Larian Studios
Posted By: HoverHorse This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 11/10/20 08:37 PM
I see a heck of a lot of people posting requests for LESS D&D mechanics in a game that is literally part of the D&D franchise. Personally I think this title needs to follow the 5e ruleset even more strictly. From what I've played, the title doesn't seem to stick well to the traditions of Larian or D&D. It sits in the middle somewhere, not satisfying the hunger for either one. I get that some people might prefer BG3 as a more traditional video game, but that's quite a snub to the franchise it takes place in. As a fan of both DOS and D&D I would very much like to see this game stick to what it calls itself: D&D. This is not DOS3 or some other original that Larian is creating, its an established IP with established rules and mechanics; so use them. Not doing so would be as nonsensical as releasing DOS3 as an over the shoulder action-rpg. I get that not everyone wants to play in the D&D ruleset, that's fine; there are plenty of other games without D&D branding to play.

There may be people making that argument that it's impossible to achieve the true feel of D&D in a video game because there's no dungeon master. To them I ask, have you ever read an official adventure module? There's enough info jam packed in those things that the game practically runs itself. Combine that with a half decent program to manage player decisions and you've basically got an AI DM to run the whole adventure. Sure player's will come up things you never would have imagined or implemented into the game in a million years, but I think you'll find them quite forgiving when it comes to that. Far less so, when it comes to the core heart and soul of the game not being true to its branding.


TL;DR,

Please adhere more strictly to the core rules and mechanics that make D&D what it is. This isn't DOS3.
Posted By: Alon Binyamin Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 11/10/20 08:53 PM
Agreed. I wouldn't want to make this game resemble DOS even more. It's already too close in my eyes. I think a significantly different game (mechanically and atmosphere wise) will only do Larian good - as it will increase the potential customer base. We can always have DOS3 for those who love that one.
Posted By: WarBaby2 Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 11/10/20 09:03 PM
Originally Posted by Alon Binyamin
Agreed. I wouldn't want to make this game resemble DOS even more. It's already too close in my eyes. I think a significantly different game (mechanically and atmosphere wise) will only do Larian good - as it will increase the potential customer base. We can always have DOS3 for those who love that one.


To be fair, much of this Divinity feeling is still in the presentation... and a bit in the writing. Some of it (UI, animations, voicework) might still be alleviated in the coming months. If Larian can be convinced there are problems, that it.
Posted By: UnderworldHades Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 11/10/20 09:10 PM
What Warbaby said. There is way too much Divinity in this to begin with. This game should have started with 5e ruleset THEN had some divinity layered on top, right now its Divinity first with some 5e layers which is fucking up the balance and the rules of this game. Like all the free surface damage everywhere, UI's, the writing for custom characters bc resource went into the Origin system (that i personally hate).
Posted By: KingWilhelm Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 11/10/20 09:23 PM
Originally Posted by WarBaby2
Originally Posted by Alon Binyamin
Agreed. I wouldn't want to make this game resemble DOS even more. It's already too close in my eyes. I think a significantly different game (mechanically and atmosphere wise) will only do Larian good - as it will increase the potential customer base. We can always have DOS3 for those who love that one.


To be fair, much of this Divinity feeling is still in the presentation... and a bit in the writing. Some of it (UI, animations, voicework) might still be alleviated in the coming months. If Larian can be convinced there are problems, that it.

I think that the game feels to much as divinity, too. Your point is good. With some changes to the UI and things like the shop, looting, you could do much to change the feeling to be more BG like.
Posted By: Yawning Spider Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 11/10/20 09:31 PM
A good start would be to leave spells and abilities as they're designed in the 5E rules instead of adding surfaces and interactions that turn every fight into a series of explosions and environmental effects as early as level one. I've never had a level one encounter in D&D where I was more worried about a barrel than I was about a goblin. That's just not what D&D feels like.

When the Infinity Engine games changed a spell or mechanic, it was typically because of an engine limitation, not because it would serve some subjective purpose or to leverage old design/engine work. If you want to make an original RPG, please do so, and please call it something else.

BG3 is a ton of fun as a game, but when you start adding environmental effects to the already hotly debated at-will spells casters get and give disadvantage/advantage on all attacks to .1 meters of vertical disparity, it stops being D&D. And for those of you out there who don't really get what people are on about, you should understand that Baldur's Gate isn't just another quality cRPG like Mass Effect or Dragon Age. It was beloved in large part because it was so tightly analogous to playing the tabletop game at home without friends. Those of us who played this series growing up and have fond memories of it typically do because it was so much alike to the paper & pen system, something to fool around with between campaigns. To throw that out and still call it Baldur's Gate is really silly.
Posted By: VeeTeg Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 11/10/20 10:16 PM
Agree. Personally when I saw this game coming out my first thought was "I cant wait for a good game that follows the D&D 5e ruleset!" My next thought was that Larian would be an amazing studio to bring that concept to life.

I really believe that much of the fanbase has a similar sentiment where they would like a game that faithfully follows the 5e ruleset.

Posted By: WarBaby2 Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 11/10/20 10:43 PM
Originally Posted by Yawning Spider
A good start would be to leave spells and abilities as they're designed in the 5E rules instead of adding surfaces and interactions that turn every fight into a series of explosions and environmental effects as early as level one. I've never had a level one encounter in D&D where I was more worried about a barrel than I was about a goblin. That's just not what D&D feels like.

When the Infinity Engine games changed a spell or mechanic, it was typically because of an engine limitation, not because it would serve some subjective purpose or to leverage old design/engine work. If you want to make an original RPG, please do so, and please call it something else.

BG3 is a ton of fun as a game, but when you start adding environmental effects to the already hotly debated at-will spells casters get and give disadvantage/advantage on all attacks to .1 meters of vertical disparity, it stops being D&D. And for those of you out there who don't really get what people are on about, you should understand that Baldur's Gate isn't just another quality cRPG like Mass Effect or Dragon Age. It was beloved in large part because it was so tightly analogous to playing the tabletop game at home without friends. Those of us who played this series growing up and have fond memories of it typically do because it was so much alike to the paper & pen system, something to fool around with between campaigns. To throw that out and still call it Baldur's Gate is really silly.


Besides the fact that the infinity engine games, for many many many people, where the actual gateway into D&D in the first place... BG1+2 (and to a lesser degree IWD1-2) was, for a looong time, the best, most faithful recreation of the Forgotten Realms in game form out there. Same what Torment was for Planescape. Sporting impressive writing, memorable characters (that even got reintegrated into D&D lore over multiple versions to this day) and follow-up novels, comics, etc. To the tabletop community, BG was not only a "based on" game series, it was/is an integral part of their hobby.

Compared to this... and I really don't want to come of as elitest here or anything... the Divinity series was an nice, but ultimately insignificant piece of good fun in a vast sea of forgettable fantasy RPGs.
Posted By: Bugginity Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 11/10/20 10:59 PM
Well I am quite a fan of divinity original sin series, I agree with some environmental interaction with spell, but now it seems much. Fire spells leave fire surface on stone floor? Ray of frost tripped enemies like hell? If there's wooden floor with more powerful spell like fireball (not cantrip), it could leave fire on surface, any of good DM would make it happen. Ice storm on water surface possibly make frozen surface that tripped melees. Now playing melee just jump every time with bonus action to avoid surface effect just like frog. (and there's bug you can move more than movement point with jump) it's just suck being melee now.

Free disengage of enemies just ignore the positioning of Martials is a bit much too, what's the point of opportunity attack? Goblins disengage every time, if he/she doesn't have healing potion, or spell.
Posted By: KingWilhelm Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 11/10/20 11:04 PM
After reading in this forum I'm becoming a WarBaby2 fan laugh


Originally Posted by WarBaby2


For me, personally... it frankly starts with the intro/main menu. The logo is right, the music and background aren't. Neither does the music riff on the classic Raldur's Gate theme (which BG2 did), the moving, 3d background: 100% Divinity OS.

After the game starts, we are frontloaded into a high octane, Planescape'esque action scene. Too much! Beginning a new D&D adventure should have a level appropriate feel. Yea, sure, the whole plane-chase aboard a Nautiloid, hunted by Githyanki raiders on red dragons is ultra cool, but, why not at least flash back to a "a few days earlier" prologue right after, where you can familiarize yourself with your character and the actual world for Toril for 2 or 3 levels, before you are pushed into crazy, Illithid mind bug, eternal Blood War, crazy territory? Remember BG1? You started of going through a more or less lazy day in Candle Keep... with assassins hounding you... before sh*t hit the fan.

Next, it's the whole look an feel of the UI. No right click interaction with character portraits, the inability to select your characters properly, that still very ropy chaining system. Inventory management is also very unintuitive. Equipping weapons and gear is... interesting. Spells scrolls are far too abundant and can be used by every character. 1000 interactive objects in the world, all are full of trash or outright empty. All of that worked so much better even 20 years ago in BG1.

Which leads me into: The rules: Yea, no. The basics are there. We have dice rolls, (very basic) character sheets, a few races, classes, spells and special abilities... but as soon as that's translated into actual gameplay, it's pure bouncy, wacky fun. Everything burns, explodes, falls over, jumps,... just like in Divinity! There is some nice stuff, like that multi faceted dialogues, branching here and there according to who speeks - if they can restrain the writing to stuff that characters in Faerun would actually say. But % chances to hit? Visible perception rolls? Hiding in more or less, plain sight? Bonus actions for everyone? Jeezas!

...and lastly: The world, the story and the characters. Wow, what a mess. I mean, sure, some of it has to be put down to game's status as EA, but also - sadly - to writing. First and foremost: The whole Ilithid tadpole gimmick is shaky from minute one, because... how to put that: Aside the fact that it highly convoluted and probably could be solved in a few, quick and easy ways by a competent group and DM, if it came along in a proper campaign, it completely roots the story in something outside of the world you are supposed to play in. Ilithids are creatures of the planes and Underdark, not Fearun proper. You are a first level adventurer. You shouldn't deal with stuff like that until level 10 plus. Heck, your companions (aside maybe La'zel) and you shouldn't even know about stuff like that without extensive research into obscure lore. It's like if in BG1, you not only immediately got the info that you are a Baal spawn, but also got a party of other god choosen and spawns together, jumped through portal to the plane of fire, and dealt with a conflict between a group of thieflings and Azers... that's D&D "campaign whiplash". So, right after you took that gut punch, and met a possy of the most convoluted adventuring buddies ever, you are reproached by a f-ing demi-fiend/cambion/whatever who immediately offers you an infernal deal! No adventuring down the Sword Coast for a few days/months, solving problems for local hamlets, making a name for yourself, learning to know your companions... instead you have tee with motherf-ing Volo, 5 hours in... and no, that's not the same as meeting Elmister on you way to the Friendly Arm.That one was a nice nod, the other is a lore sledgehammer to the face. See where I'm going with that?

Bottom line: You know who does stories like we got in BG3 right now? Larian, in their Divinity games...

Posted By: WarBaby2 Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 11/10/20 11:15 PM
Originally Posted by KingWilhelm
]After reading in this forum I'm becoming a WarBaby2 fan laugh


Damn... now I wish I had made this rant it's own thread. laugh
Posted By: CurtimusMaximus Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 02:56 AM
I've only played the game a handful of hours, but I agree—too much DOS mechanics. I do really love the DOS games, but I've also played and loved every single game connected with the D&D franchise. This needs to stay more true to D&D and *not* be a hybrid between DOS and D&D.

I'm not saying this means Larian shouldn't be creative, but come on, guys -- D&D games, and moreover DMs themselves, never have implemented the crazy surfaces and 'splosions of everything like a DOS game...unless it was an immature homebrew campaign based on DOS ;-) And the surfaces of stuff is just one glaringly noticeable DOS carryover...but it illustrates the point I think.
Posted By: Temperance Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 09:37 AM
As for now, if I'd want to exagerate things just a tad bit, I'd say I feel closer to playing a D&D videogame when using roll20 macros than when launching BG3.
Posted By: Mildudon Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 02:44 PM
Originally Posted by UnderworldHades
What Warbaby said. There is way too much Divinity in this to begin with. This game should have started with 5e ruleset THEN had some divinity layered on top, right now its Divinity first with some 5e layers which is fucking up the balance and the rules of this game. Like all the free surface damage everywhere, UI's, the writing for custom characters bc resource went into the Origin system (that i personally hate).


+1 This is so true.
Posted By: Postwave Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 02:47 PM
I sure wish this forum had a +1 button, but since it doesn't, here's a +1 post.
Posted By: Tuco Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 02:49 PM
Fun fact: with all its occasional flaws or minor tweaking needed, BG3 actually sticks closer to the 5Th edition than BG 1 and 2 ever did to the second.
Posted By: WarBaby2 Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 03:01 PM
Originally Posted by Tuco
Fun fact: with all its occasional flaws or minor tweaking needed, BG3 actually sticks closer to the 5Th edition than BG 1 and 2 ever did to the second.


No, it doesn't. BG1-2 did mostly just drop stuff that couldn't be translated to the video game format, BG3 invents stuff not even in the 5e rules just to make it more exciting and dynamic... we all know the list by now: Characters are able to do stuff they can't do in the rules, enemies are able to do stuff they can't in the rules, spells and items have effects they don't have in the rules, etc. etc. etc. That's not tweaking out of necessity, that's tampering by rule-of-cool.
Posted By: Axis Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 03:32 PM
Amen. I have 850 hours logged between DOS 1 and 2, and I have played a bit of 5e. I agree, most of the suggestions/outrages are either DOS players not liking 5e rules (spell slots especially, resting, skill checks/saving throws, etc.)
OR they are 5e players who don’t like regular RPG style mechanics, aka searching through individual containers, inventory management, etc.

Can’t win I guess lol
Posted By: Eugerome Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 03:35 PM
I personally like the environmental damage that the game adds to DnD. Granted, I have only played 5e, so can't speak for other editions, but in my opinion 5e lacks theses mechanics so that combat involves less bookkeeping.

For example a lot of fire based spells set objects on fire, unless they are worn or carried. Creatures just take the damage up front. Why - because if somebody cast fireball into a group of enemies and the DM would have to keep track of burning effects (like the oil item for example) then the game would grind to a halt.

In BG3 there is no issue - the bookkeeping is done by the game for you.
Posted By: Demoulius Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 03:39 PM
+1
Posted By: WarBaby2 Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 03:41 PM
Originally Posted by Axis
OR they are 5e players who don’t like regular RPG style mechanics, aka searching through individual containers, inventory management, etc.


Huh? Regular RPG mechanics? You are aware CRPGs had those forever, right? I doubt "5e players" have a problem with those... they do have problem when they are handled badly, though... like packing the world with a ton of empty containers, or making item stacking/splitting a pain, etc. Inventory management has been a thing in video games since the 80's, but for some reason, Larian seams to still be in love the with individual container approach Richard Garriot invented for his later Ultima games... in the early 90!
Posted By: andreasrylander Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 03:42 PM
Yes!!! More true to DnD, Certainly not less!!!
Posted By: Tuco Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 03:43 PM
Originally Posted by Eugerome
I personally like the environmental damage that the game adds to DnD.

I like it too in principle but it needs to be tuned down for sure.
And a Cantrip leaving a splash effect on ground should be possible only in minor chances and/or IF the target is particularly flammable (i.e. wood, tall dry grass, oil) not everywhere, not almost at every cast.

Posted By: Khorvale Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 03:45 PM
One thing that I find really weird is that Baldur's Gate 3 is the long-awaited flagship of D&D 5th edition in computer gaming (as far as I understand it) and yet they're not being faithful the the D&D 5th edition ruleset. I don't even mind surface effects and custom spells, but stuff like doing the skill checks correctly, doing saving throws correctly, giving you access to the all the information on your character sheet and a fair amount of other shit I'm missing is really annoying me.
Posted By: Axis Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 03:46 PM
Originally Posted by CurtimusMaximus
I've only played the game a handful of hours, but I agree—too much DOS mechanics. I do really love the DOS games, but I've also played and loved every single game connected with the D&D franchise. This needs to stay more true to D&D and *not* be a hybrid between DOS and D&D.

I'm not saying this means Larian shouldn't be creative, but come on, guys -- D&D games, and moreover DMs themselves, never have implemented the crazy surfaces and 'splosions of everything like a DOS game...unless it was an immature homebrew campaign based on DOS ;-) And the surfaces of stuff is just one glaringly noticeable DOS carryover...but it illustrates the point I think.



Your only stated one complaint: surfaces. That’s it? Lol
Posted By: clavis Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 04:16 PM

Originally Posted by Eugerome
I personally like the environmental damage that the game adds to DnD. Granted, I have only played 5e, so can't speak for other editions, but in my opinion 5e lacks theses mechanics so that combat involves less bookkeeping.

For example a lot of fire based spells set objects on fire, unless they are worn or carried. Creatures just take the damage up front. Why - because if somebody cast fireball into a group of enemies and the DM would have to keep track of burning effects (like the oil item for example) then the game would grind to a halt.

In BG3 there is no issue - the bookkeeping is done by the game for you.

Originally Posted by Axis
Amen. I have 850 hours logged between DOS 1 and 2, and I have played a bit of 5e. I agree, most of the suggestions/outrages are either DOS players not liking 5e rules (spell slots especially, resting, skill checks/saving throws, etc.)
OR they are 5e players who don’t like regular RPG style mechanics, aka searching through individual containers, inventory management, etc.

Can’t win I guess lol

.
+1

as for warbaby. Wow just Wow. you sir take the cake. This coming from someone who regularly quotes 'People are stupid sheep.' nearly daily. You sir have taken the prize. I being an ass of epic proportions wouldn't even bother spending 60 dollars on a game I didn't like, just so I could go bitch about it on forums. Hell I wouldn't pay 20 cents on a game I had issues with, but you have done it! Congratulations I am humbled that you are so dedicated to bitching you'd go and pay to bitch even more.

By the way since your blowing money go by Dragonheist the campaign book. You may be shocked to find out what you encounter as a level 1 - 5 character, indeed you should by several campaign books and read them. Also look up Illithid, and read about them.
Posted By: 0Muttley0 Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 04:32 PM
As a DM, I am perfectly happy with the surface stuff etc. I also love the push mechanics. I let a player try push an enemy overboard during combat in pnp D&D session im running [Ghosts Of Saltmarsh]. It was innovative thinking and outside of the box of just straight combat. It ended up making the encounter a lot easier. I think this is what Larian's aim was. Allowing us to do more and think outside the box. Sometimes there are things in plain sight we don't always see right away that could have made a difficult encounter easy. When I got imprisoned by the goblin priestess. The escape combat I solo'd. Easily killing her and the ogre without taking any damage whatsoever by playing tactically.
Posted By: CurtimusMaximus Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 04:33 PM
Originally Posted by Axis
Originally Posted by CurtimusMaximus
I've only played the game a handful of hours, but I agree—too much DOS mechanics. I do really love the DOS games, but I've also played and loved every single game connected with the D&D franchise. This needs to stay more true to D&D and *not* be a hybrid between DOS and D&D.

I'm not saying this means Larian shouldn't be creative, but come on, guys -- D&D games, and moreover DMs themselves, never have implemented the crazy surfaces and 'splosions of everything like a DOS game...unless it was an immature homebrew campaign based on DOS ;-) And the surfaces of stuff is just one glaringly noticeable DOS carryover...but it illustrates the point I think.



Your only stated one complaint: surfaces. That’s it? Lol


My post intended to reiterate surface effects as simply a prime example of the over-arching negative aspect of feedback being "this game feels too much like DOS and not true enough D&D." I was not trying to laundry list complaints; others have already hit on some of the other points, like a bunch of empty containers, some roll mechanics less true to 5e, etc. Also keep in mind the current state of the game has its positive aspects as well.

So no, my only complaint is not the surface effects, but I reiterate it as a primary illustration of the main title of this thread, "This Is a D&D Game, Right?"

And therefore implore Larian to consider the implications of layering 5e onto DOS instead of layering some DOS onto 5e (as well stated previously). I'm not arguing the game needs a complete overhaul, but suggest it might be that some of this feedback could be addressed by taking away some of the "overly DOS" elements that are glaring distractions from a truer D&D experience.
Posted By: CurtimusMaximus Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 04:43 PM
Originally Posted by Tuco
Originally Posted by Eugerome
I personally like the environmental damage that the game adds to DnD.

I like it too in principle but it needs to be tuned down for sure.
And a Cantrip leaving a splash effect on ground should be possible only in minor chances and/or IF the target is particularly flammable (i.e. wood, tall dry grass, oil) not everywhere, not almost at every cast.



I think there is a balance in these observations and suggestions. It really is true some things Larian implements (e.g. surfaces) are innovative and "streamlines" what a PnP campaign DM would not choose to get distracted with (describing every single item that just burst into flames).

I suggest Tuco's comment about "toning it down" perhaps be taken this way, "Considering 5e rules and traditional PnP RPG mechanics, how should we translate what actually *should* burst into flames (or insert other surface effect) in our environment?" If you cast a fireball and hit a barrel, sure, roll for the barrel to catch fire, or make it automatic, but don't stick a bunch of fire surface that remains all over the stone floor. As already observed with other spell effects, don't stick acid all over the floor from a cantrip that is supposed to come from 5e mechanics.

My $.02
Posted By: Arthellion Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 04:48 PM
+1 to this thread.

The starting point should be DnD 5e. Not DOS. Which I love both, but if t his is a DnD game, make it a DnD game.
Posted By: Limz Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 04:59 PM
But it is a D&D game not a DOS even now.
Posted By: Dark_Ansem Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 05:01 PM
Originally Posted by Tuco
Fun fact: with all its occasional flaws or minor tweaking needed, BG3 actually sticks closer to the 5Th edition than BG 1 and 2 ever did to the second.


Bold claim, but not without merit
Posted By: Koshea Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 05:01 PM
Originally Posted by Bugginity

Free disengage of enemies just ignore the positioning of Martials is a bit much too, what's the point of opportunity attack? Goblins disengage every time, if he/she doesn't have healing potion, or spell.


Well goblins in particular have you at a disadvantage there in 5e

Nimble Escape. The goblin can take the Disengage or Hide action as a bonus action on each of its turns.
Posted By: Koshea Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 05:03 PM
Originally Posted by Tuco
Fun fact: with all its occasional flaws or minor tweaking needed, BG3 actually sticks closer to the 5Th edition than BG 1 and 2 ever did to the second.


Them's fightin words
Posted By: Roarro Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 05:06 PM
Funny,for me this game atm is like 80% DoS and 20% D&D. Feels like playing Forgotten Realms Mod to DoS2.
Posted By: Koshea Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 05:06 PM
Originally Posted by 0Muttley0
As a DM, I am perfectly happy with the surface stuff etc. I also love the push mechanics. I let a player try push an enemy overboard during combat in pnp D&D session im running [Ghosts Of Saltmarsh]. It was innovative thinking and outside of the box of just straight combat. It ended up making the encounter a lot easier. I think this is what Larian's aim was. Allowing us to do more and think outside the box.



Would you let your players push someone away from threatening a caster and knock them down as a bonus action, then walk up and take their normal attack action with advantage because they are prone?

Shove is fine, it just needs to be an action, not bonus action.
Posted By: KingWilhelm Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 05:09 PM
Originally Posted by Koshea


Would you let your players push someone away from threatening a caster and knock them down as a bonus action, then walk up and take their normal attack action with advantage because they are prone?



Corrected:
Would you let your players push someone away from threatening a caster and knock them down as a bonus action, then walk up behind them and take their normal attack as a backstab action with advantage because they are prone?

I even forgot that you can push them into fire for more damage on top laugh
Posted By: Yawning Spider Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 05:10 PM
Originally Posted by Tuco
Fun fact: with all its occasional flaws or minor tweaking needed, BG3 actually sticks closer to the 5Th edition than BG 1 and 2 ever did to the second.

Please, elaborate.
Posted By: Koshea Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 05:14 PM
Originally Posted by KingWilhelm
Originally Posted by Koshea


Would you let your players push someone away from threatening a caster and knock them down as a bonus action, then walk up and take their normal attack action with advantage because they are prone?



Corrected:
Would you let your players push someone away from threatening a caster and knock them down as a bonus action, then walk up behind them and take their normal attack as a backstab action with advantage because they are prone?



Sorry, your right, but who takes melee attacks in this game that aren't backstabs when you can literally jump right over their head or walk around them and always have that bonus to hit. Amazing forsight for 5e not to have facing be a thing and this kind of situation didn't happen.
Posted By: UnderworldHades Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 06:10 PM
Originally Posted by Limz
But it is a D&D game not a DOS even now.


There is some DnD in it, yes
Posted By: Oakmaster Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 06:20 PM
+1

Start out with 5E rules THEN change what doesn't work.

As it is, balance is out the window from the get go with Larian seemingly not even playtesting 5E rules as written and just throwing in 30% divinity forcing a bunch of extra time and work spent on gettting us closer to tabletop.

Personally I don't mind the high stakes from lvl 1. It's fun to get going quickly with the story and I still got my generic goblins for low levels. I WOULD prefer it if we started off a bit gentler but the KOTOR games and Dragon age and Pillars of eternity (as well as BG 1 to an extent) all start off with a really high level stakes plot hook. Illithids are cool and appropriate and I expect to return to Avernus in later acts of BG3 so a little teaser is a cool start. (Already saw a "skip prologue" option request on reddit though xD)
Posted By: Bluthtonian Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 06:53 PM
Just adding my voice that I too think this game feels too much like Divinity, too little like Baldur's Gate.

I will say - and perhaps this is the result of 21 years of starting pnp campaigns that rarely get far - that I actually enjoy getting a balls-to-the-wall opening, without the usual slow start to adventure. But it goes too far and prompts the question - how the heck is Astarion a level 1 character anyway?
Posted By: WarBaby2 Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 07:00 PM
Originally Posted by Bluthtonian
Just adding my voice that I too think this game feels too much like Divinity, too little like Baldur's Gate.

I will say - and perhaps this is the result of 21 years of starting pnp campaigns that rarely get far - that I actually enjoy getting a balls-to-the-wall opening, without the usual slow start to adventure. But it goes too far and prompts the question - how the heck is Astarion a level 1 character anyway?


That's what I was saying, but maybe it's a symptom of the times... almost nobody does "slow and deliberate" anymore. If something doesn't go BOOOM from second one, it's called boring really fast.
Posted By: kanisatha Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 07:21 PM
Seems like every character in the game is *special* somehow. Your companions are all special outliers and exceptions to the rules for what one could expect given race, class, background, and especially starting level. Ditto for all your followers. Ditto for monsters, whether intellect devourers or goblins. The ONLY character in the whole game that is NOT special in any way, and often is mundane and boring, is yourself (as a custom PC).
Posted By: Jota Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 07:24 PM
Originally Posted by "WarBaby2"
For me, personally... it frankly starts with the intro/main menu. The logo is right, the music and background aren't. Neither does the music riff on the classic Raldur's Gate theme (which BG2 did), the moving, 3d background: 100% Divinity OS.

After the game starts, we are frontloaded into a high octane, Planescape'esque action scene. Too much! Beginning a new D&D adventure should have a level appropriate feel. Yea, sure, the whole plane-chase aboard a Nautiloid, hunted by Githyanki raiders on red dragons is ultra cool, but, why not at least flash back to a "a few days earlier" prologue right after, where you can familiarize yourself with your character and the actual world for Toril for 2 or 3 levels, before you are pushed into crazy, Illithid mind bug, eternal Blood War, crazy territory? Remember BG1? You started of going through a more or less lazy day in Candle Keep... with assassins hounding you... before sh*t hit the fan.

Next, it's the whole look an feel of the UI. No right click interaction with character portraits, the inability to select your characters properly, that still very ropy chaining system. Inventory management is also very unintuitive. Equipping weapons and gear is... interesting. Spells scrolls are far too abundant and can be used by every character. 1000 interactive objects in the world, all are full of trash or outright empty. All of that worked so much better even 20 years ago in BG1.

Which leads me into: The rules: Yea, no. The basics are there. We have dice rolls, (very basic) character sheets, a few races, classes, spells and special abilities... but as soon as that's translated into actual gameplay, it's pure bouncy, wacky fun. Everything burns, explodes, falls over, jumps,... just like in Divinity! There is some nice stuff, like that multi faceted dialogues, branching here and there according to who speeks - if they can restrain the writing to stuff that characters in Faerun would actually say. But % chances to hit? Visible perception rolls? Hiding in more or less, plain sight? Bonus actions for everyone? Jeezas!

...and lastly: The world, the story and the characters. Wow, what a mess. I mean, sure, some of it has to be put down to game's status as EA, but also - sadly - to writing. First and foremost: The whole Ilithid tadpole gimmick is shaky from minute one, because... how to put that: Aside the fact that it highly convoluted and probably could be solved in a few, quick and easy ways by a competent group and DM, if it came along in a proper campaign, it completely roots the story in something outside of the world you are supposed to play in. Ilithids are creatures of the planes and Underdark, not Fearun proper. You are a first level adventurer. You shouldn't deal with stuff like that until level 10 plus. Heck, your companions (aside maybe La'zel) and you shouldn't even know about stuff like that without extensive research into obscure lore. It's like if in BG1, you not only immediately got the info that you are a Baal spawn, but also got a party of other god choosen and spawns together, jumped through portal to the plane of fire, and dealt with a conflict between a group of thieflings and Azers... that's D&D "campaign whiplash". So, right after you took that gut punch, and met a possy of the most convoluted adventuring buddies ever, you are reproached by a f-ing demi-fiend/cambion/whatever who immediately offers you an infernal deal! No adventuring down the Sword Coast for a few days/months, solving problems for local hamlets, making a name for yourself, learning to know your companions... instead you have tee with motherf-ing Volo, 5 hours in... and no, that's not the same as meeting Elmister on you way to the Friendly Arm.That one was a nice nod, the other is a lore sledgehammer to the face. See where I'm going with that?

Bottom line: You know who does stories like we got in BG3 right now? Larian, in their Divinity games...


You should post this on /r/BaldursGate3, to be clear I agree with you in everything you have said about the game.
Posted By: Yawning Spider Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 07:31 PM
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Seems like every character in the game is *special* somehow. Your companions are all special outliers and exceptions to the rules for what one could expect given race, class, background, and especially starting level. Ditto for all your followers. Ditto for monsters, whether intellect devourers or goblins. The ONLY character in the whole game that is NOT special in any way, and often is mundane and boring, is yourself (as a custom PC).


Yeah there definitely should have been a more careful discussion at Larian about whether their Character Origin idea was an appropriate fit for a series whose players often spent as long in the character creator rolling stats as they did playing game. I don't think it is, but at this point in the development, I doubt they're willing to drop it. Spending so much time on that was probably a mistake though, as it undoubtedly consumed resources that could've been used on more choices and consequences relevant to any given Custom PC.

That said, I've thought a lot about this. And in BG 1&2, most of the companions had something strange going for them. You have a petrified cleric from a time long past, a Witch and her Barbarian bodyguard from a strange, alien culture (not to mention the Giant Miniature Space Hamster), a member of what is essentially Faerun's CIA, a Winged Elf whose race is almost entirely extinct, the descendant of a dimension-hopping Archwizard, etc. There's no shortage of that almost juvenile brand of special you're talking about in BG 1&2... I think the difference you're sussing out is that in BG 1&2, nobody is as pressed for time or resources as you are off the start.

That is to say, either NPCs are recruited for the purpose of completing a quest, or they don't get in your face about their personal quest until something triggers it. It's completely different from having these NPCs sign up, and then one night of camping in they start telling you that you'd better hurry up because there's a bomb in their chest that's going to explode, or you better get moving because they have something way more important to do than talk to you going on in Baldur's Gate, etc. BG3 seems particularly aggressive about reminding you that you aren't all that important to these people, which is a weird, uncomfortable emotion to try to evoke in a single-player RPG. Weird and uncomfortable emotions are fine... if they exist to express some larger theme, and are managed with great intention. And I don't think that's the case here, it seems like these characters were written to be the center of someone's attention for the sake of the Character Origin mechanic.
Posted By: Merry Mayhem Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 07:35 PM
Originally Posted by KingWilhelm
Originally Posted by Koshea


Would you let your players push someone away from threatening a caster and knock them down as a bonus action, then walk up and take their normal attack action with advantage because they are prone?



Corrected:
Would you let your players push someone away from threatening a caster and knock them down as a bonus action, then walk up behind them and take their normal attack as a backstab action with advantage because they are prone?

I even forgot that you can push them into fire for more damage on top laugh


See, that what I been saying. Would most human DMs let you get away with some of the mechanics BG3 is making normal? I am OK with surface effects for higher level spells, You want Fireball to leave an area of fire, sure. Cantrips doing that, please no.
Posted By: WarBaby2 Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 07:45 PM
Originally Posted by Merry Mayhem
See, that what I been saying. Would most human DMs let you get away with some of the mechanics BG3 is making normal? I am OK with surface effects for higher level spells, You want Fireball to leave an area of fire, sure. Cantrips doing that, please no.


No, at least I wouldn't... but not exactly out of the same reason it doesn't work it the game. You see, there is such a thing as item durability in D&D, it has been toned down in 5e, but technically it's still there, and, as soon as something burns (from fire or acid), it takes damage... the floor, character's cloths, gear,... see the problem already? Player's don't take kindly to having their precious gear burnt to ashes. That's why the general rule, especially as far as fire and acid damage goes, always was: When it's able to catch fire quickly and easily(!)(think paper, parchment, etc.), the player may roll a saving through for it, otherwise the fire produced by, say a flame bolt, flaming hands, fire ball, etc. is considered to be over far to quickly to realistically catch anything on fire...
Posted By: clavis Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 07:56 PM
Originally Posted by Koshea
Originally Posted by KingWilhelm
Originally Posted by Koshea


Would you let your players push someone away from threatening a caster and knock them down as a bonus action, then walk up and take their normal attack action with advantage because they are prone?



Corrected:
Would you let your players push someone away from threatening a caster and knock them down as a bonus action, then walk up behind them and take their normal attack as a backstab action with advantage because they are prone?



Sorry, your right, but who takes melee attacks in this game that aren't backstabs when you can literally jump right over their head or walk around them and always have that bonus to hit. Amazing forsight for 5e not to have facing be a thing and this kind of situation didn't happen.


I agree with the shove needing to be an action as it is in 5e. As for threatening a caster and knocking them into fire yes if the fire is there it can be used, and it's simply a tactic to get Mr./Ms. Squishy from being smashed by whats threatening them. and it can be done in 5e through a contest of strength vs. dex, dex vs str, str vs str, or any combo of them.

I personally think jumping is fine, but the disengage with it needs to be taken off so the rogues abilities can come into play more.
Posted By: WarBaby2 Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 08:01 PM
Originally Posted by Jota
You should post this on /r/BaldursGate3, to be clear I agree with you in everything you have said about the game.


Did... they don't like me very much over there. laugh Ah, I dunno, maybe I was a bit too harsh... hm, nah.
Posted By: TheWhiteRabbit Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 08:03 PM
I keep seeing people wanting it more this way or that, and this is just another example.

I think where it sits, right in the middle, is the correct course of action. Sure things can be improved, but I think pushing it more in either direction is gonna alienate too many people.
And just to be clear, IF! they HAD! to push it, the correct decision, the business decision, would be to push it toward Divinity, NOT toward a more D&D oriented game. DOS2 sold far far more copies than any recent D&D games.
So those of you fighting for more this direction or that (seems to be more complaining to push it further toward D&D TBH) just know that if they Did decide to do this, toward DOS2 is absolutely the direction they'd take.
Posted By: clavis Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 08:05 PM
Originally Posted by WarBaby2
Originally Posted by Merry Mayhem
See, that what I been saying. Would most human DMs let you get away with some of the mechanics BG3 is making normal? I am OK with surface effects for higher level spells, You want Fireball to leave an area of fire, sure. Cantrips doing that, please no.


No, at least I wouldn't... but not exactly out of the same reason it doesn't work it the game. You see, there is such a thing as item durability in D&D, it has been toned down in 5e, but technically it's still there, and, as soon as something burns (from fire or acid), it takes damage... the floor, character's cloths, gear,... see the problem already? Player's don't take kindly to having their precious gear burnt to ashes. That's why the general rule, especially as far as fire and acid damage goes, always was: When it's able to catch fire quickly and easily(!)(think paper, parchment, etc.), the player may roll a saving through for it, otherwise the fire produced by, say a flame bolt, flaming hands, fire ball, etc. is considered to be over far to quickly to realistically catch anything on fire...


If thats the case then why does it even do damage? Things would catch fire before doing damage. The heat alone would catch easily combustables on fire. After all at times it's not flame that catches things on fire, but heat, and/or ember/spark. that brief moment of heat, and fire that does you damage may also ignite something no matter if it's cantrip, or high level spell. In pen and paper I see toning it down because keeping track of whats on fire, what isn't, the damage it's causing and every other little thing, is not only a pain but slows down action, and forces you to micromanage the hell out of everything. (Note tried it before and warned players I was going to. They agreed, we all agreed nope needed adjusting). Yet in the game itself this is easily handled and doesn't slow down the action at all. Also gives you another tactical option (yes I'm a tactic whore sue me, and I looove more options). So instead of that spell simply doing nothing you now have a tiny amount of damage not spectacular but still in the long run you didn't just blow your load for nothing. Unless it's witch bolt, I cry when I miss with it.
Posted By: Bluthtonian Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 08:06 PM
Originally Posted by WarBaby2
Originally Posted by Bluthtonian
Just adding my voice that I too think this game feels too much like Divinity, too little like Baldur's Gate.

I will say - and perhaps this is the result of 21 years of starting pnp campaigns that rarely get far - that I actually enjoy getting a balls-to-the-wall opening, without the usual slow start to adventure. But it goes too far and prompts the question - how the heck is Astarion a level 1 character anyway?


That's what I was saying, but maybe it's a symptom of the times... almost nobody does "slow and deliberate" anymore. If something doesn't go BOOOM from second one, it's called boring really fast.


I think there's a balance to be sought. I personally don't like the "starting village" at this point, if for no other reason than it covers stuff I'm already familiar with. But this goes too far. It kinda feels like Larian are trying too hard to impress, putting too much heavy metal into it.
Posted By: clavis Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 08:07 PM
Originally Posted by WarBaby2
Originally Posted by Jota
You should post this on /r/BaldursGate3, to be clear I agree with you in everything you have said about the game.


Did... they don't like me very much over there. laugh Ah, I dunno, maybe I was a bit too harsh... hm, nah.



yeah I don't much like your posts half the time, and the other half there like omg he/she does make sense. can't win them all.
Posted By: clavis Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 08:08 PM
Originally Posted by Bluthtonian
Originally Posted by WarBaby2
Originally Posted by Bluthtonian
Just adding my voice that I too think this game feels too much like Divinity, too little like Baldur's Gate.

I will say - and perhaps this is the result of 21 years of starting pnp campaigns that rarely get far - that I actually enjoy getting a balls-to-the-wall opening, without the usual slow start to adventure. But it goes too far and prompts the question - how the heck is Astarion a level 1 character anyway?


That's what I was saying, but maybe it's a symptom of the times... almost nobody does "slow and deliberate" anymore. If something doesn't go BOOOM from second one, it's called boring really fast.


I think there's a balance to be sought. I personally don't like the "starting village" at this point, if for no other reason than it covers stuff I'm already familiar with. But this goes too far. It kinda feels like Larian are trying too hard to impress, putting too much heavy metal into it.


whats wrong with Asterion being a lvl 1 character I missed something?

I like the opening as stated in another thread somewhere that I've lost. Though I also like slow and deliberate but thats something of the past. Like games lasting longer then 20 hours, and being original. hoping this one will be.
Posted By: WarBaby2 Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 08:10 PM
Originally Posted by TheWhiteRabbit
I keep seeing people wanting it more this way or that, and this is just another example.

I think where it sits, right in the middle, is the correct course of action. Sure things can be improved, but I think pushing it more in either direction is gonna alienate too many people.
And just to be clear, IF! they HAD! to push it, the correct decision, the business decision, would be to push it toward Divinity, NOT toward a more D&D oriented game. DOS2 sold far far more copies than any recent D&D games.
So those of you fighting for more this direction or that (seems to be more complaining to push it further toward D&D TBH) just know that if they Did decide to do this, toward DOS2 is absolutely the direction they'd take.


That's the assumption... fact is, though, there hasen't been a faithful D&D5 adaption yet to judge from, so how would we even know that?

Besides, never underestimate the pull CRPGs still have, and there is big group of players (aka customers) that haven't been all to happy
with most of what has been done in the genre since the infinity engine games faded from the market... this includes the Pillars games and
everything Bioware did with the Dragon Age franchise since Origins.

Couple that with an old and new fanbase for everything Forgotten Realms (especially 1000s of novels), and we could very well be far beyond
what market the Divinity games ever attracted... seeing how wacky in nieche they famously have been.
Posted By: clavis Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 08:15 PM
Originally Posted by WarBaby2
Originally Posted by TheWhiteRabbit
I keep seeing people wanting it more this way or that, and this is just another example.

I think where it sits, right in the middle, is the correct course of action. Sure things can be improved, but I think pushing it more in either direction is gonna alienate too many people.
And just to be clear, IF! they HAD! to push it, the correct decision, the business decision, would be to push it toward Divinity, NOT toward a more D&D oriented game. DOS2 sold far far more copies than any recent D&D games.
So those of you fighting for more this direction or that (seems to be more complaining to push it further toward D&D TBH) just know that if they Did decide to do this, toward DOS2 is absolutely the direction they'd take.


That's the assumption... fact is, though, there hasen't been a faithful D&D5 adaption yet to judge from, so how would we even know that?

Besides, never underestimate the pull CRPGs still have, and there is big group of players (aka customers) that haven't been all to happy
with most of what has been done in the genre since the infinity engine games faded from the market... this includes the Pillars games and
everything Bioware did with the Dragon Age franchise since Origins.

Couple that with an old and new fanbase for everything Forgotten Realms (especially 1000s of novels), and we could verywell far beyond
what market the Divinity games ever attracted.


The major thing to consider is the fact that D&D as video games haven't usually been a thing. The last good ones are at least 10 years old, and even though Larian wanted to make a D&D game WoTC has a major say in it, and still does. If they don't like the direction they can cancel it, and Larian would be out of investment and capitol. Also some people (myself included) didn't like Divinity series, but like what they are doing to BG3.
Posted By: HYPERBOLOCO Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 08:19 PM
In regards to surface effects.


A) They shouldn't be an option for cantrips or arrows

B) They shouldn't occur in addition to direct hit damage from throwables or direct damage spells (your coating the enemy in a substance from a small bottle)

C) They shouldn't have guaranteed damage/debuffs or double up damage when trying to leave them (apply damage roll at turn end if inside zone maybe?)

D) They should only exist if 5e specifically states they do or at least limit them to spell critical hits (not cantrips)

E) They should have a more limited radius/quantity/duration (looking at you blood/fire)

F) They should not be nearly as widely available and accessibility/types/potencies/effects should be thematic to the creature in question (not every goblin is an alchemist)


P.S. bonus action jump/shove for everyone can screw off
Posted By: Bluthtonian Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 08:19 PM
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Seems like every character in the game is *special* somehow. Your companions are all special outliers and exceptions to the rules for what one could expect given race, class, background, and especially starting level. Ditto for all your followers. Ditto for monsters, whether intellect devourers or goblins. The ONLY character in the whole game that is NOT special in any way, and often is mundane and boring, is yourself (as a custom PC).


I agree. I think this is obviously a consequence of the whole Origin system, which means that every potential companion character is designed like a protagonist - but a protagonist and a companion character aren't the same thing, and they should be neither conceived nor written the same way.

I agree with Yawning Spider that there was some of that in the original games, but it was framed differently. Crucially, I think there was also an element of discovery, as you met different characters over the game. Here, it's all frontloaded, so you're getting hit with everything at once. Meeting a guy during your adventures who turns out to be a vampire is one thing; having an entire team of competing, tiresomely adversarial protagonists to deal with right from the start along with all the other stuff is too much.

And it's not even that interesting. I think that's part of my problem. All these characters have a lot going on with them, but none of them is particularly involving, or weird or funny. They're busy, but boring. Which again adds to that "trying too hard" feel I get from the game.
Posted By: WarBaby2 Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 08:19 PM
Originally Posted by clavis
The major thing to consider is the fact that D&D as video games haven't usually been a thing. The last good ones are at least 10 years old, and even though Larian wanted to make a D&D game WoTC has a major say in it, and still does. If they don't like the direction they can cancel it, and Larian would be out of investment and capitol. Also some people (myself included) didn't like Divinity series, but like what they are doing to BG3.


We'll see... I'm an alarmist, it's my nature, sometimes I'm right, sometimes I'm not, and right now I don't have the best feeling regarding this project...
Posted By: KingWilhelm Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 08:24 PM
Originally Posted by Yawning Spider
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Seems like every character in the game is *special* somehow. Your companions are all special outliers and exceptions to the rules for what one could expect given race, class, background, and especially starting level. Ditto for all your followers. Ditto for monsters, whether intellect devourers or goblins. The ONLY character in the whole game that is NOT special in any way, and often is mundane and boring, is yourself (as a custom PC).


Yeah there definitely should have been a more careful discussion at Larian about whether their Character Origin idea was an appropriate fit for a series whose players often spent as long in the character creator rolling stats as they did playing game. I don't think it is, but at this point in the development, I doubt they're willing to drop it. Spending so much time on that was probably a mistake though, as it undoubtedly consumed resources that could've been used on more choices and consequences relevant to any given Custom PC.

That said, I've thought a lot about this. And in BG 1&2, most of the companions had something strange going for them. You have a petrified cleric from a time long past, a Witch and her Barbarian bodyguard from a strange, alien culture (not to mention the Giant Miniature Space Hamster), a member of what is essentially Faerun's CIA, a Winged Elf whose race is almost entirely extinct, the descendant of a dimension-hopping Archwizard, etc. There's no shortage of that almost juvenile brand of special you're talking about in BG 1&2... I think the difference you're sussing out is that in BG 1&2, nobody is as pressed for time or resources as you are off the start.

That is to say, either NPCs are recruited for the purpose of completing a quest, or they don't get in your face about their personal quest until something triggers it. It's completely different from having these NPCs sign up, and then one night of camping in they start telling you that you'd better hurry up because there's a bomb in their chest that's going to explode, or you better get moving because they have something way more important to do than talk to you going on in Baldur's Gate, etc. BG3 seems particularly aggressive about reminding you that you aren't all that important to these people, which is a weird, uncomfortable emotion to try to evoke in a single-player RPG. Weird and uncomfortable emotions are fine... if they exist to express some larger theme, and are managed with great intention. And I don't think that's the case here, it seems like these characters were written to be the center of someone's attention for the sake of the Character Origin mechanic.


In divinity if you don't pick an origin PC you miss out on one quest chain and you PC felt kind of empty. The origin was kind of an alignment, as it gave you "in character" dialog options. It was not a problem in divinity as there are no classes and every companion could be played as every class.

In a BG game the PC should be what ever character I like without missing out on content. Not just one of the companions. He should feel special like your character is for you in a P&P game and not like he is for the DM. Right now I feel not much difference between the pc and the companions...

As for the companions, that everyone has the same problem (imminent death) feels too forced for a D&D campaign. In my D&D group my players would be calling me lazy for such a group setting XD
Posted By: WarBaby2 Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 08:34 PM
Originally Posted by KingWilhelm
In divinity if you don't pick an origin PC you miss out on one quest chain and you PC felt kind of empty. The origin was kind of an alignment, as it gave you "in character" dialog options. It was not a problem in divinity as there are no classes and every companion could be played as every class.

In a BG game the PC should be what ever character I like without missing out on content. Not just one of the companions. He should feel special like your character is for you in a P&P game and not like he is for the DM. Right now I feel not much difference between the pc and the companions...

As for the companions, that everyone has the same problem (imminent death) feels too forced for a D&D campaign. In my D&D group my players would be calling me lazy for such a group setting XD


...and they would be right. wink Seriously, though, I think that's another big difference petween how old school CRPG and tabletop players perceive RPGs... we are used to makeing our own characters, we don't need set character paths, that's for NPCs...

...crap, did this whole discussion just get political? laugh

Just kidding... carry on, I made my point.
Posted By: clavis Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 08:40 PM
Originally Posted by WarBaby2
Originally Posted by KingWilhelm
In divinity if you don't pick an origin PC you miss out on one quest chain and you PC felt kind of empty. The origin was kind of an alignment, as it gave you "in character" dialog options. It was not a problem in divinity as there are no classes and every companion could be played as every class.

In a BG game the PC should be what ever character I like without missing out on content. Not just one of the companions. He should feel special like your character is for you in a P&P game and not like he is for the DM. Right now I feel not much difference between the pc and the companions...

As for the companions, that everyone has the same problem (imminent death) feels too forced for a D&D campaign. In my D&D group my players would be calling me lazy for such a group setting XD


...and they would be right. wink Seriously, though, I think that's another big difference petween how old school CRPG and tabletop players perceive RPGs... we are used to makeing our own characters, we don't need set character paths, that's for NPCs...

...crap, did this whole discussion just get political? laugh

Just kidding... carry on, I made my point.



nope I'm out I don't do that p stuff.

And your right it's mostly the different of views by old school crpg players, and new ones. Also between die hard fanatics, and casual players. Though in defense about Origin stories some people don't have notebooks filled with characters, or as I say a massive vault filled with them. So there is an option for them to have a glimpse into what making a character feels like, if properly portrayed in game.

It's kinda like helping new players work on their characters, though in this case you don't ask them questions, or give them hints. You just grab there hand say here this is the one your playing.
Posted By: Zahmbomb Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 08:43 PM
Agree 100%

I play Baldurs Gate 3 because its D&D, not because Larian made it, and the area of effect and environ effects really just cheapen the experience for me. I would like to see this majorly toned down.
Posted By: ReaLMoisan Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 08:46 PM
Originally Posted by HYPERBOLOCO
In regards to surface effects.


A) They shouldn't be an option for cantrips or arrows

B) They shouldn't occur in addition to direct hit damage from throwables or direct damage spells (your coating the enemy in a substance from a small bottle)

C) They shouldn't have guaranteed damage/debuffs or double up damage when trying to leave them (apply damage roll at turn end if inside zone maybe?)

D) They should only exist if 5e specifically states they do or at least limit them to spell critical hits (not cantrips)

E) They should have a more limited radius/quantity/duration (looking at you blood/fire)

F) They should not be nearly as widely available and accessibility/types/potencies/effects should be thematic to the creature in question (not every goblin is an alchemist)


P.S. bonus action jump/shove for everyone can screw off


100% agree.
Posted By: KingWilhelm Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 09:02 PM
Originally Posted by clavis

nope I'm out I don't do that p stuff.

And your right it's mostly the different of views by old school crpg players, and new ones. Also between die hard fanatics, and casual players. Though in defense about Origin stories some people don't have notebooks filled with characters, or as I say a massive vault filled with them. So there is an option for them to have a glimpse into what making a character feels like, if properly portrayed in game.

It's kinda like helping new players work on their characters, though in this case you don't ask them questions, or give them hints. You just grab there hand say here this is the one your playing.


I don't have a problem with this. But it could be done better in my opinion:

1.Start with an origin story like in DA:O (not even as long) for each companion and one for self made characters (something more generic like BG I: for example a orphanage).
2. Give him something special... being a spawn of a god had a nice touch laugh.. and involve him in a special way in the main plot

(you could even skip 1. and let the start be as it is but add some specials for the pc e.g. let him choose a origin story - with quests and all - that no companion has and has a bigger impact on the main story as a normal origin companions)

now you add non origin companion for a more natural party development in later parts of the story and I would argue it feels more like BG
Posted By: WarBaby2 Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 09:05 PM
Originally Posted by KingWilhelm
I don't have a problem with this. But it could be done better in my opinion:

1.Start with an origin story like in DA:O (not even as long) for each companion and one for self made characters (something more generic like BG I: for example a orphanage).
2. Give him something special... being a spawn of a god had a nice touch laugh.. and involve him in a special way in the main plot

(you could even skip 1. and let the start be as it is but add some specials for the pc e.g. let him choose a origin story - with quests and all - that no companion has)

now you add non origin companion for a more natural party development in later parts of the story and I would argue it feels more like BG


Yup, that sounds like the right idea there... and since we got that whole "who do you dream about" stuff already in the game, maybe that is something that will actually come for custom characters. Maybe that someone is a personal from the prologue! A tragic death, followed by haunting memories throughout the story, maybe? Would explain the greek/roman outfit that character has, maybe visions from Elysium or something? I actually didn't consider that before...
Posted By: clavis Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 09:08 PM
Originally Posted by ReaLMoisan
Originally Posted by HYPERBOLOCO
In regards to surface effects.


A) They shouldn't be an option for cantrips or arrows

B) They shouldn't occur in addition to direct hit damage from throwables or direct damage spells (your coating the enemy in a substance from a small bottle)

C) They shouldn't have guaranteed damage/debuffs or double up damage when trying to leave them (apply damage roll at turn end if inside zone maybe?)

D) They should only exist if 5e specifically states they do or at least limit them to spell critical hits (not cantrips)

E) They should have a more limited radius/quantity/duration (looking at you blood/fire)

F) They should not be nearly as widely available and accessibility/types/potencies/effects should be thematic to the creature in question (not every goblin is an alchemist)


P.S. bonus action jump/shove for everyone can screw off


100% agree.


A = Arrows no the shouldn't be, sense the coating is on the arrow itself. Cantrips open to debate, after all most cantrips with option to have secondary effect have a reduced damage die then what is written in 5e handbook. So they may be factoring in surface effect.

B = did you take into consideration the splash damage that is in the book? That splash damage can be concieved as having an effect on the surface as well. Again whats good for pnp isn't good and logistics of tracking all this on pnp is a major undertaking. Yet again damage of throwables may been reduced to take into consideration for the secondary damage. (I personally don't use throwables very often. not playing an alchemist/artificer)

C = your moving through the zone, which in 5e would have you make a reflex check for each 5 ft. of movement. Easily avoided by jumping (hate to say that not a fan of jump/disengage) out of, or over the area.

D = again whats good/easier for pnp doesn't make it good for games. the reduceing of damage die on spells with secondary effects shows some thought has been put into this by Larian.

E = agree some surfaces should not be able to catch on fire water, blood, should not burn like oil/grease. Still effects of burned areas are usually 2 rounds 12 seconds if using standard D&D rounds. That if your standing it in means 2 ticks. With no (needs experimentation) way of putting out the fire then it results in up to 4 ticks of damage. Maybe the drinkable water jugs can put out fires and such, think they are action? (again need to experiment)

F = agree 100%
Posted By: clavis Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 09:13 PM
Originally Posted by WarBaby2
Originally Posted by KingWilhelm
I don't have a problem with this. But it could be done better in my opinion:

1.Start with an origin story like in DA:O (not even as long) for each companion and one for self made characters (something more generic like BG I: for example a orphanage).
2. Give him something special... being a spawn of a god had a nice touch laugh.. and involve him in a special way in the main plot

(you could even skip 1. and let the start be as it is but add some specials for the pc e.g. let him choose a origin story - with quests and all - that no companion has)

now you add non origin companion for a more natural party development in later parts of the story and I would argue it feels more like BG


Yup, that sounds like the right idea there... and since we got that whole "who do you dream about" stuff already in the game, maybe that is something that will actually come for custom characters. Maybe that someone is a personal from the prologue! A tragic death, followed by haunting memories throughout the story, maybe? Would explain the greek/roman outfit that character has, maybe visions from Elysium or something? I actually didn't consider that before...


I'll agree an origin story for custom characters would be lovely, hard no to CHOSEN One though, keep it simple. Not though for ones like Wyll, Shadowheart, Ast, Gale, and La (uggg remembering there names is so hard. Can't I just call them what I do in game. Mr. Overcompensating, Fickle Bitch, Annoying Emo, Needs stabbed repeatedly, Bitchy Wench) I feel it would be more hurtful to add their origin story to a proluge then the current way of slowly opening them up to your character.
Posted By: WarBaby2 Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 09:16 PM
Originally Posted by clavis
I'll agree an origin story for custom characters would be lovely, hard no to CHOSEN One though, keep it simple. Not though for ones like Wyll, Shadowheart, Ast, Gale, and La (uggg remembering there names is so hard. Can't I just call them what I do in game. Mr. Overcompensating, Fickle Bitch, Annoying Emo, Needs stabbed repeatedly, Bitchy Wench) I feel it would be more hurtful to add their origin story to a proluge then the current way of slowly opening them up to your character.


I dunno, I think it would quite nice to see, say Asterion's exploits through the dak streets and bustling taverns of Baldur's Gate for a few hours before jumping into the main story...
Posted By: clavis Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 09:24 PM
Originally Posted by WarBaby2
Originally Posted by clavis
I'll agree an origin story for custom characters would be lovely, hard no to CHOSEN One though, keep it simple. Not though for ones like Wyll, Shadowheart, Ast, Gale, and La (uggg remembering there names is so hard. Can't I just call them what I do in game. Mr. Overcompensating, Fickle Bitch, Annoying Emo, Needs stabbed repeatedly, Bitchy Wench) I feel it would be more hurtful to add their origin story to a proluge then the current way of slowly opening them up to your character.


I dunno, I think it would quite nice to see, say Asterion's exploits through the dak streets and bustling taverns of Baldur's Gate for a few hours before jumping into the main story...


It could also give away potential spoilers, like who his master is. things that can be kept for shock value in the game. You know the moments, also if you did that you'd be a higher level? Causing a rebalance in the fights....? ugg making me think, I now officially hate you, and I don't even know you!! lol.

Hmmm, would help some people who are currently struggling in game if they started at a slightly higher level. After all 90% (not accurate) of 1st level characters die within before reaching a higher level. slightly lower chance at level 2, etc until level 4 or 5 which most players aren't taking into consideration. (my opinion)
Posted By: Ascorius Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 09:28 PM
Originally Posted by TheWhiteRabbit
I keep seeing people wanting it more this way or that, and this is just another example.

I think where it sits, right in the middle, is the correct course of action. Sure things can be improved, but I think pushing it more in either direction is gonna alienate too many people.
And just to be clear, IF! they HAD! to push it, the correct decision, the business decision, would be to push it toward Divinity, NOT toward a more D&D oriented game. DOS2 sold far far more copies than any recent D&D games.
So those of you fighting for more this direction or that (seems to be more complaining to push it further toward D&D TBH) just know that if they Did decide to do this, toward DOS2 is absolutely the direction they'd take.


First of all, the alpha numbers are already insane. Giving us a hint that the BG franchise name, combined with marketing towards "true to 5E experience", is strong. Many of the sales are probably due to Larians name, but considering that DnD has tens of millions more active players than any DoS title ever had, you can be sure those people are part of the reason.

I don't even see how fans of just DoS can feel alienated. This isn't DoS. You should not expect it to be. Larian wanted to make a D&D game from the most famous D&D game franchise. They should be expected to carry the torch for BG, not DoS this time. If CD Projekt Red released DoS3 and made it a third person action game, the DoS fans would be justified in complaining. You can't give a company a pass just because they did well in another franchise. Not when they choose to market the product as something specific. I am not sure how much good will from the DnD fanbase is worth, and speculating is useless.
Posted By: WarBaby2 Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 09:32 PM
Originally Posted by clavis
It could also give away potential spoilers, like who his master is. things that can be kept for shock value in the game. You know the moments, also if you did that you'd be a higher level? Causing a rebalance in the fights....? ugg making me think, I now officially hate you, and I don't even know you!! lol.

Hmmm, would help some people who are currently struggling in game if they started at a slightly higher level. After all 90% (not accurate) of 1st level characters die within before reaching a higher level. slightly lower chance at level 2, etc until level 4 or 5 which most players aren't taking into consideration. (my opinion)


Hate, love, who gives a toss, as long as you read what i write. laugh

Obviously, that would mean to raise the starting level of everything by 2-3 levels... I doubt it would be bad for the believability of the main rnarrative, though. wink
Posted By: clavis Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 09:39 PM
Originally Posted by WarBaby2
Originally Posted by clavis
It could also give away potential spoilers, like who his master is. things that can be kept for shock value in the game. You know the moments, also if you did that you'd be a higher level? Causing a rebalance in the fights....? ugg making me think, I now officially hate you, and I don't even know you!! lol.

Hmmm, would help some people who are currently struggling in game if they started at a slightly higher level. After all 90% (not accurate) of 1st level characters die within before reaching a higher level. slightly lower chance at level 2, etc until level 4 or 5 which most players aren't taking into consideration. (my opinion)


Hate, love, who gives a toss, as long as you read what i write. laugh

Obviously, that would mean to raise the starting level of everything by 2-3 levels... I doubt it would be bad for the believability of the main rnarrative, though. wink


Valid point I personally dislike the whole hate, love blah blah blah, emotions just get in the way. wink

I don't really have a hard time believing the main narrative atm. It makes sense to me. Some of your points have been valid others not so much. Illithid mainly staying in Underdark is one, meeting Volo (has happened in at least one official campaign released by WoTC) at level one is another one I disagree with. There are some others that I didn't reply to, because of food. then I got lost in fighting a Hag with the Fickle one crying behind my back. Really need to gag her at times.
Posted By: WarBaby2 Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 09:43 PM
Originally Posted by clavis
Valid point I personally dislike the whole hate, love blah blah blah, emotions just get in the way. wink

I don't really have a hard time believing the main narrative atm. It makes sense to me. Some of your points have been valid others not so much. Illithid mainly staying in Underdark is one, meeting Volo (has happened in at least one official campaign released by WoTC) at level one is another one I disagree with. There are some others that I didn't reply to, because of food. then I got lost in fighting a Hag with the Fickle one crying behind my back. Really need to gag her at times.


That's a healthy outlook on life... wink

Anywho. Well, yea, I wouldn't write stuff like that for a first level party... but Larian choose to do so. They are the DM around here, so to speak, so all I'm left with is b*tch about it. wink
Posted By: clavis Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 09:47 PM
Originally Posted by WarBaby2
Originally Posted by clavis
Valid point I personally dislike the whole hate, love blah blah blah, emotions just get in the way. wink

I don't really have a hard time believing the main narrative atm. It makes sense to me. Some of your points have been valid others not so much. Illithid mainly staying in Underdark is one, meeting Volo (has happened in at least one official campaign released by WoTC) at level one is another one I disagree with. There are some others that I didn't reply to, because of food. then I got lost in fighting a Hag with the Fickle one crying behind my back. Really need to gag her at times.


That's a healthy outlook on life... wink

Anywho. Well, yea, I wouldn't write stuff like that for a first level party... but Larian choose to do so. They are the DM around here, so to speak, so all I'm left with is b*tch about it. wink


They did though make sure that a level 1 character could go through it, can you imagine if they hadn't. You'd die on first meeting of an intellect devourer, do to their ability to nom your intellect. So if done correctly it only enhances the narrative and the intensity. Which imo they did, you didn't have to fight an illithid 1 on 1.. (unless you goofed at some part), or take on a cambion (again unless you goofed.) Okay yes I was experimenting and shit. I mean I HAD to see if there was a bug in everything, plus bad rolls... ugg bane of a D&D'ers existance.
Posted By: Arideya Re: This IS a D&D game, isn't it? - 12/10/20 10:54 PM
Originally Posted by KingWilhelm
Originally Posted by clavis

nope I'm out I don't do that p stuff.

And your right it's mostly the different of views by old school crpg players, and new ones. Also between die hard fanatics, and casual players. Though in defense about Origin stories some people don't have notebooks filled with characters, or as I say a massive vault filled with them. So there is an option for them to have a glimpse into what making a character feels like, if properly portrayed in game.

It's kinda like helping new players work on their characters, though in this case you don't ask them questions, or give them hints. You just grab there hand say here this is the one your playing.


I don't have a problem with this. But it could be done better in my opinion:

1.Start with an origin story like in DA:O (not even as long) for each companion and one for self made characters (something more generic like BG I: for example a orphanage).
2. Give him something special... being a spawn of a god had a nice touch laugh.. and involve him in a special way in the main plot

(you could even skip 1. and let the start be as it is but add some specials for the pc e.g. let him choose a origin story - with quests and all - that no companion has and has a bigger impact on the main story as a normal origin companions)

now you add non origin companion for a more natural party development in later parts of the story and I would argue it feels more like BG


+1 to origin story for a custom protagonist, or at least something that indicates it.

Technically Candlekeep in the beginning was CHARNAME's origin story, so it would fit well imo.

I don't even want origin stories for companions. In DAO it worked because those stories were backgrounds, all they defined were if you chose a human you would be a noble, or if you were an elf you could be from a city or living with nomadic tribes, if you were a mage you were locked in the tower regardless of your race and gender. You were not limited to gender, appearance, and in some cases class (i.e. you could be a male rogue human noble or a female warrior) and those characters were pretty much blank slates. Origin characters are already way too defined.
© Larian Studios forums