I'm just going to come out and say it, since most folks seem afraid to. This game is primarily a DOS clone and has very little to do with D&D. Pathfinder-Kingmaker (a much better D&D-based game) has an expansion coming out this summer and I will wait for that and will play it until my eyes burn out. I will also wait patiently for this game, in the hopes that when the full version of Baldur's Gate 3 comes out Larian has decided if they really want to make a D&D game, or if I wasted $60.

Larian, Baldur's Gate was a D&D game. Its namesake should be a D&D game.

Hey there,

Many folks follow your sentiment to varying degrees, don't feel alone... If you can spare the time and effort, I'd strongly encourage you to drop this paragraph in to their official feedback form as well (you can find it Here), since that's a way of being certain that your voice and opinion reaches Larian directly. Every voice counts.

Just for the record Pathfinder Wrath of the Righteous is a full blown sequel in a new engine, not an expansion of Kingmaker.
It's also based on Pathfinder, not D&D, but since former is basically born as a branch of the latter and they are basically the same, mechanically speaking, we are splitting hair.

Not to mention it would be hard to deny that Kingmaker felt WAY closer to BG2 than anything Larian has ever done so far, anyway.
Starting with a control scheme that doesn't make you feel the urge to assault a random developer and beat the crap out of the poor bastard in retaliation.

Well, I'd recommend he make it a little more polite first otherwise they'll likely disregard him as a disgruntled fan.

I'm in this thread only to say even now, on EA stage, I believe that BG3 is better than Pathfinder.

You know the title of this game is not "Dungeons and Dragons 5e, The Video Game" right?

It is Baldurs gate 3. A video game that used Dungeons and Dragons as a guideline or is inspired by D&D. I don't think the goal is, or has ever been to "what ever game matches D&D the best, wins"

That being said, the games art work, the stories the way you can play though 5 times and each time get different stories, the way they make you "feel" you are in their world, has never been done quite like this game.

This game BLOWS AWAY Divinity or pathfinder, those games are kids cartoons in comparison to a full adult movie.

Thanks for sharing.

Currently I don't.
In fact, if Pathfinder could get BG3's aesthetic and production value deciding which one seems better in terms of systems at play and overall design wouldn't even be a contest.

I'm not sure if you genuinely think you are making a compelling point here.

Also, I never played a single game of D&D 5th edition in my life and that should already tell a lot of how much "absolute fidelity" is at the center of my worries, just to stress how pointless it is to keep beating that strawman.

I mean... people already claim it's a dos clone and has little to do with d&d.

Lol...no....Not accoridng to Swen Vincke/Larian:

BG3 is based on the fifth edition [of D&D]. We started by setting out the ruleset very meticulously, and then seeing what worked and what didn’t work – because it is a videogame, and D&D was made to play as a tabletop game. So for the things that didn’t work, we came up with solutions.(Swen Vincke)
https://www.pcgamesn.com/baldurs-gate-3/larian-interview

We started by taking the ruleset that's in the Player's Handbook. We ported it as faithfully as we could, then there were some number of things that we saw that doesn't work that well, and so we started looking for solutions to do that. The hardest part—and this is the most interesting part also about it, because there's a lot of stuff from the rules that actually ports quite well, so—but the most interesting part is the role of the Dungeon Master...(Swen Vincke)
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2019...-turn-based-rpgs-and-dreams-coming-true/

But in terms of actual systems, it’s Fifth Edition D&D through and through. And we’ve changed some things, because it’s a different medium, so you can’t just be like, ‘let’s just take all the rules of a tabletop game and put it into a video game.’ It just doesn’t work. So there are a few things that change, but fundamentally it is D&D. It’s built on Fifth Edition. (Adam SMith)
https://www.vg247.com/2020/02/27/baldurs-gate-3-dungeons-and-dragons/

Neither you, nor Swen should be surprised that people are upset at his dishonesty in how he described BG3, and the process of adapting 5e rules to the game, since it's painfully obvious that Larian started with DOS, and then attempted to graft on 5e, and what we have in EA, is a mess.

Imagine Swen Vincke and Todd Howard sitting a room together.

One justifies that "It just didn't work". And the other justifies that "it just works".

Really highlights that we're really talking about design choices and project choices. Both are roundabout ways of saying, we weren't ready to commit to fully implementing the concept.

Todd Howard betting on gamers being accepting of bugs and Swen betting on gamers' tolerance for sub-optimal choices.

You aren't alone in this. Some of us already gave up on the game.

Shame I already paid for it, but unless they intentionally remove the ability to do so, Modders can correct most of Larians unnecessary changes to the rule set.

Those quotes in Grudgebearers post are particularly illuminating.

My big fear is they never listen to us and this early access, feedback time, is just a big shell game now that they have our money. I hope they prove otherwise.

You understand that many games have good graphics, choices and a good story right?
Why go for a D&D license if not to use the mechanics?

The biggest problem is that they apparently lied about implementation. For real, if they had implemented 5e mechanics RAW in the EA and feedback was overwhelmingly negative, though I'd probably be on side of the few that would've liked it (based on Solasta), I'd understand if they changed it to be more like DOS based on a sales strategy. Games have to make money, I get it, no one wants this to fail.

However there is no evidence that they implemented RAW mechanics at all, but there is evidence that a mostly faithful adaptation works well, in fact, Solasta is getting higher scores than BG3 on GoG.

Wait so what is your complaint though? The OP failed to provide any concrete issue.

Is it that BG3 is a D&D based game, turn based, with faithfully implemented D&D systems, unlike real time BG1 or BG2 that were at best "D&D themed" in how they handled cast orders, spells, cantrips, controls and everything else?

Or is it that BG3 while incomplete has an incredible story telling, characters, replayability with multiple solutions and paths through most zones/encounters seen so far?

Because those are all upsides, not downsides.

Is this game a BG1/BG2 clone, with absolutely no changes to control scheme and systems? No. But it's not based on D&D Second Edition like BG1/2 were. And if anything it is WAY more faithful to 5E than either of those games were.

Is it different? Sure! Very! But the spirit is there.

I think the reality is that with BG 1/2, Bioware was attempting to adapt 2e DnD to the PC, they just chose poorly with the RTwP due to James Ohlen's love of Warhammer, and the popularity of Diablo at the time, and had to abandon parts of 2e that wouldn't work in RTwP because they were too dependent on a turn-based environment.

Whereas Larian, has claimed to be adapting 5e to the PC with BG3, but really just took DOS mechanics and haphazardly slapped a few 5e concepts on top of them.

For me the soul of D&D is not so much the mechanics, but the fantasy escape. I probably spent more hours reading through the AD&D books than actually playing the game, and generally I kept the combat mechanics pretty simple when I did play. As a DM, I rolled the monster hit & damage dice behind my screen, so that I could nudge the numbers a bit to make sure the players were having fun. A high level 8HD monster would have maybe 40 hit points, so turn-based combat was not too cumbersome.

I never played DOS, so when I do finally pick up this game it will be all new for me. And that is OK as long as the play is fun and the sense of immersion takes me into another world. I guess one aspect of D&D that I would look for is to be able to play a part in some of the nostalgic original stories revolving around places, names, and items such as the City of Brass, the Wind Dukes of Aaqa, or the Recorder of Ye Cind. Those are the things I often read about but have never gotten a chance to play.

Now, try to imagine the viewpoint of someone who knows neither 5E, nor Divinity: Original Sin. (I know, picturing what happens in other people's heads is hard.)

What do you think they think of the game? Do they think it's a mess?

Lean it a little closer, I want to whisper and tell you something.

My friend has played neither. Granted, he had me there to explain the rules to him. I've never play DOS, but I know 5e, and Baldurs Gate is enough like 5e that I could explain pretty much everything to him. He understands.

It's not very difficult, my friends never played DOS or DnD. They all really enjoyed EA access BG3. The main thing is that this was their first game with tactical pause mechanics. I think they were interested because it was visually different from the others games like this. Before that, they played games like Dragon Age and The Witcher. First, they were attracted to visual part, then story, characters and gameplay. They didn't care about DnD rules. To be honest, I also do not know which "skills" are correct, and which are not. I've only studied lore, world, races, and things like that.

I believe that there are many people like me.

I played Patch 2 BG3 with a friend who had never played anything D&D or DOS before. Their favorite part of the game was Shoving enemies off high ground (distinct from shoving into pits) which has made me reconsider my opinions on the necessity of turning it back into an action.

Overall, my friend enjoyed the game with 2 big caveats:
- Conversations are currently almost entirely a one-person experience. Only 1 of the players gets to participate in the conversation and the game doesn't actually tell any other players what dialogue option was chosen. So it was boring and confusing for me as player 2. Currently, BG3 is only really multiplayer for combat and deciding where to go next.
- The game doesn't properly explain its mechanics. I, who was familiar with both 5e and BG3 via my first playthrough, had to explain a lot of things that the tutorial/tool-tips/codex really should explain in-game.

If only Bg3 has Solasta Combat, I will buy it for 120 bucks.
But now? Pffffffft

#metoo

Still could be even better tho. :P

I've seen this discussion come up a lot here and as a perpetual lurker I have honestly been afraid to get involved. These are just my thoughts on the game and my experience playing with my friend who has more DnD experience than I do.

I'm what I would call a beginner DnD player but also a lore nerd. I'm a few sessions into a short campaign and have really enjoyed it, but the parts I care most about are RP, world building, and lore. I'll spend hours reading about a world and characters much more than crunching any numbers or worrying about the perfect build. I still need help with when to roll which dice, what all the spells do, and what everything means in a tabletop setting. The DnD game I play apparently has some homebrew and I personally see no problem with homebrew. I don't much care for strictness as long as I'm enjoying myself. I think playing BG3 has helped me understand how DnD works better. I'm NOT saying that it's taught me to play DnD, because after seeing the complaints here I know that I'm getting a Larian homebrew, but rather now I can better visualize different spells and how to use things like perception checks and stuff... please don't hurt me forum people! BG3 has actually made me more excited to play tabletop DnD, which I would hope is what people want?

So needless to say I've had a great time. I've never played any DOS games. I think BG3 is fun. I don't think it's a mess, nor do I think combat is a mess. I've had times where I questioned certain things in combat or found it buggy, but I think this will improve. There are some things I think should be changed like disengage, shove, and high ground advantage, for example, but my overall assessment is that I love it and have high hopes for it.

I also did a full multiplayer playthrough with a friend who has played a lot of DnD 5e both as a player and as a DM. They lean more towards having a good build than worrying about lore and also have more experience with these types of games than I do (but I know they haven't played DOS). They enjoyed the game and we had a lot of fun on our playthrough. They did have times where they were like "that's different" or "it's usually this way" or "oof that's annoying, hope they fix that", but also found things like high ground advantage that they thought were cool, even if they need to be tweaked, and we talked about how that could be incorporated as a cool homebrew mechanic. Overall they liked the game and intend to play it when it comes out in full.

Bought BG3 out of incredible excitement, played it for 15 hours, waited over 6 months to see how patches would evolve, now uninstalled it. Bastard child of DOS2 with sprinkled D&D here and there. Bravo to Larian, they got their demographics right on point. The game will sell. Its great fun for the modern <<<RPG>>> crowd.

Playing Solasta LOVE the D&D combat, but thats about it. Uninstalled it.

Played a bit of Pathfinder Wrath of the rigtheous in beta...In my eyes it has the most potential!

Oh well, back playing original BG2, Planescape: torment, Arcanum and Wizardy 8 for the xxxth time...

Oh the usual "if it doesn't exactly fit my own personal point of view about what dnd is then I don't accept it".

I love the game. It has dragons, it has dungeons. By pure logic this is a dungeons and dragons game. It doesn't follow any edition of the rules by Wizards of the coast? Who cares. I use those when I play in real life around a table.

Nevertheless as the click baiting title of the thread stats I'll wait for the full version of the game. Just because I already now all the map, all the secrets, and so on, so to me it has lost appeal even if there are new classes added, I hope in the next patch they add new areas, that way the fact that I have to recreate a new character because of save incompatibilities won't be a burden.

I wish they could be able to accelerate the development now that vaccines for covid 19 are somministred.

I still have extremely high hopes for this game. If they do listen to people and adjust things, this game could probably be the best RPG of all time. That's how I feel. <3
I certainly hope I am right >_<

My thoughts on the games:

BG3: Love it so far! Can't wait for the next patch.

Solasta: Not interested. It looks like it is all about the rules and little else.

Pathfinder: Didn't play the first game, which is infamous for its timed quests! But from what I can see Wrath of the Righteous doesn't have timed quests, yay! I will likely give it a try when it comes out.

I'll go ahead and ask the question. Has there ever been a pure implementation of D&D as a video game? If so, is the argument to have an updated version of that game as the template for BG3? From where I'm sitting the only games I'm hearing mentioned to compare against BG3 are not pure renderings of the ruleset. But they are FUN for an average player to pick up and play, and might send new people down the path to tabletop gaming with a basic familiarity of the game. I'm willing to accept some compromises if it helps tell a story in the way that Larian has proven they can. At the end of the day, I think that's what will keep players coming back.

Interesting read, that confirms what the poster you're telling "No" stated. Anyone looking for a 1 to 1 conversion is going to be disappointed. But that's fine, we're all entitled to our own expectations.

To the OP, good on you. It's fine to wait for full release, if that's what you want to do, it was even suggested for those that may have thought they'd get a completely polished experience from EA.

Well said. Anyone who reads that and expects pure D&D from Baldur's Gate 3 is an idiot.

There are changes to the mechanics, just like they said, and there are some oversights, like the importance of long rests. If these things bother you, feel free to say so. It's what everyone else is doing. It's what I do.

And maybe there are some quotes I'm not aware of. But if all we have to go on are the quotes above, you cannot reasonably say that Swen is wrong or lied about what they were delivering. Anyone perception that they have comes from your own assumptions of what a D&D game should and shouldn't be.

God, I hope you are wrong.
Did anyone just give up on designing a good game with interesting mechanics these days?

Where did I say that I expected a 1 to 1 conversion? The poster that I was responding to, said that Larian was just using 5e as a "guideline" or "inspiration", and that's clearly not what Swen/Larian said when asked about how much of the 5th edition ruleset would be included.

Where did I state that I expected "pure D&D"?

What I expected, was for Larian to do what they said they were doing, and start with adapting 5th edition, and make changes where necessary, not start with DOS, and add on a little 5e as lip service, which is what BG3 is in its current state.

I can 100% say that Swen was not truthful when he said that they adapted the PHB, because that is a demonstrably false statement.

That was just the impression I got from reading about it. I haven't played it (the beta was really expensive for a series I have never played).

Unfortunately, its wrong. Owlcat again made their favorite "time limits", but now they are even worse, cuz it's a punishment. Do you think it's fun? Players of the beta version were so annoyed by this that they were looking for a way or bug that would help to cancel 'curse' effect which appeared after camp rest..

The Pathfinder mechanics have never been suitable for average player who wants to enjoy the game, rather than overcome and tryhard. And now they did it again. They made everything even more difficult than in Kingmaker. I'm glad you like it, but actually this kind of gameplay is not made for a large audience. This is for a narrow circle of fans of really difficult games.

Add a LITTLE 5e as lip service? How is it that I'm able to explain just about EVERY mechanic in BG3 to my friend, using nothing more than my knowledge of 5e? Seems like more than a little to me. Guess it's a matter of expectation.

As for them plugging the rules into DOS. Never played DOS, but it must be a lot like 5e, if what you're saying is true. The fact that they did this doesn't contradict anything they said, so there you have it.

Thanks for the heads up about it having timed quests! I will take that game off my list.

I do, for several reasons but especially because going with Kingmaker you'd have to be basicallty dumb as a brick to actually FAIL something because of a time limit.

It's like losing an XCOM 2 campaign to the Avatar Project. You'd have to basically ignore months of pre-warning without doing jack shit if not even deliberately working against your best interest... And then sport your best Pikachu face when when the campaign actually fails.
Most able-bodied players will end their campaigns with the Avatar Project steadily idle at ZERO just because it can't go on negative values. That's how easy it actually is to avoid the issue.

God forbid actually trying something out of your comfort zone and learn how it works before passing judgment on it.

Lol...you've not played much 5e have you?

Weapons don't grant abilities like cleave and trip. Reactions are something that you choose to do or not. Height doesn't give advantage. Every elemental spell doesn't create a damaging surface. Push doesn't launch people 15 feet, and isn't automatic. You can't jump to disengage freely. Barrels of oil weigh 400 lbs and don't explode when you hit them with a standard arrow. I can keep going on and on about all these aspects of BG3 that you believe are actually 5th edition, that aren't

And this statement from Swen, is 100% demonstrably false:

We started by taking the ruleset that's in the Player's Handbook. We ported it as faithfully as we could, then there were some number of things that we saw that doesn't work that well, and so we started looking for solutions to do that. The hardest part—and this is the most interesting part also about it, because there's a lot of stuff from the rules that actually ports quite well, so—but the most interesting part is the role of the Dungeon Master...(Swen Vincke)

lol. You're right. When they said they made 5e with changes, I understood them to mean they were making 5e without changes.

I remember being invited to a 5e game, and when I got there the DM was like "oh, there's flanking bonuses." I felt so sad that I was lied to, as he said it was 5e, not 5e with changes.

As for the quote where he "lied", he expressly said they ported the rules from the PHB. What did they port it to? As for them STARTING from the PHB, duh. How could they port the rules if they didn't start by reading and considering the rules? You ASSUMED they would build everything from the ground up, which they did NOT say they would do, even in that cute little color coded block of text you provided.

Well, personally, it causes me stress, if we talk about Kingmaker, even if you dont fail it. The new system of "time limits" is different, and it is related to rest, it works more like a punishment, it just gives a feeling of constant discomfort or even worse, a level 3 "curse" is hard to get, but getting level 1 is very easy, and it already lowers your stats.

There are other similar points, for example, you need to kill some boss RIGHT NOW, you can not go LVL up and return to it later, you need do it RIGHT NOW. If you can't do it, you'll just have to skip this fight if possible. And if not, then replay again from last safe and pray to the gods for "critical hit".

I don't like it.

When I talk about the Pathfinder's "difficulty", I'm not just talking about "time limits". In fact, the Pathfinder leveling system is very complex, and you can easily ruin a companion or your own character. In new pathfinder, you also have to lvl up your pet, which you can also ruin. This may surprise you, but it can put a lot of people off. They'll just get tired of figuring it out.

Thanks for proving my point, nearly every aspect of 5e that they've tried to implement, they've changed with their homebrew rules, i.e., they've paid "lip service" to 5th edition.

Swen is the one who said that they started by implementing the PHB, those are his words, his description of how they developed BG3, you can simp for him all you want, but that still won't change the fact, that those were his statements, and from what we have in Early Access, it is obvious, that they did not do what Swen stated. They've tacked on some 5E concepts onto DOS, and called it DnD.

Just in case it is not clear enough, Dungeons and Dragons doesn't refer to actual dungeons and dragons, but its a title of a game with an established ruleset and lore on which BG3 is based on (the 5th edition of the ruleset specifically). Whenever game has dungeons or dragons is actually irrelevant. Many games have dragons and dungons and are not DnD. I am glad you are enjoying the game though.

You have been asked before to keep the conversation polite yet you persist in using confrontational and insulting language and phraseology in your posts.

The next time you are insulting, belittling or aggressively dismissive in these forums, you will find that you are no longer welcome here.

What term or phrase would you prefer I use, to describe ' illogically defending the indefensible' ?

Proving your point? You understand I was being facetious, right? Maybe when you've played more 5e you'll understand that a good chunk of players play with some sort of homebrew. Are they simply paying lip service to dnd?

Call me a simp if you like. I prefer to think of it as comparing Swen's words to his actions. Seems like he told the truth, considering that the sweet caramel center is 5e. Quote all the homebrew you want, it doesn't change that the core mechanics are 5e.


I won't tell you how to do your job, but for what it's worth, my feelings aren't hurt. People will bash this game for not being what they want or expect. Some will do so with more passion than others. If they're going to do it, I say let them do it here, so I can correct any misconceptions they have.

Wow.

Yes, and in your attempt to be facetious, you've proved the point. Swen stated that Larian was starting with adapting the PHB, and then making changes to mechanics that didn't translate well.

From what we have in Early Access, it's readily obvious that is not what Larian actually has done; his statement, is false. Larian started with DOS, added some heavily modified 5e concepts, and ditched the rest. Reality is incongruous with his previous statements.

Whether you like homebrew rules, or like having a sprinkling of 5th edition on DOS, is irrelevant to the original discussion. Given your limited experience with 5e, I don't really expect you to grasp the importance of the mechanics and why they don't mesh with DOS. Maybe finding a local gaming group and getting a few hours getting a character up to level 5 or so would help your perspective.

I never ever played 5e, but after playing solasta. They should just copy paste the gosh darn mechanics. The mechanics of the game is fun.

I have downloaded mods to make bg3 more dnd like but man that mod is not perfect and somethings break sadly. I really do not like it when mods fix the gameplay of the game. I like it when they improve it, like Long war 2 from xcom. Mods will certainly improve the game and let us have other classes from other books.

Dont get me wrong BG3 is an absolutely beautiful game but combat feels too easy once you understand the mechanics. No challenge beyond the game when you understand the mechanics right now. In xcom 2 for example in legendary, hell even commander, you only get a fighting chance once you understand the mechanics.

The mechanics of BG3 are way too easy to abuse. Backstabbing and shooting from high ground is way too easy especially with shove. Plus the high ground mechanic is buggy as hell anyways. You can get low ground disadvantage from the half ogre in the barn just by aiming your shot to its head. But if you aim at its feet you can normal aiming without disadvantage. The best advice I saw was give +2 to high ground -2 to low ground.

I would go even further, why should shoot better if you have high ground. You will just be harder to hit because of less exposed body parts. So - 2 to low ground only would be good enough. Maybe even too powerful.

5th edition mechanics translate better to the PC than any previous versions of DnD, Solasta is proving that.

5th edition is also pretty well balanced, any changes that Larian makes in their implementation, will have unintended consequences, which is what we're seeing on top of the issues caused by the inclusion of DOS barrelmancy/surface spam.

You're right. If only I had played the proper amount of dnd, I'd ignore the fact that
A. The quotes you're providing don't help your case and
B. The things you complain about are homebrew changes, despite the fact that, as per your words, homebrew is irrelevant to the discussion.

As much as I uh don't exactly enjoy the confrontational nature of Grudge's statements, he does have a point with a lot of BG3.

They did claim they started with the DnD5e ruleset and then made changes as needed, but it is clear they started with their DoS engine and ruleset and started to apply 5e to that, hence why many DoS mechanics still remain in BG3. Atleast with implementation, they did start with DoS, even if in planning they started with 5e.
And homebrew is very relevant because it is what Larian has done, it has homebrewed mechanics, and many of these homebrewed mechanics have become detrimental to the experience of players while others have been fun. I really don't like how they changed mage hand but I do like how they added just a little bit to weapons to give them a special action that is equivalent to asking the dm if you can swing your sword at the enemies' legs to trip them. Larian has to try to balance BG3 as a 5e game while still being fun as a videogame to someone who has no experience with 5e, which can be difficult. But genuinely closer to 5e sounds to me like it'll achieve both.

Ironically, from the posts I have seen. The people that have little to no 5E experience are enjoying the game a lot, and the people that are knowledgeable in 5e are the people with the problems. People that don't have 5e experience see this as a dungeons and dragons game, with good story telling, and do not get hung up on translations of rules. While the hardcore 5e crowd are the ones that seem to despise the game and go on about Solasta being so great.

Just thought this sentence was slightly off.

If you give up on playing it as a 5e DnD game, and embrace the DOS mechanics, then the difficulty is greatly reduced in all but maybe the Bulete encounter. I could imagine that not having any knowledge of 5e makes doing so considerably easier.

Not really, my knowledge before bg3 was 4e and 3.5, previous versions of d&d still carry over features to the next. Core fundamental features are to be expected from a game being advertised as dungeons and dragons.

From my First Post you can see me questioning missing features from races along with balance between the races. BTW there is a free pdf of 5e rules on d&dbeyond website.

Generally anyone that puts enough time into something, you'll see the cracks in it. I have 205.8 hours into EA, started optimistic for the most part and now generally the game comes off as a leap frog simulator with a mime main character. Most aspects of the game has been adjusted and tweaked by larian and uses 5e just as a guideline.

BTW you can't group up people and presume they will all have the same mind set about something.

Was anyone in EA for DOS2 as well? How did your impressions of the game from EA correspond with the final product? Were you able to accurately judge how the full game would play from what was shown of Act 1?

https://www.reddit.com/r/BaldursGate3/comments/io18gb/for_reference_changes_during_the_divinity/

BG3 has a very different scope and will remain on EA for much longer. It is hard to predict how the end product will look like.

I've uninstalled the game and won't waste the SSD space on it until official release, or changes to the mechanics during EA that bring it significantly closer to the core 5e rules.

I enjoyed the game for the first 2 or 3 playthroughs, soaking in the story, graphics and voice acting. But once I started to really think about combat tactics, I couldn't ignore how much backstab and high ground cheese dominate combat to its detriment.

For me, and most of the posters here who are asking for closer 5e rules implementation, homebrews aren't bad just because they are homebrews. The Larian homebrews, such as backstab, high ground Advantage, barrelmancy, proliferation of surface effects etc, are detested because they are so much more powerful and easy to perform than the cost to execute them. These cheesy homebrews are so much more powerful than the native DnD spells and abilities that combat revolves around them. Why even use Faerie Fire to give your team Advantage against the targeted enemies? 1. It costs a spell slot, 2. requires the enemies to fail their Dex saving throw, and 3. can even affect friendlies within the area of effect, when all it takes to gain Advantage is to walk/jump behind enemies to backstab them or climb to a high ground?

These cheesy changes by Larian make combat too dumbed down, since the player, whatever class he is playing, just needs to know two mechanics: 1. backstab with melee characters, and 2. high ground with ranged characters. All combat in the game is balanced around these two homebrews. The player can throw out the majority of class abilities and spells and just use a small handful of them, since the rest are rendered largely useless thanks to Larian's cheesy changes to the rules and mechanics.

Well for me that means it is completely on the other side of the balance. For those who do not play 5e a lot, this feels like how they perceive dnd and is fun. They have achieved that side. But for those who were promised a dnd 5e game it feels very far from core dnd, and they start to notice mechanical changes that seem detrimental and therefor unfun to them. In making a game like this, you want to balance the interests of both kinds of groups, fans of the series you are adapting AND new players. I personally think moving closer to 5e will still allow them room to keep new players invested in the fun mechanics (for example the Weapon abilities, and to a more limited extent surfaces and barrels if they get toned back) while pleasing the 5e crowd. That and a lot of the cooler stuff 5e has to offer kinda depends ON certain 5e mechanics being intact, like paladins smiting or warlock familiars scouting and giving advantage.

Funnily, I think they would have had an easier time adapting 4e due to how 4e combat was constructed (and with that though I will lament that I won't get to the crazy summoning shenanigans I get in my 4e game...)

This! Well I plan on messing around see if I can get some 4e features into the game when it goes live with the editor. Get some use out of my old books.

DDO succeeded (still in developement 15 years later) because they built a game around an already established set of rules. At least originally.

BG3 MUST remain true to form to 5e to be a grand success in my eyes. Not verbatim but any talk of walking away from D&D rules is a recipe for disaster.

Make the old school D&D nerds happy....you wont regret it.

Me and my guild of old school gamers, Tyrs Paladium, is really hoping this game is a big success.

If they chose to do a 5e/4e blend that would have been well received. Even though 4e wasn't as popular as other editions, it still had some great ideas.

My players have always enjoyed 4e inspired homebrew.

I never played 4e. What are some mechanics that you would like to see implemented?

I'm not the best subject matter expert on 4e, I received advice to look into 4e for homebrew and it's been good advice.

You've probably read about +2 to hit on the forums:
One is a creature being "flanked" results in a +2 to hit for the flanking opponents.
Flanked Defined
+2 to hit "Combat Advantage"
Adding in "Combat Advantage" for high ground to replace 5e's Advantage, would be better for combat.

Another is the minion rule, it lays groundwork for more fluid combat balance. I love it for allowing me to control how difficult I want the encounter to be.
Minion Rule

The last is I have a homebrew rule for critical hits. I got the idea from looking at how 4e handled critical hits.
4e Critical Hit
They're all good options, so I became inspired to set a damage floor for critical hits. Where the players still roll double the dice, but the damage can't be less than the maximum of a normal hit.

Go into NWN 1 or 2 and try to build an Arcane Archer the way they're done in DDO. I'll wait. I can go back about 9 years in DDO, and at best, it's a hodge podge of rule sets, and some of them aren't even close to DnD, any edition. This game, right now, is miles closer to DnD than DDO. Even if we only look at pure casters. I mean, in DDO, so long as you have a blue bar, you can cast. Remember how stats from items aren't supposed to apply to whether you can cast a specific spell level? Oh, that's right, that's not a thing in DDO. The preferred method to build a Favored Soul is to dump Charisma, and then use gear to get your caster levels, and tomes.

So if they're aiming for old school DnD players, they'd probably be better served to steer clear of DDO.

several of the 3.5 features carried over, point buy going up to 18 and starting out as 8/10/10/10/10/10, standard was 22 points.
saves are fort, reflex, and will.
Ability checks were d20+one-half your level+ability mod+whatever else.
you got at will (cantrips), encounter, utility, and daily spells/abilities
got feats while leveling up 1st, 2nd, 4th, etc usually every other level.
paragon path at 11 (prestige class)
low-light vision was still a thing
some races got encounter powers

example racials, human: +2 to one ability, know one extra at-will from class, bonus feat, additional skill from class, +1 to saves.

skills were: acrobatics, arcana, athletics, bluff, diplomacy, dungeoneering, endurance, heal, history, insight, intimidate, nature, perception, religion, stealth, streetwise, and thievery.

actions were standard, move, minor, and free

opportunity action interrupts a action that triggers it

immediate action: (commonly readied action) interrupt or reaction, interrupt lets you react when the trigger condition arises acting before its resolved while reaction in response is after. (funny thing this is what confused me when i had a few convos on the forums 4e reaction means after, like you react to a situation not interrupt it).

I don't really know modding it'll be my first attempt so I guess the skills probably would be the easiest to start off on. I do want to break down actions as how they were in 4e though with interrupt and reaction. 5e with just reaction didn't make much sense.


Would of loved to see stuff carried over or mixed in for sure.

I wont EA, all we know this game might come after 2+ year.

If there was Battle Generator I might design battles. That sounds pretty fun. There could be somekind of "magical realm" and enemies are somekind of shadowy figures.

Btw, its no brainer that battles are coming. Dragon Age 4, Diablo 4, Witcher 4, ES6, KCD2 etc. Maybe even next FF. Hell, even GW3. Cavalry is coming, take out your pikes.