Larian Studios
Posted By: NoLoGo Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 07:10 AM
The less true the game ends up being to the actual ruleset the better.

DnD is absolute trash for combat. Its poorly balanced, it has no interesting mechanics, it does absolutely nothing thats worth playing. Everything that is interesting about it comes from unique actions of the player which are not part of the core rules.

Combat is a sidenote in any decent campaign. There are several modules and games(tabletop) that do core combat rules way better.

FFS dont listen to people asking for "1 to 1 implementation". Its awful.
Posted By: Aurgelmir Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 07:14 AM
I disagree. DnD can be a very tactical game. But I don't think a 1 to 1 is going to make it the perfect game.
I'd like to see some rules adhere to DnD better though, but I don't mind the surfaces etc as much as others (although some spells gets a little too powerful right now because of it).

I like the current advantage system, that adds stratagy, but every class having "cunning actions" takes away from the rogue and makes things a little too easy.

Posted By: 00zim00 Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 07:22 AM
I don't mind some changes, but Larian themselves have said something along the lines of "this is the most faithful 5e computer game" which considering all the changes to.. well basically everything. It is not.

I would like most if not all the spells to be changed back to 5e personally. We don't need a simplified system considering all the math and leg work is done by the computer. I don't mind changes, or additions if its better then what it is replacing, eg bonus action potions and flanking (not backstab as it is now). However it feels as if each change forces them to make another change, then another to balance that change, then another. Until it will resembles little of the source material. This can already be seen in the bonus action spam, the HP bloat, etc.
Posted By: KingTiki Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 07:25 AM
I get horrible flashbacks to people who are "creative" like "I use minor illusion for something scary and the BBEG gets a heart attack, I win, hahaha".

I get that each table makes their own thing and that is fine, but I ask myself why those rule disregarding tables just dont skip a ruleset alltogether and just do collaborative story writing.

Posted By: NoLoGo Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 07:25 AM
Originally Posted by Aurgelmir
I disagree. DnD can be a very tactical game. But I don't think a 1 to 1 is going to make it the perfect game.
I'd like to see some rules adhere to DnD better though, but I don't mind the surfaces etc as much as others (although some spells gets a little too powerful right now because of it).

I like the current advantage system, that adds stratagy, but every class having "cunning actions" takes away from the rogue and makes things a little too easy.

Surfaces are a great example of an interesting mechanic added to the dull DnD System. And i agree - Advantage and Light are 2 good mechanics that actually come from the core rules.
But just to show the point im trying to make a bit more...

Core DnD does not consider positioning. No flanking, no "backstabs" in the literal sense. Thats horrible for tactical combat. The only thing core rules DnD cares about is adjacent allies - and for pen and paper that is totally fine because it simplifies combat and in pen and paper not everyone runs maps and figures. But here the game is literally you being a "figure on a map"

Posted By: Aurgelmir Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 07:31 AM
Originally Posted by NoLoGo
Originally Posted by Aurgelmir
I disagree. DnD can be a very tactical game. But I don't think a 1 to 1 is going to make it the perfect game.
I'd like to see some rules adhere to DnD better though, but I don't mind the surfaces etc as much as others (although some spells gets a little too powerful right now because of it).

I like the current advantage system, that adds stratagy, but every class having "cunning actions" takes away from the rogue and makes things a little too easy.

Surfaces are a great example of an interesting mechanic added to the dull DnD System. And i agree - Advantage and Light are 2 good mechanics that actually come from the core rules.
But just to show the point im trying to make a bit more...

Core DnD does not consider positioning. No flanking, no "backstabs" in the literal sense. Thats horrible for tactical combat. The only thing core rules DnD cares about is adjacent allies - and for pen and paper that is totally fine because it simplifies combat and in pen and paper not everyone runs maps and figures. But here the game is literally you being a "figure on a map"



In that case I kinda agree with you. I don't mind surfaces, but when an oil barrel and firebolt = Fireball at lvl 2, then it's an issue of balance too. But I think it comes down to how it all interacts and the numbers.

Heck there are rules for surfaces etc too in DnD, I think people just don't play enough with it.

----

I do think though the rules for movement, disengagement etc from DnD makes things MORE tactical, not less.
Posted By: Dastan McKay Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 07:37 AM
Well that is an opinion. And I can't agree with it. For me combat by the rules is interesting.
1 for 1 adaptation neither possible nor it is needed. Larian just went too far.
Posted By: NoLoGo Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 07:45 AM
Originally Posted by Aurgelmir
Originally Posted by NoLoGo
Originally Posted by Aurgelmir
I disagree. DnD can be a very tactical game. But I don't think a 1 to 1 is going to make it the perfect game.
I'd like to see some rules adhere to DnD better though, but I don't mind the surfaces etc as much as others (although some spells gets a little too powerful right now because of it).

I like the current advantage system, that adds stratagy, but every class having "cunning actions" takes away from the rogue and makes things a little too easy.

Surfaces are a great example of an interesting mechanic added to the dull DnD System. And i agree - Advantage and Light are 2 good mechanics that actually come from the core rules.
But just to show the point im trying to make a bit more...

Core DnD does not consider positioning. No flanking, no "backstabs" in the literal sense. Thats horrible for tactical combat. The only thing core rules DnD cares about is adjacent allies - and for pen and paper that is totally fine because it simplifies combat and in pen and paper not everyone runs maps and figures. But here the game is literally you being a "figure on a map"



In that case I kinda agree with you. I don't mind surfaces, but when an oil barrel and firebolt = Fireball at lvl 2, then it's an issue of balance too. But I think it comes down to how it all interacts and the numbers.

Heck there are rules for surfaces etc too in DnD, I think people just don't play enough with it.


There technically are rules for surfaces but all the things that make surfaces interesting here - like "dipping" and "surface combos" are not. Like i said the Core DnD is just super basic. Stand next to your buddy climb on the hill - gg - every time same thing for optimal play. All that is interesting is comes from player initiative (not the roll).

And @Fireballs being op - as mentioned in my opening post. DnD is poorly balanced (i had specifically fireball in mind for this as it is THE main offender and the most known). Fireball has been op as long as the system exists. Its what every mage does every combat every time if it doesnt melt their own face off as well (and sometimes even then). Its just an op spell. There are others that are effectively like this but i think fireball is the one absolutely everyone knows.
Posted By: KingTiki Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 07:57 AM
Originally Posted by NoLoGo

There technically are rules for surfaces but all the things that make surfaces interesting here - like "dipping" and "surface combos" are not.


1. surface combos are super gamey and immersion breaking at times. "Oh no there is electrified blood on the floor" -> "great" stuff
2. You already have an alternative to dipping in the core rules. Elemental Weapon. But yeah, dropping a candle on the floor and lightning my sword on fire for a few rounds seems legit.

Quote
Its what every mage does every combat every time


Its more of a meme. Fireball is great in a certain niche. Any wizard pumping fireballs into a single strong baddie is just wasting spell slots and not doing anything op. Fireball is great against hordes of little stuff. Seems to me, that the rules are not garbage, but you don't understand what you can do with them. Like I already said: smells like improv table to me, which are more often miss than hit.

Posted By: Aurgelmir Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 07:57 AM
The solution to Fireball being OP isn't to make firebolt even more OP than Fireball though.

Dippable surfaces is cool, but I haven't seen many complain about that. My issue is mostly the size of surfaces, and how easy they are to come by. Every goblin and their bother throwing huge surfaces from bottles.

Imo. A way to work around this is: Either you make a surface, or you hit the enemy, not both. Firebolt going: direct damage, sets the opponent on fire AND makes a fire surface. That's too much imo. Make it Direct damge and set on fire, or make a surface maybe?

Most tables seems to play with house rules to up the strategy of the game, but I think Larian currently swung a little too hard.


BUUUUT, I don't mind these sides. To me it's the movement mechancis being bonus actions which is the biggest issue in a departure from 5e. The rest is mostly about the numers.


PS: Fireball is a "staple" style spell. It's designed to be powerful and even OP. I don't think that's a "balance" issue in DnD. There are lots of times where a fireball isn't OP. But in Larians Edition DnD I can see it being way too good, huge area, then set everything and the town on fire, exploding all the barrels... wow that's a scene stopper.
Posted By: SilverSaint Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 08:08 AM
Originally Posted by NoLoGo
Originally Posted by Aurgelmir
I disagree. DnD can be a very tactical game. But I don't think a 1 to 1 is going to make it the perfect game.
I'd like to see some rules adhere to DnD better though, but I don't mind the surfaces etc as much as others (although some spells gets a little too powerful right now because of it).

I like the current advantage system, that adds stratagy, but every class having "cunning actions" takes away from the rogue and makes things a little too easy.

Surfaces are a great example of an interesting mechanic added to the dull DnD System. And i agree - Advantage and Light are 2 good mechanics that actually come from the core rules.
But just to show the point im trying to make a bit more...

Core DnD does not consider positioning. No flanking, no "backstabs" in the literal sense. Thats horrible for tactical combat. The only thing core rules DnD cares about is adjacent allies - and for pen and paper that is totally fine because it simplifies combat and in pen and paper not everyone runs maps and figures. But here the game is literally you being a "figure on a map"


Here's the problem. You aren't actually thinking.

At all. About anything you've said. None of it in practice.

At current, everyone in melee has advantage unless your back is to a wall, at all times. Why? The backstabbing and disengage systems are so utterly, hilariously broken that there is no reason not to get behind an enemy and backstab them. Literally no reason not to.

At current, the only reason to every take AOO is because the game either glitched, or the pathfinding is broken. Bonus action disengage/jump sees to that.

At current, the only reason to use weapons is nostalgia. Firebolt-even on characters with no skill in using magic-is a better damage dealer because of how completely broken fire surfaces are. Misses do more damage than hits with other abilities. Concentration is a joke because of it.

At current, whomever starts highest wins due to advantage spam, which means that you can trivialize encounters by approaching them from the highest elevation possible. Those that force you into set positions are simply unfair.

At current, enemies have far too much HP and far too little AC, meaning you hit constantly but it takes multiple hits to kill even level 1 foes, even from spells specialized in that task.

Is this fixable? Sure. Make disengaging (and if jump needs to be the source of disengage, jumping) an action instead of a bonus action. Remove advantage from backstabbing unless you also actually flank (creatures at opposite locations), or just remove it altogether, or ideally model dynamic facing as characters move relative to each other. Make it so surfaces deal less damage by more than half, make it so that cantrips either make surfaces or do damage and never both, and make it so that fire surfaces either set you on fire (to deal damage) or straight deal damage, not both. Also fix that ice surfaces eat turns-they should remove actions, not turns. Make enemy HP and AC reflect 5e rules unless there is a good reason not to. Remove advantage from elevation-keep disadvantage due to elevation to simulate cover, but not advantage.

I have no problem with surfaces as a theoretical. I have no problem with backstabbing as a theoretical, if it actually requires thought to use. I am fine with changes, but at current these things are simply "how to win". Not "how to use tactics". If there is a right decision in all circumstances, it's not tactics. You simply understand how they broke the system and can exploit it, or you don't and struggle against enemies that do.
Posted By: NoLoGo Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 08:12 AM
Originally Posted by Aurgelmir
The solution to Fireball being OP isn't to make firebolt even more OP than Fireball though.

That is completely off topic - please dont do that. Balance for BG3 specifically will obviously be adjusted during EA and making any kind of comment on the current state of any specific spell is pointless - we were talking about the Core DnD rules being uninteresting and certain spells in Core DnD being op.

Originally Posted by Aurgelmir
To me it's the movement mechancis being bonus actions which is the biggest issue in a departure from 5e.

I agree with this but i actually think its an EA issue as well - to make a wild guess: Id assume they havent finished making conditions for it.

Originally Posted by Aurgelmir
PS: Fireball is a "staple" style spell. It's designed to be powerful and even OP. I don't think that's a "balance" issue in DnD. There are lots of times where a fireball isn't OP. But in Larians Edition DnD I can see it being way too good, huge area, then set everything and the town on fire, exploding all the barrels... wow that's a scene stopper.

I mean half the problem is its size honestly as you pointed out. Its freaking 6 meters in diameter in core rules. Thats absolutely insane. You can toast a lot of orcs and gobbos running at you like that. Nevermind using it to bomb rooms from outside.
And yes its iconic and a staple. But that doesnt mean its not super easy to exploit - like the barrels arent the problem here. Its a massive aoe bomb - of course its going to be the dominant strategy as soon as it is available.
Posted By: endolex Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 08:15 AM
I really think the only way of resolving this difference in expectations in the playerbase is for Larian to make it an option in game difficulty / setting:
- a strict "5E by the rules" mode
- a "let's go wild" mode, with higher HP count, attacks that almost always hit, surface shenanigans, countless explosive barrels and a more "we take 5E as an inspiration for our design, but that's it"

This will of course double the workload, but I think if even Pillars of Eternity II managed to introduce a turn-based mode long after release, then Larian with the resources available can afford to implement and maintain this kind of separation. Especially since "wild mode" would not need to be balanced much, because players in this mode are expected to exploit and cheese encounters every step of the way, anyway.
Posted By: FatePeddler Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 08:15 AM
Originally Posted by NoLoGo


DnD is absolute trash for combat.



Baldur's Gate is owned by the guys who made DnD, I think you're playing the wrong game then OP :X.
Well people are entitled to have their opinions, you seems to be playing the wrong IP though. Cause this is a DnD game, a poor adaption but still.
Posted By: NoLoGo Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 08:21 AM
Originally Posted by SilverSaint

At current, whomever starts highest wins due to advantage spam, which means that you can trivialize encounters by approaching them from the highest elevation possible. Those that force you into set positions are simply unfair.

^So this is core rules btw. So you complain about core rules DnD being dumb and agree with me - perfect - i agree. Core rules are dumb. Get on the hill win game.

Originally Posted by SilverSaint

At current, enemies have far too much HP and far too little AC, meaning you hit constantly but it takes multiple hits to kill even level 1 foes, even from spells specialized in that task.

You cant make consistent difficulty in high RNG evnvironments. Increasing AC is a terrible solution.
While higher health "technically" is a nerf to spells - "in practice" (as you so wonderfully put it) the best things in the game right now (that is not obviously a bug) are spells and by a huge margin. Magic Missile with amulet, Hex with Scorching ray and so on. Magic right now is the dominant strategy already. So "in practice" youre not thinking at all.
Posted By: KingTiki Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 08:26 AM
Originally Posted by NoLoGo
Originally Posted by SilverSaint

At current, whomever starts highest wins due to advantage spam, which means that you can trivialize encounters by approaching them from the highest elevation possible. Those that force you into set positions are simply unfair.

^So this is core rules btw. So you complain about core rules DnD being dumb and agree with me - perfect - i agree. Core rules are dumb. Get on the hill win game.


Height advantage is not a core rule. This just shows that you probably have no real clue about the core 5e rules tbh. Yes a DM *could* give advantage for height, but a DM can do that for anything at any time. You are very hostile in your tone, but fail to back that up with facts. Very unpleasant behavior.
Posted By: NoLoGo Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 08:28 AM
Everyone gets the response he deserves - read his post.
Posted By: KingTiki Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 08:31 AM
Originally Posted by NoLoGo
Everyone gets the response he deserves - read his post.


I have and he delivers arguments. You on the other side behave very hostile and are spewing falsehoods like I pointed out above. Which makes it impossible to have a discussion in good faith. So either step it up or consider other platforms for your "feedback".
Posted By: NoLoGo Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 08:36 AM
Originally Posted by KingTiki


I have and he delivers arguments. You on the other side behave very hostile and are spewing falsehoods like I pointed out above. Which makes it impossible to have a discussion in good faith. So either step it up or consider other platforms for your "feedback".

So he starts his "valuable contribution" with a huge ad hom and you actually defend it. Brilliant. Cant beat those mental gymnasics bro 10/10. Incest DnD community.
Posted By: KingTiki Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 08:42 AM
Originally Posted by NoLoGo
Originally Posted by KingTiki


I have and he delivers arguments. You on the other side behave very hostile and are spewing falsehoods like I pointed out above. Which makes it impossible to have a discussion in good faith. So either step it up or consider other platforms for your "feedback".

So he starts his "valuable contribution" with a huge ad hom and you actually defend it. Brilliant. Cant beat those mental gymnasics bro 10/10. Incest DnD community.


You still fail to see that you were just factually wrong. And now you are kicking and punching around verbally. Fact is: height advantage is not a core dnd rule. And my suspicions are getting stronger that you really have no clue about 5e, as you state so many falsehoods. You probably just dont want a DnD game, which is okay, but maybe you can realize that a 5e game then is not the right thing for you. Would be easier for all of us. There is a lot of great stuff out there.
Posted By: NoLoGo Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 08:47 AM
Originally Posted by KingTiki
Originally Posted by NoLoGo
Originally Posted by KingTiki


I have and he delivers arguments. You on the other side behave very hostile and are spewing falsehoods like I pointed out above. Which makes it impossible to have a discussion in good faith. So either step it up or consider other platforms for your "feedback".

So he starts his "valuable contribution" with a huge ad hom and you actually defend it. Brilliant. Cant beat those mental gymnasics bro 10/10. Incest DnD community.


You still fail to see that you were just factually wrong. And now you are kicking and punching around verbally. Fact is: height advantage is not a core dnd rule. And my suspicions are getting stronger that you really have no clue about 5e, as you state so many falsehoods. You probably just dont want a DnD game, which is okay, but maybe you can realize that a 5e game then is not the right thing for you. Would be easier for all of us. There is a lot of great stuff out there.

You being low key looking for conflict after your first post and now spamming when i finally address you is predictable to say the least.

But yea cant have an decent conversation when you think ad homs are actual contributions.

Advantage is clearly in the rules. But yea keep going for those ad homs.
Posted By: KingTiki Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 08:54 AM
It is just clear that you don't really know the rules. Tell me where exactly there is the "Height gives advantage" rule. Emphasis on rule. I already said that a DM can give advantage where ever he sees fit.

If you are offended that I point out that you don't know the rules and think I'm wrong: proof it. Give me the PHB/DMG page. You can't.



Quote
But yea cant have an decent conversation

Quote
Cant beat those mental gymnasics bro 10/10. Incest DnD community.


Where is the clown emoji?
Posted By: Wrathbone Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 08:56 AM
Solasta is a much closer representation of 5E rules than BG3 and the result is much more satisfying combat. So I strongly disagree that the 5E core rules are 'garbage'.
Originally Posted by NoLoGo


Advantage is clearly in the rules. But yea keep going for those ad homs.



Yeah, no. You're wrong, you know you're wrong, and you got called out for *being* wrong, and now you're back pedaling because of how clearly it demonstrated your lack of knowledge regarding the rules of 5e that you are so vehemently complaining about.

Advantage is a core part of 5e.

There is ZERO rule saying that you gain Advantage against a target if you are higher than that target. Since you *clearly* have no idea what you're talking about, here's the text straight from the 5e PHB you definitely don't own:

"You usually gain advantage or disadvantage through the use of special abilities, actions, or spells. Inspiration (see chapter 4) can also give a character advantage on checks related to the character's personality, ideals, or bonds. The DM can also decide that circumstances influence a roll in one direction or the other and grant advantage or impose disadvantage as a result."

Boy howdy, would you look at that? Deferment to DM discretion .... and not a damn thing about Advantage from Height. Golly gee it's like you're wrong and you should both admit you were wrong and apologize to the original responses for pointing out you were wrong.
Posted By: PanShlyaptor Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 09:01 AM
As for me, I think d&d 5 is pretty easy system, especially after playing Pathfinder. But Larian did great job with tactical maps, so in Baldur's gate 3 easy system creates really great tactical encounters, and it is great
Posted By: The Composer Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 09:11 AM
Guys, be civil.

If you can't constructively participate in the thread's topic without starting to lash at eachother, consider not typing.

Continuing to type in such manners will get you in trouble.

I suggest not to try. Thanks.
Posted By: Rimm Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 09:29 AM
Originally Posted by NoLoGo
[quote=Aurgelmir]
Core DnD does not consider positioning. No flanking, no "backstabs" in the literal sense. Thats horrible for tactical combat. The only thing core rules DnD cares about is adjacent allies - and for pen and paper that is totally fine because it simplifies combat and in pen and paper not everyone runs maps and figures. But here the game is literally you being a "figure on a map"



That is incorrect. Flanking rule exists as an optional rule in the Dungeon Master Guide. It is designed, of course, to be used with miniatures. Miniatures combat in D&D 5E feels great btw smile


[Linked Image]

The Player handbook also has rules for underwater combat and mounted combat, so I'd say they're quite complete.





Posted By: Sadurian Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 09:34 AM
D&D has never had the best combat system in my eyes, but it is what it is. Plenty of other games have more detailed, more realistic, or more elegant combat systems, but they are not D&D. D&D obviously works as a game because it is so popular - nobody is forcing gamers to buy and play the game. I don't like the way a lot of the game works but I am apparently not the majority, and my issues with the system are tempered with a long association with the game and an acknowledgement that D&D rules just work that way. It is D&D and I accept that when I play the game.

BG3 is game that is heavily based in D&D 5e (not exactly, but that would never be the case), and the developers have stated that they would be using D&D 5e from day one. The BG franchise is immersed in a Forgotten Realms setting which has been used for AD&D and D&D since the very early days.

I don't know that, were I to so vehemently hate a set of rules, I would be willing to spend money on buying a game that so clearly uses those rules. You don't buy a cow and then complain that it is too bovine.
Posted By: Sadurian Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 09:36 AM
Originally Posted by Rimm
That is incorrect. Flanking rule exists as an optional rule in the Dungeon Master Guide. It is designed, of course, to be used with miniatures. Miniatures combat in D&D 5E feels great btw smile

Yes, we use flanking a lot. It is a little contrived mechanically because you need to line up exactly opposite each other, but the rule is there.
Rimm's post also makes a fantastic point that of all the rules Larian *didn't* implement, neglecting Cover is one of the biggest mistakes. https://forums.larian.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=707485#Post707485

Implementing Cover, removing Adv/Dis from elevation, and soooo many problems get fixed.
Posted By: WarBaby2 Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 10:01 AM
Originally Posted by Isaac Springsong
Rimm's post also makes a fantastic point that of all the rules Larian *didn't* implement, neglecting Cover is one of the biggest mistakes. https://forums.larian.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=707485#Post707485

Implementing Cover, removing Adv/Dis from elevation, and soooo many problems get fixed.


True, well that and making all those bonus action combat maneuvers actual actions...
Originally Posted by NoLoGo


Advantage is clearly in the rules. But yea keep going for those ad homs.



... advantage? Yeah but "height" doesn't automatically confer advantage or disadvantage, in older editions there were modifiers for such things, or at least suggested. However, "height advantage" is not a part of the CORE concept of 5e.

Seems to me you are not as familiar with the rules as someone should be before criticising them. At least if your goal is to be taken seriously.
Originally Posted by WarBaby2
Originally Posted by Isaac Springsong
Rimm's post also makes a fantastic point that of all the rules Larian *didn't* implement, neglecting Cover is one of the biggest mistakes. https://forums.larian.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=707485#Post707485

Implementing Cover, removing Adv/Dis from elevation, and soooo many problems get fixed.


True, well that and making all those bonus action combat maneuvers actual actions...


+1

Also, for all the people saying 5e is bad.....can't help but notice you haven't been listing any game systems that do it *better*?
Posted By: Sadurian Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 10:13 AM
Larian, being the game designers, are taking the part of the tabletop GM.

Traditionally, and written into every rules edition of D&D that I remember, the GM has the right (the duty, even) to alter the existing rules to suit the group's preferred gameplay style. As CrestOfAstorias says, height does not automatically confer any bonus or penalty, but this is where a tabletop GM would step in and choose to give Advantage or Disadvantage.

So, the rules as written are not the same as the situation in the game, because the 'GM' (Larian) has declared it so. As with any other such ruling, I dare say that it will be assessed and reassessed, and either toned down or kept as it is.
Posted By: Wrathbone Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 10:18 AM
Originally Posted by Sadurian
Larian, being the game designers, are taking the part of the tabletop GM.

Traditionally, and written into every rules edition of D&D that I remember, the GM has the right (the duty, even) to alter the existing rules to suit the group's preferred gameplay style. As CrestOfAstorias says, height does not automatically confer any bonus or penalty, but this is where a tabletop GM would step in and choose to give Advantage or Disadvantage.

So, the rules as written are not the same as the situation in the game, because the 'GM' (Larian) has declared it so. As with any other such ruling, I dare say that it will be assessed and reassessed, and either toned down or kept as it is.


I agree that Larian are the DM implementing their own house rules, but at some liminal point when you change lots of rules, it stops being D&D and becomes something else entirely for better or worse. I don't claim to know exactly where that line is drawn, but Larian have crossed it.
Posted By: Sadurian Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 10:21 AM
Originally Posted by Isaac Springsong
Also, for all the people saying 5e is bad.....can't help but notice you haven't been listing any game systems that do it *better*?

I could list several that I find better, but my opinion is not yours.

I generally use GURPS and that is my favourite at present, but have played too many systems to list. My first break from AD&D revelation was with Runequest 2e back in 1980/1, where I discovered the joys of separate attack, parry and block rolls, and armour that reduced damage rather than made you harder to hit. I used Phoenix Command many years ago, which was ultra-detailed but slow and painfully heavy on numbers. Chivalry and Sorcery was similarly very slow and heavy on numbers. At the other end of the scale I played Prince Valiant, where all challenges were resolved by throwing coins and counting heads and tails, and the higher number won.

Every game system has its critics, but you usually find one that you prefer, be that ultra detailed or ultra simplistic or anything in between. We all find our own balance.
Originally Posted by Sadurian
Larian, being the game designers, are taking the part of the tabletop GM.

Traditionally, and written into every rules edition of D&D that I remember, the GM has the right (the duty, even) to alter the existing rules to suit the group's preferred gameplay style. As CrestOfAstorias says, height does not automatically confer any bonus or penalty, but this is where a tabletop GM would step in and choose to give Advantage or Disadvantage.

So, the rules as written are not the same as the situation in the game, because the 'GM' (Larian) has declared it so. As with any other such ruling, I dare say that it will be assessed and reassessed, and either toned down or kept as it is.


I agree with the sentiment, however as with every session on every healthy table I have ever participated in, if you do not like the way the game is currently going, or feel its not fun, you let the DM know smile
Posted By: KingTiki Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 10:32 AM
Originally Posted by Wrathbone
I agree that Larian are the DM implementing their own house rules, but at some liminal point when you change lots of rules, it stops being D&D and becomes something else entirely for better or worse. I don't claim to know exactly where that line is drawn, but Larian have crossed it.


+1 to this.

Also house rules are very often very table-related. And this having such a huge audience I think the better way to do it would be as close as possible to RAW and then let the modders have their way. 5e is damned popular, probably the most popular system out there right now.

I am btw fine with the advantage on heights. This is a valid DM decision for me (even tho its not raw). But completely reworking things like reactions or pimping spells with new effects is a little more in the direction of bad homebrew for me. I once talked to a DM that reworked the Inspiration in a way that would have made it exactly like the Lucky feat. It was a horrible idea.
Originally Posted by KingTiki
Originally Posted by Wrathbone
I agree that Larian are the DM implementing their own house rules, but at some liminal point when you change lots of rules, it stops being D&D and becomes something else entirely for better or worse. I don't claim to know exactly where that line is drawn, but Larian have crossed it.


+1 to this.

Also house rules are very often very table-related. And this having such a huge audience I think the better way to do it would be as close as possible to RAW and then let the modders have their way. 5e is damned popular, probably the most popular system out there right now.

I am btw fine with the advantage on heights. This is a valid DM decision for me (even tho its not raw). But completely reworking things like reactions or pimping spells with new effects is a little more in the direction of bad homebrew for me. I once talked to a DM that reworked the Inspiration in a way that would have made it exactly like the Lucky feat. It was a horrible idea.


+1 to that.
Posted By: AngryFan_ Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 21/10/20 10:42 AM
It sounds like the OP has either...
  • A. Never played DnD as intended. or/and
  • B. Has or is a DM who doesn't enforce/understand the rules. or/and
  • C. Doesn't understand item balance. And probable every player in the session has a dragon mask meant only for NPCs. And other fully decked out chars at level 1. (Scratch that. They probable never played a level 1 character, and always started at level 20. And probable also use weighted dice.)


Look the ground effects everything in this game. Is not a fun way to play. Not for me anyways. And DnD has plenty of area of effect stuff in the game. Such as:
  • Difficult terrain. And ways to make difficult terrain threw spells and items. Like Ball barring.
  • Has many utility AOE spells. Like darkness.
  • Or terrain altering/Obstacle spells like wall of force.
  • etc...


I have never finished either of the divinity games. Why? As I grew very tired of all the aoe ground effects every battle. Some here and there is ok. But every battle? I get it if you like that crap than fine. It isn't expected in D&D. It wasn't expect in baldurs gate 1 or 2. I am sad to see it be pretty much the only way to do combat in baldurs gate 3. And the characters/companions choices didn't seem that great either. I mean personalities wise. And I loved Minsc BG 1 & 2. Grabed that guy every play threw. Hell the only char I remember not liking was Imoen. In BG 3 I don't like any of the characters so far. BG 3 has fewer characters too?

Sorry got side tracked. Back to combat.
While elevation bonuses are okish. They are a bit over powered in this game. And I would rather see cover from D&D work instead. My guy shot a railing he was leaning against for example... Like really? I guess it is better to stand on it instead of beside it.

I was looking forward to a D&D game. What we got is a mix of divinity and D&D. And divinity rules win/won in most things. At least from what I experienced from early access. I would not call this game the closest thing to D&D. Not even the dialog or narrative options seem that close to D&D to me. Like characters get mad at you for your dialog option choice to a completely different character. Despite not being anywhere where near the conversation. This is a far cray from D&D. And is much more like Divinity 3 than Baldurs Gate 3.

Hey look at this spell... Oh wait you can't cast it in combat... And can change prepared spells on the fly. Why ever have it prepared? I can still cast it outside combat regardless!?!?!? Yah Divinity version of D&D rules aren't that great in my opinion. And it has taken away more from the game then it adds.
Posted By: SilverSaint Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 22/10/20 01:23 AM
Originally Posted by NoLoGo
Originally Posted by SilverSaint

At current, whomever starts highest wins due to advantage spam, which means that you can trivialize encounters by approaching them from the highest elevation possible. Those that force you into set positions are simply unfair.

^So this is core rules btw. So you complain about core rules DnD being dumb and agree with me - perfect - i agree. Core rules are dumb. Get on the hill win game.

Originally Posted by SilverSaint

At current, enemies have far too much HP and far too little AC, meaning you hit constantly but it takes multiple hits to kill even level 1 foes, even from spells specialized in that task.

You cant make consistent difficulty in high RNG evnvironments. Increasing AC is a terrible solution.
While higher health "technically" is a nerf to spells - "in practice" (as you so wonderfully put it) the best things in the game right now (that is not obviously a bug) are spells and by a huge margin. Magic Missile with amulet, Hex with Scorching ray and so on. Magic right now is the dominant strategy already. So "in practice" youre not thinking at all.

It's not a core rule.

I'd be fine with nerfing spells as a real decision, but increasing HP also increases combat duration. Goblins should die quicker to keep combat fast at low levels. One solid greatsword attack should consistently kill them-coming from other games or the tabletop, it's impossible to go back.

The current rest system rewards spells because it's also broken. If spell slots mattered, then this would be different.

And I do apologize for being a bit insulting originally, by the by.
Posted By: dmwyvern Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 22/10/20 01:38 AM
Originally Posted by SilverSaint
Originally Posted by NoLoGo
Originally Posted by Aurgelmir
I disagree. DnD can be a very tactical game. But I don't think a 1 to 1 is going to make it the perfect game.
I'd like to see some rules adhere to DnD better though, but I don't mind the surfaces etc as much as others (although some spells gets a little too powerful right now because of it).

I like the current advantage system, that adds stratagy, but every class having "cunning actions" takes away from the rogue and makes things a little too easy.

Surfaces are a great example of an interesting mechanic added to the dull DnD System. And i agree - Advantage and Light are 2 good mechanics that actually come from the core rules.
But just to show the point im trying to make a bit more...

Core DnD does not consider positioning. No flanking, no "backstabs" in the literal sense. Thats horrible for tactical combat. The only thing core rules DnD cares about is adjacent allies - and for pen and paper that is totally fine because it simplifies combat and in pen and paper not everyone runs maps and figures. But here the game is literally you being a "figure on a map"


Here's the problem. You aren't actually thinking.

At all. About anything you've said. None of it in practice.

At current, everyone in melee has advantage unless your back is to a wall, at all times. Why? The backstabbing and disengage systems are so utterly, hilariously broken that there is no reason not to get behind an enemy and backstab them. Literally no reason not to.

At current, the only reason to every take AOO is because the game either glitched, or the pathfinding is broken. Bonus action disengage/jump sees to that.

At current, the only reason to use weapons is nostalgia. Firebolt-even on characters with no skill in using magic-is a better damage dealer because of how completely broken fire surfaces are. Misses do more damage than hits with other abilities. Concentration is a joke because of it.

At current, whomever starts highest wins due to advantage spam, which means that you can trivialize encounters by approaching them from the highest elevation possible. Those that force you into set positions are simply unfair.

At current, enemies have far too much HP and far too little AC, meaning you hit constantly but it takes multiple hits to kill even level 1 foes, even from spells specialized in that task.

Is this fixable? Sure. Make disengaging (and if jump needs to be the source of disengage, jumping) an action instead of a bonus action. Remove advantage from backstabbing unless you also actually flank (creatures at opposite locations), or just remove it altogether, or ideally model dynamic facing as characters move relative to each other. Make it so surfaces deal less damage by more than half, make it so that cantrips either make surfaces or do damage and never both, and make it so that fire surfaces either set you on fire (to deal damage) or straight deal damage, not both. Also fix that ice surfaces eat turns-they should remove actions, not turns. Make enemy HP and AC reflect 5e rules unless there is a good reason not to. Remove advantage from elevation-keep disadvantage due to elevation to simulate cover, but not advantage.

I have no problem with surfaces as a theoretical. I have no problem with backstabbing as a theoretical, if it actually requires thought to use. I am fine with changes, but at current these things are simply "how to win". Not "how to use tactics". If there is a right decision in all circumstances, it's not tactics. You simply understand how they broke the system and can exploit it, or you don't and struggle against enemies that do.


All of this gets a +1 from me.
Posted By: Alon Binyamin Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 22/10/20 02:12 AM
Personally, I hope the game sticks to DnD rules as much possible, for several reasons:
1. There is no other game that does that. There are plenty of games that try to do original things. I like the diversity.
2. BG3 does not seem to focus mainly on combat. The story is interesting, the characters are well written and voiced, and the environment is beautiful. I enjoy the immersion and don't want it to fall into a hack&slash game where all effort is in combat.
3. I have an emotional connection to DnD which definitely adds to the experience. I didn't finish DoS even though I thought it was a great game because I was not connected to the world and system.
4. If Larian do too many changes they will change the game closer and closer to DoS - it would be natural for them (the game already have strong DoS vibes). This directly hurts the nostalgic feeling I want from a BG game.
5. I really want to be able to plan a character using the DnD resources and being it to life in the game.
Posted By: CMF Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 22/10/20 02:28 AM
Has no one ever in the history of pen and paper d&d ever said "I throw a jar of oil on the ground and light it on fire" and the DM had to figure out what the damage per turn fire does? LIke ever?
It is not in the rule book on having a skill that makes fire by default, but with table top you can describe your actions and state your intent.

The DM then can determine based off ruleset the success and damage those actions may do (or could just overrule it with DM actions and say it did or did not work without a dice roll).

So in this scenario, Larian is the DM and they are determining the application of the 5e rules and adapting them to match the environment they created.

Just because you never thought to throw fire on the ground doesn't mean it can't be done in 5e.

I looked it up and apparently the 5e rule state on page 249 that falling in a fire might do 1d10 - 24d10 depending on the severity of the improvised damage from hot coals and a pit of fire to elemental plane fire dmg, so imagine that type of fire dmg, this is tame in comparison.

Now useful feedback is:
- Surface effects stay TOO long.
- Saving Throw per turn in surface effects (like oil/fire/poison) to see if you don't take damage or slip or fall (this already exists, but fire seems the easiest to get use out of)
- Maybe make Firebolt and such fire effect apply on the target but not on the ground, unless specifically ground targeted (then the target only takes dmg from spell application and not both spell and ground).
- Elevation advantage/disadvantage vs Cover fire system (I'm fine with elevation, but no strong decision one way or the other)
- Always strafing around to get behind to gain advantage (maybe make any flanking movement in melee range cause a roll for dex so that not everyone is spinning around or jumping around in combat?)


Overall I actually like what is done in the game, but in order to listen and compromise instead of 2 sides just shouting at each other, I feel evaluating these topics like this would help both types of players.
Posted By: Noraver Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 22/10/20 02:23 PM
Originally Posted by NoLoGo
The less true the game ends up being to the actual ruleset the better.

DnD is absolute trash for combat. Its poorly balanced, it has no interesting mechanics, it does absolutely nothing thats worth playing. Everything that is interesting about it comes from unique actions of the player which are not part of the core rules.

Combat is a sidenote in any decent campaign. There are several modules and games(tabletop) that do core combat rules way better.

FFS dont listen to people asking for "1 to 1 implementation". Its awful.


>Actively and knowingly purchases and plays a D&D game
>Doesn't like how it's supposed to represent tabletop D&D
>Mad when people say it should be more like tabletop D&D and stay true to its vision
>Complains about D&D combat being limited while playing a D&D game that's even more limited in its mechanics than tabletop is

lol what
And here I thought there wouldn't be trolls in the Early Access version.
Posted By: Sludge Khalid Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 22/10/20 02:34 PM
Originally Posted by Noraver
Originally Posted by NoLoGo
The less true the game ends up being to the actual ruleset the better.

DnD is absolute trash for combat. Its poorly balanced, it has no interesting mechanics, it does absolutely nothing thats worth playing. Everything that is interesting about it comes from unique actions of the player which are not part of the core rules.

Combat is a sidenote in any decent campaign. There are several modules and games(tabletop) that do core combat rules way better.

FFS dont listen to people asking for "1 to 1 implementation". Its awful.


>Actively and knowingly purchases and plays a D&D game
>Doesn't like how it's supposed to represent tabletop D&D
>Mad when people say it should be more like tabletop D&D and stay true to its vision
>Complains about D&D combat being limited while playing a D&D game that's even more limited in its mechanics than tabletop is

lol what
And here I thought there wouldn't be trolls in the Early Access version.


+1

I’ll say it again, there are CORE classes that rely and advantage system as Barbarians. Dishing that every single turn shows Larian didn’t think straight when altering the battle system in the long run OR Larian don’t care about balance at all.
In the end we’ll see barbarian reckless attack granting +15 damage instead an advantage and that’ll snowball through the entire class. Is this videogame adaptation because the rules are way too complex? I guess not.
Posted By: Benny89 Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 22/10/20 06:01 PM
Originally Posted by NoLoGo
The less true the game ends up being to the actual ruleset the better.

DnD is absolute trash for combat. Its poorly balanced, it has no interesting mechanics, it does absolutely nothing thats worth playing. Everything that is interesting about it comes from unique actions of the player which are not part of the core rules.

Combat is a sidenote in any decent campaign. There are several modules and games(tabletop) that do core combat rules way better.

FFS dont listen to people asking for "1 to 1 implementation". Its awful.


I can already tell this comes from person who never really played or learnt DnD rules in combat.
Posted By: Takamori Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 22/10/20 06:05 PM
Product has been marketed as a WOTC D&D product, OP I respectfully disagree with your statement. You might ask for a story mode difficulty where is completely disregard the 5E rules. I bought this game for 5E and Larian as the "Dungeon Master"
Posted By: Thrythlind Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 22/10/20 06:17 PM
I completely disagree with you on the core mechanics of D&D. It isn't my favorite TTRPG (though it is my favorite version of D&D) but it's pretty good on combat for the most part. That said, I am also thoroughly enjoying the combat of BG3.

There is some polishing here and there, but nothing too big.

The only issue I'm having right now is with how they implement skills in some of the dialogue trees. Everything else is lovely and I'm hoping to see subclasses and races from the supplements further down the way.
Posted By: SilverSaint Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 22/10/20 06:25 PM
Originally Posted by CMF
Has no one ever in the history of pen and paper d&d ever said "I throw a jar of oil on the ground and light it on fire" and the DM had to figure out what the damage per turn fire does? LIke ever?
It is not in the rule book on having a skill that makes fire by default, but with table top you can describe your actions and state your intent.

The DM then can determine based off ruleset the success and damage those actions may do (or could just overrule it with DM actions and say it did or did not work without a dice roll).

So in this scenario, Larian is the DM and they are determining the application of the 5e rules and adapting them to match the environment they created.

Just because you never thought to throw fire on the ground doesn't mean it can't be done in 5e.

I looked it up and apparently the 5e rule state on page 249 that falling in a fire might do 1d10 - 24d10 depending on the severity of the improvised damage from hot coals and a pit of fire to elemental plane fire dmg, so imagine that type of fire dmg, this is tame in comparison.

Now useful feedback is:
- Surface effects stay TOO long.
- Saving Throw per turn in surface effects (like oil/fire/poison) to see if you don't take damage or slip or fall (this already exists, but fire seems the easiest to get use out of)
- Maybe make Firebolt and such fire effect apply on the target but not on the ground, unless specifically ground targeted (then the target only takes dmg from spell application and not both spell and ground).
- Elevation advantage/disadvantage vs Cover fire system (I'm fine with elevation, but no strong decision one way or the other)
- Always strafing around to get behind to gain advantage (maybe make any flanking movement in melee range cause a roll for dex so that not everyone is spinning around or jumping around in combat?)


Overall I actually like what is done in the game, but in order to listen and compromise instead of 2 sides just shouting at each other, I feel evaluating these topics like this would help both types of players.

There actually are specific rules for throwing oil on the ground and setting it on fire. It deals a straight 5 fire damage to a creature that enters or ends its turn in the fire, and burns for 2 turns. It doesen't set you on fire or anything.

This is worded such so that if you set it on fire at a creature feet it can move out of it, because the correct way to do that is to hit the creature in which case they take 5 more fire damage from the next fire attack. It's an area denial tool, not a "I win" tool. Fire surfaces right now are "I win".
Posted By: simsurf Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 22/10/20 11:53 PM
Yeah DnD has only been developed over thirty years of testing. Completely unbalanced.
Posted By: Orbax Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 22/10/20 11:54 PM
Originally Posted by simsurf
Yeah DnD has only been developed over thirty of testing. Completely unbalanced.


50*
Posted By: WarBaby2 Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 12:04 AM
Originally Posted by SilverSaint
This is worded such so that if you set it on fire at a creature feet it can move out of it, because the correct way to do that is to hit the creature in which case they take 5 more fire damage from the next fire attack. It's an area denial tool, not a "I win" tool. Fire surfaces right now are "I win".


Funniest thing is, that, of all the systems, it's 5e they try to make those surface shenanigans work with, where lingering effects have ben severely toned down from previous versions... if they added stuff like that to, say, 3.5, it wouldn't have been nearly as big of a problem.
Posted By: Thrythlind Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 12:28 AM
Originally Posted by WarBaby2
Originally Posted by SilverSaint
This is worded such so that if you set it on fire at a creature feet it can move out of it, because the correct way to do that is to hit the creature in which case they take 5 more fire damage from the next fire attack. It's an area denial tool, not a "I win" tool. Fire surfaces right now are "I win".


Funniest thing is, that, of all the systems, it's 5e they try to make those surface shenanigans work with, where lingering effects have ben severely toned down from previous versions... if they added stuff like that to, say, 3.5, it wouldn't have been nearly as big of a problem.


There are a lot of lingering locational effects in D&D 5e. And it's fairly easy to work in alchemical versions. Alchemist's fire is already in. The differences between grenades and spells are usually DC and radius. And around about 6th level, spells start seriously outpacing alchemical grenades.
Posted By: WarBaby2 Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 12:34 AM
Originally Posted by Thrythlind
Originally Posted by WarBaby2
Originally Posted by SilverSaint
This is worded such so that if you set it on fire at a creature feet it can move out of it, because the correct way to do that is to hit the creature in which case they take 5 more fire damage from the next fire attack. It's an area denial tool, not a "I win" tool. Fire surfaces right now are "I win".


Funniest thing is, that, of all the systems, it's 5e they try to make those surface shenanigans work with, where lingering effects have ben severely toned down from previous versions... if they added stuff like that to, say, 3.5, it wouldn't have been nearly as big of a problem.


There are a lot of lingering locational effects in D&D 5e. And it's fairly easy to work in alchemical versions. Alchemist's fire is already in. The differences between grenades and spells are usually DC and radius. And around about 6th level, spells start seriously outpacing alchemical grenades.


Yes, but especially at low levels, those effects are not long lasting and easily overcome, they usually have only minor impact on battles.
Posted By: Thrythlind Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 12:52 AM
Originally Posted by WarBaby2
Originally Posted by Thrythlind
Originally Posted by WarBaby2
Originally Posted by SilverSaint
This is worded such so that if you set it on fire at a creature feet it can move out of it, because the correct way to do that is to hit the creature in which case they take 5 more fire damage from the next fire attack. It's an area denial tool, not a "I win" tool. Fire surfaces right now are "I win".


Funniest thing is, that, of all the systems, it's 5e they try to make those surface shenanigans work with, where lingering effects have ben severely toned down from previous versions... if they added stuff like that to, say, 3.5, it wouldn't have been nearly as big of a problem.


There are a lot of lingering locational effects in D&D 5e. And it's fairly easy to work in alchemical versions. Alchemist's fire is already in. The differences between grenades and spells are usually DC and radius. And around about 6th level, spells start seriously outpacing alchemical grenades.


Yes, but especially at low levels, those effects are not long lasting and easily overcome, they usually have only minor impact on battles.


I haven't seen any of the surface effects in this game last longer than one round....maybe 2. That's on par with the grenades in tabletop. It may just seem longer in battles with more participants, because a round with a lot of participants takes longer than one with fewer.
Posted By: kazzfire Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 01:38 AM
Wow a man, You understands that the system is flawed, i'm pretty sure the Larian spice is what DnD really needs. So if people will keep their fingers out of the pie, The game will turn out fine. Report bugs and only suggest things that really need fixed, or improved features. Not whats is not 100% DnD.
Posted By: WarBaby2 Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 02:01 AM
Originally Posted by kazzfire
wow a man you understands that a system is flawed, i'm pretty sure the larian spice is what DnD really needs so if people will keep their fingers out of the pie the game will turn out fine report bugs and only suggest things that really need fixed not whats not like DnD.


Yes sir! ...wait, who are you again? wink
Posted By: CMF Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 02:16 AM
So per the case of fire dmg in game (1-4 dmg per turn) and fire dmg on tabletop (5 dmg static? per turn) it is consistent?

The big suggestion I think would make everyone happy is to not let firebolt create a surface AND do direct damage at the same time. At that point it is double dipping direct damage and surface damage (1d6 + 1d4 = approx 2-10 dmg). BUT isn't 5e firebolt 1d10 dmg? so does that not equal out? The biggest case against it doing surface is it can turn firebolt into an AE spell if targets are in a flammable surface.

If anything, Larian's current design for firebolt may make it less useful at higher levels. I looked it up and 5e has firebolt doing 2d10 at 5th lvl, 3d10 at 11th lvl, and 4d10 at 17th lvl.

Right now if Larian were to increase the dmg die by 2/3/4 it would only be 2d6/3d6/4d6 while fire dmg would conceivably keep doing 1d4.

So at 17th level Larian's firebolt would do about 5-28 max dmg (4d6 + 1d4) and 5e firebolt would do 4-40 dmg (4d10).
The difference between throwing a pot of Oil on to the ground and lightning it on fire in 5e...

and the current game of BG 3...

Is the sheer *amount* of fire on the ground. Yes, you absolutely can encounter burning ground in 5e. The difference is that it doesn't happen *ever*, *SINGLE* fight. Surfaces don't rule combat in 5e, they absolutely rule combat in BG 3. That and Bonus Action Shove. Literally nothing else is even remotely as powerful. That is the problem.

Surfaces occasionally? That's fine, there are spells that specifically create them and they are a highly unique and costly resource.

Surfaces like they are in BG 3? No, that makes it DoS 3. Stop.
Posted By: Panda Warlord Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 03:09 AM
Originally Posted by WarBaby2
Yes, but especially at low levels, those effects are not long lasting and easily overcome, they usually have only minor impact on battles.


This. And you wouldn't expect every goblin you encounter to be carrying around a grenade, or special arrow, and/or be a caster. Especially with the sheer numbers in encounters. There's a few changes that up the importance of surfaces in the system, for example the changes to firebolt, but it's not just system but encounter design that emphasises surfaces much more where they already exist in the system.
Posted By: mrfuji3 Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 03:15 AM
Originally Posted by SilverSaint
There actually are specific rules for throwing oil on the ground and setting it on fire. It deals a straight 5 fire damage to a creature that enters or ends its turn in the fire, and burns for 2 turns. It doesen't set you on fire or anything.

You can also throw the oil at a target, covering them instead of the ground. You just have to hit them with a range attack w/an improvised weapon.
Originally Posted by CMF
So per the case of fire dmg in game (1-4 dmg per turn) and fire dmg on tabletop (5 dmg static? per turn) it is consistent?

If you throw oil at a target and then set it on fire (firebolt=1d10 damage), that is 2 actions for 15.5 damage (5 "on fire" damage for 2 turns, 5.5 for firebolt)
If you throw oil at the ground and then set it on fire, that is 2 actions for 5 damage (assuming the enemy stays in the pool of oil), but you get a bit of battlefield control.

In BG3, you can cast firebolt at a target which sets them *and* the ground on fire. They are set on fire for 2(?) turns. That is 1d6+1d4+1d4=8.5 damage for the cost of 1 action, which is comparable to 5e oil+firebolt's 15.5 damage for 2 actions. Seems fine...

But! BG3's firebolt also sets the ground on fire, and you can do this every turn. (I believe that alchemist's fire in BG3 also sets the ground on fire, whereas in 5e it only sets a single enemy on fire).
In addition, in BG3 if you miss with firebolt, you still set the ground on fire. In 5e, if you miss either the oil flask throw OR the firebolt, the enemy does not get set on fire. BG3 allows you to, in effect, cover a person *and* the ground in oil/fire at the same time for a similar action cost.

Conclusion: In BG3 it is easier to deal direct fire damage to enemies and much easier to cover the ground in fire surfaces.
Posted By: CMF Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 04:11 AM
Do you think that fire surfaces will be depreciated as the game advances and levels/spells overcome it? Take for example the changes to firebolt being weaker in Larian's version at max level possibly doing 4d6 with fire effect 1d4 x2 (initial application and next turn dmg) vs 5e doing flat 4d10.

6-32 dmg with 2 turns of fire surface (I think thats about 19.32 avg?)
1-40 dmg with 1 application of direct dmg (20.5 avg?)

In scenarios where the ground can't be lit on fire due to blood/water/liquids/mist/wet conditions firebolt is even more depreciated in Larian's version.
Posted By: JDCrenton Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 05:42 AM
LOL, how they can allow this low quality bait threads to even exist. Shame on you Larian.
Posted By: WarBaby2 Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 05:48 AM
Originally Posted by CMF
Do you think that fire surfaces will be depreciated as the game advances and levels/spells overcome it? Take for example the changes to firebolt being weaker in Larian's version at max level possibly doing 4d6 with fire effect 1d4 x2 (initial application and next turn dmg) vs 5e doing flat 4d10.

6-32 dmg with 2 turns of fire surface (I think thats about 19.32 avg?)
1-40 dmg with 1 application of direct dmg (20.5 avg?)

In scenarios where the ground can't be lit on fire due to blood/water/liquids/mist/wet conditions firebolt is even more depreciated in Larian's version.


So, why do it all then? Fire Bolt is supposed to be a caster single target damage standard ranged attack... it is balanced to go up in damage as casters advance in levels, to keep them competitive with other classe's (ranged) capabilities outside of their limited spell casting resource. Almost every other cantrip has some form of side effect (usually debuffs) that allow saves. There are also multiple other cantrips that deal with generation/spread of fire, specifically not rolled into Firebolt, to keep the balance.
Posted By: CMF Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 06:21 AM
That didn't really address the question I posed though. In Larian's version firebolt gets weaker as you level. In 5e edition it grows with you as you level.

I am actually for firebolt only doing first dmg to the target and not causing ground effect unless specifically cast on the ground. Honestly I am fine with it being raw 5e version too. I am not against surfaces, as people act like it is unheard of, yet we just stated it can be done in 5e with multiple DM determined actions and choices to pick a damage roll type.

I do agree that Larian's version has a lot of utility packed into it for such a low cost spell/cantrip. I am fine with either application, but Larian's is stronger to start with, yet I wanted to point out it gets weaker as the game progresses.

As for the food meme above, you can only eat one food per a bonus action and its equivalent of a potion of healing doing somewhere between 1 to as high as 10 hp from what I have seen, as well as not scaling as you level, so its good now but almost worthless later (much like a majority of these changes it seems). Being flagrantly exaggerated makes you sound petty.

The availability of food diminishes the requisite of resting or having a healer in the party to keep going, so that is a different argument that can be held. Some have pointed out that by moving cleric/healer away from heal bot and party maintenance they can now do more damage and debuffs in combat instead of banking spells for post combat heals.

In the end I am actually FOR more 5e adherence, but the arguments against Larian's application are mostly just complaints that it isn't how people like because it's not how they D&D or it isn't like BG1&2. If there is a counter argument to be held it needs to be rooted in tangible facts and objectivity, not just feelings.

I am content with the current mechanics of BG3, but there are for sure bugs that need to be fleshed out like offhand weapons all applying bonuses regardless of traits or not, or warlock devil's sight not working at all apparently.
Originally Posted by CMF
*snip*

...the arguments against Larian's application are mostly just complaints that it isn't how people like because it's not how they D&D or it isn't like BG1&2. If there is a counter argument to be held it needs to be rooted in tangible facts and objectivity, not just feelings.



Two things:

1. There are lots of counter-argumetns rooted in tangible facts and objectivity. Just because you didn't read the full thread or other similar ones on this forum, doesn't mean they don't exist.

2. The game has been both marketed as a D&D 5e game *and* a successor to the Baldur's Gate 1 & 2 series. They choose to use the name. If they wanted to make DoS 3, they should have made that. Larian choose to tap into the easy built in community and marketing by making a game based on the most popular table top ruleset *ever*, and one of the most highly acclaimed and longest sustained cRPGs of all time. It is 100% okay to critique the game for not feeling like a D&D game nor a BG game, and for absolutely feeling like a DoS sequel instead.
Posted By: CMF Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 07:31 AM
I read all the arguments and I continue to read them. The unfathomable pushback for any deviations seems overly dramatic to me and excessive on part of the players. I understand the want to keep things as "true" as possible, but I am open to interpretation and adjustments (as should any DM adjust according to the group and setting?).

Some rules should be hard rules, some rules are baseline and can be adjusted. I guess you could say I'm more chaotic good while a lot of you are lawful good?
Posted By: WarBaby2 Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 07:34 AM
Originally Posted by CMF
I read all the arguments and I continue to read them. The unfathomable pushback for any deviations seems overly dramatic to me and excessive on part of the players. I understand the want to keep things as "true" as possible, but I am open to interpretation and adjustments (as should any DM adjust according to the group and setting?).

Some rules should be hard rules, some rules are baseline and can be adjusted. I guess you could say I'm more chaotic good while a lot of you are lawful good?


Nope, since the game has no alignment system to begin with... wink
Except these changes aren't good. They aren't even well intentioned in the less direct meaning of 'good'. They are made to make the game play and feel more like DoS, and see my previous point #2 why that is bad for BG 3.
Posted By: CMF Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 07:39 AM
Originally Posted by WarBaby2
Originally Posted by CMF
I read all the arguments and I continue to read them. The unfathomable pushback for any deviations seems overly dramatic to me and excessive on part of the players. I understand the want to keep things as "true" as possible, but I am open to interpretation and adjustments (as should any DM adjust according to the group and setting?).

Some rules should be hard rules, some rules are baseline and can be adjusted. I guess you could say I'm more chaotic good while a lot of you are lawful good?


Nope, since the game has no alignment system to begin with... wink



wink
Posted By: CMF Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 07:48 AM
Originally Posted by Isaac Springsong
Except these changes aren't good. They aren't even well intentioned in the less direct meaning of 'good'. They are made to make the game play and feel more like DoS, and see my previous point #2 why that is bad for BG 3.



That's where the subjectivity comes in. BG 1&2 were of an older edition of D&D rulesets and even then there were adaptations made in that game that differed from the ruleset.

Through the success of DoS 1 & 2 they Larian was recognized as bringing back that "old school" RPG combat back into the mainstream, so much so they were compared to BG 1 & 2 and were encouraged to keep going and have now taken over for a BG3. If the gameplay was good enough for people to recognize them then, and then when they do what got them here again, why is there a sudden rejection from the community?

A lot of adaptations of their DoS engine have been adjusted to be closer to 5e rules, but there are changes they made to keep their own flavor as well.

Subjectivity is on if it is good or bad.

Broken mechanics on the other hand very well should be addressed or things that are overpowered to the point it is game breaking.

The emotions on many make them feel betrayed by not a perfect rendition of 5e rules by a bible. Adjustments are made to match 5e without having to completely rewrite their engine from scratch, and I am sure there is some amount of shoehorning going on for some mechanics.

Firebolt on the other hand I can go either way on. Surfaces as a whole do not bother me. Shove being a bonus action may be too powerful with the high inclusion of elevation in the game and the dramatic distance shove moves a target. Throwing enemies is fun and strength based but again is abusable, and probably should be adjusted more for a roll for success or by adding grapple prior to a throw maybe? Dipping weapons I think is probably bad as a design as a whole.
Posted By: WarBaby2 Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 07:59 AM
Originally Posted by CMF
Through the success of DoS 1 & 2 they Larian was recognized as bringing back that "old school" RPG combat back into the mainstream, so much so they were compared to BG 1 & 2 and were encouraged to keep going and have now taken over for a BG3. If the gameplay was good enough for people to recognize them then, and then when they do what got them here again, why is there a sudden rejection from the community?


Because, while what they did with the DOS series (well, DOS2 really) might have gotten them this gig from WotC, it didn't get them the media attention and the 1 million EA sales, that was the Baldur's Gate and D&D names...
Posted By: Rhobar121 Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 08:05 AM
The surface effects are fine except fire. Removing them will only make the game worse.
Sticking to the basic rules too closely will not be good for the game in the long run.
Posted By: WarBaby2 Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 08:18 AM
Originally Posted by Rhobar121
The surface effects are fine except fire. Removing them will only make the game worse.
Sticking to the basic rules too closely will not be good for the game in the long run.


People keep saying that, but how would you even know? We have no faithful 5e adaption - besides Solasta - which seams to work quite well with a more purist rules adaption...
Posted By: JDCrenton Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 08:21 AM
Surface effects could be easily balanced by just having any fire surface have 1 turn duration and do less dmg. Same with reducing explosion dmg by a lot so it doesn't outright kill anything and divinity kids cry. Now for stuff like grease it should be permanent unless the player or enemy decides to ignite it for some quick area damage and could also serve as some way to clear it fast if the surface is too big. Just program the A.I. to shoot it with fire spells, alchemist fire or fire arrows if a player decides to block a door/pathway with grease unless it's some other kind of monster with no way to produce fire. None of the damage surfaces should have more than 1 turn duration and dmg should be a lot lower because of how many enemies you can ignite at the same time. That way you can go back to increase firebolt dmg as it should be.
Posted By: Rhobar121 Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 08:24 AM
Originally Posted by JDCrenton
Surface effects could be easily balanced by just having any fire surface have 1 turn duration and do less dmg. Same with reducing explosion dmg so it doesn't outright kill anything. Now for stuff like grease it should be permanent unless the player or enemy decides to ignite it for some quick area damage and could also serve as some way to clear it fast if the surface is too big. Just program the A.I. to shoot it with fire spells, alchemist fire or fire arrows if a player decides to block a door/pathway with grease unless it's some other kind of monster with no way to produce fire.


I think 1 turn is too short, it should be 2-3, but not more.
Enemies should try to avoid fire
Posted By: JDCrenton Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 08:26 AM
Originally Posted by Rhobar121
Originally Posted by JDCrenton
Surface effects could be easily balanced by just having any fire surface have 1 turn duration and do less dmg. Same with reducing explosion dmg so it doesn't outright kill anything. Now for stuff like grease it should be permanent unless the player or enemy decides to ignite it for some quick area damage and could also serve as some way to clear it fast if the surface is too big. Just program the A.I. to shoot it with fire spells, alchemist fire or fire arrows if a player decides to block a door/pathway with grease unless it's some other kind of monster with no way to produce fire.


I think 1 turn is too short, it should be 2-3, but not more.


It's still too much because of how big the area can potentially be. Just make the dmg completely unavoidable so it always ignites anyone standing on it.
Posted By: Rhobar121 Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 08:30 AM
Originally Posted by JDCrenton
Originally Posted by Rhobar121
Originally Posted by JDCrenton
Surface effects could be easily balanced by just having any fire surface have 1 turn duration and do less dmg. Same with reducing explosion dmg so it doesn't outright kill anything. Now for stuff like grease it should be permanent unless the player or enemy decides to ignite it for some quick area damage and could also serve as some way to clear it fast if the surface is too big. Just program the A.I. to shoot it with fire spells, alchemist fire or fire arrows if a player decides to block a door/pathway with grease unless it's some other kind of monster with no way to produce fire.


I think 1 turn is too short, it should be 2-3, but not more.


It's still too much because of how big the area can potentially be. Just make the dmg completely unavoidable so it always ignites anyone standing on it.


If they fix the AI, it shouldn't be a problem, but we need wait to next patch frown
Originally Posted by JDCrenton
Surface effects could be easily balanced by just having any fire surface have 1 turn duration and do less dmg. *snip*



Disagree, that isn't an easy balance. Even doing just 1 point of unavoidable damage is too much because of Concentration, which is a *huge*, absolutely *MASSIVE* limitation to control spellcasters from getting out of control (like in prior D&D editions). Even just 1 point of unavoidable damage = Concentration Save (it's a save not a check damn it). That is part of why unavoidable damage in 5e is so rare and usually has a large costs associated with it (primarily from spell slots or other limited class resources). Unavoidable damage makes Concentration spells significantly less useful, which throws a ton of other things out of balance.
Posted By: Dastan McKay Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 09:44 AM
Originally Posted by CMF
Originally Posted by Isaac Springsong
Except these changes aren't good. They aren't even well intentioned in the less direct meaning of 'good'. They are made to make the game play and feel more like DoS, and see my previous point #2 why that is bad for BG 3.



That's where the subjectivity comes in. BG 1&2 were of an older edition of D&D rulesets and even then there were adaptations made in that game that differed from the ruleset.

Through the success of DoS 1 & 2 they Larian was recognized as bringing back that "old school" RPG combat back into the mainstream, so much so they were compared to BG 1 & 2 and were encouraged to keep going and have now taken over for a BG3. If the gameplay was good enough for people to recognize them then, and then when they do what got them here again, why is there a sudden rejection from the community?

A lot of adaptations of their DoS engine have been adjusted to be closer to 5e rules, but there are changes they made to keep their own flavor as well.

Subjectivity is on if it is good or bad.

Broken mechanics on the other hand very well should be addressed or things that are overpowered to the point it is game breaking.

The emotions on many make them feel betrayed by not a perfect rendition of 5e rules by a bible. Adjustments are made to match 5e without having to completely rewrite their engine from scratch, and I am sure there is some amount of shoehorning going on for some mechanics.

Firebolt on the other hand I can go either way on. Surfaces as a whole do not bother me. Shove being a bonus action may be too powerful with the high inclusion of elevation in the game and the dramatic distance shove moves a target. Throwing enemies is fun and strength based but again is abusable, and probably should be adjusted more for a roll for success or by adding grapple prior to a throw maybe? Dipping weapons I think is probably bad as a design as a whole.

Here is another angle to think about it. How long did WoTC develop this rules? And how soon do you want BG3 to be released? It is mach easier to program existing logic than balance thousands of spells, creatures, and abilityes. And Larian with full licence don't have to wast there time on balance, yet the chose to.

They introduced house rules. Fine, what DM doesn't do that. It's the amount of them, and the extend to which they introduce broken interactions, that is being frowned upon.

They made guaranteed damage easily available through surfaces and barrels, so now they need to buff up enemies HP. They stole cunning action from rogues, so now advantage (therefore sneak attack) is easily available. Wait, now we need to rise HP even more. Lets lower the AC so fights dont last so long. Ouch, save spells are useless now. Need to do something with that. Dominos keep falling.
Posted By: Rhobar121 Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 09:51 AM
Originally Posted by Dastan McKay
Originally Posted by CMF
Originally Posted by Isaac Springsong
Except these changes aren't good. They aren't even well intentioned in the less direct meaning of 'good'. They are made to make the game play and feel more like DoS, and see my previous point #2 why that is bad for BG 3.



That's where the subjectivity comes in. BG 1&2 were of an older edition of D&D rulesets and even then there were adaptations made in that game that differed from the ruleset.

Through the success of DoS 1 & 2 they Larian was recognized as bringing back that "old school" RPG combat back into the mainstream, so much so they were compared to BG 1 & 2 and were encouraged to keep going and have now taken over for a BG3. If the gameplay was good enough for people to recognize them then, and then when they do what got them here again, why is there a sudden rejection from the community?

A lot of adaptations of their DoS engine have been adjusted to be closer to 5e rules, but there are changes they made to keep their own flavor as well.

Subjectivity is on if it is good or bad.

Broken mechanics on the other hand very well should be addressed or things that are overpowered to the point it is game breaking.

The emotions on many make them feel betrayed by not a perfect rendition of 5e rules by a bible. Adjustments are made to match 5e without having to completely rewrite their engine from scratch, and I am sure there is some amount of shoehorning going on for some mechanics.

Firebolt on the other hand I can go either way on. Surfaces as a whole do not bother me. Shove being a bonus action may be too powerful with the high inclusion of elevation in the game and the dramatic distance shove moves a target. Throwing enemies is fun and strength based but again is abusable, and probably should be adjusted more for a roll for success or by adding grapple prior to a throw maybe? Dipping weapons I think is probably bad as a design as a whole.

Here is another angle to think about it. How long did WoTC develop this rules? And how soon do you want BG3 to be released? It is mach easier to program existing logic than balance thousands of spells, creatures, and abilityes. And Larian with full licence don't have to wast there time on balance, yet the chose to.

They introduced house rules. Fine, what DM doesn't do that. It's the amount of them, and the extend to which they introduce broken interactions, that is being frowned upon.

They made guaranteed damage easily available through surfaces and barrels, so now they need to buff up enemies HP. They stole cunning action from rogues, so now advantage (therefore sneak attack) is easily available. Wait, now we need to rise HP even more. Lets lower the AC so fights dont last so long. Ouch, save spells are useless now. Need to do something with that. Dominos keep falling.



I think they are increased the HP because they lowered the AC earlier. Some changes seem unnecessary, but in this case it makes sense.
If the Wotc approved the changes, they obviously don't mind.
Posted By: Dastan McKay Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 10:00 AM
Originally Posted by Rhobar121
Originally Posted by Dastan McKay
Originally Posted by CMF
Originally Posted by Isaac Springsong
Except these changes aren't good. They aren't even well intentioned in the less direct meaning of 'good'. They are made to make the game play and feel more like DoS, and see my previous point #2 why that is bad for BG 3.



That's where the subjectivity comes in. BG 1&2 were of an older edition of D&D rulesets and even then there were adaptations made in that game that differed from the ruleset.

Through the success of DoS 1 & 2 they Larian was recognized as bringing back that "old school" RPG combat back into the mainstream, so much so they were compared to BG 1 & 2 and were encouraged to keep going and have now taken over for a BG3. If the gameplay was good enough for people to recognize them then, and then when they do what got them here again, why is there a sudden rejection from the community?

A lot of adaptations of their DoS engine have been adjusted to be closer to 5e rules, but there are changes they made to keep their own flavor as well.

Subjectivity is on if it is good or bad.

Broken mechanics on the other hand very well should be addressed or things that are overpowered to the point it is game breaking.

The emotions on many make them feel betrayed by not a perfect rendition of 5e rules by a bible. Adjustments are made to match 5e without having to completely rewrite their engine from scratch, and I am sure there is some amount of shoehorning going on for some mechanics.

Firebolt on the other hand I can go either way on. Surfaces as a whole do not bother me. Shove being a bonus action may be too powerful with the high inclusion of elevation in the game and the dramatic distance shove moves a target. Throwing enemies is fun and strength based but again is abusable, and probably should be adjusted more for a roll for success or by adding grapple prior to a throw maybe? Dipping weapons I think is probably bad as a design as a whole.

Here is another angle to think about it. How long did WoTC develop this rules? And how soon do you want BG3 to be released? It is mach easier to program existing logic than balance thousands of spells, creatures, and abilityes. And Larian with full licence don't have to wast there time on balance, yet the chose to.

They introduced house rules. Fine, what DM doesn't do that. It's the amount of them, and the extend to which they introduce broken interactions, that is being frowned upon.

They made guaranteed damage easily available through surfaces and barrels, so now they need to buff up enemies HP. They stole cunning action from rogues, so now advantage (therefore sneak attack) is easily available. Wait, now we need to rise HP even more. Lets lower the AC so fights dont last so long. Ouch, save spells are useless now. Need to do something with that. Dominos keep falling.



I think they are increased the HP because they lowered the AC earlier. Some changes seem unnecessary, but in this case it makes sense.
If the Wotc approved the changes, they obviously don't mind.

It wasn't the point of my post.
I tried to convey the idea the one wrong step can send you on a months journey to redesign every aspect of the game.
Taht time and resources are better spent on ironing out bugs, and making story and world believable.
Originally Posted by Rhobar121


I think they are increased the HP because they lowered the AC earlier. Some changes seem unnecessary, but in this case it makes sense.
If the Wotc approved the changes, they obviously don't mind.


No, no it doesn't make sense. The AC and HP values of enemies are carefully tailored to match that creatures expected CR value. The problem is that a few people at Larian probably never understood the mechanics of 5e or D&D, rolled badly on some attack rolls, and decided that it was no fun to "miss". So they lowered enemy AC, which fair enough. That's okay, in fact that would be a primary method of balancing gameplay Difficulty. But then they also increased enemy HP, which is stupid. Because that breaks a LOT more than just lowering AC breaks.

What Larian needs to realize is that there are plenty of methods of gaining Advantage/imposing Disadvantage during fights based on the 5e rules. Those methods have been balanced to have certain drawbacks or limitations, like the Faerie Fire spell or Barbarian Reckless or Rogue Cunning Action Hide. Each method has some sort of cost (spell slot, providing the enemy Advantage, Bonus Action and several requirements) and usually often involves some sort of Party synergy.

By introducing two no-cost methods of gaining Advantage, every single other method becomes useless. Why on earth would I ever cast Faerie Fire when I can just circle-strafe my Fighter? The amount of reliance on a good party drops off dramatically until every combat devolves to the exact same priority of:
1. Get height advantage
2. Get behind target
3. Use surfaces/shove

Fin. That's the optimal strategy for literally every fight in BG 3 right now. 1/3 of the game, no reliance on any thing else. What build you do, what your class is, any tactical efforts at party synergy, none of those matter because there are such stronger options introduced into an otherwise decently balanced rule system.

All stemming from the back that Larian didn't like to miss, but also wanted fights to last as long as DoS fights did.
Posted By: CMF Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 10:26 AM
Because of the abundance of love the forums here is giving it, I bought Solasta. My initial impressions are not great.

Ignoring graphics because small studio and unity engine.
Ignoring the UI (some have said they like it, I don't)
Ignoring the controls (I detest the camera manipulation even more than I had problems with BG3s! and the movement of characters is pretty boring with a sprawling empty city)
Ignoring the acting and script (some of the most cringe table top generic fantasy "we meet at an inn" listen to the trouble I had getting to work today! story telling)
Just focusing on combat.....

It is stale. Somehow it is very true to how I felt playing the Gold Box games for Dragonlance and Pools of Radiance, and at the time I loved it, but in this game it works, but is somehow lifeless?

I "AM" rushing through trying to experience the game to give a valid critique and comparison, so probably missing things that make it great, but pure combat evaluation is highly similar to BG3. There are far less actions you can take per a turn, attack, shove, cast a spell. It all feels very static.

Going to keep playing to give it more time as I don't want to buy it with an agenda to say "bg3 is great and that is trash", but my initial impression is confusion on why everyone loves it so much more.
Posted By: Argonaut Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 10:28 AM
Originally Posted by CMF
Because of the abundance of love the forums here is giving it, I bought Solasta. My initial impressions are not great.

Ignoring graphics because small studio and unity engine.
Ignoring the UI (some have said they like it, I don't)
Ignoring the controls (I detest the camera manipulation even more than I had problems with BG3s! and the movement of characters is pretty boring with a sprawling empty city)
Ignoring the acting and script (some of the most cringe table top generic fantasy "we meet at an inn" listen to the trouble I had getting to work today! story telling)
Just focusing on combat.....

It is stale. Somehow it is very true to how I felt playing the Gold Box games for Dragonlance and Pools of Radiance, and at the time I loved it, but in this game it works, but is somehow lifeless?

I "AM" rushing through trying to experience the game to give a valid critique and comparison, so probably missing things that make it great, but pure combat evaluation is highly similar to BG3. There are far less actions you can take per a turn, attack, shove, cast a spell. It all feels very static.

Going to keep playing to give it more time as I don't want to buy it with an agenda to say "bg3 is great and that is trash", but my initial impression is confusion on why everyone loves it so much more.

Bro its just EA. cry
Posted By: Rhobar121 Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 10:31 AM
Originally Posted by Isaac Springsong
Originally Posted by Rhobar121


I think they are increased the HP because they lowered the AC earlier. Some changes seem unnecessary, but in this case it makes sense.
If the Wotc approved the changes, they obviously don't mind.


No, no it doesn't make sense. The AC and HP values of enemies are carefully tailored to match that creatures expected CR value. The problem is that a few people at Larian probably never understood the mechanics of 5e or D&D, rolled badly on some attack rolls, and decided that it was no fun to "miss". So they lowered enemy AC, which fair enough. That's okay, in fact that would be a primary method of balancing gameplay Difficulty. But then they also increased enemy HP, which is stupid. Because that breaks a LOT more than just lowering AC breaks.

What Larian needs to realize is that there are plenty of methods of gaining Advantage/imposing Disadvantage during fights based on the 5e rules. Those methods have been balanced to have certain drawbacks or limitations, like the Faerie Fire spell or Barbarian Reckless or Rogue Cunning Action Hide. Each method has some sort of cost (spell slot, providing the enemy Advantage, Bonus Action and several requirements) and usually often involves some sort of Party synergy.

By introducing two no-cost methods of gaining Advantage, every single other method becomes useless. Why on earth would I ever cast Faerie Fire when I can just circle-strafe my Fighter? The amount of reliance on a good party drops off dramatically until every combat devolves to the exact same priority of:
1. Get height advantage
2. Get behind target
3. Use surfaces/shove

Fin. That's the optimal strategy for literally every fight in BG 3 right now. 1/3 of the game, no reliance on any thing else. What build you do, what your class is, any tactical efforts at party synergy, none of those matter because there are such stronger options introduced into an otherwise decently balanced rule system.

All stemming from the back that Larian didn't like to miss, but also wanted fights to last as long as DoS fights did.


First, if they don't increase HP, the fight will be too easy.
Games should primarily be fun.
If players miss too often, it can be frustrating for them.
It problem with turn-based games which you can't easly
fix by adding extra enemies because fights will be to long.
Posted By: Mezbarrena Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 10:38 AM
Originally Posted by Wrathbone
Solasta is a much closer representation of 5E rules than BG3 and the result is much more satisfying combat. So I strongly disagree that the 5E core rules are 'garbage'.


This is very very very much true. I only wish they had a better license so it the world feels more D&D
Posted By: CMF Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 10:45 AM
I am playing solasta as we speak, and more satisfying combat is subjective. I am actually not impressed, yet I know a lot are. So this comes down to personal preference.
Posted By: Mezbarrena Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 10:46 AM
Originally Posted by Rhobar121

First, if they don't increase HP, the fight will be too easy.
Games should primarily be fun.
If players miss too often, it can be frustrating for them.
It problem with turn-based games which you can't easly
fix by adding extra enemies because fights will be to long.


Having a few Bosses/sub-bosses per fight with a little bloated hp I think is fine. Perfectly fine. But not bloated stats. Look at some of the stats of even the easier goblins and stuff. They are stupid good. I personally don't mind a few misses until you start gaining levels. That's the power of magic missile and a few other spells IE sleep and other CC spells. Knocking someone prone for your buddy to get an advantage etc. Thats only an issue really through the first 3 levels. Which is why those levels fly by on both p&p and this game. I'd rather them get closer to the MM and have a key few "Named guys" during a fight then fight a goblin with 10000000000000 hp and 2 ac.
Posted By: WarBaby2 Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 10:46 AM
Originally Posted by Rhobar121

First, if they don't increase HP, the fight will be too easy.
Games should primarily be fun.
If players miss too often, it can be frustrating for them.
It problem with turn-based games which you can't easly
fix by adding extra enemies because fights will be to long.


That's the primary reason why the old infinity engine games where RTWP.
Posted By: Dastan McKay Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 10:50 AM
Originally Posted by Rhobar121

First, if they don't increase HP, the fight will be too easy.
Games should primarily be fun.
If players miss too often, it can be frustrating for them.
It problem with turn-based games which you can't easly
fix by adding extra enemies because fights will be to long.

Another thing that is not fun is when half of your spell list is useless because enemies HP is too high, or AC is so low that chances to hit it with a mace are higher.
Posted By: Sadurian Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 10:54 AM
The PnP game allows for stronger monsters simply by allocating levels to them - gone are the days where every goblin had the same HP range and did the same damage. An quick alternative is just to boost the stats, as Larian have done. Most encounters are matched to party capability by the GM, although there are occasions where an encounter might be deliberately out of the their league or particularly easy.

HP based on level is a D&D legacy that I don't like. It makes sense only if you insert a huge suspension of disbelief and agree that more heroic automatically means harder to kill because the hero is pumped full of life-giving narrativium. I would rather see major enemies made harder to kill through having better skills or resources than just becoming less vulnerable to having swords stuck through them.
Posted By: KingTiki Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 10:55 AM
Originally Posted by Rhobar121

First, if they don't increase HP, the fight will be too easy.
Games should primarily be fun.
If players miss too often, it can be frustrating for them.
It problem with turn-based games which you can't easly
fix by adding extra enemies because fights will be to long.


"Missing is not fun" - that just feels very much like a problem of modern gaming to me. And damn, I am not even that old. Gamers are used to playing with skinnerboxes of constant gratification. So the new motto for games is: "Ohhohh, better never do something that could be misunderstood/is not working immediately, or someone will complain on the steam forums".

To this day, one of my favorite games of all time is Morrowind. I got it and tried it. Could not hit a stupid crab right in front of me and quit. Like the child that I was at the time. Then I read online, how it actually works, understood what I did wrong and became better. And holy shit. This game offers so much freedom in probably the greatest sandbox games of all time, that no game since could replicate. And why? Because Oblivion and Skyrim did so much better. It is the "I clicked on it, it must hit"-Crowd. If the skinnerbox is not giving out gratification, its not working right, and so many people got used to it. From an economical standpoint: I get it. But game design really got cowardly.
Posted By: Gaidax Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 10:56 AM
I think 5e action economy fad is not a very good system for games.

This was done to make TT players life easier, streamline, simplify and limit rolls, as well as try to balance things a bit better. But for video games, where computer handles the rolling without driving players crazy - having very limited amount of things you can do in your turn is a downgrade for sure from previous versions.

I am glad Larian understands it and tries to spice up amount of things you can do per turn, they should do this, especially given how quite a few encounters with 20+ actors work - I absolutely think that these are the cases where for sure out characters should be able to do more than plain 5e allows after waiting these 2 minutes or so for the single turn.

---

And yes, missing is not fun.

It's ok to have Larian adjust this a bit to allow more actual effect for your actions. Missing was fine in earlier D&D RTwP games, where the ruleset allowed more actions per turn AND your whole round was 6 seconds flat. It's not fine when rounds take a good minute+ to complete and your actions are much more limited on top of it.

I think it's fine to adjust the game so that you are not expected to miss 50% of the time normally.

Besides, what we have now is Normal mode - it's a mode most of the players are expected to gun for, even those who have no idea about D&D. There is no need to be anal with this mode. I'm sure on tactician things will be quite different with higher ACs and so on.
Posted By: Argonaut Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 10:57 AM
Originally Posted by KingTiki
Originally Posted by Rhobar121

First, if they don't increase HP, the fight will be too easy.
Games should primarily be fun.
If players miss too often, it can be frustrating for them.
It problem with turn-based games which you can't easly
fix by adding extra enemies because fights will be to long.


"Missing is not fun" - that just feels very much like a problem of modern gaming to me. And damn, I am not even that old. Gamers are used to playing with skinnerboxes of constant gratification. So the new motto for games is: "Ohhohh, better never do something that could be misunderstood/is not working immediately, or someone will complain on the steam forums".

To this day, one of my favorite games of all time is Morrowind. I got it and tried it. Could not hit a stupid crab right in front of me and quit. Like the child that I was at the time. Then I read online, how it actually works, understood what I did wrong and became better. And holy shit. This game offers so much freedom in probably the greatest sandbox games of all time, that no game since could replicate. And why? Because Oblivion and Skyrim did so much better. It is the "I clicked on it, it must hit"-Crowd. If the skinnerbox is not giving out gratification, its not working right, and so many people got used to it. From an economical standpoint: I get it. But game design really got cowardly.

The modern mantra is instant gratification. Doesn't matter if you are right or wrong as long as you meet some arbitrary parameters. People don't want actual complexity. They don't want to have to think. They want video games to be escapist in it's most diluted form where it's a time burner to distract from everything else.
Posted By: WarBaby2 Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 10:59 AM
Originally Posted by Argonaut
The modern mantra is instant gratification. Doesn't matter if you are right or wrong as long as you meet some arbitrary parameters. People don't want actual complexity. They don't want to have to think. They want video games to be escapist in it's most diluted form where it's a time burner to distract from everything else.


...plus: They want to still feel "smart" and accomplished. That's also important. wink
Posted By: Rhobar121 Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 11:00 AM
Originally Posted by WarBaby2
Originally Posted by Rhobar121

First, if they don't increase HP, the fight will be too easy.
Games should primarily be fun.
If players miss too often, it can be frustrating for them.
It problem with turn-based games which you can't easly
fix by adding extra enemies because fights will be to long.


That's the primary reason why the old infinity engine games where RTWP.


True, but unfortunately RTWP is no longer popular, so we have to live with all of this problem.
I don't think there is a simple solution.
Posted By: Gaidax Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 11:07 AM
Originally Posted by Argonaut

The modern mantra is instant gratification. Doesn't matter if you are right or wrong as long as you meet some arbitrary parameters. People don't want actual complexity. They don't want to have to think. They want video games to be escapist in it's most diluted form where it's a time burner to distract from everything else.


I think some people here are forgetting that games are entertainment, not everyone considers bashing their head against the RNG and systems galore an entertainment.

It is absolutely fine for BG3 to provide a "normal" mode, which is what we have now btw, that does not have excessive frustrations with inherent excessive D&D RNG. This is the mode intended for vast majority of players who are not necessarily familiar with the systems or inherently born with knowledge of how to make use of advantage/disadvantage and so on at any given situation. The guys/gals just want to play a game that is reasonably challenging for players unfamiliar with that and is not a meme level of RNG BS.

People who want more - will get it from difficulties dedicated to that. We will have Tactician mode, as per custom and things there might much more to the liking of people who want this kind of thing.
Posted By: Argonaut Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 11:13 AM
Originally Posted by Gaidax

I think some people here are forgetting that games are entertainment, not everyone considers bashing their head against the RNG and systems galore an entertainment.

No one said you can't enjoy bad things. They are still bad though.


Originally Posted by gaidax
It is absolutely fine for BG3 to provide a "normal" mode, which is what we have now btw, that does not have excessive frustrations with inherent excessive D&D RNG. This is the mode intended for vast majority of players who are not necessarily familiar with the systems or inherently born with knowledge of how to make use of advantage/disadvantage and so on at any given situation. The guys/gals just want to play a game that is reasonably challenging for players unfamiliar with that and is not a meme level of RNG BS.

So what is the excuse for the bad writing, immersion braking artificial mechanics shoved in your face, the constant skip from 3rd to 1st person for pre rendered cinematics, the lack of impact of decisions etc.
None of these things affect the 'difficulty'.

Originally Posted by gaidax
People who want more - will get it from difficulties dedicated to that. We will have Tactician mode, as per custom and things there might much more to the liking of people who want this kind of thing.

Tactician mode was a joke in previous releases and will be a joke in this one. You are ignoring all the problems except this one as you feel you have a basis for this argument and while I'm not about to throw neuroscience articles at you what you said doesn't address anything other than mechanics which larian has never ever been good at.
Posted By: WarBaby2 Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 11:13 AM
Originally Posted by Gaidax
People who want more - will get it from difficulties dedicated to that. We will have Tactician mode, as per custom and things there might much more to the liking of people who want this kind of thing.


If Larian want's put in the work, that is...
Posted By: KingTiki Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 11:21 AM
Originally Posted by Gaidax

I think some people here are forgetting that games are entertainment, not everyone considers bashing their head against the RNG and systems galore an entertainment.


But so is Monopoly, The Game of Life, Clue and so on. You do need a ruleset in any way. 5e provides one of the easiest rule sets out there. And it is also relatively robust and balanced. The problem starts when someone thinks "I did not hit, even tho I clicked on that person, that is SO unfair!!1". No one playing monopoly would *really* call a bad dice throw that sends you to jail "unfair" or would have problems understanding what happens. The main thing - imo - is that Larian really really is betting a lot on this game and they try to minimize any risks. And because they don't trust people to understand one of die easiest rulesets for a game out there, they made changes. And now they toppled the first domino and all the others need to fall too:

People need to hit more often -> AC down
Monsters die too quick -> HP up
PCs still use normal HP rules, so we need HP through Food
PCs are getting HP back too easy so we need to threaten them more often -> surfaces
Because killing small and many enemies in one hit is not possible all PCs get free disengage

Instead they could trust the rules already tested, but do a better job to explaining them in some way. To hide the real mechanics in a collapsed log while just showing statistics that mislead people is just a bad way of doing that. When someone sees that they need to hit a 13 with a D20 and their +3 mod they is is better than seeing a "50%". The first one you instantly understand: "oh, dang I rolled a 8 and a 2, thats just bad luck with dice", the other one is "fuck this game, it said 50%, and I missed 2 attacks!?! This is not 50%!!"
Posted By: CMF Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 11:23 AM
Originally Posted by Argonaut
Originally Posted by Gaidax

I think some people here are forgetting that games are entertainment, not everyone considers bashing their head against the RNG and systems galore an entertainment.

No one said you can't enjoy bad things. They are still bad though.


Originally Posted by gaidax
It is absolutely fine for BG3 to provide a "normal" mode, which is what we have now btw, that does not have excessive frustrations with inherent excessive D&D RNG. This is the mode intended for vast majority of players who are not necessarily familiar with the systems or inherently born with knowledge of how to make use of advantage/disadvantage and so on at any given situation. The guys/gals just want to play a game that is reasonably challenging for players unfamiliar with that and is not a meme level of RNG BS.

So what is the excuse for the bad writing, immersion braking artificial mechanics shoved in your face, the constant skip from 3rd to 1st person for pre rendered cinematics, the lack of impact of decisions etc.
None of these things affect the 'difficulty'.

Originally Posted by gaidax
People who want more - will get it from difficulties dedicated to that. We will have Tactician mode, as per custom and things there might much more to the liking of people who want this kind of thing.

Tactician mode was a joke in previous releases and will be a joke in this one. You are ignoring all the problems except this one as you feel you have a basis for this argument and while I'm not about to throw neuroscience articles at you what you said doesn't address anything other than mechanics which larian has never ever been good at.


The writing in BG3 is good to me, unless the whole lore dump hero thump thing:
"I am lord tallywag from galandria, second son to the great bimplewig, slayer of targoth and founder or the town of bragom. Hail good sire, shall we off on a grand adventure from this tavern? My it twill be a good morrow upon whence we gather our specifically six other allies, including a doe eyed female cleric who is very nice to me and never says bad things at all about our relations. Come, I am the hero and everyone is less important than me with little interference to how awesome I am!"

I really don't get why BG3 writing is considered bad by you guys. Immersion breaking artificial mechanics may be bad scripting where you took an action but no one changes in accordance to that. Sure those things should be fleshed out, but the characters themselves are great to me (again this is my subjectivity against yours, so we most likely will not agree because there are not objective points to discuss other than our feelings. Pretty pointless huh?).
Posted By: CMF Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 11:27 AM
Originally Posted by KingTiki
Originally Posted by Gaidax

I think some people here are forgetting that games are entertainment, not everyone considers bashing their head against the RNG and systems galore an entertainment.


But so is Monopoly, The Game of Life, Clue and so on. You do need a ruleset in any way. 5e provides one of the easiest rule sets out there. And it is also relatively robust and balanced. The problem starts when someone thinks "I did not hit, even tho I clicked on that person, that is SO unfair!!1". No one playing monopoly would *really* call a bad dice throw that sends you to jail "unfair" or would have problems understanding what happens. The main thing - imo - is that Larian really really is betting a lot on this game and they try to minimize any risks. And because they don't trust people to understand one of die easiest rulesets for a game out there, they made changes. And now they toppled the first domino and all the others need to fall too:

People need to hit more often -> AC down
Monsters die too quick -> HP up
PCs still use normal HP rules, so we need HP through Food
PCs are getting HP back too easy so we need to threaten them more often -> surfaces
Because killing small and many enemies in one hit is not possible all PCs get free disengage

Instead they could trust the rules already tested, but do a better job to explaining them in some way. To hide the real mechanics in a collapsed log while just showing statistics that mislead people is just a bad way of doing that. When someone sees that they need to hit a 13 with a D20 and their +3 mod they is is better than seeing a "50%". The first one you instantly understand: "oh, dang I rolled a 8 and a 2, thats just bad luck with dice", the other one is "fuck this game, it said 50%, and I missed 2 attacks!?! This is not 50%!!"


We are already seeing that issue with people using the current bg3 mechanics now. Because they don't understand percentages and there is confirmation bias rampant. Unless it is 100% you have a chance to miss. Even if your chance is 99% you can conceivably miss 10 times in a row. Chances are low but it can happen. More rolls do not increase your chances, each time is the same (gamblers fallacy).

If they can't understand the current mechanics, then going to 5e would be even harder for them (which they are basically the same with the inclusion of advantage/disadvantage on elevation). Even then, I don't think a lot of the people complaining that they can't hit anything understand advantage in the first place.
Posted By: Sadurian Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 11:27 AM
I'm with you on the writing.

Nothing worse to my eyes than pseudo-Medieval speak used incorrectly to try to set a Medieval tone. It is 'RenFayre' or 'guides in period costume' territory where using 'thee' and 'thou' and hyperbolic Shakespeare-isms is supposed to be Medieval-speak. <shudder>
Posted By: Argonaut Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 11:28 AM
@CMF
Because character are homogenous. Because there are few options and the writing completely ignores basic principles of writing such as characterization. Because they make unrealistic choices and present themselves in unrealistic ways and these things go against their backstory or background. There are many, many reasons but I'll be happy to outline them in great detail once another chunk of content has been released.
Posted By: WarBaby2 Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 11:28 AM
Originally Posted by CMF
I really don't get why BG3 writing is considered bad by you guys. Immersion breaking artificial mechanics may be bad scripting where you took an action but no one changes in accordance to that. Sure those things should be fleshed out, but the characters themselves are great to me (again this is my subjectivity against yours, so we most likely will not agree because there are not objective points to discuss other than our feelings. Pretty pointless huh?).


Short version? It's full of contrivances, conveniences, is sidestepping/misrepresenting established lore, and feels all in all too skittish, sensationalistic, and juvenile.

...but that's not what this thread is about.
Posted By: Mezbarrena Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 11:28 AM
@gaidax. Lack of impact of decisions? You can make some pretty bad decisions. And some pretty bad things can happen. There are limitations on what a computer game can do when it's setup like this. The time it would take for a chose your own adventure type of game would be 5-10 years if you make everything have a reaction.

For example.. how many times did you mess up but yet reloaded your game instantly?? You yourself are not living with the outcome of what happened.
Posted By: arion Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 11:31 AM
Originally Posted by Gaidax
I think 5e action economy fad is not a very good system for games.

This was done to make TT players life easier, streamline, simplify and limit rolls, as well as try to balance things a bit better. But for video games, where computer handles the rolling without driving players crazy - having very limited amount of things you can do in your turn is a downgrade for sure from previous versions.


No, you're wrong. The system used in dnd(limited actions) has been used in many games and it feels perfectly in party focused games(Darkest dungeon, Xcoms etc). AP system on the contrary is better for games with one hero (Fallout,Underrail etc) and btw because of this, the majority preferred to play by LW in the DOS2.
Posted By: Rhobar121 Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 11:35 AM
Originally Posted by KingTiki
Originally Posted by Gaidax

I think some people here are forgetting that games are entertainment, not everyone considers bashing their head against the RNG and systems galore an entertainment.


But so is Monopoly, The Game of Life, Clue and so on. You do need a ruleset in any way. 5e provides one of the easiest rule sets out there. And it is also relatively robust and balanced. The problem starts when someone thinks "I did not hit, even tho I clicked on that person, that is SO unfair!!1". No one playing monopoly would *really* call a bad dice throw that sends you to jail "unfair" or would have problems understanding what happens. The main thing - imo - is that Larian really really is betting a lot on this game and they try to minimize any risks. And because they don't trust people to understand one of die easiest rulesets for a game out there, they made changes. And now they toppled the first domino and all the others need to fall too:

People need to hit more often -> AC down
Monsters die too quick -> HP up
PCs still use normal HP rules, so we need HP through Food
PCs are getting HP back too easy so we need to threaten them more often -> surfaces
Because killing small and many enemies in one hit is not possible all PCs get free disengage

Instead they could trust the rules already tested, but do a better job to explaining them in some way. To hide the real mechanics in a collapsed log while just showing statistics that mislead people is just a bad way of doing that. When someone sees that they need to hit a 13 with a D20 and their +3 mod they is is better than seeing a "50%". The first one you instantly understand: "oh, dang I rolled a 8 and a 2, thats just bad luck with dice", the other one is "fuck this game, it said 50%, and I missed 2 attacks!?! This is not 50%!!"


We can complain about the changes introduced by Larian, however, they dont change the rules just for the sake of the changes.
They just try to adjust the rules so that people don't get discouraged in the very beginning.
Posted By: Argonaut Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 11:40 AM
@Rhobar121
That is a very PG way of saying they assume their audience to be simpletons that are afraid of a bit of learning / challenge.
Posted By: KingTiki Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 11:42 AM
Originally Posted by Rhobar121

We can complain about the changes introduced by Larian, however, they dont change the rules just for the sake of the changes.
They just try to adjust the rules so that people don't get discouraged in the very beginning.


Discouraged by what exactly? Atm the miss chances are still really not much better than Tabletop courtesy of height advantage/disadvantage (which I am more fine with btw) and how often you start in a shit position. So your average Joe is just as much discouraged as before. If he can figure out that scouting and starting in a good position is the way to go, he also can work out how a random number from 1-20 plus another number works.

They fear that a person just flips the table on a game of monopoly just because he was unlucky and got to jail in round 1. And yes, those people do exist, but the question is: would monopoly be a better game, if you design it in a manner that this cannot happen? I'd doubt that.
Posted By: Rhobar121 Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 11:42 AM
Originally Posted by Argonaut
@Rhobar121
That is a very PG way of saying they assume their audience to be simpletons that are afraid of a bit of learning / challenge.


You said that smile
Posted By: Demoulius Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 11:59 AM
Originally Posted by NoLoGo
The less true the game ends up being to the actual ruleset the better.

DnD is absolute trash for combat. Its poorly balanced, it has no interesting mechanics, it does absolutely nothing thats worth playing. Everything that is interesting about it comes from unique actions of the player which are not part of the core rules.

Combat is a sidenote in any decent campaign. There are several modules and games(tabletop) that do core combat rules way better.

FFS dont listen to people asking for "1 to 1 implementation". Its awful.

The only people that ive seen react like this with regards to the rules are the people who dont actually READ the rules and dont even know what options are open to them. They just want to mimic the voice actors from Critical Role and think dnd is only about stage acting or something.

I dm for groups and play in a few. Combat can be quick and sweet if everyone at the table knows the bloody rules and its muddy and slow in groups that dont. Some groups have people who prefer the roleplaying part and thats fine. But combat is and always will be a part of dnd. I swear if I hear 'the rules are just guidelines' as an excuse why a DM wont follow basic rules and to restrict players or 'this is homework the game' I swear il bloody toss my desk out of the window.
Posted By: CMF Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 12:02 PM
True enough, this thread is about combat rules.

That said, strict adherence to 5e combat rules is fine. My playthrough of solasta was probably more marred with the user interface being bad at providing information to the player. the UI in bg3 is fairly intuitive and gives lots of feedback as far as percentages, advantages, dmg done, formulas used to determine hit/miss and dmg rolls, line of sight, spell effects, etc.

There are exceptions to those where some tooltips are wrong or skills are broken, but those are expected to be fixed as this is EA.

The biggest differences with bg3 combat is:
- Surfaces
- Shove/Push Actions
- Elevation Advantages
- Jump/Disengage to gain Advantage from a flank

Going back to solasta
- Surfaces obviously didn't exist there
- Shove/Push actions were present, killed a few monsters that way that crowded my wizard and thunderwaved 3 of them off to their death on falling. Bonus thing that I actually did like from solasta was that my cleric got knocked off a ledge and the game paused and asked if I wanted to use a spell to cast feather fall and prevent dmg. Interesting mechanic, but it basically play combat FOR you.
- Elevation Advantages again did not exist
- Disengage was available, but it took an action so you could not use that and then attack again. BUUUT, you could still just run behind them and attack for a flank. BG3 permits you to move while engaged with mulitple targets to jump behind them and not having to risk an attack of opportunity in order to get a flank on your primary target.

From my point of view, BG3 just needs a couple of rule set changes for balance and its core is actually pretty solid.

Originally Posted by Gaidax
I think 5e action economy fad is not a very good system for games.

This was done to make TT players life easier, streamline, simplify and limit rolls, as well as try to balance things a bit better. But for video games, where computer handles the rolling without driving players crazy - having very limited amount of things you can do in your turn is a downgrade for sure from previous versions.



I think this statement is pretty fair. Table top combat needed to be deliberate and paced due to so many moving pieces and limitation of automated organization that computer gaming can provide. Also in computer gaming turn based can feel tedious to some. Already with bg3 there is a crowd of people who don't like how slow it is and want rtwp back, they also feel like they waste their turn if they don't expend all the resources and action/bonus actions/movement.

Core 5e is very slow in practice with very little done per a move. Larian spiced it up a bit and changed some things to bonus actions and allowed you to do a little bit more per a turn, still fairly slow in comparison, but I'm used to this style of gameplay from back in the 80s/90s. Rtwp is ok too, but can be chaotic if totally player driven actions or too passive if overly automated and letting AI control a majority of the movement while reserving specific spell casts or actions to the player IF they want to pause the game and dig through the skills to cast something.

I feel I like turn based more, even if it is slow.
Posted By: Zahur Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 12:07 PM
Originally Posted by CMF
We are already seeing that issue with people using the current bg3 mechanics now. Because they don't understand percentages and there is confirmation bias rampant. Unless it is 100% you have a chance to miss. Even if your chance is 99% you can conceivably miss 10 times in a row. Chances are low but it can happen. More rolls do not increase your chances, each time is the same (gamblers fallacy).

If they can't understand the current mechanics, then going to 5e would be even harder for them (which they are basically the same with the inclusion of advantage/disadvantage on elevation). Even then, I don't think a lot of the people complaining that they can't hit anything understand advantage in the first place.


This is the reason why e.g. Dota 2 does use pseudo-random distribution. People just can't naturally deal with statistics and probability. It's somehow too aliens for our brains. When we see 30% we expect it's about to happen on every third occasion. That's what pseudo-random distribution does achive while still keeping some degree of randomness.
Posted By: arion Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 12:08 PM
Originally Posted by CMF

The biggest differences with bg3 combat is:
- Surfaces
- Shove/Push Actions
- Elevation Advantages
- Jump/Disengage to gain Advantage from a flank

you forgot "healing food" issue
Posted By: Sadurian Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 12:10 PM
Originally Posted by Demoulius
I dm for groups and play in a few. Combat can be quick and sweet if everyone at the table knows the bloody rules and its muddy and slow in groups that dont. .

After nearly three years of alternate weekend games, our current group (stood down at present) has picked the rules up well enough that combats go quickly and smoothly. We do, however, have a girl who still forgets what die to roll and how much damage she is meant to be inflicting with a longbow. The round inevitably stalls when it reaches her, and she rarely has anything planned for her turn. It is frustrating. Luckily we are a fairly mature and well-balanced group so nobody has yet stood up and told her that she is an anchor around the group's neck. She's a lovely person, but my gods it is frustrating to play RPGs with her.
Posted By: CMF Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 12:12 PM
Originally Posted by arion
Originally Posted by CMF

The biggest differences with bg3 combat is:
- Surfaces
- Shove/Push Actions
- Elevation Advantages
- Jump/Disengage to gain Advantage from a flank

you forgot "healing food" issue


The food healing issue isn't as game breaking in my opinion. Food takes a bonus action, much like a potion. Even then the food does not scale with your level and is maybe 1-10 hp in recovery. At higher levels this will be insufficient in combat. The mass availability of it trivializes short rest/long rest though. Possibly put a debuff on food so you can only eat so much in a day before needing to rest? Or make it mandatory to have food in order to short rest and provide more short rests allowed in a day.
Posted By: Sadurian Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 12:12 PM
Originally Posted by Zahur
This is the reason why e.g. Dota 2 does use pseudo-random distribution. People just can't naturally deal with statistics and probability. It's somehow too aliens for our brains. When we see 30% we expect it's about to happen on every third occasion. That's what pseudo-random distribution does achive while still keeping some degree of randomness.

That's true enough. When playing games where I get (for example) three shots and each one has a 75% chance of hitting, I am frustrated that none of them hit. After all, 3 x 75% is 225%, isn't it? ...
Posted By: CMF Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 12:21 PM
Pseudo-random is bad in my opinion. If anything, that should be a skill on a weapon or a piece of equipment that incrementally provides you with higher chance to hit until you do, then resets. I do understand what you are getting at though, making people feel good puts a lot of complaints away.

I feel like we should be mature enough to just accept things and not ask to be patronized, but I guess some people like being treated special.
Posted By: Argonaut Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 12:27 PM
@ CMF
Pseudo-random chance is reflective of reality. Video games and D&D are simulations of reality(I have already sourced this proof from the introduction of the PHB mind you before but I am happy to do it again) and therefor that which is a better reflection of how mechanical issues work in reality is superior and better for the efficacy of the simulation.

I don't have much to say about your second point as I haven't read anything but evidence is kind.
Posted By: Demoulius Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 12:29 PM
Originally Posted by Sadurian
Originally Posted by Demoulius
I dm for groups and play in a few. Combat can be quick and sweet if everyone at the table knows the bloody rules and its muddy and slow in groups that dont. .

After nearly three years of alternate weekend games, our current group (stood down at present) has picked the rules up well enough that combats go quickly and smoothly. We do, however, have a girl who still forgets what die to roll and how much damage she is meant to be inflicting with a longbow. The round inevitably stalls when it reaches her, and she rarely has anything planned for her turn. It is frustrating. Luckily we are a fairly mature and well-balanced group so nobody has yet stood up and told her that she is an anchor around the group's neck. She's a lovely person, but my gods it is frustrating to play RPGs with her.

One of the groups that I play with also has a player like that with a simular problem but its her first ttrpg and we havent been playing for even a year yet. We also play abit unregulary so that isent helping either. If shes still doing it after 3 years though il start to ask questions xD

One of my players that I DM for is a poor planner as well. He only starts to think about his actions until its his turn, and then often reads the spells description rather then the spell itself. It infuriates the other players (and myself) but hes also autistic so I dont think to much of it. Luckily he generally is only slow the first 1 or 2 turns of combat in a session and then knows what the wants to do.

Point is, if you at least put some effort into understanding the rules AT ALL its not hard to make combat go faster. When other players or enemy monsters are taking their turns, think what you want to do. Unless you suddenly go down or something happens in the action right before yours you probably wont have to change your plan. The OP just saying 'combat is garbage' without taking a look why it is garbage to you is not a very helpfull stance and makes you look like you just dont like the system. 5th ed is very streamlined, if youve played 1 character for any length of time and know how your damage is calculated you know it for other classes as well, just that they use a different statline.

Bg3 does explain things poorly and if you dont have tabletlop knowledge I can understand things beeing confusing.
Posted By: Demoulius Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 12:32 PM
Originally Posted by Sadurian
Originally Posted by Zahur
This is the reason why e.g. Dota 2 does use pseudo-random distribution. People just can't naturally deal with statistics and probability. It's somehow too aliens for our brains. When we see 30% we expect it's about to happen on every third occasion. That's what pseudo-random distribution does achive while still keeping some degree of randomness.

That's true enough. When playing games where I get (for example) three shots and each one has a 75% chance of hitting, I am frustrated that none of them hit. After all, 3 x 75% is 225%, isn't it? ...

Not sure if troll or not? 👀

Thats not how calculating the odds of hitting or missing 3 times works...
Posted By: Sludge Khalid Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 12:34 PM
Originally Posted by CMF
Originally Posted by arion
Originally Posted by CMF

The biggest differences with bg3 combat is:
- Surfaces
- Shove/Push Actions
- Elevation Advantages
- Jump/Disengage to gain Advantage from a flank

you forgot "healing food" issue


The food healing issue isn't as game breaking in my opinion. Food takes a bonus action, much like a potion. Even then the food does not scale with your level and is maybe 1-10 hp in recovery. At higher levels this will be insufficient in combat. The mass availability of it trivializes short rest/long rest though. Possibly put a debuff on food so you can only eat so much in a day before needing to rest? Or make it mandatory to have food in order to short rest and provide more short rests allowed in a day.


Actually currently food and potions are way too homebrew due the abundance of the source scattered all over the map of the first act. I’d say that the interpretation of the rules would be ok if the resource was scarce.
Now, we can use that bonus action in every single turn (when not shoving or disengaging) to use a reliable source of healing. There’s potions and food enough to do it every single round. Have you ever wondered why? Because the resource balance is non existent. Have you ever wondered the impact of that in the long run?

Clerics/Bards/Paladins have healing spells - limited by spell slots - which makes you decide whether to heal or to buff, attack and so on. Spells slots are unreliable source of healing because the DnD rules forces you to make hard decisions (and that’s what I call being tactical). With food system on the loop, abundant as it is, the game takes that decision away. I wouldn’t have to think twice when deciding whether to buff or to heal because the game took away that decision of my control.

My argument can be replied by: well, simply don’t use food or potions, and play how you like to play. And I would say: the game was balanced over the assumption that resources are abundant and that you can spam healing stuff every single bonus action.

Can I beat the game in its current state without using it? Yes
Is it fun? No
Posted By: CMF Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 12:36 PM
Originally Posted by Argonaut
@ CMF
Pseudo-random chance is reflective of reality. Video games and D&D are simulations of reality(I have already sourced this proof from the introduction of the PHB mind you before but I am happy to do it again) and therefor that which is a better reflection of how mechanical issues work in reality is superior and better for the efficacy of the simulation.

I don't have much to say about your second point as I haven't read anything but evidence is kind.


I clicked the link and read a bit of that wiki for dota, I didn't notice the passage that explained how it is reflective of reality when it is manipulating chance by reducing the odds you will fail. Reality does not have a hidden system that will assist us in getting a result with pseudo-random chance. I do see how this would make for a more enjoyable game experience for some players though who don't like to see "miss miss miss".
Posted By: Argonaut Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 12:38 PM
How to calculate statistical probability

Originally Posted by CMF
Originally Posted by Argonaut
@ CMF
Pseudo-random chance is reflective of reality. Video games and D&D are simulations of reality(I have already sourced this proof from the introduction of the PHB mind you before but I am happy to do it again) and therefor that which is a better reflection of how mechanical issues work in reality is superior and better for the efficacy of the simulation.

I don't have much to say about your second point as I haven't read anything but evidence is kind.


I clicked the link and read a bit of that wiki for dota, I didn't notice the passage that explained how it is reflective of reality when it is manipulating chance by reducing the odds you will fail. Reality does not have a hidden system that will assist us in getting a result with pseudo-random chance. I do see how this would make for a more enjoyable game experience for some players though who don't like to see "miss miss miss".

simulation
/sɪmjuːˈleɪʃ(ə)n/
Learn to pronounce
noun
imitation of a situation or process.
"simulation of blood flowing through arteries and veins"
the action of pretending; deception.
"clever simulation that's good enough to trick you"
the production of a computer model of something, especially for the purpose of study.
"the method was tested by computer simulation"

I phrased that poorly so my bad on that one. I didn't mean all simulations have to be reflective of reality in their entirety, I said mechanical functions. What this means is that things from which we can draw from reality are simulated that way. Dota has physics and it's physics use real life mathematics and scientific principles to simulate. Everything that is pretend is simulation. It is also why, for example, Hammer is presented as being a very bulky and strong dude whereas mage slayer has a more agile aesthetic.
Posted By: CMF Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 12:39 PM
Originally Posted by Sludge Khalid
Originally Posted by CMF
Originally Posted by arion
Originally Posted by CMF

The biggest differences with bg3 combat is:
- Surfaces
- Shove/Push Actions
- Elevation Advantages
- Jump/Disengage to gain Advantage from a flank

you forgot "healing food" issue


The food healing issue isn't as game breaking in my opinion. Food takes a bonus action, much like a potion. Even then the food does not scale with your level and is maybe 1-10 hp in recovery. At higher levels this will be insufficient in combat. The mass availability of it trivializes short rest/long rest though. Possibly put a debuff on food so you can only eat so much in a day before needing to rest? Or make it mandatory to have food in order to short rest and provide more short rests allowed in a day.


Actually currently food and potions are way too homebrew due the abundance of the source scattered all over the map of the first act. I’d say that the interpretation of the rules would be ok if the resource was scarce.
Now, we can use that bonus action in every single turn (when not shoving or disengaging) to use a reliable source of healing. There’s potions and food enough to do it every single round. Have you ever wondered why? Because the resource balance is non existent. Have you ever wondered the impact of that in the long run?

Clerics/Bards/Paladins have healing spells - limited by spell slots - which makes you decide whether to heal or to buff, attack and so on. Spells slots are unreliable source of healing because the DnD rules forces you to make hard decisions (and that’s what I call being tactical). With food system on the loop, abundant as it is, the game takes that decision away. I wouldn’t have to think twice when deciding whether to buff or to heal because the game took away that decision of my control.

My argument can be replied by: well, simply don’t use food or potions, and play how you like to play. And I would say: the game was balanced over the assumption that resources are abundant and that you can spam healing stuff every single bonus action.

Can I beat the game in its current state without using it? Yes
Is it fun? No



I think it is a fair point that the abundance of food is the problem. The actual mechanic is fine. If anything, what if it was reverted back to taking an action instead of a bonus action and that would limit it even more while keeping the resource available.
Posted By: Demoulius Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 12:44 PM
I dont think the amount of food is a problem considering we have only 1 short rest per day. Food allows us some chance to regain it out of combat.

Is it true to dnd? No. But out of the issues that the game currently has I dont rate it very high as a problem...
Posted By: Sadurian Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 12:46 PM
Originally Posted by Demoulius
Originally Posted by Sadurian
That's true enough. When playing games where I get (for example) three shots and each one has a 75% chance of hitting, I am frustrated that none of them hit. After all, 3 x 75% is 225%, isn't it? ...

Not sure if troll or not? 👀

Thats not how calculating the odds of hitting or missing 3 times works...

Just agreeing that our brains do funny things when we look at odds.

I'm aware of the way odds work, I was pretending otherwise for comic effect. It didn't work.
Posted By: CMF Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 12:49 PM
Originally Posted by Sadurian
Originally Posted by Demoulius
Originally Posted by Sadurian
That's true enough. When playing games where I get (for example) three shots and each one has a 75% chance of hitting, I am frustrated that none of them hit. After all, 3 x 75% is 225%, isn't it? ...

Not sure if troll or not? 👀

Thats not how calculating the odds of hitting or missing 3 times works...

Just agreeing that our brains do funny things when we look at odds.

I'm aware of the way odds work, I was pretending otherwise for comic effect. It didn't work.


Dont' worry, I got the humor ;p
Posted By: Demoulius Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 12:58 PM
Originally Posted by Sadurian
Originally Posted by Demoulius
Originally Posted by Sadurian
That's true enough. When playing games where I get (for example) three shots and each one has a 75% chance of hitting, I am frustrated that none of them hit. After all, 3 x 75% is 225%, isn't it? ...

Not sure if troll or not? 👀

Thats not how calculating the odds of hitting or missing 3 times works...

Just agreeing that our brains do funny things when we look at odds.

I'm aware of the way odds work, I was pretending otherwise for comic effect. It didn't work.

Humor or sarcasm can be hard to get across with just text 😂

But for anyone whos interested your odds of 3 missing 3 attacks with 75% chance to hit each is 1.56%. So yes. Very unlikely. But not impossible.

Anyone who played tabletop probably has plenty of stories to share of such unlikely bad luck with the dice 🤣

-edit-
Made a booboo with the odds of hitting. But youve got 1.56 chance to miss all 3 attacks in a row. A 42.18% to hit all 3 in a row. a 14,06x3=42.18 chance to hit with 2 attacks and a 4.68x3=14.04 chance to hit with only 1 attack.
Posted By: Zahur Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 01:00 PM
We have two extremes: true randomness and total predictability. If we have lets say 50% to hit and dealing 1-2 damage and the target has 4 HP, we will need about 5 attacks (ranging from 2 to lets say 30) to kill the target. Based on this, we are able to design totally predictable system, when you hit everytime, dealing 1 damage while your target has 5 HP. What system will be more fun? If neither, then pseudo-randomness is solid compromise.
Posted By: Sadurian Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 01:01 PM
Originally Posted by Demoulius
Anyone who played tabletop probably has plenty of stories to share of such unlikely bad luck with the dice 🤣

I'm the guy who can roll 6 sets of stats and get nothing above a 12. I can also miss the important saving throws every. single. time.

But yes, any TT gamer probably has a wealth of such stories to tell.
Posted By: Demoulius Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 01:09 PM
75% chance to hit is needing a 6 and up on a D20 to hit. Adds are in your favour because 15 results hit but still 5 results on that die miss. And sometimes the die simply decide that fun isent allowed frown

Which, incidentily make things are guarranteed to hit very powerfull. Specially at early levels. You cant miss the dieroll if you dont have to roll it wink
Posted By: Dastan McKay Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 02:27 PM
Originally Posted by Zahur
We have two extremes: true randomness and total predictability. If we have lets say 50% to hit and dealing 1-2 damage and the target has 4 HP, we will need about 5 attacks (ranging from 2 to lets say 30) to kill the target. Based on this, we are able to design totally predictable system, when you hit everytime, dealing 1 damage while your target has 5 HP. What system will be more fun? If neither, then pseudo-randomness is solid compromise.

That system breaks when you start to introduce additional effects to damage. Like stuns and other non damaging conditions. And 5e rules are filled with these.
When i played DoS2 a lot of fights were over the moment initiative was shown. Enemies just never got their turn. Doesn't metter that they had a ton of HP. They just were perma-stuned.
Posted By: Sadurian Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 02:49 PM
GURPS (and other systems) use 3d6 for all skills and combat. It gives a more reliable result and means that a person with a reasonable amount of training and experience can be relied upon to hit a target more often than not. Combat becomes less random.

D&D is probably stuck with the d20, though, especially as the whole 'd20 system' thing seems very popular. It means that the die you roll has a more random spread than rolling several dice together. This is just something you have to live with unless you want to design a completely different system.
Posted By: wpmaura Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 03:02 PM
Then they shouldn't of made baldurs gate then. I like dnd combat
Posted By: Limz Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 03:06 PM
Originally Posted by Sadurian
GURPS (and other systems) use 3d6 for all skills and combat. It gives a more reliable result and means that a person with a reasonable amount of training and experience can be relied upon to hit a target more often than not. Combat becomes less random.

D&D is probably stuck with the d20, though, especially as the whole 'd20 system' thing seems very popular. It means that the die you roll has a more random spread than rolling several dice together. This is just something you have to live with unless you want to design a completely different system.


Exalted uses dice pools if I recall correctly which is a good way to expend and manage resources, though I guess you have that with battlemaster's superiority die.

D20 is probably an aspect of table top D&D but not necessarily D&D (lol DDO, Deadly Alliance, books? etc.)

Posted By: Sadurian Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 03:09 PM
I've played dice pool games and I'm not a fan (for several reasons, but this thread isn't about that).

I'm sure that DDO used to use a d20 system. Has it gone in another direction now?
Posted By: Limz Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 03:54 PM
Originally Posted by Sadurian
I've played dice pool games and I'm not a fan (for several reasons, but this thread isn't about that).

I'm sure that DDO used to use a d20 system. Has it gone in another direction now?


If this old thread is any indication then they've made it a fairly minor role: https://www.ddo.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-471065.html?s=ee717d17771bf0c902fb3e4b3bcb0c89

Seems like most D&D systems break at the higher end of things.
Posted By: Dastan McKay Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 04:34 PM
Originally Posted by Limz
Originally Posted by Sadurian
I've played dice pool games and I'm not a fan (for several reasons, but this thread isn't about that).

I'm sure that DDO used to use a d20 system. Has it gone in another direction now?


If this old thread is any indication then they've made it a fairly minor role: https://www.ddo.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-471065.html?s=ee717d17771bf0c902fb3e4b3bcb0c89

Seems like most D&D systems break at the higher end of things.

Pathfinder 2e uses d20 system, but at some point proficiency bonus gets so high the only way to miss is to roll 1. Rogue expertise fill that niche in DnD 5e, but thy got lost in early access
Posted By: Sadurian Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 23/10/20 04:38 PM
Given Pathfinder's development history and raison d'etre, I imagine we'll see D&D ditch the d20 before Pathfinder does.
Originally Posted by CMF
I am playing solasta as we speak, and more satisfying combat is subjective. I am actually not impressed, yet I know a lot are. So this comes down to personal preference.

Do you want a faithful implementation of 5e rules? No, so obviously you won't enjoy it.

You want something akin to DOS3 which you will eventually get, now kindly let DnD be DnD.
Originally Posted by CMF
*Snip*
- Disengage was available, but it took an action so you could not use that and then attack again. BUUUT, you could still just run behind them and attack for a flank. BG3 permits you to move while engaged with mulitple targets to jump behind them and not having to risk an attack of opportunity in order to get a flank on your primary target.


See that right there shows you do not understand 5e at all. There is no "flanking" in Solasta. There is "engaged" which allows the rogue to proc their sneak attack if the enemy is already engaged by someone else. However, in that case the Rogue would be able to use their bonus action to disengage, reposition AND attack. Sorry it become more and more apparent that you are criticising a system you have no understanding of.
Posted By: MuCephei Re: Core DnD Rules combat is garbage. - 26/10/20 09:44 AM
Originally Posted by CrestOfArtorias
Originally Posted by CMF
I am playing solasta as we speak, and more satisfying combat is subjective. I am actually not impressed, yet I know a lot are. So this comes down to personal preference.

Do you want a faithful implementation of 5e rules? No, so obviously you won't enjoy it.

You want something akin to DOS3 which you will eventually get, now kindly let DnD be DnD.


Exactly this, 100% agree. People moaning about BG3 being like D&D and not like DOS

As a response to the haters;

I've seen threads like this on multiple fora 'OMG d20 system is trash for combat',
1) Git gud, L2D&D.
2) Personal preference kiddo.
3) Play another game.

The combat system works, and if you've enjoyed 5e I assume you're more likely to enjoy BG3 too than if you've only played DOS2.
Is it perfect, no. But it has it's charm. But remember just because 'you' don;t like it, does not mean it's trash.
RNG is upsetting to some, but just roll with it, pun intended.

'I have a 90% chance of hitting, but I miss 3 times in a row! OMG so mad' Suck it up buttercup, it happens.


© Larian Studios forums