Larian Studios
Ok, so first of all: I am HUGE fan of DOS2. I beat that game like 3 times and I had blast playing it. It was my fav RPG in last years with Witcher 3. So this is not because I don't like DOS2 system/world/mechanics.


This is because I wanted to play DnD. I am playing Table RPGs for 15 years now and for last 3 years I DM and play DnD 5e. I was really excited to play BG3 and really happy that it's Larian that will make it. But I was hoped to play almost 100% 5e system. Maybe 95% as some things can't be that easy put into cRPG.

But currently game is too much like DOS2. And I really don't like it. I feel "cheated" (strong world but hear me out first) that I was supposed to play DnD, not DOS2 1.5. I know it's EA, and I understand game can still be changed/adjusted so I take my chance here to post feedback and hope that Devs will hear me out.

So:

1. Ground elemental effects SHOULD absolutely be not part of DnD game. 5e is specific system that was designed in a way where lasting effects on ground (like Entangle, Mist, Could Kill, Storm Sphere, Spike Growth etc.) require a magical caster and concentration. Because they can be very powerful tools when you combo them with some other spellcasters, melee, grapplers etc. In BG3 this makes tons of spells dull. It's better to just place fire effect on ground from Cantrip and hold enemy with another party member there, than use higher level spell. Not only ground effect IGNORE AC (which is BIG deal in DnD system) but also deals DoT damage (which is also big in 5e system and effects like that require concentration, are in higher slots, like Heat Metal and are mostly single target). Simillar are other elemental effects on ground. They disbalance gameplay, they are easy to exploit and they are against core rules/mechanics of 5e. I would much rather have them removed and make spells do what they do in books so when AOE ground effect happens - it's more signifact and also makes spells feel unique - than having elemental ground spam again. This is not DOS2. It's DND. DnD doesn't need ground element effects, it has spells for that (like Fire Wall, Wall of Ice, Wall of Force, Sickening Radiance and many more).

2. Lowering AC and increasing HP of monsters is not good idea. They have that AC for a reason in 5e. This is to make sure that magic spells that ignore AC (Fireball, Lightning) or can damage high AC enemies (Heat Metal) or control enemies with high AC (Hold Person) are needed and are important in case where melee classes struggle. This is team-based system. AC is for a reason, so Fireball hitting group of enemies with AC 16 on level 5 will be very impactfull. Lowering that AC to 12-13 allows melee to just cut through them with eas (they can kill 1-2 enemies per turn) which makes spells like Fireball very very weak. Not to mention that increasing HP also makes spells like Fireball/Lightning etc. weaker as DEX save already cuts damage in half.

5e went through play-tests and that amount of AC and HP of enemies when compare to melee classes and spells are there to balance it out. This change is ABSOLUTELY not needed. You already have balanced system and play-tested in years. There is not place here for experiments that destroys that balance.
Also argument "less frustrating with misses" is stupid. Misses are part of d20 system. That is the system. You hit or miss. This is not DOS2 where you hit all the time and you balanced game around enemies HP/Shield/Armor bars vs DPS of players- this is not that system!
Also misses should be part of lower levels. Low levels should feel hard and frustrating because that is part of DnD system. Also - you can offset that with giving players options to get more magical items, like weapons +1/2/3, Belts of Strength etc.

Please remember that 5e is designed to be PERFECTLY viable for melee classes (when it comes to AC/HP vs hit chance/damage) without ANY MAGIC ITEMS AT ALL. Giving players a lot of magic items in 1-10 levels in 5e will already make them much better than system recommends to any adjustment to AC/HPs of enemies frtom 5e books is not needed at all. It will only cause never ending cycle or chantes/nerfs/balance patches while you have already handed to you on table a perfectly balanced system (well, of course there are less balanced things, that that is unavoidable in RPGs).

3. Beginning is little too much for 1st level characters and party members you meet - it's very unrealistic for such low level character to survive all that high-level maiheim around. I think character needs level 3 boost so it feel less anti-climatic. Remember that DnD is from "zero to hero". You don't start as hero with 8 HP smile. I would tone down the beginning.

4. Alignments are big part of 5e system. They should have impact and be more important. It's not DOS with it's fluid personality system. Please remember that.

5. You have to make a decision - do you want to go down in history as devs that finally after many years made "another successful DnD cRPG" or devs who were afraid that that won't be enough and you need to also cather to your DOS2 fans and makes sure game looks simillar so they will buy product too. Please realize that some of us DnD fans were waiting very long to play another DnD cRPG. And we want to play that - DnD. It will also prove that DnD is great system for making cRPGs. But it will not happen if you will try to sneak in your favourite mechanics from DOS2.

Divinity system already had it chance and success. And I am happy for it. I will definitely play another Divinity Original Sin game, where I will expect and enjoy all DOS-specific mechanics. You will have chance to play with it as devs again, really. You will make another DOS game.

But please, make this one a DnD game. DnD deserves to be put into cRPG. It doesn't need to be mixed with another system. If there is any system that was tested enough in history of RPGs - that is DnD. And you already have huge DnD fan base. It will be enough, trust me.

Thanks for hearing me out. Love you Larian!
I agreed with this 100% they wanted our feedback and I suggest to anyone keep giving your feedback, no matter if it has been said before. I feel some people think us criticizing the game mean we hate it.... it's actually the opposite. I want this game to succeed and go down as the best DND 5e recreation, but right now it's not close.

SO Keep giving your feedback everyone, and don't let other tell you to stop "complaining" or "get over it".
well said!
two minor disagreements:
even though i like alignment more than my friends, it's not really part of 5e anymore.
5e is not perfectly balanced. if you give out no magic items magic users will overshadow martials at higher levels.
also i would not mind them buffing shitty spells like find traps, witch bolt or barskin.
I agree almost 100%, I never liked the alignment system in DnD. And I like it even less in video games because it is, as far as I am aware, never done well. It is either over done to the point it makes no sense (Pathfinder:kingmaker) or just too black and white if its Good v Evil spectrum. It tends to run into issues of "you said X so alignment shifts" unless you add a (lie) option for literally every dialogue option that becomes a bit of a mess. Reputation systems tend to do better to represent the same basic thing. But I, as I said, dislike the alignment system. Many bad DMs take it as a rule rather than some fluid thing that a character can be.

Besides that yeah. Cheated is actually a pretty good word to use here. Is BG3 good? Absolutely. Is it DnD? Hahahha... you serious? It certainly lacks the DnD aspects in not just feel and mechanics but just.. general lore stuff. Like how easily fixable the tadpole issue is yet party never considers it. Die and rez. The guy who does basically true resurrections in camp would be good enough. And going by how angry many Forgotten Realms lore nerds are I... yeah I can sort of see why. There's a lot wrong on that end too. But that's highly unlikely to be Larians fault, probably more so WotC since they are no doubt in charge of lore oversight.

I also absolutely (pun intended) adore DOS2 and cant wait for Heroes but... kind of bought BG3 for the DnD part. Honestly I'd much rather Larian drops BG3 or never did and made DOS3 or Heroes. That excites me more.
+1

I am also a huge DOS fan and D&D PnP and cRPG fan for 20+ years. I want the games to be true to form and succeed in their respective differences...not all be the same.

I do slightly disagree with your #3 -- Yea, it's a big deal to be in hell on a nautiloid and all those fireworks at level 1...but it's really just a story set up of "you're involved in something important, even though you're level 1, but you don't know what or why."

It's similar in some respects to BG1 and 2 in that respect. Yeah, you're level 1, but the story is set up that you're in some deep $*#%, cause you're a lvl 1 CHILD OF BHAAL ;-)

Despite my slight nuance, excellent post and observations.

Developers, please consider the ramifications of NOT making this a more true DND cRPG.
I agree mostly!

We must go closer to the 5e ruleset ( No Food that heals, Disenage mechanic, no ground effects unless the spell actually says that in 5e etc, fix cantrips to be as written ) Unfortunately the list goes on.

The Ramifications is that it's gonna feel like "Fake News" if you call it anything other than D:OS 3 at this stage. Based on D:OS 2 not D&D is more like it. I truly hope they sort out all of their identity crisis issues and decide if what they really wanted to do was just D:OS 3 instead of this. Sure the D&D reskin is nice but the most important thing should always be the core gameplay and mechanics.
Generally I totally support your sentiment.
I don't think 3 is a big deal, probably not worth the time it would take to revamp all that and starting at level 3 would just demolish non-D&D players.
As many others have said, alignment doesn't play almost any mechanical role in 5E, so I'm happy to have it just for RP purposes.

All that said, there are certainly some aspects of tabletop D&D that can be done much better in a cRPG (like stealth/hiding, which in PnP is very flexible and DM dependent because it's too complicated for basic rules (think light, sound, lack of facing, etc)). So there are some parts of D&D that I'm okay with them altering a bit. But at this point it feels like they've over altered just to use mechanics they had from DOS2.
I honestly don't know how people can find barrel fishing entertaining because that's just how stealth cheese feels like with how the A.I. reacts to the hide mechanic atm. Same goes for Backstabbing Grasshoppers ( What Disengage? ) and trivializing the whole D&D Spell, Skill and Class System with surface effects abuse/spam and throwables.
I agree 100%. The only difference is that I didn’t loved DOS2 (6/10)
Great feedback!
Originally Posted by JDCrenton
I honestly don't know how people can find barrel fishing entertaining because that's just how stealth cheese feels like with how the A.I. reacts to the hide mechanic atm. Same goes for Backstabbing Grasshoppers ( What Disengage? ) and trivializing the whole D&D Spell, Skill and Class System with surface effects abuse/spam and throwables.

Well, a lot of people don't go out of their way to "stealth cheese" or drag explosive barrels anywhere, frankly.

Originally Posted by Tuco
Originally Posted by JDCrenton
I honestly don't know how people can find barrel fishing entertaining because that's just how stealth cheese feels like with how the A.I. reacts to the hide mechanic atm. Same goes for Backstabbing Grasshoppers ( What Disengage? ) and trivializing the whole D&D Spell, Skill and Class System with surface effects abuse/spam and throwables.

Well, a lot of people don't go out of their way to "stealth cheese" or drag explosive barrels anywhere, frankly.




True, but there are so many barrels out there that its beyond silly. WAY to many environment helps if you will. When you stack a fight so you "have" to use the barrels its silly. Or the amount of throwables the enemy has is beyond silly too. Too many times now I have gotten the high ground just for someone to throw/shoot a barrel/flame arrow at me just to knock me down. Don't get me wrong, I love this game so far. I just wish some of the cheese is taken out. Both sides.
Originally Posted by Tuco
Originally Posted by JDCrenton
I honestly don't know how people can find barrel fishing entertaining because that's just how stealth cheese feels like with how the A.I. reacts to the hide mechanic atm. Same goes for Backstabbing Grasshoppers ( What Disengage? ) and trivializing the whole D&D Spell, Skill and Class System with surface effects abuse/spam and throwables.

Well, a lot of people don't go out of their way to "stealth cheese" or drag explosive barrels anywhere, frankly.



Highly unlikely since 99% played D:OS 2. All the people i know abuse it to death.
I am in agreement generally but I want to give my full support to point 5. I have been playing D&D for 20 years now and have been waiting for a game that uses D&D rules since Neverwinter Nights 2. I'd like to see it done well rather than a copy of DoS2.
Originally Posted by JDCrenton

Highly unlikely since 99% played D:OS 2. All the people i know abuse it to death.

I played DOS 2 as well (as the first) and I couldn't be bothered to cheese shit.

I'd still like to see these problems addressed, because knowing something is broken is
1) always a temptation
2) annoying in general,

but generally speaking I don't go out of my way to make a game more tedious for myself. It's not even a matter of being "honorable" about it. I genuinely find the amount of preparation to leverage these "structural weak points" into the system a fucking chore.

It's like when people say: "AAAH, I can literally go and do a long rest after every time I fight a single goblin".
Well... Just don't? Why do you even need to do that? What are you, mentally challenged?

Originally Posted by Mezbarrena
True, but there are so many barrels out there that its beyond silly. WAY to many environment helps if you will. When you stack a fight so you "have" to use the barrels its silly. Or the amount of throwables the enemy has is beyond silly too. Too many times now I have gotten the high ground just for someone to throw/shoot a barrel/flame arrow at me just to knock me down. Don't get me wrong, I love this game so far. I just wish some of the cheese is taken out. Both sides.

Hey, I'm all for

- significantly reducing them in number.
- make them way too heavy to be moved around by anyone with less than ogre-tiers of strength (as they should theoretically be. A full barrel is supposed to weight up to a fucking *literal* ton).

Still, I don't go out of my way to use them. Doing it and then bitching about it is vaguely stupid, frankly.
I agree that this definitely feels like DOS3 vs BG3.
Originally Posted by JDCrenton
Highly unlikely since 99% played D:OS 2. All the people i know abuse it to death.

Never played any of those.
I will break and abuse the crap out of anything in early access/beta in the hopes it will be fixed.
If this barrel stuff remains in full release I would not use it because I like to pretend npcs have at least some intelligence and would definitely become suspicious of all the furniture moving.
There are definitely a lot of things that need to be changed before release.
Originally Posted by Zarna
Originally Posted by JDCrenton
Highly unlikely since 99% played D:OS 2. All the people i know abuse it to death.

Never played any of those.
I will break and abuse the crap out of anything in early access/beta in the hopes it will be fixed.
If this barrel stuff remains in full release I would not use it because I like to pretend npcs have at least some intelligence and would definitely become suspicious of all the furniture moving.
There are definitely a lot of things that need to be changed before release.


We can pretend all we want but the A.I. is still going to be retarded in the end because "Design Choices". Just like i can't ask the goblins to not spam throwables or arrows all the time even if i cripple myself. Most ppl don't understand the real issue here.

Let's Race to The High Ground: The Game.
Originally Posted by JDCrenton
Originally Posted by Zarna
Originally Posted by JDCrenton
Highly unlikely since 99% played D:OS 2. All the people i know abuse it to death.

Never played any of those.
I will break and abuse the crap out of anything in early access/beta in the hopes it will be fixed.
If this barrel stuff remains in full release I would not use it because I like to pretend npcs have at least some intelligence and would definitely become suspicious of all the furniture moving.
There are definitely a lot of things that need to be changed before release.


We can pretend all we want but the A.I. is still going to be retarded in the end because "Design Choices". Just like i can't ask the goblins to not spam throwables or arrows all the time even if i cripple myself. Most ppl don't understand the real issue here.

Really hoping they can fix the AI, there is still time but maybe I am too much an optimist.
With the OP on everything but #3. Love the epic start. Will be nice to grow a character from once forced to run from dragons and mind flayers to one that can go toe to toe with both.

But yeah, giving a +1 to the HP bloat. There's no reason to have a wizard in the party.

On barrelmancy, ashamed to say I've started using it to take out the main goblin boss. Largely because I can't handle the hang that goes on when the AI is "planning next move" and the whole temple goes hostile. Something is wrong there -- I have a stable overclock of 4.2 with temps that never go above 70. And it's not GPU either, my GPU doesn't go above 60 percent usage when the "planning " message hangs.

This time I noticed that the script even expected barrelmancy -- if you create a lake of fire you kill not only the bosses but the tadpole.

I loved DOS2, got a number of plays out of it each time playing on harder and harder difficulty. But D&D is something different. I mean what are these barrels of oil for? What use does one have mineral oil for in a fantasy medieval setting -- and if it is for sieges, 'boiling oil' and the like why aren't barrels locked up tight?
Originally Posted by KillerRabbit


This time I noticed that the script even expected barrelmancy -- if you create a lake of fire you kill not only the bosses but the tadpole.



Yeah, had a good laugh at that one.
Originally Posted by nizanegusa
well said!
two minor disagreements:
even though i like alignment more than my friends, it's not really part of 5e anymore.
5e is not perfectly balanced. if you give out no magic items magic users will overshadow martials at higher levels.
also i would not mind them buffing shitty spells like find traps, witch bolt or barskin.

yeah it's a misconception that the game is balanced around martial classes having no magic weapons

The guidelines for magical weapons by level are in Xanathar's Guide to Everything, these guidelines are Wizards of the Coast's inbuilt assumptions

BG3 I feel does pretty good with its magic items, lots of alternatives and sidegrades, few power spike items
I agree, I, like many people came to this game thinking that they were going to play baldurs' gate, not Divinity. I have been playing tabletop RPG's for 20 something years. I am not here to say that this game is not a beautiful game but this is not D&D. This is not Faerun. This is a game that is loosely based on D&D and uses many story elements from Faerun. It should not be the next game in the franchise of Baldur's Gate. This should be called Homebrew Evil game (loosely based on D&D and sorta in the setting of Faerun).

But this is my opinion. Yeah I am angry but I feel cheated. I wanted balder's gate and got divintiy 1.5. This is what I call a "miss" in the world of reviews.
Lower AC is necessary. In turn-based rpg misses aren't funny for most people.
It's frustrating when you miss every attack for several turns in a row, but if you lowered AC you have to increase HP or fight will be to easy.
You can't just add new enemies because no one wants to wait 10 minutes for next turn.
Changes in rules are necessary if Larian wants to sell a game for people unfamiliar with d&d.
You can't make game for few thousand people if you create AAA.

I have yet to use a single barrel. Have not used terrain damage mechanics. I admit to using positioning, including height, but as far as I am concerned, if they can attack me from a roof, I can do the same to them.
There are choices you can make as to how to play the game, and I am not ready to write off everything that happens to step in part from DoS2 - I'll wait to see how it all balances out in the end.
Originally Posted by Rhobar121
Lower AC is necessary. In turn-based rpg misses aren't funny for most people.
It's frustrating when you miss every attack for several turns in a row, but if you lowered AC you have to increase HP or fight will be to easy.
You can't just add new enemies because no one wants to wait 10 minutes for next turn.
Changes in rules are necessary if Larian wants to sell a game for people unfamiliar with d&d.
You can't make game for few thousand people if you create AAA.




What exactly are you smoking? Few thousand people? Dungeons & Dragons is the single most valuable fantasy RPG IP in the world.

And those fans are reasonably looking for D&D 5e in this game, not D:OS3.
+1
Originally Posted by dmwyvern
Originally Posted by Rhobar121
Lower AC is necessary. In turn-based rpg misses aren't funny for most people.
It's frustrating when you miss every attack for several turns in a row, but if you lowered AC you have to increase HP or fight will be to easy.
You can't just add new enemies because no one wants to wait 10 minutes for next turn.
Changes in rules are necessary if Larian wants to sell a game for people unfamiliar with d&d.
You can't make game for few thousand people if you create AAA.




What exactly are you smoking? Few thousand people? Dungeons & Dragons is the single most valuable fantasy RPG IP in the world.

And those fans are reasonably looking for D&D 5e in this game, not D:OS3.


Do you really think at least 1/4 of the D&D fans will buy this game? Most of players will be casual.
Larian has to sell far more copies than last time if they don't want to end up like Obsidian.


Originally Posted by Rhobar121
Lower AC is necessary. In turn-based rpg misses aren't funny for most people.
It's frustrating when you miss every attack for several turns in a row, but if you lowered AC you have to increase HP or fight will be to easy.


Make compelling animations. I love the superiority dice jump-n-smash animation add some other great animations like sword against sword, clanking against a shield, smashing against a breast plate, rolling away from the attack. Done well, missing can become just as engaging as hitting. Or, alternatively, the wizard might have something to do smile

Love this sword fight -- miss, miss, sword clank, dodge, miss, hit:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ImPXMsnc2F4
Originally Posted by KillerRabbit
Originally Posted by Rhobar121
Lower AC is necessary. In turn-based rpg misses aren't funny for most people.
It's frustrating when you miss every attack for several turns in a row, but if you lowered AC you have to increase HP or fight will be to easy.


Make compelling animations. I love the superiority dice jump-n-smash animation add some other great animations like sword against sword, clanking against a shield, smashing against a breast plate, rolling away from the attack. Done well, missing can become just as engaging as hitting. Or, alternatively, the wizard might have something to do smile

Love this sword fight -- miss, miss, sword clank, dodge, miss, hit:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ImPXMsnc2F4


It may be fun for a few early hours, but it will eventually get boring.
Perhaps they can be persuaded to have house rules and core rules. BG2 had a slider, you could either have a generous interpretation of the rules or as close the rules as possible.

Originally Posted by Rhobar121
It may be fun for a few early hours, but it will eventually get boring.


Especially if they each made an attack every 6 seconds... wink
Originally Posted by Rhobar121
Originally Posted by KillerRabbit
Originally Posted by Rhobar121
Lower AC is necessary. In turn-based rpg misses aren't funny for most people.
It's frustrating when you miss every attack for several turns in a row, but if you lowered AC you have to increase HP or fight will be to easy.


Make compelling animations. I love the superiority dice jump-n-smash animation add some other great animations like sword against sword, clanking against a shield, smashing against a breast plate, rolling away from the attack. Done well, missing can become just as engaging as hitting. Or, alternatively, the wizard might have something to do smile

Love this sword fight -- miss, miss, sword clank, dodge, miss, hit:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ImPXMsnc2F4


It may be fun for a few early hours, but it will eventually get boring.


Then you have the INSANE amount of asians and other ppl that find grinding entertaining too which is tedious no matter how you look at it AND YET. If we are going for which one would be more popular but Soulless, MMORPG would be the answer. If we go on about what feels repetitive or not, you'll find out that every single videogame out there has some sort of repetitive mechanics or patterns. Whether you find it entertaining or not is subjective to your own standards.
Originally Posted by Rhobar121
Lower AC is necessary. In turn-based rpg misses aren't funny for most people.
It's frustrating when you miss every attack for several turns in a row, but if you lowered AC you have to increase HP or fight will be to easy.
You can't just add new enemies because no one wants to wait 10 minutes for next turn.
Changes in rules are necessary if Larian wants to sell a game for people unfamiliar with d&d.
You can't make game for few thousand people if you create AAA.



Just a heads up I believe there is a bug with that to hit ratio. Today i saw i had 96% chance to hit which is pretty much rolling less than a 2 on a D20.

I attacked twice and missed back to back, I checked my logs and saw the Rolls that I did and I actually ended up only rolling an 8 total when the mobs AC was 12. So im not sure what the heck is going on with that.

Jaz
Originally Posted by JDCrenton
Originally Posted by Zarna
Originally Posted by JDCrenton
Highly unlikely since 99% played D:OS 2. All the people i know abuse it to death.

Never played any of those.
I will break and abuse the crap out of anything in early access/beta in the hopes it will be fixed.
If this barrel stuff remains in full release I would not use it because I like to pretend npcs have at least some intelligence and would definitely become suspicious of all the furniture moving.
There are definitely a lot of things that need to be changed before release.


We can pretend all we want but the A.I. is still going to be retarded in the end because "Design Choices". Just like i can't ask the goblins to not spam throwables or arrows all the time even if i cripple myself. Most ppl don't understand the real issue here.

Let's Race to The High Ground: The Game.


In my tabletop we dont use flanking rules or higher ground rules or anything unless abilities do anything special like that. If they were to remove the additional bonus to hit from the Z axis that would make people not just want to always climb. At that point the benefit of being high up is wasting others resources for them to be able to attack.

Jaz
Originally Posted by Rhobar121
Originally Posted by dmwyvern
Originally Posted by Rhobar121
Lower AC is necessary. In turn-based rpg misses aren't funny for most people.
It's frustrating when you miss every attack for several turns in a row, but if you lowered AC you have to increase HP or fight will be to easy.
You can't just add new enemies because no one wants to wait 10 minutes for next turn.
Changes in rules are necessary if Larian wants to sell a game for people unfamiliar with d&d.
You can't make game for few thousand people if you create AAA.




What exactly are you smoking? Few thousand people? Dungeons & Dragons is the single most valuable fantasy RPG IP in the world.

And those fans are reasonably looking for D&D 5e in this game, not D:OS3.


Do you really think at least 1/4 of the D&D fans will buy this game? Most of players will be casual.
Larian has to sell far more copies than last time if they don't want to end up like Obsidian.




Most of players can play on casual mode.
Originally Posted by KillerRabbit
Originally Posted by Rhobar121
Lower AC is necessary. In turn-based rpg misses aren't funny for most people.
It's frustrating when you miss every attack for several turns in a row, but if you lowered AC you have to increase HP or fight will be to easy.


Make compelling animations. I love the superiority dice jump-n-smash animation add some other great animations like sword against sword, clanking against a shield, smashing against a breast plate, rolling away from the attack. Done well, missing can become just as engaging as hitting. Or, alternatively, the wizard might have something to do smile

Love this sword fight -- miss, miss, sword clank, dodge, miss, hit:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ImPXMsnc2F4

I believe this is the way. Animations, intimidation shouts, sparks, whatever. There is big space for creativity.
I guess people don’t comprehend the fact that those added features like dishing advantage will highly impact advantage based classes that are not currently in the game, like barbarians & If xanathars get released at some point samurai. Also, there are crowd control spells like Fear will also be highly affected as the advantage effect will not be as good.

The majority of the folks here that are supporting Larians decisions in regard that flavor homebrew rules simply can’t see the future ahead and actually capture the picture that a minor change in the rules will lead to a snowball effect that in the end gonna alter the whole DnD mechanics.
Aside from no. 3, which I think ok as a story hook, I pretty much agree on everything you said.
Originally Posted by Sludge Khalid
I guess people don’t comprehend the fact that those added features like dishing advantage will highly impact advantage based classes that are not currently in the game, like barbarians & If xanathars get released at some point samurai. Also, there are crowd control spells like Fear will also be highly affected as the advantage effect will not be as good.

The majority of the folks here that are supporting Larians decisions in regard that flavor homebrew rules simply can’t see the future ahead and actually capture the picture that a minor change in the rules will lead to a snowball effect that in the end gonna alter the whole DnD mechanics.


Dude most of the people which are against some of the feedback regarding rule changes breaking the game can't tell left from right. They are completely clueless about what they're saying, for example:

Originally Posted by Rhobar121
Lower AC is necessary. In turn-based rpg misses aren't funny for most people.
It's frustrating when you miss every attack for several turns in a row, but if you lowered AC you have to increase HP or fight will be to easy.
You can't just add new enemies because no one wants to wait 10 minutes for next turn.
Changes in rules are necessary if Larian wants to sell a game for people unfamiliar with d&d.
You can't make game for few thousand people if you create AAA.



All they want is to play a clicker game where you make a 4 fighter party and click on the enemy. Every attack must hit and have a 50% crit chance. Also, every attack must have an ultra flashy animation like some bullshit MMORPG where a simple auto attack from a level 1 character shatters the ground and sends waves of force etc. They don't realize that these changes break several fundamentals of the gameplay. Oh, there's a sleep spell? uh. My irl INT score is too low so I never take spell casters anyway ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. Team-work? Class synergies? Buffs and debuffs? Wat dat? ME SMASH!
There are problems with the game which need to be addressed at their core. The way people argue about this just makes it seem like they want a never-ending loop of workarounds that attempt to fix part of a problem to create 10 others...

We all like Larian here, at least to some extent. Otherwise we wouldn't have bothered to pay full price for a severely unfinished EA game, play the buggy mess, create an account in their forums and take time out of our days to come and try to better the game. Still, it remains the fact that Larian has taken several liberties with the game which made many people upset, and rightly so. If they want to use the Baldur's Gate name, they should respect its origins and player base. Instead, they copy pasted DOS2 and threw the DnD 5e ruleset in there using a crooked canon as their precision instrument of choice. The rules are so mangled to the point that they break core functionalities of the game. Spells become pointless, enemies become bullet sponges. Surfaces everywhere... Bogus advantages of all kinds, fucked up disengage/jump bundles that make the game into a kangaroo simulator. Combat is boring as shit... They can't just make a DOS2 clone, change some stuff and say "fuck it, this'll do.".
Totally with you, OP, on all your points.
Originally Posted by coredumped
Originally Posted by Sludge Khalid
I guess people don’t comprehend the fact that those added features like dishing advantage will highly impact advantage based classes that are not currently in the game, like barbarians & If xanathars get released at some point samurai. Also, there are crowd control spells like Fear will also be highly affected as the advantage effect will not be as good.

The majority of the folks here that are supporting Larians decisions in regard that flavor homebrew rules simply can’t see the future ahead and actually capture the picture that a minor change in the rules will lead to a snowball effect that in the end gonna alter the whole DnD mechanics.


Dude most of the people which are against some of the feedback regarding rule changes breaking the game can't tell left from right. They are completely clueless about what they're saying, for example:

Originally Posted by Rhobar121
Lower AC is necessary. In turn-based rpg misses aren't funny for most people.
It's frustrating when you miss every attack for several turns in a row, but if you lowered AC you have to increase HP or fight will be to easy.
You can't just add new enemies because no one wants to wait 10 minutes for next turn.
Changes in rules are necessary if Larian wants to sell a game for people unfamiliar with d&d.
You can't make game for few thousand people if you create AAA.



All they want is to play a clicker game where you make a 4 fighter party and click on the enemy. Every attack must hit and have a 50% crit chance. Also, every attack must have an ultra flashy animation like some bullshit MMORPG where a simple auto attack from a level 1 character shatters the ground and sends waves of force etc. They don't realize that these changes break several fundamentals of the gameplay. Oh, there's a sleep spell? uh. My irl INT score is too low so I never take spell casters anyway ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. Team-work? Class synergies? Buffs and debuffs? Wat dat? ME SMASH!
There are problems with the game which need to be addressed at their core. The way people argue about this just makes it seem like they want a never-ending loop of workarounds that attempt to fix part of a problem to create 10 others...

We all like Larian here, at least to some extent. Otherwise we wouldn't have bothered to pay full price for a severely unfinished EA game, play the buggy mess, create an account in their forums and take time out of our days to come and try to better the game. Still, it remains the fact that Larian has taken several liberties with the game which made many people upset, and rightly so. If they want to use the Baldur's Gate name, they should respect its origins and player base. Instead, they copy pasted DOS2 and threw the DnD 5e ruleset in there using a crooked canon as their precision instrument of choice. The rules are so mangled to the point that they break core functionalities of the game. Spells become pointless, enemies become bullet sponges. Surfaces everywhere... Bogus advantages of all kinds, fucked up disengage/jump bundles that make the game into a kangaroo simulator. Combat is boring as shit... They can't just make a DOS2 clone, change some stuff and say "fuck it, this'll do.".


What worries me is the fact that many of them sided with Larian without any sort of rational thinking. I understand the passionate way of thinking of those guys because in the end Larian reintroduced this genre back to the top, even though I’m not fan of DOS2. Yet, Larian lacks in something CD have in abundance - concept aggressiveness and detachment of previous successes. CD is not worried about what Witcher’s fans might think or how they’ll be disappointed in having this medieval to cybernetic changes.
Compared to CD, Larian didn’t have to create a new whole environment - the rule set and the lore was always there waiting to be explored. The resources are constantly being wasted due to the fear they have of innovating over a great sales success.

Quite frankly, the biggest difference I’ve noticed between BG1/2 to BG3 is the audience target. It seems that the game wasn’t made for those who enjoy quality over quantity. sometimes I feel that I’m in a point and click game where I’m locked in a room and I must figure out how to leave and there’s only one path out there. From the time I’ve spent playing the game I’m almost 100% sure that battle system gives me way less freedom compared to any other tactical game and that’s a major flaw in the concept where the company sold a game that you can be whomever you want yet in battles you gonna fight their way.
Originally Posted by Benny89
Ok, so first of all: I am HUGE fan of DOS2. I beat that game like 3 times and I had blast playing it. It was my fav RPG in last years with Witcher 3. So this is not because I don't like DOS2 system/world/mechanics.


This is because I wanted to play DnD. I am playing Table RPGs for 15 years now and for last 3 years I DM and play DnD 5e. I was really excited to play BG3 and really happy that it's Larian that will make it. But I was hoped to play almost 100% 5e system. Maybe 95% as some things can't be that easy put into cRPG.

But currently game is too much like DOS2. And I really don't like it. I feel "cheated" (strong world but hear me out first) that I was supposed to play DnD, not DOS2 1.5. I know it's EA, and I understand game can still be changed/adjusted so I take my chance here to post feedback and hope that Devs will hear me out.

So:

1. Ground elemental effects SHOULD absolutely be not part of DnD game. 5e is specific system that was designed in a way where lasting effects on ground (like Entangle, Mist, Could Kill, Storm Sphere, Spike Growth etc.) require a magical caster and concentration. Because they can be very powerful tools when you combo them with some other spellcasters, melee, grapplers etc. In BG3 this makes tons of spells dull. It's better to just place fire effect on ground from Cantrip and hold enemy with another party member there, than use higher level spell. Not only ground effect IGNORE AC (which is BIG deal in DnD system) but also deals DoT damage (which is also big in 5e system and effects like that require concentration, are in higher slots, like Heat Metal and are mostly single target). Simillar are other elemental effects on ground. They disbalance gameplay, they are easy to exploit and they are against core rules/mechanics of 5e. I would much rather have them removed and make spells do what they do in books so when AOE ground effect happens - it's more signifact and also makes spells feel unique - than having elemental ground spam again. This is not DOS2. It's DND. DnD doesn't need ground element effects, it has spells for that (like Fire Wall, Wall of Ice, Wall of Force, Sickening Radiance and many more).

2. Lowering AC and increasing HP of monsters is not good idea. They have that AC for a reason in 5e. This is to make sure that magic spells that ignore AC (Fireball, Lightning) or can damage high AC enemies (Heat Metal) or control enemies with high AC (Hold Person) are needed and are important in case where melee classes struggle. This is team-based system. AC is for a reason, so Fireball hitting group of enemies with AC 16 on level 5 will be very impactfull. Lowering that AC to 12-13 allows melee to just cut through them with eas (they can kill 1-2 enemies per turn) which makes spells like Fireball very very weak. Not to mention that increasing HP also makes spells like Fireball/Lightning etc. weaker as DEX save already cuts damage in half.

5e went through play-tests and that amount of AC and HP of enemies when compare to melee classes and spells are there to balance it out. This change is ABSOLUTELY not needed. You already have balanced system and play-tested in years. There is not place here for experiments that destroys that balance.
Also argument "less frustrating with misses" is stupid. Misses are part of d20 system. That is the system. You hit or miss. This is not DOS2 where you hit all the time and you balanced game around enemies HP/Shield/Armor bars vs DPS of players- this is not that system!
Also misses should be part of lower levels. Low levels should feel hard and frustrating because that is part of DnD system. Also - you can offset that with giving players options to get more magical items, like weapons +1/2/3, Belts of Strength etc.

Please remember that 5e is designed to be PERFECTLY viable for melee classes (when it comes to AC/HP vs hit chance/damage) without ANY MAGIC ITEMS AT ALL. Giving players a lot of magic items in 1-10 levels in 5e will already make them much better than system recommends to any adjustment to AC/HPs of enemies frtom 5e books is not needed at all. It will only cause never ending cycle or chantes/nerfs/balance patches while you have already handed to you on table a perfectly balanced system (well, of course there are less balanced things, that that is unavoidable in RPGs).

3. Beginning is little too much for 1st level characters and party members you meet - it's very unrealistic for such low level character to survive all that high-level maiheim around. I think character needs level 3 boost so it feel less anti-climatic. Remember that DnD is from "zero to hero". You don't start as hero with 8 HP smile. I would tone down the beginning.

4. Alignments are big part of 5e system. They should have impact and be more important. It's not DOS with it's fluid personality system. Please remember that.

5. You have to make a decision - do you want to go down in history as devs that finally after many years made "another successful DnD cRPG" or devs who were afraid that that won't be enough and you need to also cather to your DOS2 fans and makes sure game looks simillar so they will buy product too. Please realize that some of us DnD fans were waiting very long to play another DnD cRPG. And we want to play that - DnD. It will also prove that DnD is great system for making cRPGs. But it will not happen if you will try to sneak in your favourite mechanics from DOS2.

Divinity system already had it chance and success. And I am happy for it. I will definitely play another Divinity Original Sin game, where I will expect and enjoy all DOS-specific mechanics. You will have chance to play with it as devs again, really. You will make another DOS game.

But please, make this one a DnD game. DnD deserves to be put into cRPG. It doesn't need to be mixed with another system. If there is any system that was tested enough in history of RPGs - that is DnD. And you already have huge DnD fan base. It will be enough, trust me.

Thanks for hearing me out. Love you Larian!


Some players that don't really care about D&D and just want to experience a new gen Baldur's Gate game agree with that.

Not because BG1/2 is closer to D&D than BG3 (idk), but because BG3 is too close to DoS atm and the general experience doesn't feel like FR/D&D at all with such surfaces and advantages, arcady rest and fast travel, inconsistent bestiary, locations, OP creatures and so on...

Anyway I totally agree.

I'm sure that the experience would suit better to BG according to me if Larian start to following the rules a little bit more and use the FR and D&D as the base material instead of tools in which they pick what they like and find fun.
Too many melee misses are not fun. You maybe a spell caster fan but a lot of people ae not. Plus, 5e is not perfectly balanced. Magic is easily op. No melee can come close to casters without the help of magic items.

However, too many successful attacks are not fun too. I would rather have enemies with a little bit dodge than being a meatshield.
Originally Posted by JDCrenton
Originally Posted by Tuco
Originally Posted by JDCrenton
I honestly don't know how people can find barrel fishing entertaining because that's just how stealth cheese feels like with how the A.I. reacts to the hide mechanic atm. Same goes for Backstabbing Grasshoppers ( What Disengage? ) and trivializing the whole D&D Spell, Skill and Class System with surface effects abuse/spam and throwables.

Well, a lot of people don't go out of their way to "stealth cheese" or drag explosive barrels anywhere, frankly.



Highly unlikely since 99% played D:OS 2. All the people i know abuse it to death.

I have always loved this argument: "all the people I know". How many is that? 4? 400? Maybe it's (meme incoming) over 9000? Maybe it's only 1? Oh, and citations needed for "99% played DOS2". Just a link to the survey you ran, or that someone else ran will be fine.

Originally Posted by JDCrenton
Originally Posted by Zarna
Originally Posted by JDCrenton
Highly unlikely since 99% played D:OS 2. All the people i know abuse it to death.

Never played any of those.
I will break and abuse the crap out of anything in early access/beta in the hopes it will be fixed.
If this barrel stuff remains in full release I would not use it because I like to pretend npcs have at least some intelligence and would definitely become suspicious of all the furniture moving.
There are definitely a lot of things that need to be changed before release.


We can pretend all we want but the A.I. is still going to be retarded in the end because "Design Choices". Just like i can't ask the goblins to not spam throwables or arrows all the time even if i cripple myself. Most ppl don't understand the real issue here.

Let's Race to The High Ground: The Game.

So the issue is that the AI doesn't just stand there and let you wail on them? Interesting. Most of the game's I've played, this would be a welcome addition. I'm sure there are a lot of people that wanted to play Cuphead, or Dark Souls that would just love that. If it's "but there's more than one way to skin a cat", yes? You see, despite the "all the people I know" that's supposed to convey some kind of omniscient knowledge of the game, and how it's being played, I haven't spent a lot of time wondering how I can best set up a bunch of barrels to blow things up, or create slippery surfaces. It's amazing how many encounters I've played in so far that didn't even have any barrels to do that with, and yet, I've still managed to get through them, or not, as the case may be. Both have happened, and will continue to happen, it's the nature of the beast.
just wait until the low ac supporters discover save or suck spells and want them to hit all the time.

"i tried to cast hold person but it always misses! lower the ac of that to!" =D
1. Somewhat agree. Does it need balance? Yes. Are "ground" effects bad idea in general? No.
One of the main features that Larian brought to RPG with huge success are environment interactions. It's also one of the things that gave new life to RPG games as it was good step forward and theirs sales compared to other classic RPG titles are showing it. Also making things 1:1 with tabletops/paper games for video games isn't good idea and rarely will work at all, so I do understand Larian decision. Some spells and skills with good RNG would be just instant kills, close to it or just too off for video game.
Overall it's good idea as it makes game more modern (physics and other new solutions) and gives new ways to use some spells witch otherwise would be boring, too situational to use or just too much RNG based. I would say it just needs better balance as like you mentioned some effects are just too strong/strange at the moment. One way to balance it might be setting not book AOE/Ground spells to have no "splash" DMG and just chance to ignite/froze, etc things. For example Fire Bolt would just have chance to ignite objects/enemies on direct hit with guaranteed ignition on flammable things like alcohols/webs (so barrels with alcohols would just burn for long time making it extra light source or something to throw/kick at enemies, etc) and explosion only happening with things that makes sense like black powder or some alchemic potions and so on. What I'm saying is that effect/combination for "No book AOE/Grounds spells/skills" should be small bonus dmg (like up to 25%, like electrifying water dealing extra 1/3 dmg + effect chance and so on) or outcome for you instead of it being the main way to deal with enemies. Also you can set it like 1st turn/step in fire haves lower chance to set "On Fire" status than every turn/step you stay in it after that. So in general I would say it's mostly matter of balance.

2. Most important thing to say for me, it's a bit too early to complain about that too much when there are still missing classes, subclasses, spells and skills. It's something to think about after future patches with content so probably about 6 months or so from now as it's mostly related to balancing the numbers. However, once again making it 1:1 with 5E rules most likely will only hurt the game. Having turns in which both your party and enemies miss everything constantly will just take out fun factor from it. This is why most other titles force active pause, so constant missing can be hidden in 1-6s turns. They probably can make like Classic mode with 1:1 rules, but it would be played by some small margin of players in the end.

3. Too be honest I don't see any good reason for it. It's good start, something bit different to others titles. It's not like our character and origins characters have any impact on these events, they are just trying to survive this mess and it's good. It also matches theirs starting attitude towards player as it isn't standard party of adventures established in traditional way. They all are just random people who want to survive, so sticking together and using others seems like good idea. Only thing I would change is adding Force Turn Mode tutorial where you need to sneak around/by some powerful enemies to survive and just reach next part of the ship and failing it would mean instant death from some bad ass enemy/monster.

4. This one is tricky. Most games end up with using it as a way to just add some potential extra line to pick up in the dialogue. Too be honest I will prefer if Larian won't use it and instead will focus on making our decisions having bigger impact on the world and our character being recognize by those deeds. As for companions I don't like idea of them being stick with one Alignment for the entire game. I think our actions should lead to them potentially chaining theirs thinking (not 180 degree of course) if they stick with us, companions leaving if they won't agree on mayor things and of course some potential betrayals. I think good example here could be Shadowheart who seems like Neutral/ Chaotic Neutral opportunist character, so our actions could lead her to darker path or something more heroic (will leave spoilers for my EA feedback)

5. I'm D&D fan and same goes for previous Baldur's Gate games (1 and 2). However, if I must be honest then without nostalgic aspect it doesn't look so good any more. Baldur's Gate 1 just didn't survive time trials and now is just a good game with average story. Baldur's Gate 2 ends up much better, but still it's a relic of the past. Someone can say they are masterpieces that shouldn't be touch, but I call it no sense. If something can't be changed or improved in just 70 years old field (Video Games), then why even bother to make something new. That's why it's time to kill your heroes and move on. I get from where you are coming, but still tabletop fans are small margin compared to video games fans. Where video games are now bigger market than music, television and movies.


Agree almost 100%, specially on 1, 2 and 5, you are spot on. Points 3 and 4 not so much.

Its feels much more like DOS 3 than BG3, and does not feel like BG3 in may aspects, the excess of surface effects is specially annoying for the reasons you pointed out, everything is constantly burning/frozen/steaming.

Higher/Lower elevation is also too much of a factor than it should and eating food during combat is just beyond silly.




Originally Posted by sinogy
Too many melee misses are not fun. You maybe a spell caster fan but a lot of people ae not. Plus, 5e is not perfectly balanced. Magic is easily op. No melee can come close to casters without the help of magic items.

However, too many successful attacks are not fun too. I would rather have enemies with a little bit dodge than being a meatshield.


Too many misses ARE unfun, which is why Larian's homebrew elevation rules are silly

Everyone who thinks you need Larian's insane elevation changes for elevation to matter tactically either A: hasn't played a TTRPG or turn based tactical shooter before, or B: should go play the first goblin fight in Solasta: Crown of the Magister, where the goblins can use their elevation to get out of line of sight, flank you, or bypass your cover, the game doesn't decide that you need to have a 30% chance to hit them because they're above you if they're standing in the open

How about this compromise: Ranged weapons have disadvantage outside of their short range when firing vertically? This would be trivial to calculate for Larian
Hi Benny,

That's an interesting perspective, however i've been playing DnD on and off for years now and have a different one.

Expecting a DnD 5e emulation in 3d is unreasonable. There are design decisions in 5e that were made because it was tabletop, translating this into an isometric RPG game will require changes and optimisation. So when playing this game it needs to be faithful to the world and *general* mechanics of 5e - which they've succeeded with. It is more closer to the source than past games, such as Neverwinter Nights, BG1&2, Planescape, etc. They've also added extra combat mechanics that make combat more fun - all of which needs to be balanced in time of course.

If it "feels" like DoS3 - why is that? Is that the result of:

> AoE throwable items
> The story being so similar (prisoner from crashed ship, need to control strange powers, manipulation by higher powers)
> Similar graphics engine

I've gone through 3 playthroughs of act1 at this point, and from someone who plays more iRPGs on the reg than DnD, this game feels *super* 5e to the point that it's probably confusing players who have to google what advantage in combat means. Anyways to your points specifically:

Originally Posted by Benny89

Ground elemental effects SHOULD absolutely be not part of DnD game


Environmental effects may need a reduction in damage or/and duration, but removing them completely would be a mistake - environmental effects add extra complexity in combat without friction which makes combat more tactical

Originally Posted by Benny89

You already have balanced system and play-tested in years


Hate to break it to you Benny, but DnD 5e is not balanced. There's multi-class cheese, rogue meta, spells that can be abused, and ect... luckily there's a DM that will tell you "no" if you're going OTT. The thing is that RNG needs balance: too little and things are predictable, too much and things are fustrating. In DnD the DM is the director, you don't have this in video-game form so there needs to be a reduction to RNG from table top.

Originally Posted by Benny89

Please remember that 5e is designed to be PERFECTLY viable for melee classes (when it comes to AC/HP vs hit chance/damage) without ANY MAGIC ITEMS AT ALL


Compared to other iRPGs the magic item pickup is still limited, IIRC it's similar to the previous BG games. The warrior class is underwhelming at this point, this is because rogues have the same AC, are quicker, and there's no strength based ranged weapons. It's also likely to do with the hieght bonuses, and number of enemies per encounter (focus-fire has always been the go-to strat, something ranged classes excel at).

Originally Posted by Benny89

Beginning is little too much for 1st level characters and party members you meet - it's very unrealistic


Most DnD campaigns I've rolled dont start at lvl1. The intro of this story indicates that the adventurers are not randoms but people of exceptional ability, so I really dont see this problem. There are plenty of RPGs that start off with killing rats in the basement, and it's boring. You do have a point tho, there is a risk of unrealistic escalation - if you're fighting observers at level 4, what will you have to deal with at level 8?

Originally Posted by Benny89

Alignments are big part of 5e system.


Alignments are not a big part of 5e.. they removed most of this to add more rpg flexibility. IIRC Larian were thinking about adding in allignment, and Wizards told them "no".


Originally Posted by Klawz
Hi Benny,

That's an interesting perspective, however i've been playing DnD on and off for years now and have a different one.

Expecting a DnD 5e emulation in 3d is unreasonable. There are design decisions in 5e that were made because it was tabletop, translating this into an isometric RPG game will require changes and optimisation. So when playing this game it needs to be faithful to the world and *general* mechanics of 5e - which they've succeeded with. It is more closer to the source than past games, such as Neverwinter Nights, BG1&2, Planescape, etc. They've also added extra combat mechanics that make combat more fun - all of which needs to be balanced in time of course.

If it "feels" like DoS3 - why is that? Is that the result of:

> AoE throwable items
> The story being so similar (prisoner from crashed ship, need to control strange powers, manipulation by higher powers)
> Similar graphics engine

I've gone through 3 playthroughs of act1 at this point, and from someone who plays more iRPGs on the reg than DnD, this game feels *super* 5e to the point that it's probably confusing players who have to google what advantage in combat means. Anyways to your points specifically:

Originally Posted by Benny89

Ground elemental effects SHOULD absolutely be not part of DnD game


Environmental effects may need a reduction in damage or/and duration, but removing them completely would be a mistake - environmental effects add extra complexity in combat without friction which makes combat more tactical

Originally Posted by Benny89

You already have balanced system and play-tested in years


Hate to break it to you Benny, but DnD 5e is not balanced. There's multi-class cheese, rogue meta, spells that can be abused, and ect... luckily there's a DM that will tell you "no" if you're going OTT. The thing is that RNG needs balance: too little and things are predictable, too much and things are fustrating. In DnD the DM is the director, you don't have this in video-game form so there needs to be a reduction to RNG from table top.

Originally Posted by Benny89

Please remember that 5e is designed to be PERFECTLY viable for melee classes (when it comes to AC/HP vs hit chance/damage) without ANY MAGIC ITEMS AT ALL


Compared to other iRPGs the magic item pickup is still limited, IIRC it's similar to the previous BG games. The warrior class is underwhelming at this point, this is because rogues have the same AC, are quicker, and there's no strength based ranged weapons. It's also likely to do with the hieght bonuses, and number of enemies per encounter (focus-fire has always been the go-to strat, something ranged classes excel at).

Originally Posted by Benny89

Beginning is little too much for 1st level characters and party members you meet - it's very unrealistic


Most DnD campaigns I've rolled dont start at lvl1. The intro of this story indicates that the adventurers are not randoms but people of exceptional ability, so I really dont see this problem. There are plenty of RPGs that start off with killing rats in the basement, and it's boring. You do have a point tho, there is a risk of unrealistic escalation - if you're fighting observers at level 4, what will you have to deal with at level 8?

Originally Posted by Benny89

Alignments are big part of 5e system.


Alignments are not a big part of 5e.. they removed most of this to add more rpg flexibility. IIRC Larian were thinking about adding in allignment, and Wizards told them "no".




I will go with it fast

1. There is no point in increasing complexity of combat system. 5e is complex enough with hundreds of spells, tons of subclasses and it's features etc. There is no point in tweaking it more.

2. 5e is the most balanced DnD system version ever. Complare to 3.5 it's like night and day. Of course there are some things that are unbalanced (Sorcadins, Hexblades, Simulacrum, dips for caster classes etc.) but NO RPG SYSTEM EVER will be perfectly balanced. It's been proved in tens of years of table/video game RPGS that it's impossible. The best we can get is as balanced as possible. Which I believe 5e is. Adding additional stuff ON TOP of that will only make overall game less balanced, because every additional mechanical factor you add - increase possibilities of exploiting it in a way that devs/authors did not think about. That was the reason why 3.5 was such a balance mess - there were tons of new spells, races, prestige classes etc. added in every book and so many books were added that nobody could keep up with new OP builds, combos etc. 5e takes slower time with new books for the reason to preserve balance as much as possible. Perfect one in RPG is just no achievable.

3. Rogues are as good as Fighters becaue again Larian messes with 5e rules. In 5e book Rogue is not a Fighter. He does not have simillar AC (the highest AC rogue can have is 17 with 20 DEX, while Fighter in Plate Armor, Defense Style and Shield can have 21 AC. Also Fighters have higher HP pool, two attacks at level 4 and 3 at level 11 and Action Surge, while Rogue is always stuck with 1 attack/turn, but with Sneak Attack on top of that. They also get Expertises, while Figherrs get things like Battlemaster Manouvers, Eldricht Knight magic boosts or Samurai Fighting Spirit.

The only reason that Fighter may feel not good for you compare to Rogue is because Larian messed with 5e balance. Rogues are balanced around 1 attach/turn with Sneak Attack. Fighters are balanced around up to 4/attacks per turn + Action Surge that can give them another 4 attacks on level 20. Add to that Precision Strike from Battlemaster, Great Weapon Master Feat, Polearm Master Feat + Sentinel Feat and you have combat monster. Rogues can't compare when it comes to DPS with Fighters in 5e. Arcane Trickster is only one who can get really good DPS thanks to Familliar Help Action + Haste later.

4. Most DnD campaigns do start at level 1. Take a look at most published campaigns by Wizards. Most start at level 1.
Originally Posted by coredumped
We all like Larian here, at least to some extent. Otherwise we wouldn't have bothered to pay full price for a severely unfinished EA game, play the buggy mess, create an account in their forums and take time out of our days to come and try to better the game. Still, it remains the fact that Larian has taken several liberties with the game which made many people upset, and rightly so...

This is a thing I wish more people understood. We're not here to whine on the internet. The whole point of an Alpha release is to air out these things so that Larian can get ahead of problems. If we didn't see a great game just under the surface of this one, then we'd have just stayed quiet, gotten a return from steam, and left.

A large portion of the flaws and broken mechanics in BG3 stem directly from the deviations away from the rules of 5e. When you have a system that is designed to act in a certain way, every change has knock on effects.

There is no option to use the perception or investigation skill actively, instead your "passive" perception is a roll. This causes several problems and exploits. First, because it's a roll, it tells you that there is something to notice, but without a way to investigate, you can't move carefully through a trap filled dungeon the way you would in normal D&D. But also, your familiars get a "passive" perception check, and since each summoned familiar is a new creature, and is treated like a disposable pet, it can be summoned infinitely for free. So any time your group fails a perception check, you can summon new familiars until one succeeds on the check. If passive perception instead worked the way it was supposed to, then this exploit wouldn't exist. Instead, any character that had a high enough passive would automatically notice the thing on the ground.

Without active perception, there is nothing that the AI can do once your party successfully gets into stealth. Because Passive perception doesn't exist, everyone automatically succeeds on stealth checks once they get out of line of sight. Stealth is supposed to be something you can attempt with cover or concealment, but there is no cover or concealment mechanically, only line of sight. This means that rogues get shafted again, since they need total concealment to make a stealth check. The changes to cover and concealment and the seeming replacement with advantage and disadvantage from elevation also play havoc with balance. Cover is supposed to give a bonus to AC, and it's supposed to let you hide. It's not supposed to give you a bonus to hit.

The AI will drop everything to get a height advantage so that it can more easily hit you. And there is no benefit to being partially behind something. These two things trivialize a lot of the tactics of a normal 5e fight. But surface effects just annihilate them. Having rare environmental advantages and disadvantages exist in a game adds some fun flavor to fights. Having nearly every fight devolve into a fight to see who can explode the other the most with random explosive barrels does not. But it's worse than that. That's an easy fix, have less barrels, give the goblins fewer flasks of acid. Cantrips however are another can of worms.

Supposedly the reason for the higher health on all of the monsters is to balance out the lower AC that they were given to make fights more "fun". I think that that's a justification that was given, but I think the real culprit behind the decision is Fire Bolt. On a miss, Firebolt can do something like 3d4 damage before the targeted creature gets to act. On a normal health goblin, this has a decent chance of killing it outright. Because of the ease of applying status effects anywhere at any time, with no downside, low health enemies would have no chance of surviving a party of firebolting Wizards who kite as they ignite. But if you cite "fun"you can justify a lot of back end changes to cover up an unbalanced mechanic. Never mind the damage that said change caused to things like sacred flame, who don't get the same buff to hit, and now has to chew through more health to boot.

Of course if the hypothetical Fire Bolt Brigade got tied up in melee, they'd still have some trouble, because they'd have to waste their action trying to disengage so that they don't light themselves on fire. Except that every class has taken some levels in rogue, and thus can disengage as a bonus action. But worse, disengage is tied to jump, so you don't even need to make a check to pass through or over an enemy square. This means that clever positioning to box someone in doesn't work. Which means that Tanks can't effectively protect the squishies. It means that there is no downside to playing pure ranged and ignoring melee entirely.

But even if you are playing a Melee character, you can still get advantage if you can backstab someone. Introducing Facing is certainly a choice. It means that anyone can get advantage without the help of a flanker. Which means that there is no benefit to formation fighting at all. It throws teamwork out the window, in favour of cheesing the fact that the game is turn based. One of the conceits of the initiative system is that the round happens more or less simultaneously, which means that some actions are assumed to be possible even when it's not your turn. It's where opportunity attacks come from. But the other thing that is assumed is that you can turn to face your opponent. This is why flanking is flanking, and not getting behind someone. Instead you can walk, or jump behind someone to get free advantage on every attack.

All in all the changes that have been made reduce a party's reliance on each other, reduce the tactical nuance of the game, and make non-attack based combat more powerful than anything that any character could do.
Concerning "Elemental effects have no business in a D&D game, jump to 25:56

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5j1wd4Ay81A&ab_channel=OutsideXtra
Originally Posted by Benny89
Originally Posted by Klawz
Hi Benny,

That's an interesting perspective, however i've been playing DnD on and off for years now and have a different one.

Expecting a DnD 5e emulation in 3d is unreasonable. There are design decisions in 5e that were made because it was tabletop, translating this into an isometric RPG game will require changes and optimisation. So when playing this game it needs to be faithful to the world and *general* mechanics of 5e - which they've succeeded with. It is more closer to the source than past games, such as Neverwinter Nights, BG1&2, Planescape, etc. They've also added extra combat mechanics that make combat more fun - all of which needs to be balanced in time of course.

If it "feels" like DoS3 - why is that? Is that the result of:

> AoE throwable items
> The story being so similar (prisoner from crashed ship, need to control strange powers, manipulation by higher powers)
> Similar graphics engine

I've gone through 3 playthroughs of act1 at this point, and from someone who plays more iRPGs on the reg than DnD, this game feels *super* 5e to the point that it's probably confusing players who have to google what advantage in combat means. Anyways to your points specifically:

Originally Posted by Benny89

Ground elemental effects SHOULD absolutely be not part of DnD game


Environmental effects may need a reduction in damage or/and duration, but removing them completely would be a mistake - environmental effects add extra complexity in combat without friction which makes combat more tactical

Originally Posted by Benny89

You already have balanced system and play-tested in years


Hate to break it to you Benny, but DnD 5e is not balanced. There's multi-class cheese, rogue meta, spells that can be abused, and ect... luckily there's a DM that will tell you "no" if you're going OTT. The thing is that RNG needs balance: too little and things are predictable, too much and things are fustrating. In DnD the DM is the director, you don't have this in video-game form so there needs to be a reduction to RNG from table top.

Originally Posted by Benny89

Please remember that 5e is designed to be PERFECTLY viable for melee classes (when it comes to AC/HP vs hit chance/damage) without ANY MAGIC ITEMS AT ALL


Compared to other iRPGs the magic item pickup is still limited, IIRC it's similar to the previous BG games. The warrior class is underwhelming at this point, this is because rogues have the same AC, are quicker, and there's no strength based ranged weapons. It's also likely to do with the hieght bonuses, and number of enemies per encounter (focus-fire has always been the go-to strat, something ranged classes excel at).

Originally Posted by Benny89

Beginning is little too much for 1st level characters and party members you meet - it's very unrealistic


Most DnD campaigns I've rolled dont start at lvl1. The intro of this story indicates that the adventurers are not randoms but people of exceptional ability, so I really dont see this problem. There are plenty of RPGs that start off with killing rats in the basement, and it's boring. You do have a point tho, there is a risk of unrealistic escalation - if you're fighting observers at level 4, what will you have to deal with at level 8?

Originally Posted by Benny89

Alignments are big part of 5e system.


Alignments are not a big part of 5e.. they removed most of this to add more rpg flexibility. IIRC Larian were thinking about adding in allignment, and Wizards told them "no".




I will go with it fast

1. There is no point in increasing complexity of combat system. 5e is complex enough with hundreds of spells, tons of subclasses and it's features etc. There is no point in tweaking it more.

2. 5e is the most balanced DnD system version ever. Complare to 3.5 it's like night and day. Of course there are some things that are unbalanced (Sorcadins, Hexblades, Simulacrum, dips for caster classes etc.) but NO RPG SYSTEM EVER will be perfectly balanced. It's been proved in tens of years of table/video game RPGS that it's impossible. The best we can get is as balanced as possible. Which I believe 5e is. Adding additional stuff ON TOP of that will only make overall game less balanced, because every additional mechanical factor you add - increase possibilities of exploiting it in a way that devs/authors did not think about. That was the reason why 3.5 was such a balance mess - there were tons of new spells, races, prestige classes etc. added in every book and so many books were added that nobody could keep up with new OP builds, combos etc. 5e takes slower time with new books for the reason to preserve balance as much as possible. Perfect one in RPG is just no achievable.

3. Rogues are as good as Fighters becaue again Larian messes with 5e rules. In 5e book Rogue is not a Fighter. He does not have simillar AC (the highest AC rogue can have is 17 with 20 DEX, while Fighter in Plate Armor, Defense Style and Shield can have 21 AC. Also Fighters have higher HP pool, two attacks at level 4 and 3 at level 11 and Action Surge, while Rogue is always stuck with 1 attack/turn, but with Sneak Attack on top of that. They also get Expertises, while Figherrs get things like Battlemaster Manouvers, Eldricht Knight magic boosts or Samurai Fighting Spirit.

The only reason that Fighter may feel not good for you compare to Rogue is because Larian messed with 5e balance. Rogues are balanced around 1 attach/turn with Sneak Attack. Fighters are balanced around up to 4/attacks per turn + Action Surge that can give them another 4 attacks on level 20. Add to that Precision Strike from Battlemaster, Great Weapon Master Feat, Polearm Master Feat + Sentinel Feat and you have combat monster. Rogues can't compare when it comes to DPS with Fighters in 5e. Arcane Trickster is only one who can get really good DPS thanks to Familliar Help Action + Haste later.

4. Most DnD campaigns do start at level 1. Take a look at most published campaigns by Wizards. Most start at level 1.


Another Larian fanboy obliterated by a d4 dice.
+1
Für BG3, my expectation is simply that it feels like D&D, so I'm a little disappointed with EA version. Exactly this expectation is currently not felt. Also for me the EA version feels more like a DOS2 successor which happens to play near Baldurs Gate.
The original post perfectly mirrors my feelings as well.

DOS2 is a great game. BG1&2 are great games.

Don't try to force the DOS mechanics into a D&D game. Don't try to inject the more light hearted cartoony DOS feel into BG3. These two franchises are fundamentally different and should maintain their own identities.

Sometimes in an RPG it's more important to create a world that feels believable and real rather than having a million fun overpowered things to do every turn in combat. This is true with the Baldur's Gate games. D&D 5e is quite enough to offer a fun and satisfying tactical party based combat experience. Beyond that, focus entirely on atmosphere and story.

Originally Posted by robertthebard
Concerning "Elemental effects have no business in a D&D game, jump to 25:56

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5j1wd4Ay81A&ab_channel=OutsideXtra


Virtually no one claims that ground effects have "no business in D&D", most of us are quite aware that D&D has a lot of ground based spells like Spike Growth, Grease, Web, etc. as well as items such as Alchemist's Fire or oil/acid flasks. What D&D DOESN'T have are cantrips that deal damage AND create a surface effect in addition or even on a miss. Of course throwing an oil flask with your rogue and having your mage set it ablaze with Burning Hands or even a Firebolt should remain, no one is arguing that.
But a Firebolt that creates a fire ground effect by itself is a bit much, not to mention the general overuse of such effects.
Originally Posted by Kendaric
Originally Posted by robertthebard
Concerning "Elemental effects have no business in a D&D game, jump to 25:56

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5j1wd4Ay81A&ab_channel=OutsideXtra


Virtually no one claims that ground effects have "no business in D&D", most of us are quite aware that D&D has a lot of ground based spells like Spike Growth, Grease, Web, etc. as well as items such as Alchemist's Fire or oil/acid flasks. What D&D DOESN'T have are cantrips that deal damage AND create a surface effect in addition or even on a miss. Of course throwing an oil flask with your rogue and having your mage set it ablaze with Burning Hands or even a Firebolt should remain, no one is arguing that.
But a Firebolt that creates a fire ground effect by itself is a bit much, not to mention the general overuse of such effects.


Exactly... using thrown items or spell effect combinations are very valid low level tactics, but they are usually just that. A low level party shouldn't be able to turn a whole courtyard or goblin camp into a hellish inferno, using a cantrip and a few jugs of oil, though, that's what high level spells are for. Why even have character progression otherwise?
Originally Posted by Kendaric
Originally Posted by robertthebard
Concerning "Elemental effects have no business in a D&D game, jump to 25:56

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5j1wd4Ay81A&ab_channel=OutsideXtra


Virtually no one claims that ground effects have "no business in D&D", most of us are quite aware that D&D has a lot of ground based spells like Spike Growth, Grease, Web, etc. as well as items such as Alchemist's Fire or oil/acid flasks. What D&D DOESN'T have are cantrips that deal damage AND create a surface effect in addition or even on a miss. Of course throwing an oil flask with your rogue and having your mage set it ablaze with Burning Hands or even a Firebolt should remain, no one is arguing that.
But a Firebolt that creates a fire ground effect by itself is a bit much, not to mention the general overuse of such effects.


Exactly. On lower levels it's one of the most popular tactics: using Create Bonefire and throwing an Oil Flask. So there is a cantrip that creates a fire surface in 5e (Bonfire, but you know - it's fire). But it requires CONCENTRAION, which is BIG factor for AOE surface effects, because they are powerful so caster can only keep one at the time because concentration. So why add surface effects to spells that should not have them? It destroys balance of spells.

For example there is no point in adding freeze effect to something like Cone of Cold. Cone of Cold it's meant to be damage spell, it's balanced around that. Adding CC to it on top of that makes it OP. If you want to CC group of enemies, go with Wall of Ice or Mealstorm etc.

You want electric AOE effect that lasts? You have Storm Sphere for it.

DnD doesn't need DOS 2 elemental sufraces. It has tons of spell that can do it and are balanced around it.

Also DnD is not balanced around comboing elemental effect of spells. For example Otiuke Freezing Sphere won't freeze wet target in DnD. It just deal cold damage.

I don't want to play DOS again. I want to play DnD.
Originally Posted by Kendaric
Originally Posted by robertthebard
Concerning "Elemental effects have no business in a D&D game, jump to 25:56

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5j1wd4Ay81A&ab_channel=OutsideXtra


Virtually no one claims that ground effects have "no business in D&D", most of us are quite aware that D&D has a lot of ground based spells like Spike Growth, Grease, Web, etc. as well as items such as Alchemist's Fire or oil/acid flasks. What D&D DOESN'T have are cantrips that deal damage AND create a surface effect in addition or even on a miss. Of course throwing an oil flask with your rogue and having your mage set it ablaze with Burning Hands or even a Firebolt should remain, no one is arguing that.
But a Firebolt that creates a fire ground effect by itself is a bit much, not to mention the general overuse of such effects.


Don't forget talking about dipping^^

[Linked Image]
Don't get me started on dipping.... I try my best to ignore that abomination of a mechanic even exists.
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Originally Posted by Kendaric
Originally Posted by robertthebard
Concerning "Elemental effects have no business in a D&D game, jump to 25:56

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5j1wd4Ay81A&ab_channel=OutsideXtra


Virtually no one claims that ground effects have "no business in D&D", most of us are quite aware that D&D has a lot of ground based spells like Spike Growth, Grease, Web, etc. as well as items such as Alchemist's Fire or oil/acid flasks. What D&D DOESN'T have are cantrips that deal damage AND create a surface effect in addition or even on a miss. Of course throwing an oil flask with your rogue and having your mage set it ablaze with Burning Hands or even a Firebolt should remain, no one is arguing that.
But a Firebolt that creates a fire ground effect by itself is a bit much, not to mention the general overuse of such effects.


Don't forget talking about dipping^^

[Linked Image]


Argh! Don't even start with that bull cr... sorry, but, even with all the abstraction, magic and monsters, D&D rules still TRY to stay logical and grounded in reality, and lighting 4ft of steel ablaze with candle is just... yea, it's wacky Divinity fun fun logic, and has no place in any game which takes itself even a little bit seriously.
id even go a step further and say that the abundance of throwables that also leave surface effects also contributes to the disconnect from dnd, but other than scaling the number/triggering synergies back idk what would be a good fix - id say that unless your players/dm highlights them in the campaign that 'bombs' are used fairly sparingly overall.

now i dont think that these throwables should be removed from the game, as i love playing as a rogue that specializes in tinkering with alchemical bombs, but i just think larian's throwable tuning is set too high, even beyond those that leave surface effects.

somewhat related, and idk if you can do this in ea, but i think being able to craft fire/acid/etc throwables would be a neat feature (i hope the crafting we get in ea is just the start)
Originally Posted by Kendaric
Originally Posted by robertthebard
Concerning "Elemental effects have no business in a D&D game, jump to 25:56

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5j1wd4Ay81A&ab_channel=OutsideXtra


Virtually no one claims that ground effects have "no business in D&D", most of us are quite aware that D&D has a lot of ground based spells like Spike Growth, Grease, Web, etc. as well as items such as Alchemist's Fire or oil/acid flasks. What D&D DOESN'T have are cantrips that deal damage AND create a surface effect in addition or even on a miss. Of course throwing an oil flask with your rogue and having your mage set it ablaze with Burning Hands or even a Firebolt should remain, no one is arguing that.
But a Firebolt that creates a fire ground effect by itself is a bit much, not to mention the general overuse of such effects.

Oh, you mean except for the OP, that literally said that? Oh my, what about all the people that wholeheartedly agree? They've been duped!
Originally Posted by robertthebard
Originally Posted by Kendaric
Originally Posted by robertthebard
Concerning "Elemental effects have no business in a D&D game, jump to 25:56

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5j1wd4Ay81A&ab_channel=OutsideXtra


Virtually no one claims that ground effects have "no business in D&D", most of us are quite aware that D&D has a lot of ground based spells like Spike Growth, Grease, Web, etc. as well as items such as Alchemist's Fire or oil/acid flasks. What D&D DOESN'T have are cantrips that deal damage AND create a surface effect in addition or even on a miss. Of course throwing an oil flask with your rogue and having your mage set it ablaze with Burning Hands or even a Firebolt should remain, no one is arguing that.
But a Firebolt that creates a fire ground effect by itself is a bit much, not to mention the general overuse of such effects.

Oh, you mean except for the OP, that literally said that? Oh my, what about all the people that wholeheartedly agree? They've been duped!


Or maybe they just read more than the first sentence and try to understand the OP's feelings....
Also I would like if Larian avoid changing base 5e classes WITHOUT first them being implemented and tested as they should be in game. Changes to Rogues before even EA started is silly. We didn't even test a base 5e class in BG3.
Originally Posted by Paimon
Originally Posted by coredumped
We all like Larian here, at least to some extent. Otherwise we wouldn't have bothered to pay full price for a severely unfinished EA game, play the buggy mess, create an account in their forums and take time out of our days to come and try to better the game. Still, it remains the fact that Larian has taken several liberties with the game which made many people upset, and rightly so...

This is a thing I wish more people understood. We're not here to whine on the internet. The whole point of an Alpha release is to air out these things so that Larian can get ahead of problems. If we didn't see a great game just under the surface of this one, then we'd have just stayed quiet, gotten a return from steam, and left.

A large portion of the flaws and broken mechanics in BG3 stem directly from the deviations away from the rules of 5e. When you have a system that is designed to act in a certain way, every change has knock on effects.

There is no option to use the perception or investigation skill actively, instead your "passive" perception is a roll. This causes several problems and exploits. First, because it's a roll, it tells you that there is something to notice, but without a way to investigate, you can't move carefully through a trap filled dungeon the way you would in normal D&D. But also, your familiars get a "passive" perception check, and since each summoned familiar is a new creature, and is treated like a disposable pet, it can be summoned infinitely for free. So any time your group fails a perception check, you can summon new familiars until one succeeds on the check. If passive perception instead worked the way it was supposed to, then this exploit wouldn't exist. Instead, any character that had a high enough passive would automatically notice the thing on the ground.

Without active perception, there is nothing that the AI can do once your party successfully gets into stealth. Because Passive perception doesn't exist, everyone automatically succeeds on stealth checks once they get out of line of sight. Stealth is supposed to be something you can attempt with cover or concealment, but there is no cover or concealment mechanically, only line of sight. This means that rogues get shafted again, since they need total concealment to make a stealth check. The changes to cover and concealment and the seeming replacement with advantage and disadvantage from elevation also play havoc with balance. Cover is supposed to give a bonus to AC, and it's supposed to let you hide. It's not supposed to give you a bonus to hit.

The AI will drop everything to get a height advantage so that it can more easily hit you. And there is no benefit to being partially behind something. These two things trivialize a lot of the tactics of a normal 5e fight. But surface effects just annihilate them. Having rare environmental advantages and disadvantages exist in a game adds some fun flavor to fights. Having nearly every fight devolve into a fight to see who can explode the other the most with random explosive barrels does not. But it's worse than that. That's an easy fix, have less barrels, give the goblins fewer flasks of acid. Cantrips however are another can of worms.

....


This is the best post in the thread, and should be agreed upon by everyone that wants a D&D game. Please change height/backstab/surfaces, and honestly take the time you need to make a better AI.

Surfaces don't need to be fully removed (though I would be very happy to see them go), a fireball should leave some sort of fire on the ground, and that's probably fine, but why does every area have oil barrels and flammable booze buckets laying around? Down the line it is going to make gameplay much worse, rather than better. Imagine actually getting to level 10, or 12, and still just firebolting barrels when you should have all these other cool spells or actions you could be using because it's still the most efficient thing you can do. If surfaces are a thing we need to live with they should at least be REWARDING to use, require some setup or forethought, instead of there just being an oil barrel in every room of every dungeon.
Originally Posted by Paimon

This is a thing I wish more people understood. We're not here to whine on the internet. The whole point of an Alpha release is to air out these things so that Larian can get ahead of problems. If we didn't see a great game just under the surface of this one, then we'd have just stayed quiet, gotten a return from steam, and left.

A large portion of the flaws and broken mechanics in BG3 stem directly from the deviations away from the rules of 5e. When you have a system that is designed to act in a certain way, every change has knock on effects.

There is no option to use the perception or investigation skill actively, instead your "passive" perception is a roll. This causes several problems and exploits. First, because it's a roll, it tells you that there is something to notice, but without a way to investigate, you can't move carefully through a trap filled dungeon the way you would in normal D&D. But also, your familiars get a "passive" perception check, and since each summoned familiar is a new creature, and is treated like a disposable pet, it can be summoned infinitely for free. So any time your group fails a perception check, you can summon new familiars until one succeeds on the check. If passive perception instead worked the way it was supposed to, then this exploit wouldn't exist. Instead, any character that had a high enough passive would automatically notice the thing on the ground.

Without active perception, there is nothing that the AI can do once your party successfully gets into stealth. Because Passive perception doesn't exist, everyone automatically succeeds on stealth checks once they get out of line of sight. Stealth is supposed to be something you can attempt with cover or concealment, but there is no cover or concealment mechanically, only line of sight. This means that rogues get shafted again, since they need total concealment to make a stealth check. The changes to cover and concealment and the seeming replacement with advantage and disadvantage from elevation also play havoc with balance. Cover is supposed to give a bonus to AC, and it's supposed to let you hide. It's not supposed to give you a bonus to hit.

The AI will drop everything to get a height advantage so that it can more easily hit you. And there is no benefit to being partially behind something. These two things trivialize a lot of the tactics of a normal 5e fight. But surface effects just annihilate them. Having rare environmental advantages and disadvantages exist in a game adds some fun flavor to fights. Having nearly every fight devolve into a fight to see who can explode the other the most with random explosive barrels does not. But it's worse than that. That's an easy fix, have less barrels, give the goblins fewer flasks of acid. Cantrips however are another can of worms.

....


The funny thing is – DOS2 already had what you would describe as Passive Perception with their Wits ability. You needed a certain number in Wits and you’d automatically succeed as noticing things. So they’ve moved away from something which is more in tune with 5E toward some broken mechanic that ruins the experience. I really don’t think they understand D&D very well.
Originally Posted by Benny89

This is because I wanted to play DnD. I am playing Table RPGs for 15 years now and for last 3 years I DM and play DnD 5e. I was really excited to play BG3 and really happy that it's Larian that will make it. But I was hoped to play almost 100% 5e system. Maybe 95% as some things can't be that easy put into cRPG.

But currently game is too much like DOS2. And I really don't like it. I feel "cheated" (strong world but hear me out first) that I was supposed to play DnD, not DOS2 1.5. I know it's EA, and I understand game can still be changed/adjusted so I take my chance here to post feedback and hope that Devs will hear me out.


100%.
I really want to play DnD and currently the similarly to DoS overshadows it.
+1 with everything here.

Especially number 2.
Originally Posted by nizanegusa
well said!
two minor disagreements:
even though i like alignment more than my friends, it's not really part of 5e anymore.
5e is not perfectly balanced. if you give out no magic items magic users will overshadow martials at higher levels.
also i would not mind them buffing shitty spells like find traps, witch bolt or barskin.


First +1 times infinity to the OP and second poster!!! To the quoted above:

True, alignment isn't a major factor in 5E anymore, but its not completely invisible either.

5E is not "perfectly" balanced, but what the OP is saying is why have Larian rehash solved problems in 5E by making poor/uninformed changes to the system that has been through years of playtesting already?

The OP also didn't say "don't give any magic items" he said don't pepper them on PC's in the level range of 1-10 well over and above what they should have in those tiers. Its already problematic enough that goblins are throwing thousands of gold worth of alchemical bombs and magic arrows at a level 2 party.
Originally Posted by Dominemesis
Its already problematic enough that goblins are throwing thousands of gold worth of alchemical bombs and magic arrows at a level 2 party.


Yup. It's riddiculous. Goblins are the lowest tier enemies you face in DnD, tied with Kobolds probably. Yet they somehow have funds and access to magic arrows, achlemical bombs etc. This is just stupid. So what Orcs will have? Magical Axes, magical plate armors, ring of protection +1, Orc Shaman will have Staff of Magi?

There is no DnD balance here. Take a look at NWN1 beginning or BG1 beginning. You are lucky to find something else than throwing axe from enemies and a wolf can kill you. Tha is what level 1 in DnD is. And goblins have 2 coppers on them, short bows and some normal arrows, sometimes club or dagger/short sword.

This is fantasy setting, but it's not DnD.
Originally Posted by Benny89
Originally Posted by Dominemesis
Its already problematic enough that goblins are throwing thousands of gold worth of alchemical bombs and magic arrows at a level 2 party.


Yup. It's riddiculous. Goblins are the lowest tier enemies you face in DnD, tied with Kobolds probably. Yet they somehow have funds and access to magic arrows, achlemical bombs etc. This is just stupid. So what Orcs will have? Magical Axes, magical plate armors, ring of protection +1, Orc Shaman will have Staff of Magi?

There is no DnD balance here. Take a look at NWN1 beginning or BG1 beginning. You are lucky to find something else than throwing axe from enemies and a wolf can kill you. Tha is what level 1 in DnD is. And goblins have 2 coppers on them, short bows and some normal arrows, sometimes club or dagger/short sword.

This is fantasy setting, but it's not DnD.

So I'm curious; are you paying attention to the dialog from NPCs outside of "go kill x"? I have to ask, because there is Absolute-ly an explanation for how the goblins are acting given in a dialog, in the Druid's Grove. I'm at a loss to explain how, if you're actually exploring the dialog from NPCs in that zone, you're not getting that. I'm at a loss to explain how you're not getting it if you managed to get into the Blighted Village w/out combat, and listened to the ambient discussions going on with the goblins there. Because there are Absolute-ly some rather strong hints there too. There are clues all throughout the goblin camp that they Absolute-ly aren't working on their own. In fact, I'm Absolute-ly positive that there are tons of clues scattered all over the map, even in magic items that can drop that Absolute-ly explain that there's a force working behind the scenes.
Stop using story as an excuse for shitty balancing. "oh its the absolute", well doesn't change that every Goblin has bombs and got archers with fancy arrows. That's not how balance works.
Speaking of balance, I aggroed the entire goblin camp by trying to get that goblin to kiss my feet. What ensued was an epic fight where I only had two characters using high ground to murder most of the camp(and only my ranger was alive at the end). BUT during the fight, a level one NPC used color spray 5 times (4 of which were in a row). Now, that's either a crapload of money he wasted on scrolls or the NPC's don't use spell slots like the heroes do. Just like the level 4 archers firing twice, or the level 5 gnoll archers firing three times. I love Larian, but I'm questioning a lot of their design choices for this game(which I wouldn't do as much if it wasn't marketed as a D&D game).
Originally Posted by Victordeus
Speaking of balance, I aggroed the entire goblin camp by trying to get that goblin to kiss my feet. What ensued was an epic fight where I only had two characters using high ground to murder most of the camp(and only my ranger was alive at the end). BUT during the fight, a level one NPC used color spray 5 times (4 of which were in a row). Now, that's either a crapload of money he wasted on scrolls or the NPC's don't use spell slots like the heroes do. Just like the level 4 archers firing twice, or the level 5 gnoll archers firing three times. I love Larian, but I'm questioning a lot of their design choices for this game(which I wouldn't do as much if it wasn't marketed as a D&D game).



Yup. Enemies don't care about spell slots, they straight up cheat. Not including the crap ton of grenades and special arrows. The enemies are also "Larian'd" up. Where they are given some weird attacks and things just...for the sake of it? Like "oh give it more" It's designed by a DM that has barely played DnD. Like Phase spiders having range. The whole point of their teleport is to teleport in, melee then get out next turn. Giving you 1 turn to hit them. Now they just teleport, range attack and just keep doing it. It took me forever to kill 1 spider because it kept going high up in a place I couldn't even see and just using range because...Larian. -.- Every monster has this issue, including Minotaurs.

This is their stats from 5e directly.
Charge: If the minotaur moves at least 10 ft. straight toward a target and then hits it with a gore Attack on the same turn, the target takes an extra 9 (2d8) piercing damage. If the target is a creature, it must succeed on a DC 14 Strength saving throw or be pushed up to 10 ft. away and knocked prone.

Labyrinthine Recall: The minotaur can perfectly recall any path it has traveled.

Reckless: At the start of its turn, the minotaur can gain advantage on all melee weapon Attack rolls it makes during that turn, but Attack rolls against it have advantage until the start of its next turn.

Actions Greataxe: Melee Weapon Attack: +6 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. Hit: 17 (2d12 + 4) slashing damage.

Gore: Melee Weapon Attack: +6 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. Hit: 13 (2d8 + 4) piercing damage.

No where there is a prone jump attack with 3x attack. Right now these Minotaurs, while sharing the same base hp and AC, have a speed of fucking 60, can not only Charge for 2d8 but also do a AOE Jump that does 1d8 damage and can knock prone anyone in its rather large radius, and on top of that, they get a multi attack. That means that one Minotaur, without its Greataxe, can jump, deal 1d8 damage and knock everyone prone, then do a Gore attack with advantage twice, dealing 2d8+4 each time, and then charge through for another 2d8. In one round, one of these fuckers can do 7d8, without the use of any resource whatsoever. Oh, and they also have Reckless attack, which means that if they fail to knock you prone, they got advantage anyway.
Originally Posted by UnderworldHades
Stop using story as an excuse for shitty balancing. "oh its the absolute", well doesn't change that every Goblin has bombs and got archers with fancy arrows. That's not how balance works.

I read this as "Stop using the stuff the game tells us to explain the stuff we find in the game". What's that that Castle used to tell Becket? Oh yeah, "Stop ruining my stories with your logic".

You see, the problem with your ultimatum here is that I was responding to how they may have come up with this equipment, and how they may have learned better tactics. I get that we have to be on board with this "but my DnD" narrative, but the entirety of the plotline was approved by WotC. If it hadn't been approved, you can bet it wouldn't be in the game. No matter how much of a purist one wants to be, when the owner of the IP says "This is ok", it's ok. Now, you can rally together a social media mob to attack them if you're unhappy about their decision, but until they reverse course on it, they've approved it, and that means that it is, in fact, DnD.

A lot of people want to crack the whip on Larian for poor writing, but here's the story you're trying to tell, in a nutshell:

So a new power in the Realms is trying to take over and remove all the Gods from their pantheons. What is their army, you ask, and rightly so, for such an ambitious undertaking? Why, it's Goblins of course, armed with pointy sticks.

Do you see the flaw with your narrative here? The Absolute, whomever they may be, is very definitely well connected. How do I know that? Because our tadpole has been altered. I'm afraid that the clout, and ability to do something like that is going to require something more than goblins with pointy sticks. So while people huff and puff about "not DnD" about something that was approved by the people with the final say on what is or isn't, I have to look at the story, and plot, what of it we have at this point, and make a judgement call based on what's been provided to us. That you, or anyone else, want(s) to ignore that because "but my DnD" doesn't mean a whole lot in the current context of how content gets introduced into the game. It's not some homebrewed version of DnD, it's approved by the owners of the source material, and if they say yes, you can slip into denial, and try to ignore the information provided in game all you like, but it doesn't make you right, and, it doesn't give you some sort of "high ground" to say "stop using things in the game to explain things in the game".
Originally Posted by robertthebard
Originally Posted by UnderworldHades
Stop using story as an excuse for shitty balancing. "oh its the absolute", well doesn't change that every Goblin has bombs and got archers with fancy arrows. That's not how balance works.

I read this as "Stop using the stuff the game tells us to explain the stuff we find in the game". What's that that Castle used to tell Becket? Oh yeah, "Stop ruining my stories with your logic".

You see, the problem with your ultimatum here is that I was responding to how they may have come up with this equipment, and how they may have learned better tactics. I get that we have to be on board with this "but my DnD" narrative, but the entirety of the plotline was approved by WotC. If it hadn't been approved, you can bet it wouldn't be in the game. No matter how much of a purist one wants to be, when the owner of the IP says "This is ok", it's ok. Now, you can rally together a social media mob to attack them if you're unhappy about their decision, but until they reverse course on it, they've approved it, and that means that it is, in fact, DnD.

A lot of people want to crack the whip on Larian for poor writing, but here's the story you're trying to tell, in a nutshell:

So a new power in the Realms is trying to take over and remove all the Gods from their pantheons. What is their army, you ask, and rightly so, for such an ambitious undertaking? Why, it's Goblins of course, armed with pointy sticks.

Do you see the flaw with your narrative here? The Absolute, whomever they may be, is very definitely well connected. How do I know that? Because our tadpole has been altered. I'm afraid that the clout, and ability to do something like that is going to require something more than goblins with pointy sticks. So while people huff and puff about "not DnD" about something that was approved by the people with the final say on what is or isn't, I have to look at the story, and plot, what of it we have at this point, and make a judgement call based on what's been provided to us. That you, or anyone else, want(s) to ignore that because "but my DnD" doesn't mean a whole lot in the current context of how content gets introduced into the game. It's not some homebrewed version of DnD, it's approved by the owners of the source material, and if they say yes, you can slip into denial, and try to ignore the information provided in game all you like, but it doesn't make you right, and, it doesn't give you some sort of "high ground" to say "stop using things in the game to explain things in the game".


TL;DR: 2020 WotC is trash and they are - once again - running the Realm's world lore into the ground... seems legit! laugh

Seriously, though, do you KNOW the game's story was approved by Wizards, or do you guess? I mean, it's possible Larian is building new canon here, but who is to tell whether or not all the details have been signed off on?
Originally Posted by WarBaby2


TL;DR: 2020 WotC is trash and they are - once again - running the Realm's world lore into the ground... seems legit! laugh

Seriously, though, do you KNOW the game's story was approved by Wizards, or do you guess? I mean, it's possible Larian is building new canon here, but who is to tell whether or not all the details have been signed off on?

I know how copyright works. If you want a good idea of the constraints they put on content creators, you can read through the Dragonlance lawsuit, to see what kind of creative control they keep over their products. Hoeg Law on YouTube did a pretty good breakdown of it. I can dig up the link if you're interested.

Are they breaking the system? Probably. I really haven't been very impressed with how they've handled it over the years, and I do miss the TSR days. They are, however, the final arbiters, and whether I'm down or not, I can't, in good conscience, lay that at Larian's feet. They proposed what they wanted to do, and WotC said ok, so if it's well and truly broken, then it's well and truly on WotC/Hasbro.
The OP here seems to think that BG3 has to adhere to a very rigid interpretation of the hard rules presented in the 5E core books in order to feel like D&D.

I disagree with this, on the grounds that D&D itself is not really about adhering to the hard rules presented in the core books.

The rules in the core books should be a starting place for a DM to learn how to adjudicate the things that happen in the game for which there are no rules. For example, if a player somehow starts a fire in a cave where bandits are hiding, the DM should not say:

“Well your fire doesn’t do any damage because sustained AOE damage normally requires concentration.”

Instead, the DM should just pick some kind of reasonable damage and have the fire does, and have it damage the bandits every round. This is basically equivalent to a surface effect.

Same difference with if a player tries to drop a Huge chandelier on an enemy. The DM should not say:

“Well at your level you can only do a max of 1d10+4 per round, so the chandelier only does 5 damage.”

That’s lame. The chandelier should do whatever damage seems reasonable for 300 pound hunk of metal and glass falling on someone from 50 feet high would do.

This kind of thing, this dynamic gameplay that is not necessarily laid out in the rulebooks is very common in D&D.

But most D&D video games don’t allow for any of this, or it’s extremely situational.

But with BG3, they actually put mechanics like, surfaces, environmental effects and height advantage into the game that let you do a lot more of this unconventional stuff that normally can only happen in pen and paper D&D.

I feel like taking this out in order to present a more bog standard D&D video game would be a terrible mistake.
Originally Posted by robertthebard
Originally Posted by WarBaby2


TL;DR: 2020 WotC is trash and they are - once again - running the Realm's world lore into the ground... seems legit! laugh

Seriously, though, do you KNOW the game's story was approved by Wizards, or do you guess? I mean, it's possible Larian is building new canon here, but who is to tell whether or not all the details have been signed off on?

I know how copyright works. If you want a good idea of the constraints they put on content creators, you can read through the Dragonlance lawsuit, to see what kind of creative control they keep over their products. Hoeg Law on YouTube did a pretty good breakdown of it. I can dig up the link if you're interested.

Are they breaking the system? Probably. I really haven't been very impressed with how they've handled it over the years, and I do miss the TSR days. They are, however, the final arbiters, and whether I'm down or not, I can't, in good conscience, lay that at Larian's feet. They proposed what they wanted to do, and WotC said ok, so if it's well and truly broken, then it's well and truly on WotC/Hasbro.


Fair enough... still, while WotC may have the final say on the "what" of the overall storyline, I doubt they care much about the "how", if any of the "not so good" novels coming out over the years are anything to go by, and that might very well be laid at Larian's feet.
Originally Posted by WarBaby2


Fair enough... still, while WotC may have the final say on the "what" of the overall storyline, I doubt they care much about the "how", if any of the "not so good" novels coming out over the years are anything to go by, and that might very well be laid at Larian's feet.

I'm sure there's some to go around too. I was sort of surprised at how much control they exercised over what the Dragonlance creators were writing in their new trilogy. They made them take out love potions, change a character's name, hit 'em for and some other stuff that's "sensitive" to some people. I'm sure that's not going to have a very good impact on story quality either. Unless WotC loses the suit, and has to let 'em publish the books they signed the contract for, we'll probably never know.
Originally Posted by robertthebard
Originally Posted by WarBaby2


Fair enough... still, while WotC may have the final say on the "what" of the overall storyline, I doubt they care much about the "how", if any of the "not so good" novels coming out over the years are anything to go by, and that might very well be laid at Larian's feet.

I'm sure there's some to go around too. I was sort of surprised at how much control they exercised over what the Dragonlance creators were writing in their new trilogy. They made them take out love potions, change a character's name, hit 'em for and some other stuff that's "sensitive" to some people. I'm sure that's not going to have a very good impact on story quality either. Unless WotC loses the suit, and has to let 'em publish the books they signed the contract for, we'll probably never know.


Yea, that sounds like "current year" WotC alright... not able to provide descent card stock in MtG for years now, but at least they make sure all their products are nicely sanitized and PC... crazy
Originally Posted by Creslin321
The OP here seems to think that BG3 has to adhere to a very rigid interpretation of the hard rules presented in the 5E core books in order to feel like D&D.

I disagree with this, on the grounds that D&D itself is not really about adhering to the hard rules presented in the core books.

The rules in the core books should be a starting place for a DM to learn how to adjudicate the things that happen in the game for which there are no rules. For example, if a player somehow starts a fire in a cave where bandits are hiding, the DM should not say:

“Well your fire doesn’t do any damage because sustained AOE damage normally requires concentration.”

Instead, the DM should just pick some kind of reasonable damage and have the fire does, and have it damage the bandits every round. This is basically equivalent to a surface effect.

Same difference with if a player tries to drop a Huge chandelier on an enemy. The DM should not say:

“Well at your level you can only do a max of 1d10+4 per round, so the chandelier only does 5 damage.”

That’s lame. The chandelier should do whatever damage seems reasonable for 300 pound hunk of metal and glass falling on someone from 50 feet high would do.

This kind of thing, this dynamic gameplay that is not necessarily laid out in the rulebooks is very common in D&D.

But most D&D video games don’t allow for any of this, or it’s extremely situational.

But with BG3, they actually put mechanics like, surfaces, environmental effects and height advantage into the game that let you do a lot more of this unconventional stuff that normally can only happen in pen and paper D&D.

I feel like taking this out in order to present a more bog standard D&D video game would be a terrible mistake.


+1

There's a big difference between "The spirit of the game" and the "rules as written".

I agree, the game doesn't have to doggedly replicate the rules of tabletop to be a great game.
There are going to be compromises that have to be made in service of making a fun video game.

I think there's room for improvement for sure, but I enjoy seeing a unique take on the system.
I love environmental effects and interaction. It rewards so much more than just rolling against stat blocks.

Originally Posted by Quietwulf
[quote=Creslin321]
I love environmental effects and interaction. It rewards so much more than just rolling against stat blocks.



Then just play DOS1, DOS2? Can't we have finally a DnD game? There is already great RPG with that.

We don't need another DOS. We need DnD game.
I just bought Solasta in EA, it is the 5E game you've been looking for.
I'm afraid the only similarities to D&D I see in BG3 are mostly cosmetic. The names pf the character classes and spells.

The entire combat system in BG3 has virtually nothing to do with D&D's mechanics. It's all about height advantages and environmental effects. This puts melee classes at a SERIOUS disadvantage as they have to be at the same height as their target and will almost always be subject to the same environmental effects at their target because they have to be in melee distance.
After playing Solasta, I wish they had got the Baldurs Gate licence.
Originally Posted by Suhiira
I'm afraid the only similarities to D&D I see in BG3 are mostly cosmetic. The names pf the character classes and spells.

The entire combat system in BG3 has virtually nothing to do with D&D's mechanics. It's all about height advantages and environmental effects. This puts melee classes at a SERIOUS disadvantage as they have to be at the same height as their target and will almost always be subject to the same environmental effects at their target because they have to be in melee distance.


Yeah, I mean either make BG3 or make DOS3. I would play DOS3 with pleasure, but this is not what I expected from DnD.
Surface combat is not rewarding when it becomes the default way to complete every encounter. It is fine if there are certain encounters where surfaces could come into play, but as the game plays right now it is nearly EVERY encounter.
Originally Posted by Suhiira
I'm afraid the only similarities to D&D I see in BG3 are mostly cosmetic. The names pf the character classes and spells.

The entire combat system in BG3 has virtually nothing to do with D&D's mechanics. It's all about height advantages and environmental effects. This puts melee classes at a SERIOUS disadvantage as they have to be at the same height as their target and will almost always be subject to the same environmental effects at their target because they have to be in melee distance.


That’s exactly my definition of how battles should be handled by BG3. Why would you bother with 12 classes witch branches to tons of subclasses if people are playing by the environment? DnD is a class based system (which DOS isn’t and I’m okay with that), where the class must shine ( once in a while you can apply the rule of cool to allow your players to accomplish unrealistic things for the sake of the roleplay). Currently I don’t feel classes intertwining in that special way because the game wasn’t programmed for direct combat.

There’s a simple test to run the balance. You take an early boss fight (phase spider matriarch for instance) - fight with it without using the environment - without pre-buffing and without killing the eggs beforehand (because by the sake of roleplay you shouldn’t know that the damn eggs would watch) - you should win more than 50% of the time.

Currently if you take that battle using the class system that’s not going to happen. It’s feasible but you’re depending on luck purely.



Originally Posted by Bosco
Surface combat is not rewarding when it becomes the default way to complete every encounter. It is fine if there are certain encounters where surfaces could come into play, but as the game plays right now it is nearly EVERY encounter.

Had a thought about this. What if placing and removing barrels from an area worked like damaging the war drums? Someone would come and investigate, if too many were moved then they would know something was up and attack. If the player carried barrels to another area and dropped them near npcs they would then move away and maybe question the player like vendors do if you steal from them. Or just make them weigh a lot more so they can only be moved not picked up.
Actually did the spider fight without using explodables and surface abuse ( Didn't even knock it down shooting all the webs ). It's not tailored to beat it with any class atm ( Specially Melee ), the dmg it does is dumb ( Has heavy damage area attack ) just like the HP scaling and has infinite teleports. The only way you can beat it is through hide cheese. Also check how many spiders they throw at you at the same time. Even the small ones do good damage, it was so stupid xd. They literally want you to play like Divinity for the majority of encounters then some kid comes out and says: "You don't have to use the D:OS mechanics if you don't like them" haha. That is what "Balanced encounters around the D:OS System" does to a D&D game. That's why the 5E ruleset had set HP for monsters too because the AC system exists and now we have it all Larianized.
+1

I'm down for DOS3 but when you advertise BG3 i want BG3.
+1

Exactly.
Originally Posted by JDCrenton
Actually did the spider fight without using explodables and surface abuse ( Didn't even knock it down shooting all the webs ). It's not tailored to beat it with any class atm ( Specially Melee ), the dmg it does is dumb ( Has heavy damage area attack ) just like the HP scaling and has infinite teleports. The only way you can beat it is through hide cheese. Also check how many spiders they throw at you at the same time. Even the small ones do good damage, it was so stupid xd. They literally want you to play like Divinity for the majority of encounters then some kid comes out and says: "You don't have to use the D:OS mechanics if you don't like them" haha. That is what "Balanced encounters around the D:OS System" does to a D&D game. That's why the 5E ruleset had set HP for monsters too because the AC system exists and now we have it all Larianized.


Same my dude... my 4'th playthrough, i use two rouge and most of the fight i had to stealth cheese the mechanic they have in BG3... The spider does beyond any phase spooder damg in PHB. Also beat her with the cheese where i keep throwing potion at one of my down rogue, while the other bonus backstab till the matriarch die. Now i see some people are saying they have to sell more copy that mean dumbing down the mechanic or LACK THEREOF of DnD 5e.... Knowing now that a company of 17ppl can recreate the 5E rule so well, almost 1:1 and works great, now there people are doing mental gymnastic to protect Larian who promised BG3 will "faithfully follow DnD 5e". Is astounding really...
Originally Posted by Madoric
Originally Posted by JDCrenton
Actually did the spider fight without using explodables and surface abuse ( Didn't even knock it down shooting all the webs ). It's not tailored to beat it with any class atm ( Specially Melee ), the dmg it does is dumb ( Has heavy damage area attack ) just like the HP scaling and has infinite teleports. The only way you can beat it is through hide cheese. Also check how many spiders they throw at you at the same time. Even the small ones do good damage, it was so stupid xd. They literally want you to play like Divinity for the majority of encounters then some kid comes out and says: "You don't have to use the D:OS mechanics if you don't like them" haha. That is what "Balanced encounters around the D:OS System" does to a D&D game. That's why the 5E ruleset had set HP for monsters too because the AC system exists and now we have it all Larianized.


Same my dude... my 4'th playthrough, i use two rouge and most of the fight i had to stealth cheese the mechanic they have in BG3... The spider does beyond any phase spooder damg in PHB. Also beat her with the cheese where i keep throwing potion at one of my down rogue, while the other bonus backstab till the matriarch die. Now i see some people are saying they have to sell more copy that mean dumbing down the mechanic or LACK THEREOF of DnD 5e.... Knowing now that a company of 17ppl can recreate the 5E rule so well, almost 1:1 and works great, now there people are doing mental gymnastic to protect Larian who promised BG3 will "faithfully follow DnD 5e". Is astounding really...


Faithfully foolow DnD 5e = a DnD style DOS game xD
Originally Posted by dunehunter
Originally Posted by Madoric
Originally Posted by JDCrenton
Actually did the spider fight without using explodables and surface abuse ( Didn't even knock it down shooting all the webs ). It's not tailored to beat it with any class atm ( Specially Melee ), the dmg it does is dumb ( Has heavy damage area attack ) just like the HP scaling and has infinite teleports. The only way you can beat it is through hide cheese. Also check how many spiders they throw at you at the same time. Even the small ones do good damage, it was so stupid xd. They literally want you to play like Divinity for the majority of encounters then some kid comes out and says: "You don't have to use the D:OS mechanics if you don't like them" haha. That is what "Balanced encounters around the D:OS System" does to a D&D game. That's why the 5E ruleset had set HP for monsters too because the AC system exists and now we have it all Larianized.


Same my dude... my 4'th playthrough, i use two rouge and most of the fight i had to stealth cheese the mechanic they have in BG3... The spider does beyond any phase spooder damg in PHB. Also beat her with the cheese where i keep throwing potion at one of my down rogue, while the other bonus backstab till the matriarch die. Now i see some people are saying they have to sell more copy that mean dumbing down the mechanic or LACK THEREOF of DnD 5e.... Knowing now that a company of 17ppl can recreate the 5E rule so well, almost 1:1 and works great, now there people are doing mental gymnastic to protect Larian who promised BG3 will "faithfully follow DnD 5e". Is astounding really...


Faithfully foolow DnD 5e = a DnD style DOS game xD


Are you not enjoying the forgotten realms skin?
I keep seeing that surface effects are the decisive factor in fights and that melee doesn't work but I really don't think so. Fire isn't enough to kill anything really. It just deals a little damage. Meanwhile a warrior with a greatsword can one shot a lot with menacing attack + frighten is crazy good.

The spider? I fought it with 2 rogues backstabbing, wizard throwing spells and cleric healing mostly. I did drop it down by burning its web before combat which really helped. The little spiders pretty much all came in the same turn. After they group up you can just AOE and clean it up. Surface effects would've hurt my rogues more than anything, and they deal BIG damage.

I very rarely use surface effects and the game isn't even hard. I still think there's too much of it. It's not very fun to use when it's so common and often all it does is lengthen the fight when you could just take a straight forward approach instead. But if you as a player feel like surface effects rule fights, I think you haven't given other approaches a fair try. Maybe since it's not part of 5e, you guys are forgetting to utilize backstab and high ground? Just get behind or above enemies and hit them. Stronger than surface effects
Originally Posted by denhonator
I keep seeing that surface effects are the decisive factor in fights and that melee doesn't work but I really don't think so. Fire isn't enough to kill anything really. It just deals a little damage. Meanwhile a warrior with a greatsword can one shot a lot with menacing attack + frighten is crazy good.

The spider? I fought it with 2 rogues backstabbing, wizard throwing spells and cleric healing mostly. I did drop it down by burning its web before combat which really helped. The little spiders pretty much all came in the same turn. After they group up you can just AOE and clean it up. Surface effects would've hurt my rogues more than anything, and they deal BIG damage.

I very rarely use surface effects and the game isn't even hard. I still think there's too much of it. It's not very fun to use when it's so common and often all it does is lengthen the fight when you could just take a straight forward approach instead. But if you as a player feel like surface effects rule fights, I think you haven't given other approaches a fair try. Maybe since it's not part of 5e, you guys are forgetting to utilize backstab and high ground? Just get behind or above enemies and hit them. Stronger than surface effects


You don't even need to make a rogue, heal, waste spells, etc... classes don't even matter, there's so much freaking cheese. And having 10 enemies go for the squishie i assure you that no one can evade unless rngjesus is favoring them through the whole fight ( Extremely rare with how the dice roll is implemented ). If you fight it legit you get overwhelmed right away, the normal phase spiders also do very good dmg with acid spits and even the small ones hit hard. You can't count on the ini system either because of how broken and random it is. I literally can clear this fight using the shittiest char you can think of just by abusing the hide mechanic. The big spider only needs 1 successful attack to one shot you. You are not getting the point at all, the whole backstab abuse and advantage is also a D:OS thing. You didn't beat that fight legit or like a D&D game, you were just abusing the gimmicky larian feature like always.

No one is saying that this game is hard when is exactly the opposite because of all the gimmicks and bad mechanic implementation.
Originally Posted by JDCrenton
You didn't beat that fight legit or like a D&D game, you were just abusing the gimmicky larian feature like always.


So walking behind an enemy to attack it is abusing mechanics? The game isn't pure 5e and if you're gonna play it like it is, it won't go in your favor.

Also sure people get KO'd. Cleric can get them back up as a bonus action with heal. Let's say someone straight up dies. You should still have scrolls to revive them and keep going. Since the enemies tend to focus one person, it's not like the whole party is getting wiped, so the survivors can help that one guy.

I do agree there's a lot of cheese but you don't really have to play that way. Of course if you count backstab as cheese then it's pretty hard to avoid
Originally Posted by denhonator
Originally Posted by JDCrenton
You didn't beat that fight legit or like a D&D game, you were just abusing the gimmicky larian feature like always.


So walking behind an enemy to attack it is abusing mechanics? The game isn't pure 5e and if you're gonna play it like it is, it won't go in your favor.

Also sure people get KO'd. Cleric can get them back up as a bonus action with heal. Let's say someone straight up dies. You should still have scrolls to revive them and keep going. Since the enemies tend to focus one person, it's not like the whole party is getting wiped, so the survivors can help that one guy.

I do agree there's a lot of cheese but you don't really have to play that way. Of course if you count backstab as cheese then it's pretty hard to avoid


Thanks for not getting it just like the title of this thread. Hope you enjoy D:OS 3.
Originally Posted by JDCrenton
Originally Posted by denhonator
I keep seeing that surface effects are the decisive factor in fights and that melee doesn't work but I really don't think so. Fire isn't enough to kill anything really. It just deals a little damage. Meanwhile a warrior with a greatsword can one shot a lot with menacing attack + frighten is crazy good.

The spider? I fought it with 2 rogues backstabbing, wizard throwing spells and cleric healing mostly. I did drop it down by burning its web before combat which really helped. The little spiders pretty much all came in the same turn. After they group up you can just AOE and clean it up. Surface effects would've hurt my rogues more than anything, and they deal BIG damage.

I very rarely use surface effects and the game isn't even hard. I still think there's too much of it. It's not very fun to use when it's so common and often all it does is lengthen the fight when you could just take a straight forward approach instead. But if you as a player feel like surface effects rule fights, I think you haven't given other approaches a fair try. Maybe since it's not part of 5e, you guys are forgetting to utilize backstab and high ground? Just get behind or above enemies and hit them. Stronger than surface effects


You don't even need to make a rogue, heal, waste spells, etc... classes don't even matter, there's so much freaking cheese. And having 10 enemies go for the squishie i assure you that no one can evade unless rngjesus is favoring them through the whole fight ( Extremely rare with how the dice roll is implemented ). If you fight it legit you get overwhelmed right away, the normal phase spiders also do very good dmg with acid spits and even the small ones hit hard. You can't count on the ini system either because of how broken and random it is. I literally can clear this fight using the shittiest char you can think of just by abusing the hide mechanic. The big spider only needs 1 successful attack to one shot you. You are not getting the point at all, the whole backstab abuse and advantage is also a D:OS thing. You didn't beat that fight legit or like a D&D game, you were just abusing the gimmicky larian feature like always.

No one is saying that this game is hard when is exactly the opposite because of all the gimmicks and bad mechanic implementation.


This is amazing, and freaking hilarious. Someone lays out a "non exploit" method to take on a fight, and you fall back on what you do? Larian did not invent sneak attacks. In fact, DnD would be closer to that "title" than anything else. I had sneak attacks on my rogue in Baldur's Gate 1. How is that a "larian tactic"? Did 5e remove sneak attacks? If I look up an online manual, and find it, can I just link it to every post you make from now on saying "but it's not DnD"? "But barrels" are in FPS games, and even 3rd person shooters that predate Larian. "But elemental arrows" were in the first BG game. "but surfaces", Grease says hello, along with a myriad of other AoE spells that have been in DnD since before there was a real Player's Handbook.

The scenario painted in the post you quoted here? That's something that I've seen used in table top sessions that predate even 3.5. So I'm not sure what you're going on about, except maybe "It's not what I want, so no matter how much people show me that the exploits I use in combat aren't required, they are, and that's bad". You see, my solution to "too many barrels" is that I don't carry them around with me. Burning a web out from under a spider isn't "cheese" or "a Larian/DOS system", unless you're trying to claim that Larian games are the only games where webs are flammable? You see, in order to get to your level of animosity to this game, I really do have to take it to that ridiculous length. There's no other way for me to get there. I have to assume that Larian made the very first PC game with exploding barrels, and that CC/damaging AoE spells are a direct result of Larian's influence on gaming. Of course, the sheer number of games that I've played that predate Larian, and yet have some or all of these mechanics in them is staggering, but hey, I've got to try to find some way to support your narrative, right?

Serious question: Are you next going to try to claim that TB combat is a Larian feature too? It's about the only thing left you haven't tried to attribute to them.
The thing is... you shouldn't be constantly getting into a situation where backstab/sneak attack is possible, since the enemy is assumed to follow your movements/positioning unless distracted by someone else (flanking) or completely unaware of you. That's also why disengage and hide absolutely have to be actions instead of bonus actions.
Originally Posted by Kendaric
The thing is... you shouldn't be constantly getting into a situation where backstab/sneak attack is possible, since the enemy is assumed to follow your movements/positioning unless distracted by someone else (flanking) or completely unaware of you. That's also why disengage and hide absolutely have to be actions instead of bonus actions.

I agree with this. As it is, why not get the backstab when possible? And make use of the jump disengage. But it's something they should change so that it's not so easy to get everywhere during combat with any class. That's a pretty big balance adjustment and I'm sure they would balance other aspects accordingly such that they aren't just making melee or the game in general harder
Originally Posted by JDCrenton
Actually did the spider fight without using explodables and surface abuse ( Didn't even knock it down shooting all the webs ). It's not tailored to beat it with any class atm ( Specially Melee ), the dmg it does is dumb ( Has heavy damage area attack ) just like the HP scaling and has infinite teleports. The only way you can beat it is through hide cheese. Also check how many spiders they throw at you at the same time. Even the small ones do good damage, it was so stupid xd. They literally want you to play like Divinity for the majority of encounters then some kid comes out and says: "You don't have to use the D:OS mechanics if you don't like them" haha. That is what "Balanced encounters around the D:OS System" does to a D&D game. That's why the 5E ruleset had set HP for monsters too because the AC system exists and now we have it all Larianized.



I've largely been avoiding the Larian mechanics and playing as close to 5e as I can. So far the best way I've found to handle that fight is as a Light Cleric and waiting for the enemies surround my party before dropping Radiance of the Dawn. It did a pretty good job of clearing out most of the small adds. That's not to say that I don't think there need to be some adjustments to get things a little more balanced and friendly for other classes, because it was definitely a struggle when I tried it that way without being a Cleric. At this point Light Cleric is my favorite though.
Originally Posted by DarkSeldarine
Originally Posted by JDCrenton
Actually did the spider fight without using explodables and surface abuse ( Didn't even knock it down shooting all the webs ). It's not tailored to beat it with any class atm ( Specially Melee ), the dmg it does is dumb ( Has heavy damage area attack ) just like the HP scaling and has infinite teleports. The only way you can beat it is through hide cheese. Also check how many spiders they throw at you at the same time. Even the small ones do good damage, it was so stupid xd. They literally want you to play like Divinity for the majority of encounters then some kid comes out and says: "You don't have to use the D:OS mechanics if you don't like them" haha. That is what "Balanced encounters around the D:OS System" does to a D&D game. That's why the 5E ruleset had set HP for monsters too because the AC system exists and now we have it all Larianized.



I've largely been avoiding the Larian mechanics and playing as close to 5e as I can. So far the best way I've found to handle that fight is as a Light Cleric and waiting for the enemies surround my party before dropping Radiance of the Dawn. It did a pretty good job of clearing out most of the small adds. That's not to say that I don't think there need to be some adjustments to get things a little more balanced and friendly for other classes, because it was definitely a struggle when I tried it that way without being a Cleric. At this point Light Cleric is my favorite though.


Never said you can't "self cripple" yourself to try and "mimmick" a 5e experience, but that's the thing isn't it? I've been doing it myself and haven't reached a wall yet.
Originally Posted by JDCrenton
Originally Posted by DarkSeldarine
Originally Posted by JDCrenton
Actually did the spider fight without using explodables and surface abuse ( Didn't even knock it down shooting all the webs ). It's not tailored to beat it with any class atm ( Specially Melee ), the dmg it does is dumb ( Has heavy damage area attack ) just like the HP scaling and has infinite teleports. The only way you can beat it is through hide cheese. Also check how many spiders they throw at you at the same time. Even the small ones do good damage, it was so stupid xd. They literally want you to play like Divinity for the majority of encounters then some kid comes out and says: "You don't have to use the D:OS mechanics if you don't like them" haha. That is what "Balanced encounters around the D:OS System" does to a D&D game. That's why the 5E ruleset had set HP for monsters too because the AC system exists and now we have it all Larianized.



I've largely been avoiding the Larian mechanics and playing as close to 5e as I can. So far the best way I've found to handle that fight is as a Light Cleric and waiting for the enemies surround my party before dropping Radiance of the Dawn. It did a pretty good job of clearing out most of the small adds. That's not to say that I don't think there need to be some adjustments to get things a little more balanced and friendly for other classes, because it was definitely a struggle when I tried it that way without being a Cleric. At this point Light Cleric is my favorite though.


Never said you can't self cripple yourself to try and "mimmick" a 5e experience, but that's the thing isn't it?


Oh for sure. At this point trying to play as close to 5e as you can is definitely more of a challenge mode. Next to impossible if you don't at least abuse height as it currently stands, having disadvantage for every hit from low ground does not make for a long life.
Originally Posted by Kendaric
That's also why disengage and hide absolutely have to be actions instead of bonus actions.

Other than Cunning Action for rogues
Of course, I was assuming that as a given though as I want the game to be closer to 5e smile

Currently I use the D&D rebalance mod for my playthroughs and it makes a lot of difference. It feels a lot better than the default game and quite frankly, I couldn't imagine playing without it anymore. Now I just need a mod that gets monster HP and AC closer to the MM stats and I'd be happy.
Originally Posted by Zarna
Originally Posted by Kendaric
That's also why disengage and hide absolutely have to be actions instead of bonus actions.

Other than Cunning Action for rogues


It's actually more than that. Basically any class feature that grants Disengage as a Bonus Action is incredibly cheapened (and thus the entire class's/subclass's value) by everyone being able to do that. Two easy examples are Monk's Ki for Step of the Wind or taking the Mobile feat.

Originally Posted by Rhobar121
Originally Posted by dmwyvern
Originally Posted by Rhobar121
Lower AC is necessary. In turn-based rpg misses aren't funny for most people.
It's frustrating when you miss every attack for several turns in a row, but if you lowered AC you have to increase HP or fight will be to easy.
You can't just add new enemies because no one wants to wait 10 minutes for next turn.
Changes in rules are necessary if Larian wants to sell a game for people unfamiliar with d&d.
You can't make game for few thousand people if you create AAA.




What exactly are you smoking? Few thousand people? Dungeons & Dragons is the single most valuable fantasy RPG IP in the world.

And those fans are reasonably looking for D&D 5e in this game, not D:OS3.


Do you really think at least 1/4 of the D&D fans will buy this game? Most of players will be casual.
Larian has to sell far more copies than last time if they don't want to end up like Obsidian.



Sales figures are not representative of quality. Millions of people buy into apple despite how poorly optimized, overpriced and outdated their tech is even ignoring their extremely corrupt business practices. DivOS and DivOS2 where paid for in full by kickstarter long before sales became an issue and they have already received funding for BG3 as well as 1 million sales of EA(very roughly 60m although I won't take a guess as to what part is net revenue).
Even bloody Solasta has environmental effects, oneshots from falling rocks/hung cages, destruction of environment, destruction of tiles under the mobs and so on. Every other fight you can do that aplenty if you so desire.

Yes, that Solasta, our patron saint and savior of 5e video games. People are really too full of themselves - in the end video game that 100% follows RAW and is not flexible even a bit would make a shitty experience.

P.S. And for the love of god, I for sure hope Larian does not implement that true to spirit of 5e Smite, that one is annoying as fuck in Solasta. Pretty sure in 2k20 studios can figure a better way to do it than auto-pause mid swing with a popup every bloody time you attack.
Originally Posted by Gaidax
Even bloody Solasta has environmental effects, oneshots from falling rocks/hung cages, destruction of environment, destruction of tiles under the mobs and so on. Every other fight you can do that aplenty if you so desire.

Yes, that Solasta, our patron saint and savior of 5e video games. People are really too full of themselves - in the end video game that 100% follows RAW and is not flexible even a bit would make a shitty experience.

P.S. And for the love of god, I for sure hope Larian does not implement that true to spirit of 5e Smite, that one is annoying as fuck in Solasta. Pretty sure in 2k20 studios can figure a better way to do it than auto-pause mid swing with a popup every bloody time you attack.


Absolutely false. On my second playthrough and there is definitely environmental interactivity, but not even *remotely* close to how overbearing it is in BG 3. Yes, some fights you can drop a chandelier/rock/equivalent on the enemy, but most fights you cannot. It makes that particular fight feel *special* when it happens, unlike BG 3 where it's literally expected at this point. Non-5e based surface effects are practically non-existent.

You are lying to troll, or just lying because you genuinely didn't play Solasta.
Originally Posted by Gaidax
Even bloody Solasta has environmental effects, oneshots from falling rocks/hung cages, destruction of environment, destruction of tiles under the mobs and so on. Every other fight you can do that aplenty if you so desire.

Yes, that Solasta, our patron saint and savior of 5e video games. People are really too full of themselves - in the end video game that 100% follows RAW and is not flexible even a bit would make a shitty experience.

P.S. And for the love of god, I for sure hope Larian does not implement that true to spirit of 5e Smite, that one is annoying as fuck in Solasta. Pretty sure in 2k20 studios can figure a better way to do it than auto-pause mid swing with a popup every bloody time you attack.


...and again, the straw flies.

Nobody complains about environmental effects in general, you know that damn well. We criticize the gimmick laden way of how almost every encounter is set up, and the strange rule changes that seem arbitrary, unnecessarry, and deluding changes (bonus actions, height advantage, etc.) to the perfectly fine and balanced tactical framework that is D&D5e combat.
Originally Posted by WarBaby2
Originally Posted by Gaidax
Even bloody Solasta has environmental effects, oneshots from falling rocks/hung cages, destruction of environment, destruction of tiles under the mobs and so on. Every other fight you can do that aplenty if you so desire.

Yes, that Solasta, our patron saint and savior of 5e video games. People are really too full of themselves - in the end video game that 100% follows RAW and is not flexible even a bit would make a shitty experience.

P.S. And for the love of god, I for sure hope Larian does not implement that true to spirit of 5e Smite, that one is annoying as fuck in Solasta. Pretty sure in 2k20 studios can figure a better way to do it than auto-pause mid swing with a popup every bloody time you attack.


...and again, the straw flies.

Nobody complains about environmental effects in general, you know that damn well. We criticize the gimmick laden way of how almost every encounter is set up, and the strange rule changes that seem arbitrary, unnecessarry, and deluding changes (bonus actions, height advantage, etc.) to the perfectly fine and balanced tactical framework that is D&D5e combat.


Which is something that can be tuned, whether it's excessive Barrelmancy or Firebolt. And yes what one of the guys above said that if I already start a frikkin' fire, then it should have actual effect - that is fine. What needs to be tuned is the overall ease at which you can do it now, which I hope they will do. But all in all environment effects themselves are not the devil, they are fine and fun if you can set this up proper with some coordinated effort.

But the reality of the matter environmental impact as a whole is fine, heck Solasta 2nd tavern story/tutorial teaches you to make use of it and somehow the game does not explode there at all whether you can oneshot a wolf 6 levels above you by destroying a tile under it or drop a cage on goblins in first mission or a stone on soraks same mission.

People really need to stop being so much anti-fun tight-asses, not everything ever should be the holy immutable RAW 5e, even Solasta devs understand it.
Agree regarding many of the comments regarding BG3 being more Divinity v3 than AD&D, ad also the making use of the decades of successful gameplay and testing that makes up the AD&D collection(s). Obviously any Gaming house will try to make use of existing system engines from their past game systems as it makes financial sense to do so (waste not etc...). Unfortunately, D&D/AD&D franchise has been going for around fifty years and is still going, so there's a Vast level of experience and knowledge backing it up (like, do not mess with 'Star Trek').

Firstly, and most importantly, BG3 is EARLY ACCESS (two+ weeks in)! - still looks more final than early access when compared to other open world games...

My penny's worth:

- add two buttons to link all party members together and the other to separate them all. Leave the current mechanic for players to modify outside of those two);

- yes, showing a d20 animation does look nice, but it does sometimes appear a little - 'That's not random'?. Surely any foundation-layer program engine can be made to incorporate the other sized dice as and when applicable? It will make us feel better and warm and cosy, if not covered in blood and entrails.

- Although I personally love finding hundreds of these Bags (and chests) of Holding, it would be nice to see variations of how many items can actually fit in them - and that carrying three barrels, two chests, seven backpacks, a collection of sacks and weapons may impact fighting, walking, stealth, breathing and your arms and legs breaking.

- talking containers: please let us double-click an item with the container open and the item's moved over - and Stacked where applicable)

- PLEASE introduce some additional randomisation of stuff to find and forage, and encounters to spring on us. Although many old games like this simplistic, linear approach where, once ABC has been cleared out, you can completely forget it. Conversely, you then know that, though drops are basically random, once cleared then that is that. It also implies a basic fixed level of wealth. You can therefore forget buying enchanted weapons because you have to try to work out which trader you will need to go to/back to in getting that magic shield/tiara/box of goop that you have always yearned for

- Having that Starter area being relatively safe and not DIE DIE DIE like some other areas, having a couple of random creatures, traders, monsters, etc. of varying levels that can be interacted with, or beaten senseless by, will keep players checking back here and there. Time has proven that attention spans are limited. Relying on 'okay, I have played Good, now I will start again as Evil' is not always a great, modern formula to follow., especially if the storylines remain the same (and there is no present way to speed through dialogue (note spelling) )

Can anyone clarify for me why (what I am doing wrong), when my party (sneaking and hidden of course) spot a group of 'easy-pickings', move carefully about to cover all the victims and then attack, to suddenly only have one of the party able to attack? Even opponents completely out of sight of the first victim magically knows that someone (invisible) is standing in the bushes behind them and gets off a first strike?

As already said, 'Early-Access'.

And also, Thanks to Larian for the truly magnificent vistas and character layouts and customisations. Those poor 'gollum' actors in their unitards and visi-tabs have had to put up with a lot to make this truly amazing. Matching dialogue and lip-synchs also superb. Of course, now that the bar has been set so very high, you're going to have to start feeding and watering them for the rest of the game. Well done and a Huge thank you for the magical experience we have gotten in this early version.

PS: You do know that, like many other adventure/world games, Larian could make expansions to the final game modular (and paid for), as all those decades of AD&D have done so successfully and lucratively. All you have to do is get that pesky core game-engine purring like a goblin on a rack and you can just slap on module after module like a soap slapping on seasons.

PPS: Fix the #@&# 'dialogue stream not complete...' error that stops saving and quick-saving PLEASE! (the Duergar dialogue kicks it off) I have had to just roll back to a pre Myconid save and forget them for now. Most vexing.
Originally Posted by Gaidax
People really need to stop being so much anti-fun tight-asses, not everything ever should be the holy immutable RAW 5e, even Solasta devs understand it.


I don't think it's so much about anti fun as it is anti cheese... and, personally, I really draw a line when you balance and power levels of classes are concearned. Fact is, firebolt is no AOE spell, and it shouldn't be, not because it's not fun to light enemies ablaze with a basic bitch, "infinite" use spell, but because it's not what it's intended to do... there are other spells for that. Same goes for everybody being able to bonus action jump around, or shove each other of ledges. Sure, all those things are probably fun - if goofy as hell - but giving all characters those options not only waters down the tactical challenge, but also devalues much of the classes identity and balance. You know what I mean? Much of the appeal of D&D, heck, most pnp rules systems, really, is: Having a limited range of tools and finding out how to employ them to solve situations... not having "all" the tools and solving "all" situations, basically the same way.
Originally Posted by Gaidax

Which is something that can be tuned, whether it's excessive Barrelmancy or Firebolt. And yes what one of the guys above said that if I already start a frikkin' fire, then it should have actual effect - that is fine. What needs to be tuned is the overall ease at which you can do it now, which I hope they will do. But all in all environment effects themselves are not the devil, they are fine and fun if you can set this up proper with some coordinated effort.

But the reality of the matter environmental impact as a whole is fine, heck Solasta 2nd tavern story/tutorial teaches you to make use of it and somehow the game does not explode there at all whether you can oneshot a wolf 6 levels above you by destroying a tile under it or drop a cage on goblins in first mission or a stone on soraks same mission.

People really need to stop being so much anti-fun tight-asses, not everything ever should be the holy immutable RAW 5e, even Solasta devs understand it.


Yeah, you're just trolling I have to imagine.

Solasta started from base 5e and introduced new elements as needed. They made sure their 5e mechanics were solid first.

BG 3 started from DoS 2 and added 5e elements only where absolutely required to seem like a D&D game, but ended up with just a DoS reskin. You're purposely ignoring the points being made (not saying no surfaces, saying follow the rules for them and otherwise use sparingly).

Seriously, how much of Solasta have you actually played? How many times did you have react to enemies throwing unavoidable damaging surfaces on you? How many times did enemies shove you off something to cause damage? And honestly, how many times did you kill an enemy via non-5e means (rock dropping on them) versus 5e means? Because right now, I know that amount is exceedingly minimal, especially since most environmental interactions aren't one-shots.
Originally Posted by Isaac Springsong
BG 3 started from DoS 2 and added 5e elements only where absolutely required to seem like a D&D game, but ended up with just a DoS reskin. You're purposely ignoring the points being made (not saying no surfaces, saying follow the rules for them and otherwise use sparingly).


Pretty much what I said in not so many words... +1
As an old school D&D player I'm not particularly wedded to 5e rules and understand that there has to be a little wriggle room to produce a functional video game based on a tabletop ruleset.

However, my feeling is that currently the game is a little too much like DoS (which I played and loved) and not enough like Baldur's Gate etc (which I also played and enjoyed - yes I'm old smile ). So toning down the surface effects etc, making the game a little less about scrambling to the top of every area asap when in combat and a little more 'DnD-ish' would be great. I thought that having early access was to get exactly this sort of feedback - which I have submitted through Larian's feedback page.

I t feels to me like BG3 is going to be a great game, it's already pretty cool in this version - but I think folks would like it more if it were less obviously derivative of Larian's earlier games.

Mostly I agree with the OP's post, with the exception of #3 - video games tend to have start out with a big set piece to get players involved. A bunch of people hanging round a bar discussing which nearby cave to go clean out is really going to cut it.

Oh yeah - and have less boxes and chests, who in their right mind is going to buy 3 chests, a put one or 2 small objects in each? That's not what you do with chests, that's what you do with little boxes! So less chests with more stuff please unless a subplot of the game is a bid for world domination by the Guild of Chest Builders.
Originally Posted by Isaac Springsong
Originally Posted by Gaidax
Even bloody Solasta has environmental effects, oneshots from falling rocks/hung cages, destruction of environment, destruction of tiles under the mobs and so on. Every other fight you can do that aplenty if you so desire.

Yes, that Solasta, our patron saint and savior of 5e video games. People are really too full of themselves - in the end video game that 100% follows RAW and is not flexible even a bit would make a shitty experience.

P.S. And for the love of god, I for sure hope Larian does not implement that true to spirit of 5e Smite, that one is annoying as fuck in Solasta. Pretty sure in 2k20 studios can figure a better way to do it than auto-pause mid swing with a popup every bloody time you attack.


Absolutely false. On my second playthrough and there is definitely environmental interactivity, but not even *remotely* close to how overbearing it is in BG 3. Yes, some fights you can drop a chandelier/rock/equivalent on the enemy, but most fights you cannot. It makes that particular fight feel *special* when it happens, unlike BG 3 where it's literally expected at this point. Non-5e based surface effects are practically non-existent.

You are lying to troll, or just lying because you genuinely didn't play Solasta.

Damn, where's the big rock I can drop on the Matriarch, I haven't seen one in there yet. So it's "I'm going to counter your perceived hyperbole with hyperbole of my own"?
@robertthebard
You learn the difference between a plot line and a plot point yet to be schooling people on hyperbole?
Originally Posted by Isaac Springsong
[quote=Gaidax]
...

Solasta started from base 5e and introduced new elements as needed. They made sure their 5e mechanics were solid first.

BG 3 started from DoS 2 and added 5e elements only where absolutely required to seem like a D&D game, but ended up with just a DoS reskin. You're purposely ignoring the points being made (not saying no surfaces, saying follow the rules for them and otherwise use sparingly).
...


I have seen this argument so many times, that BG3 is somehow DOS3 in disguise, and is far more like DOS than 5E. No offense, but this is just wrong. I honestly don't see how you can play BG3 and come away with the idea that it's a DoS reskin that only added 5E mechanics where "absolutely required."

The entire system of the game is 5E. The classes are 5E, the skills are 5E, the abilities are 5E, the combat system is 5E, the action economy is 5E, the races are 5E. Just to illustrate the differences between DoS and 5E further...

DoS uses an action point system in combat, BG3 and 5E use action/bonus action/move.
DoS has a classless skill based system for abilities, BG3 and 5E use classes and levels.
DoS has a stat system where you increase stats every time you level, BG3 and 5E have stats largely set at character creation, that increase only on levels which are mulitples of 4.
DoS used a percentile chance to hit system, BG3 and 5E use a D20 with attack bonus and AC, or saving throws.

All of these things are foundational system layer aspects of the game. Just because both DoS and BG3 have surface effects doesn't make BG3 not a D&D game...it's more like a D&D game with a few house rules. Also...D&D has surface effects anyway.
Just to give you an idea of how absurd Firebolt is right now, especially with the changes to AC and health on enemies, I made a half elf Fighter with High Elf ancestry. In spite of dumping INT, my Fire Bolt cantrip is my most reliable source of ranged damage.
Originally Posted by Creslin321
Originally Posted by Isaac Springsong
[quote=Gaidax]
...

Solasta started from base 5e and introduced new elements as needed. They made sure their 5e mechanics were solid first.

BG 3 started from DoS 2 and added 5e elements only where absolutely required to seem like a D&D game, but ended up with just a DoS reskin. You're purposely ignoring the points being made (not saying no surfaces, saying follow the rules for them and otherwise use sparingly).
...


I have seen this argument so many times, that BG3 is somehow DOS3 in disguise, and is far more like DOS than 5E. No offense, but this is just wrong. I honestly don't see how you can play BG3 and come away with the idea that it's a DoS reskin that only added 5E mechanics where "absolutely required."

The entire system of the game is 5E. The classes are 5E, the skills are 5E, the abilities are 5E, the combat system is 5E, the action economy is 5E, the races are 5E. Just to illustrate the differences between DoS and 5E further...

DoS uses an action point system in combat, BG3 and 5E use action/bonus action/move.
DoS has a classless skill based system for abilities, BG3 and 5E use classes and levels.
DoS has a stat system where you increase stats every time you level, BG3 and 5E have stats largely set at character creation, that increase only on levels which are mulitples of 4.
DoS used a percentile chance to hit system, BG3 and 5E use a D20 with attack bonus and AC, or saving throws.

All of these things are foundational system layer aspects of the game. Just because both DoS and BG3 have surface effects doesn't make BG3 not a D&D game...it's more like a D&D game with a few house rules. Also...D&D has surface effects anyway.


+ Spell slots instead of cool downs
+ Roll to hit against armour class instead of destroying armour
+ Saving throws against status effects instead of protection by armour
+ No weapon and armour levelling

Not having to keep your equipment up to date is a massive difference.
Originally Posted by Paimon
Just to give you an idea of how absurd Firebolt is right now, especially with the changes to AC and health on enemies, I made a half elf Fighter with High Elf ancestry. In spite of dumping INT, my Fire Bolt cantrip is my most reliable source of ranged damage.

Ok? Ranged physical damage is based on your Dex and modifier. What are those scores?
It's more to do with the fact that I can damage things even when I get a critical miss.
Originally Posted by Paimon
It's more to do with the fact that I can damage things even when I get a critical miss.

That is the weirdest part about firebolt right now. It is essentially 100% success rate. IMO they should change it to only create a surface when ground targeted, in which case it would not deal direct damage or burn anyone until they walk on it
+1 for the guy/girl who invented the term "barrelmancy" for Larians combatsystem-essentials.
Unfortunately, I fear they're not looking at how their changes reverberate through the system. The worst offender is handing out advantage like candy, with no resource cost. A host of abilities and spells offer the player or their team-mates advantage at some resource cost. The HP bloat and ready made surfaces, some produced by cantrips no less, trivializes anything that does damage. They are trivializing the benefits one gets from leveling up. In the end, their removing emphasis of a team of adventures, all with weaknesses and strengths, using their hard earned abilities to overcome challenges. And what do we get return? ""Oh, wow I can set your area effect on fire!" You know the one you wasted a spell slot on. Which is just as well, since if the area/spell actually landed, why would it matter that your team-mates would have advantage to hit due to blinding, enwebbing, entangling, or knocking prone their foe. All your team-mate needs to due is walk behind the target to get advantage. Not even flanking is in the core rules, guess what, this is is why.
Originally Posted by Ignatius
Unfortunately, I fear they're not looking at how their changes reverberate through the system. The worst offender is handing out advantage like candy, with no resource cost. A host of abilities and spells offer the player or their team-mates advantage at some resource cost. The HP bloat and ready made surfaces, some produced by cantrips no less, trivializes anything that does damage. They are trivializing the benefits one gets from leveling up. In the end, their removing emphasis of a team of adventures, all with weaknesses and strengths, using their hard earned abilities to overcome challenges. And what do we get return? ""Oh, wow I can set your area effect on fire!" You know the one you wasted a spell slot on. Which is just as well, since if the area/spell actually landed, why would it matter that your team-mates would have advantage to hit due to blinding, enwebbing, entangling, or knocking prone their foe. All your team-mate needs to due is walk behind the target to get advantage. Not even flanking is in the core rules, guess what, this is is why.


Sometimes I ask myself if we are underestimating Larian comprehension of the rules and the impact any change can possibly snowball through the entire game and this early access thing is just supposed to be for the player to evaluate the story. Then I wake up and remember how DOS EA was close to full release mechanicallywise and I realize I’m living in a nightmare.

I used to hate people saying that BG3 = DOS3 due to the turn based system. After all, 5e works better in that scenario.
Now I’ve teamed with those folks. How unfortunate!
Originally Posted by Ignatius
Unfortunately, I fear they're not looking at how their changes reverberate through the system. The worst offender is handing out advantage like candy, with no resource cost. A host of abilities and spells offer the player or their team-mates advantage at some resource cost. The HP bloat and ready made surfaces, some produced by cantrips no less, trivializes anything that does damage. They are trivializing the benefits one gets from leveling up. In the end, their removing emphasis of a team of adventures, all with weaknesses and strengths, using their hard earned abilities to overcome challenges. And what do we get return? ""Oh, wow I can set your area effect on fire!" You know the one you wasted a spell slot on. Which is just as well, since if the area/spell actually landed, why would it matter that your team-mates would have advantage to hit due to blinding, enwebbing, entangling, or knocking prone their foe. All your team-mate needs to due is walk behind the target to get advantage. Not even flanking is in the core rules, guess what, this is is why.


HP bloat is mainly for goblins and they've reduced AC, the most likely cause of this change is to scale goblins somewhat along with giving them consumables to make the fight challenging and somewhat easy to tune (can always reduce the hp, reduce consumable usage) while not drastically increasing round time by adding goblins.

The minos in the Underdark do not have HP bloat for example, so it's mainly the goblins.

Also, you can keep talking about cantrips and surfaces as though they're superior to everything in the arsenal except the math doesn't quite work out that way; hex + scorching ray, MM with or without the necklace at level 2, full round of attacks from either a ranger or a thief etc.

And these things tend to come with levels, so I have no idea why you're being such a bitch about it. Your argument would be stronger if you stated it diminishes the gap between levels and then you would need to prove it by stating how much.

The weaknesses and strengths are very much apparent even in the current flawed system; clerics are superior at utility, rogues at maneuvering and at burst damage, fighters for general damage / shoving lol and some cc (battlemaster), wizards for area and guaranteed damage, and warlocks for ranged damage and minimal utility, and rangers for solid damage and horde control / single target specialization.

So yeah, you can get advantage pretty easily but so can your opponents, it still comes down to better positioning and when all things are even usage of resources.
Originally Posted by Limz

So yeah, you can get advantage pretty easily but so can your opponents, it still comes down to better positioning and when all things are even usage of resources.


Still you fail to see the impact of dishing advantage in the overall weight of some classes that are highly dependent of it as Barbarians with reckless attack. Advantage is gold in DnD5e. Advantage in BG3 is a must. See the difference?
Originally Posted by Sludge Khalid
Originally Posted by Limz

So yeah, you can get advantage pretty easily but so can your opponents, it still comes down to better positioning and when all things are even usage of resources.


Still you fail to see the impact of dishing advantage in the overall weight of some classes that are highly dependent of it as Barbarians with reckless attack. Advantage is gold in DnD5e. Advantage in BG3 is a must. See the difference?


The class feature, if implemented as is, would have relatively diminished returns just like rogues see diminishing returns on having bonus actions. You still have a net gain (but by how much) for having another source of advantage for when you can't flank for the free backstab or for when there's a height difference that cannot be overcome.

You're correct in the weight of classes being shifted, but that primarily depends on how the class is implemented and how much in the grand scheme of things. Having the weight shifted is meaningless without taking a look at the context as a whole. The 5e system is not that fragile.
So my take, in response to each point

1.I disagree here, I think the ground effects can make for a unique 5e homebrew experience. They just need to stick tighter to the underlying conceptual reasoning behind some of the 5e rules. The fire surface needs an interaction with Dex saves, like every other surface. Essentially they need to apply the rules of Fireball to fire surface and it will feel more like D&D, there is no dice roll to hit you and there is no save roll to mitigate it. The problem with fire surfaces is that they are functionally magic missiles. I have no issues with the other surfaces although knock prone on a D8 does feel pretty strong in the cantrip department

2. As far as I understand, Goblins are treated as humanoids and just have more health based on level. Goblins are a playable race in 5e, so it makes sense for them to scale in HP in the same way as the players. I really have no knowledge about AC changes, I do agree with not messing with AC too much as the game is balanced entirely around the AC and save rolls. I feel like what affects this the most is the "Altitude" system that they have used to replace 5e's "Cover" system. Elevation is basically +5 to hit rolls and -5 to theirs... or something absurd like that. They need Elevation to be balanced in the exact same way as Cover was. "Elevation is the new Cover" and it needs to be no stronger than full cover. With the capacity feats to resolve the drawback (spell sniper / sharpshooter were the SRD 5 resolutions to enemy cover bonuses)

3. Yea... that is kind of only something that veteran D&D players are going to feel. "Oh, the very first thing that you encounter AT ALL... is an Intellect Devourer... yea, this is totally like real D&D". I kinda of disagree on your sentiment here, I understand that the Devil fighting the mindflayer is super high HP and players can potentially battle this beast at level 1 (and surprisingly the AI isnt a jerk and just attack the lowest HP character, so he lets you kill him). However, if you linger too long those Cambions will just clean you up, they do push the urgency in that department.

4. Yes.

5. Yes. Larian Studios, I'm gonna say it like this, I like the surfaces.... I dont like the combat being entirely about them in my D&D game. They are a nice touch if thats all they are... a touch. The barrels are redonkulously over tuned, the fire surface itself as I said earlier is a magic missile hit (100% hit chance) AND too many goblins are yoking around this unavoidable source of damage. Elevation should be tuned to "Half-cover" and "Full cover" values, it feels like much more than that right now. The cover system was additive, the elevation system 'feels' multiplicative, though I could be wrong. The "Full Elevation" bonus needs to be a fairly large elevation gap... Using the Windmill fight as a guage... the top of the rock formation should be "Half bonus" and the Windmill, if you climb up the ladder, should be "Full Bonus"
Originally Posted by Kendaric
Of course, I was assuming that as a given though as I want the game to be closer to 5e smile

Currently I use the D&D rebalance mod for my playthroughs and it makes a lot of difference. It feels a lot better than the default game and quite frankly, I couldn't imagine playing without it anymore. Now I just need a mod that gets monster HP and AC closer to the MM stats and I'd be happy.


Mods are wonderful but I don't want BG3 to become like a Bethesda game where they expect the modders to fix the game. I would rather have Larian follow the 5e ruleset and modders are adding wacky / crazy house rules.
Originally Posted by Limz
Originally Posted by Ignatius
Unfortunately, I fear they're not looking at how their changes reverberate through the system. The worst offender is handing out advantage like candy, with no resource cost. A host of abilities and spells offer the player or their team-mates advantage at some resource cost. The HP bloat and ready made surfaces, some produced by cantrips no less, trivializes anything that does damage. They are trivializing the benefits one gets from leveling up. In the end, their removing emphasis of a team of adventures, all with weaknesses and strengths, using their hard earned abilities to overcome challenges. And what do we get return? ""Oh, wow I can set your area effect on fire!" You know the one you wasted a spell slot on. Which is just as well, since if the area/spell actually landed, why would it matter that your team-mates would have advantage to hit due to blinding, enwebbing, entangling, or knocking prone their foe. All your team-mate needs to due is walk behind the target to get advantage. Not even flanking is in the core rules, guess what, this is is why.


HP bloat is mainly for goblins and they've reduced AC, the most likely cause of this change is to scale goblins somewhat along with giving them consumables to make the fight challenging and somewhat easy to tune (can always reduce the hp, reduce consumable usage) while not drastically increasing round time by adding goblins.

The minos in the Underdark do not have HP bloat for example, so it's mainly the goblins.

Also, you can keep talking about cantrips and surfaces as though they're superior to everything in the arsenal except the math doesn't quite work out that way; hex + scorching ray, MM with or without the necklace at level 2, full round of attacks from either a ranger or a thief etc.

And these things tend to come with levels, so I have no idea why you're being such a bitch about it. Your argument would be stronger if you stated it diminishes the gap between levels and then you would need to prove it by stating how much.

The weaknesses and strengths are very much apparent even in the current flawed system; clerics are superior at utility, rogues at maneuvering and at burst damage, fighters for general damage / shoving lol and some cc (battlemaster), wizards for area and guaranteed damage, and warlocks for ranged damage and minimal utility, and rangers for solid damage and horde control / single target specialization.

So yeah, you can get advantage pretty easily but so can your opponents, it still comes down to better positioning and when all things are even usage of resources.


Nope, AI is not smart enough and I never see enemy backstab my characters, if they do so, I will hate this mechanism even more.
Originally Posted by Limz
Originally Posted by Sludge Khalid
Originally Posted by Limz

So yeah, you can get advantage pretty easily but so can your opponents, it still comes down to better positioning and when all things are even usage of resources.


Still you fail to see the impact of dishing advantage in the overall weight of some classes that are highly dependent of it as Barbarians with reckless attack. Advantage is gold in DnD5e. Advantage in BG3 is a must. See the difference?


The class feature, if implemented as is, would have relatively diminished returns just like rogues see diminishing returns on having bonus actions. You still have a net gain (but by how much) for having another source of advantage for when you can't flank for the free backstab or for when there's a height difference that cannot be overcome.

You're correct in the weight of classes being shifted, but that primarily depends on how the class is implemented and how much in the grand scheme of things. Having the weight shifted is meaningless without taking a look at the context as a whole. The 5e system is not that fragile.


The only case u cannot backstab is when there are already 3-4 characters stand behind the enemy, which is very rare. Als your argument of diminishing return is not very convincing. Additional bonus action is very powerful even in high level.
Originally Posted by Merry Mayhem
Originally Posted by Kendaric
Of course, I was assuming that as a given though as I want the game to be closer to 5e smile

Currently I use the D&D rebalance mod for my playthroughs and it makes a lot of difference. It feels a lot better than the default game and quite frankly, I couldn't imagine playing without it anymore. Now I just need a mod that gets monster HP and AC closer to the MM stats and I'd be happy.


Mods are wonderful but I don't want BG3 to become like a Bethesda game where they expect the modders to fix the game. I would rather have Larian follow the 5e ruleset and modders are add wacky / crazy house rules.


True, but if Larian doesn't bring the game closer to 5e rules then modders will. I'd rather avoid having to mod my game extensively, but if that is what it takes... so be it.
Originally Posted by Ignatius
he worst offender is handing out advantage like candy, with no resource cost. A host of abilities and spells offer the player or their team-mates advantage at some resource cost. T


That is also a BIG NO NO. There is a reason why "flanking" mechanic is OPTIONAL rule in books and why it's considered absolutely broken by majority of 5e community and almost noone ever uses this rule at their table.

Not only it makes many of class features useless: like Help Action, Fearie Fire, Greater Invisibility, Fighting Spirit, Reckless Attacks, Vow of Enmity etc. that COST RESOURCES or have a downside attached to it FOR A REASON.

Because advantage is THE thing in 5th edition. It's super powerful and it requires resources (spell slot, concentration etc.) or class features (limited to 3/day for Samurai for example or 1/short rest per 1 enemy on Vengeance Paladin) or have severe punishment attached (enemies have advantage on you when you Reckless Attack).

Handing advantage to everyone for cheap is not only stupid and destroys balance in game, but complicates classes (you have to tweak them now because you made their book features useless) - which causes more balance issues but also advantage doesn't feel significant anymore.



Sometimes I get the feeling they just want new player to feel like god from level 1, getting advantage left and right and throwing AOE firebolts everywhere that ignore AC.

This is not DnD.
Originally Posted by Benny89
Originally Posted by Ignatius
he worst offender is handing out advantage like candy, with no resource cost. A host of abilities and spells offer the player or their team-mates advantage at some resource cost. T


That is also a BIG NO NO. There is a reason why "flanking" mechanic is OPTIONAL rule in books and why it's considered absolutely broken by majority of 5e community and almost noone ever uses this rule at their table.

Not only it makes many of class features useless: like Help Action, Fearie Fire, Greater Invisibility, Fighting Spirit, Reckless Attacks, Vow of Enmity etc. that COST RESOURCES or have a downside attached to it FOR A REASON.

Because advantage is THE thing in 5th edition. It's super powerful and it requires resources (spell slot, concentration etc.) or class features (limited to 3/day for Samurai for example or 1/short rest per 1 enemy on Vengeance Paladin) or have severe punishment attached (enemies have advantage on you when you Reckless Attack).

Handing advantage to everyone for cheap is not only stupid and destroys balance in game, but complicates classes (you have to tweak them now because you made their book features useless) - which causes more balance issues but also advantage doesn't feel significant anymore.



Sometimes I get the feeling they just want new player to feel like god from level 1, getting advantage left and right and throwing AOE firebolts everywhere that ignore AC.

This is not DnD.


+1

As a tabletop DnD 5e player, I couldnt agree more. Giving advantage/disadvantage because of elevation is the worst offender, I feel like I am playing "who climbs the highest simulator" and not a real tatical game.
Originally Posted by Chacineiro
Originally Posted by Benny89
Originally Posted by Ignatius
he worst offender is handing out advantage like candy, with no resource cost. A host of abilities and spells offer the player or their team-mates advantage at some resource cost. T


That is also a BIG NO NO. There is a reason why "flanking" mechanic is OPTIONAL rule in books and why it's considered absolutely broken by majority of 5e community and almost noone ever uses this rule at their table.

Not only it makes many of class features useless: like Help Action, Fearie Fire, Greater Invisibility, Fighting Spirit, Reckless Attacks, Vow of Enmity etc. that COST RESOURCES or have a downside attached to it FOR A REASON.

Because advantage is THE thing in 5th edition. It's super powerful and it requires resources (spell slot, concentration etc.) or class features (limited to 3/day for Samurai for example or 1/short rest per 1 enemy on Vengeance Paladin) or have severe punishment attached (enemies have advantage on you when you Reckless Attack).

Handing advantage to everyone for cheap is not only stupid and destroys balance in game, but complicates classes (you have to tweak them now because you made their book features useless) - which causes more balance issues but also advantage doesn't feel significant anymore.



Sometimes I get the feeling they just want new player to feel like god from level 1, getting advantage left and right and throwing AOE firebolts everywhere that ignore AC.

This is not DnD.


+1

As a tabletop DnD 5e player, I couldnt agree more. Giving advantage/disadvantage because of elevation is the worst offender, I feel like I am playing "who climbs the highest simulator" and not a real tatical game.


And if you can't go higher, that's the "miss-fest" because they changed creatures abilities^^

Please Larian go back a little bit and let us try a more accurate D&D experience. That's the only way for testers to give a good feedback about what can be improved and added.
Don't do things the wrong way or the entire EA is going to be about balance issues...
+1. Agree with all points.
+1
Agree with what OP said
Originally Posted by Benny89

So:

1. Somewhat agree. Instead of throwing the baby out with the bathwater, scale environmental fx down/make it less prevalent.
2. Absolutely agree. Not only that, being so opposed to missing/high AC that you make decent non-magical armor more rare than powerful magic items is immersion breaking. Give us breastplates etc. before we get (potentially) +10 intelligence items!!!
3. Disagree. Arguably the rest of the game setting is anti-climactic as opposed to starting in hell, but I like the beginning. Combat is easy for the most part with potential to make it hard. Good balance.
4. WotC is a very "progressive company". I believe they have pushed for Larian to tone it down/remove it. Don't want to be non-inclusive to psychopaths now do we? wink
5. I think this is a bit of a false dichotomy. Many are fans of both franchises and I don't think Larian goes out specifically to cater to DOS fans, but they have enjoyed quite a bit of success with their creative gameplay. Larian's tactical approach to combat goes beyond environmental effects and creative tricks though...it is also about verticality, bottlenecks and mobility. This is something I believe the most ardent fans of each franchise will agree makes combat more interesting.

Originally Posted by Kendaric
Originally Posted by Merry Mayhem
Originally Posted by Kendaric
Of course, I was assuming that as a given though as I want the game to be closer to 5e smile

Currently I use the D&D rebalance mod for my playthroughs and it makes a lot of difference. It feels a lot better than the default game and quite frankly, I couldn't imagine playing without it anymore. Now I just need a mod that gets monster HP and AC closer to the MM stats and I'd be happy.


Mods are wonderful but I don't want BG3 to become like a Bethesda game where they expect the modders to fix the game. I would rather have Larian follow the 5e ruleset and modders are add wacky / crazy house rules.


True, but if Larian doesn't bring the game closer to 5e rules then modders will. I'd rather avoid having to mod my game extensively, but if that is what it takes... so be it.


Should try actual new things instead of being just another "One Trick Pony" house.
Originally Posted by Chacineiro
As a tabletop DnD 5e player, I couldnt agree more. Giving advantage/disadvantage because of elevation is the worst offender, I feel like I am playing "who climbs the highest simulator" and not a real tatical game.


Height is a tactic though, I like to see it stay perhaps tame the benefits/penalties.
Originally Posted by Horrorscope
Originally Posted by Chacineiro
As a tabletop DnD 5e player, I couldnt agree more. Giving advantage/disadvantage because of elevation is the worst offender, I feel like I am playing "who climbs the highest simulator" and not a real tatical game.


Height is a tactic though, I like to see it stay perhaps tame the benefits/penalties.

cover rules from PHB,
Walls, trees, creatures, and other obstacles can provide cover during combat, making a target more difficult to harm. A target can benefit from cover only when an attack or other effect originates on the opposite side of the cover.
There are three degrees of cover. If a target is behind multiple sources of cover, only the most protective degree of cover applies; the degrees aren't added together. For example, if a target is behind a creature that gives half cover and a tree trunk that gives three-quarters cover, the target has three-quarters cover.
A target with half cover has a +2 bonus to AC and Dexterity saving throws. A target has half cover if an obstacle blocks at least half of its body. The obstacle might be a low wall, a large piece of furniture, a narrow tree trunk, or a creature, whether that creature is an enemy or a friend.
A target with three-quarters cover has a +5 bonus to AC and Dexterity saving throws. A target has three-quarters cover if about three-quarters of it is covered by an obstacle. The obstacle might be a portcullis, an arrow slit, or a thick tree trunk.
A target with total cover can't be targeted directly by an attack or a spell, although some spells can reach such a target by including it in an area of effect. A target has total cover if it is completely concealed by an obstacle.

And yet enemies can still have advantage shooting through a crack in the wall from on top of a building personally experienced this during the fight in the goblin village.
Personally in my games, my DM would rule something like that with disadvantage.
Originally Posted by Creslin321
Originally Posted by Isaac Springsong
[quote=Gaidax]
...

Solasta started from base 5e and introduced new elements as needed. They made sure their 5e mechanics were solid first.

BG 3 started from DoS 2 and added 5e elements only where absolutely required to seem like a D&D game, but ended up with just a DoS reskin. You're purposely ignoring the points being made (not saying no surfaces, saying follow the rules for them and otherwise use sparingly).
...


I have seen this argument so many times, that BG3 is somehow DOS3 in disguise, and is far more like DOS than 5E. No offense, but this is just wrong. I honestly don't see how you can play BG3 and come away with the idea that it's a DoS reskin that only added 5E mechanics where "absolutely required."

The entire system of the game is 5E. The classes are 5E, the skills are 5E, the abilities are 5E, the combat system is 5E, the action economy is 5E, the races are 5E. Just to illustrate the differences between DoS and 5E further...

DoS uses an action point system in combat, BG3 and 5E use action/bonus action/move.
DoS has a classless skill based system for abilities, BG3 and 5E use classes and levels.
DoS has a stat system where you increase stats every time you level, BG3 and 5E have stats largely set at character creation, that increase only on levels which are mulitples of 4.
DoS used a percentile chance to hit system, BG3 and 5E use a D20 with attack bonus and AC, or saving throws.

All of these things are foundational system layer aspects of the game. Just because both DoS and BG3 have surface effects doesn't make BG3 not a D&D game...it's more like a D&D game with a few house rules. Also...D&D has surface effects anyway.


Except they've been modified and dumbed down to some homebrew system that you wouldn't play after session zero.
Originally Posted by simsurf
Originally Posted by Creslin321
Originally Posted by Isaac Springsong
[quote=Gaidax]
...

Solasta started from base 5e and introduced new elements as needed. They made sure their 5e mechanics were solid first.

BG 3 started from DoS 2 and added 5e elements only where absolutely required to seem like a D&D game, but ended up with just a DoS reskin. You're purposely ignoring the points being made (not saying no surfaces, saying follow the rules for them and otherwise use sparingly).
...


I have seen this argument so many times, that BG3 is somehow DOS3 in disguise, and is far more like DOS than 5E. No offense, but this is just wrong. I honestly don't see how you can play BG3 and come away with the idea that it's a DoS reskin that only added 5E mechanics where "absolutely required."

The entire system of the game is 5E. The classes are 5E, the skills are 5E, the abilities are 5E, the combat system is 5E, the action economy is 5E, the races are 5E. Just to illustrate the differences between DoS and 5E further...

DoS uses an action point system in combat, BG3 and 5E use action/bonus action/move.
DoS has a classless skill based system for abilities, BG3 and 5E use classes and levels.
DoS has a stat system where you increase stats every time you level, BG3 and 5E have stats largely set at character creation, that increase only on levels which are mulitples of 4.
DoS used a percentile chance to hit system, BG3 and 5E use a D20 with attack bonus and AC, or saving throws.

All of these things are foundational system layer aspects of the game. Just because both DoS and BG3 have surface effects doesn't make BG3 not a D&D game...it's more like a D&D game with a few house rules. Also...D&D has surface effects anyway.


Except they've been modified and dumbed down to some homebrew system that you wouldn't play after session zero.



Only their weird philosophy on modifying the affect of light on combat is really a problem. I agree, if they keep that homebrew rule, its going to destroy overall intrerest in the game because they effectively made lighting MORE impactful than this game makes elevation. Is it too much to ask for a game that feels like playing D&D with friends? I am thinking you just have to play D&D with friends if thats what you want, game designers always have a chip on their shoulder with their novel mechanics they want to push.
Originally Posted by Isaac Springsong
Originally Posted by Gaidax

Which is something that can be tuned, whether it's excessive Barrelmancy or Firebolt. And yes what one of the guys above said that if I already start a frikkin' fire, then it should have actual effect - that is fine. What needs to be tuned is the overall ease at which you can do it now, which I hope they will do. But all in all environment effects themselves are not the devil, they are fine and fun if you can set this up proper with some coordinated effort.

But the reality of the matter environmental impact as a whole is fine, heck Solasta 2nd tavern story/tutorial teaches you to make use of it and somehow the game does not explode there at all whether you can oneshot a wolf 6 levels above you by destroying a tile under it or drop a cage on goblins in first mission or a stone on soraks same mission.

People really need to stop being so much anti-fun tight-asses, not everything ever should be the holy immutable RAW 5e, even Solasta devs understand it.


Yeah, you're just trolling I have to imagine.

Solasta started from base 5e and introduced new elements as needed. They made sure their 5e mechanics were solid first.

BG 3 started from DoS 2 and added 5e elements only where absolutely required to seem like a D&D game, but ended up with just a DoS reskin. You're purposely ignoring the points being made (not saying no surfaces, saying follow the rules for them and otherwise use sparingly).

Seriously, how much of Solasta have you actually played? How many times did you have react to enemies throwing unavoidable damaging surfaces on you? How many times did enemies shove you off something to cause damage? And honestly, how many times did you kill an enemy via non-5e means (rock dropping on them) versus 5e means? Because right now, I know that amount is exceedingly minimal, especially since most environmental interactions aren't one-shots.


Nailed it. I have completed the Solasta EA and the only rock dropping i did was in the tutorial. I had enemies a few times try to knock me down, especially the big soraks and some random orcs, but it was pretty rare. The only lingering environmental effects were from standard 5e spells like darkness or stinking cloud, which is as it should be. The guy clearly hasn't played the game, probably made his arguments from a few youtube videos lmao.
Originally Posted by Seraphael
Originally Posted by Benny89

So:

1. Somewhat agree. Instead of throwing the baby out with the bathwater, scale environmental fx down/make it less prevalent.
2. Absolutely agree. Not only that, being so opposed to missing/high AC that you make decent non-magical armor more rare than powerful magic items is immersion breaking. Give us breastplates etc. before we get (potentially) +10 intelligence items!!!
3. Disagree. Arguably the rest of the game setting is anti-climactic as opposed to starting in hell, but I like the beginning. Combat is easy for the most part with potential to make it hard. Good balance.
4. WotC is a very "progressive company". I believe they have pushed for Larian to tone it down/remove it. Don't want to be non-inclusive to psychopaths now do we? wink
5. I think this is a bit of a false dichotomy. Many are fans of both franchises and I don't think Larian goes out specifically to cater to DOS fans, but they have enjoyed quite a bit of success with their creative gameplay. Larian's tactical approach to combat goes beyond environmental effects and creative tricks though...it is also about verticality, bottlenecks and mobility. This is something I believe the most ardent fans of each franchise will agree makes combat more interesting.


I dont agree. I tried so so much to like DOS, but the AOE surface spamming and whoever can get higher faster combat made me put the the game down. Thats literally the combat in a nutshell. Set everything on fire and climb. Boring. After finishing Solasta EA it has be demonstrated that a computer version of 5E can be implemeted, works and is super fun.
I've noticed that I'm currently having a hard time finishing the EA after being hyped about it for months. The reasons are all the broken balance issues in fights due to Larian's homebrewing. Last night I had the fight with the Kua Toa and watching another race to the top and those multi-attack archers (out of all freaking attacks - you give ranged weapons exploiting height to get advantage additional attacks??), overall it just reminded me I need to play more cheese - even though I had already placed 3 party memebers concealed behind enemies on high ground to even start the fight (by the way, why can they still move freely while others are stuck in combat 2 feet from them? go cheese-fest)...

I honestly hate the combat at this point. It got worse the longer I've played and I'm not sure I will do a second playthrough before it gets closer to 5e. I won't use mods during EA because that's not the point of EA. But if the final version of the game looks like this then I will only play it with a 5e mod or regret buying it (I would not have bought a full price DOS3 - I like Larian a lot, but not DOS2-combat). You can have your environmental effects and shoves, but the way they are implemented in 5e not by breaking the balance. Make them special and memorable in specific situation, not your standard go-tos. At least twice I've lost party members shoved into the abyss because its just your run-of-the-mill-go-to-move. I hated DOS2's combat system and now in BG3 its even worse because its all about surfaces and unbalanced bonus actions. The whole action economy is f*** up. Monsters are unbalanced (those minotaurs are just an unbalanced joke and yet cheesing the fight you don't even notice them).


So yeah, I agree with the OP except for the alignments (because to me those were ridicolous ever since).


I think BG3 has a the potential to be a truley great game - even among the best role playing games in history - but the combat needs to fall closer in line with 5e and not this unbalanced hybrid. You sold me a D&D 5e game, but you didn't deliver it. Coming from someone who isn't a die-hard 5e-fan.
Originally Posted by simsurf
Originally Posted by Seraphael
Originally Posted by Benny89

So:

1. Somewhat agree. Instead of throwing the baby out with the bathwater, scale environmental fx down/make it less prevalent.
2. Absolutely agree. Not only that, being so opposed to missing/high AC that you make decent non-magical armor more rare than powerful magic items is immersion breaking. Give us breastplates etc. before we get (potentially) +10 intelligence items!!!
3. Disagree. Arguably the rest of the game setting is anti-climactic as opposed to starting in hell, but I like the beginning. Combat is easy for the most part with potential to make it hard. Good balance.
4. WotC is a very "progressive company". I believe they have pushed for Larian to tone it down/remove it. Don't want to be non-inclusive to psychopaths now do we? wink
5. I think this is a bit of a false dichotomy. Many are fans of both franchises and I don't think Larian goes out specifically to cater to DOS fans, but they have enjoyed quite a bit of success with their creative gameplay. Larian's tactical approach to combat goes beyond environmental effects and creative tricks though...it is also about verticality, bottlenecks and mobility. This is something I believe the most ardent fans of each franchise will agree makes combat more interesting.


I dont agree. I tried so so much to like DOS, but the AOE surface spamming and whoever can get higher faster combat made me put the the game down. Thats literally the combat in a nutshell. Set everything on fire and climb. Boring. After finishing Solasta EA it has be demonstrated that a computer version of 5E can be implemeted, works and is super fun.



While I really liked the combat system in DOS, the truth is - it was much less tactical than some believe and less tactial than clear 5e is. This is because DOS was bascially either - earth to fire for magical burst damage, CC chain with melees combine with action points manipulation (Flesh Sacrefice, Adrenaline, Chameleon Skin etc.) to keep enemies perma CC on the ground (you could chain enemies in CC forver if you knew what you do) and high ground Ranger burst damage which could one-two shot everything in the middle of the game. And as in all simillar RPGs - stack crit chance to the roof.

Again - I AM NOT SAYING that it wasn't fun. It was. But this is not DND.

In 5e there absolutely no way (if we follow rules from books and monster stats from books) to make as OP things as in DOS2.

Full 5e would be more fun in the long run because it would provide way more challange and tactical approach.
In 5e the best strat would be to bottle neck everything at a choke like a door with melee characters and keep ranged/caster behind. Mobility would be static because there wouldn't be a huge reason to flank depending on if you wanted to include the flanking rules or not as mentioned above, so it becomes a face to face slug fest.

Ground effects and positional advantages force mobility versus static formations. Typically it was too the defenders advantage to take the high ground and defend from a wall or a cliff, otherwise traveling through a mountain pass with threats of archers on the cliff ledges above you is not as dangerous or necessary beyond flare, but they could have easily just been on the ground standing behind 3 or 4 big bruisers.

We are in a three dimensional playing field, why not use more than two of those?

Is it too strong? Maybe? At early stages it is difficult to land attacks from the low ground. Advantage/disadvantage is rolling two dice and picking the best/worst of the two, correct? So really there is no modifier making you roll better or worse, you still have to roll the correct DC with your current stats. The closer to the DC you are with your hit modifiers, the easier it is to overcome disadvantage. My hunter/ranger with +2 in archery and +4 in dex now has a +6 in chance to hit. If the AC of the target is at 12? (I don't remember what the average AC you run into in the game is at the moment) I only need to roll a 6 to land a hit. Out of 2 dice rolls, a 6 or higher is quite doable and I find in game I land hits from low ground pretty consistently.

My other characters who don't have as many hit modifiers struggle to hit from the ground as they were meant for melee or spell casting. Str and Int/Wis/Cha characters don't seem to get better at elevation fights over time as str does not help at ranged attacks and Int/Wis/Cha only applies to saving roll modifiers for resistances on spells that use them. Otherwise they use ranged chance to hit rolls via Dex (need to confirm this as I am word vomiting based on my understanding of the combat mechanics).

So spells and abilities that use spell DC rolls would be more reliable ways to hit targets of elevation with a caster, as you can level/equip gear to increase the spell DC and increase your primary stat to add modifiers to it. Currently in bg3 there is only the ogre headband that increases int, and that is only to 18, so you can't get +1/+2 gear for casters to help eek it up higher.

The other suggestion I have seen is having elevation give adjustments into AC. That would work I guess, but theoretically it makes it harder to land a hit as the roll you need to land on the dice is now higher, versus you get 2 chances at the rolling the dice to hit a lower number. Both result in less chances to hit, but one could put a target completely out of your chance to hit range while the other makes you roll twice and take the lower/higher roll.

If the target AC is 20, and elevation gives them a +2 to AC, you now have to roll a 22 with modifiers. If your modifiers are only +2, the highest you could ever roll is without landing a critical hit is 19. Add modifier and you roll a 21. So now you have to crit regardless and you only have 1 of 20 chances to land. With advantage on elevation, you could succeed with 18, 19, and 20 providing 3 of 20 chances to land a hit, but then you have to roll 2 dice. The odds are the same both times, and subsequent rolls are left to rng. We can argue gamblers fallacy or probability over time, but that can get into a rabbit hole.

So I guess what I am getting at is, this combat is different, sure. Is it inherently worse? Subjective. I would say all my years playing "fight in the doorway" in older D&D games was tedious and a yawn fest, but one of the best ways to protect my squishy ranged characters. Is that immersion breaking? Yeah to me, every fight I run to a door or a choke and my characters just cower behind the big hulking warrior as they do almost nothing.

One system makes you hide behind a frontline and play very 18th century military tactics "hold the line! Stand in a square!". The other system makes you chase the high ground that way Anakin will never be able to beat you.

Originally Posted by CMF

One system makes you hide behind a frontline and play very 18th century military tactics "hold the line! Stand in a square!". The other system makes you chase the high ground that way Anakin will never be able to beat you.


And that is why if someone doesn't like 5e system - can go play DOS2 and not play BG3. If someone like 5e and not DOS2 - can play BG3. If someone like both- they can play both.

There is no reason to mix it. Back in the end they were people who loved BG2 and didn't like Morrowind. Doesn't mean that next DnD game should have blended Morrowind with DnD 3.5.

Every system has it's fans. There is no universal good system.

When your try to make a product that will appeal to everyone - you make product that won't be remembered by anyone.
© Larian Studios forums