many apparently ignorant people say things like "play another game then." The point of this forum is to discuss the game, and Larian has explicitly asked us to criticize the game so they can make a better one.

There are major issues with the way the game mechanics are balanced. Not just between classes, but the way D&D has been refined and balanced over five decades. This is not some silly generic RPG -- this is an officially licensed campaign. So, if you give players unlimited shove to CC every fight with no skills or spells, easy advantage on all attacks, consequence-free stealing of all items and gold, effortless cheesing of AI through barrels, and unlimited replenishment of spell slots and abilities...then it's not D&D anymore. The game mechanics are what define the game. Removing all the game mechanics makes it not the game.
Originally Posted by timebean
I for one wish combat was a little more challenging. I took out the ENTIRE Zentarim hideoout (with Asterion) in a single turn by 1) showing a person off a cliff and 2) shooting a barrel.

It was epic --- and also very boring. Sort of like a summer blockbuster movie with lots of explosions. No depth, big boom.

I have no idea about DnD rules and what would be better/worse in those terms of getting it closer to 5e. The upside of some of these mechanics (like shove and backstab and throw) is that newbs can have a more accessible experience because they don't have to know every little nuance of party building and strategy in Dnd to survive --- ie, they can make it work with whoever ended up in the engagement and can go for a party of folks they actually like story-wise. Hell, I can even say that this game has made me want to play *actual* tabletop DnD, which I have not done for many, many, MANY years. So being accessible is great.

On the downside --- being able to take out a whole hideout in a single move? I don't know...I gotta call that cheese. The stinky kind.

Would be great to have "newbie version" and "advanced version" settings in game, with the advanced being more challenging and true to 5e (ie, no barrels, less surfaces, disengage separate from jump, and all the others raised by DnD old-schooolers).

Maybe in the next game?
You don't even have to use barrels. Just start from high ground and shove them down and the fight is over whatever you do to kill them. High Ground wins and bad AI loses.
© Larian Studios forums