Things BG3 needs to feel like D&D summary

As the title says,

1) Random encounters
2) Night and day cycle
3) Camping where you are, dungeon, woods etc.
4) No height advantage in combat
5) No enemy HP bloat
6) limited fast travel
7) less consumerbles for trash mobs
8) less ground effects
9) dice rolled attributes on character creation
10) food per character per day (camping requirements aka supplies)
11) More short rests
12) Traps, crafting and setting of (no limit)

That's it pretty much. All with a few threads covering each topic. Anything else? Pretty much the gist ofthe feedback I am reading.

While that would be cool for people super into D&D, I kinda just want to play it as a regular turn based game. I get that Larian Studios are trying to be true to D&D but at the same time thereâ€™s a bunch of gamers that just donâ€™t care how true to D&D it can be. Plus I love looting everything.

I agree with 1, 10, and 11. Maybe also 2. None of the others have much to do with making it feel more like D&D, to me.

These could be summarized/reduced
1.) More Immersive World: includes your #2, 3 and 7

2.) Resource Management: your #6,10,11

3.) Balanced Combat Corrections: your #4, 5, 8

I didn't include your #12 as I haven't seen much conversation regarding it, and personally meh. 5e doesn't have a big focus on traps/crafting honestly.
I didn't include your #9 because I just assume Larian will implement it when the full game releases (and it doesn't fit easily into one of my 3 categories)

Disagree, especially 6 and 10.

Originally Posted by mrfuji3

These could be summarized/reduced
1.) More Immersive World: includes your #2, 3 and 7

2.) Resource Management: your #6,10,11

3.) Balanced Combat Corrections: your #4, 5, 8

I didn't include your #12 as I haven't seen much conversation regarding it, and personally meh. 5e doesn't have a big focus on traps/crafting honestly.
I didn't include your #9 because I just assume Larian will implement it when the full game releases (and it doesn't fit easily into one of my 3 categories)

Shhhh that was my way of being sneaky (12). But yeah I know some are being implemented it was just a summary of the gist I was getting.

Originally Posted by Anthony Talcott

While that would be cool for people super into D&D, I kinda just want to play it as a regular turn based game. I get that Larian Studios are trying to be true to D&D but at the same time thereâ€™s a bunch of gamers that just donâ€™t care how true to D&D it can be. Plus I love looting everything.

Honestly I think people like yourself would prefer the "random encounter" side of things for loot etc. You would need to loot more for food and find uses for other currently useless stuff. Crafting interesting things like bombs and traps. The TT version of D&D is pretty involved and tonnes of loot that would be better represented in a PC game because it is a pain in the arse in the TT.

Originally Posted by Soul-Scar

As the title says,

1) Random encounters
2) Night and day cycle
3) Camping where you are, dungeon, woods etc.
4) No height advantage in combat
5) No enemy HP bloat
6) limited fast travel
7) less consumerbles for trash mobs
8) less ground effects
9) dice rolled attributes on character creation
10) food per character per day (camping requirements aka supplies)
11) More short rests
12) Traps, crafting and setting of (no limit)

That's it pretty much. All with a few threads covering each topic. Anything else? Pretty much the gist ofthe feedback I am reading.

Before all that, I think the first and foremost action to make it feel more D&D is to fix the broken D&D rules: combat actions / bonus actions / interactions, sneak attack, ... but I doubt they'd do it. If that remains, I'm not sure the other points are relevant, Larian has its own vision of the game and we have to stop thinking D&D.

The "no":
1, 2: not necessary
3: yes, but I don't think they can do it anymore
4: if I'm not wrong, height is very much embedded in D&D rules, so I would certainly keep it.
5, 7: not sure what you mean?
9: hell, no! To each their own, I'd say make it an option like in Solasta, possibility to enforce in MP

The "yes":
6: yes, while I understand they want to avoid the player getting bored, those portals are perhaps a tad too much
8: definitely, that's way overdone
10: food when hunting is not possible, but since I don't expect them to change the camp, it's academic
11: well, I'd prefer, but that's really up to the DM
12: not sure what the current implementation is, it would be nice to have them
others: reaction actions

Originally Posted by RumRunner151

Disagree, especially 6 and 10.

Fast travel was broken in dos2 and it is in bg3 too in its current form, I think they should limit it but only on higher difficulties, since I know a lot of casual players will want it no matter what. Being able to steal something and then instantly teleporting away should not be a thing, nor should it be possible to just teleport to safety after pissing off the entire goblin camp. It does just break a lot of systems in the game.

I don't get how random encounters would make it feel more DnD. If you're fighting something on the tabletop it is usually because your DM had that fight sequence planned in advance and set it up to appear like a random fight.

So like running into gnolls. Sure, those gnolls are scripted, but they are done in such a way that if you hadn't played the game (and thus the campaign) before it'd feel like a random encounter.

Similarly night and day don't just happen on the tabletop. Your DM tells you when night falls and when morning comes based on the time passed. Personally I am fine with the current implimentation of "when you're adventuring it is day, then it becomes night when you go to rest" because that is more or less how a DnD campaign usually goes. That said I would like an option to be able to wait for night to engage in a certain fight. Make it a strategic choice. I'd also like the game to feel more like time is actually progressing whenever I go for a long rest.

Short rests should also be more... I dunno. Maybe have the NPCs sit or lay down when you click it and have you wait 10-20 seconds? Right now short rests feel more like an instant refresher button.

The only limit on fast travel we really need is maybe one to prevent us from using it in combat. Should be simple enough. Lore-wise using the waypoint marks could be described as a short ritual rather than an instant spell.

HP bloat, surfaces, etc. have been talked about to death already.

All that said, I 100% agree that we need more options to set our own traps. There's nothing I like more than a good trap. It makes my inner kobold oh so happy.

Originally Posted by SaurianDruid

I don't get how random encounters would make it feel more DnD. If you're fighting something on the tabletop it is usually because your DM had that fight sequence planned in advance and set it up to appear like a random fight.

So like running into gnolls. Sure, those gnolls are scripted, but they are done in such a way that if you hadn't played the game (and thus the campaign) before it'd feel like a random encounter.

I mean, optimally this is kind of how random encounters would work in BG3. Not actually random (the game wouldn't "roll 1d8 gnolls to fight"), but one of ~20-30 set encounters (not all combat!) that would happen.

It would feel more D&D because it would add to the world immersion. We are setting up camp, in the wilderness, in somewhat close proximity to an entire goblin army. Either we have to travel to our safe-ish location, passing multiple goblins and thus risking encounter, or goblins might be able to scout and discover us. It also helps with the resource management point: risk pushing onward or play it safe?

Random encounters - on travelling or rest the DM rolls D20 to see if one of the night time monsters that move in the area come across camp, 1-4 yes 5-20 no. Roll d4 again for encounter. Can be positive aka trader wagon or hostile - raiders, undead or angry mushrooms. These enemies like all other in D&D drop all their equiped stuff and whatever they are carrying.

In D&D TT this would be tasking for the DM to randomize gear on raiders etc. PC game? not so much.

I feel like I am playing a different game than others sometimes.
I've never noticed the AI using consumables.

Originally Posted by Soul-Scar

1) Random encounters
2) Night and day cycle
3) Camping where you are, dungeon, woods etc.
4) No height advantage in combat
5) No enemy HP bloat
6) limited fast travel
7) less consumerbles for trash mobs
8) less ground effects
9) dice rolled attributes on character creation
10) food per character per day (camping requirements aka supplies)
11) More short rests
12) Traps, crafting and setting of (no limit)

1) Might make the game feel more like pokemon than D&D.

4) I agree here. I could see some height advantage, but isn't being able to snipe ogres from the roof while they're completely baffled as to why it's suddenly raining arrows advantage enough?

7) I really like how they've implemented this. It incentivizes you to take down enemies quickly, before they consume all those valuable and lootable potions. In AD&D, treasure was rolled as part of encounter building so that the DM could determine not only what the monsters had, but whether or not they knew what it was. Suddenly that bugbear with a vorpal sword and five healing potions is a lot more intimidating!

8) I agree that there are too many ground affects from low level spells. Chill Touch, Acid Splash, and Firebolt shouldn't work like this. I wonder if this effect from firebolt is an early test of what fireball (and burning hands) should be doing. Fireball affects an entire area, while firebolt affects only what it strikes and does not ignites objects that are "worn or carried." However, it does ignite unattended objects, like a slick of grease on the ground, IF it is aimed at them.

10) I've always hated tracking this in D&D. Partly because no one does it, partly because it's easy to spend your way out of it, and also because it means that when I DM I become the "bean counter" insisting that people track arrows. Worse, it sometimes feels more like Oregon Trail than D&D when everyone does this. It's challenging to make this fun at the table, let alone in a video game.

11) It would be nice if they removed the limit entirely. There's no hard limit to how many short rests you can have in a day (technically, 144 short rests would comprise an entire day, but that's hardly worth tracking).

Yes to all
+ party of 5 or 6
+ more companions
+ identify magic Ãtems

Originally Posted by Soul-Scar

As the title says,

1) Random encounters[
2) Night and day cycle
3) Camping where you are, dungeon, woods etc.
4) No height advantage in combat
5) No enemy HP bloat
6) limited fast travel
7) less consumerbles for trash mobs
8) less ground effects
9) dice rolled attributes on character creation
10) food per character per day (camping requirements aka supplies)
11) More short rests
12) Traps, crafting and setting of (no limit)

1) Random Encounters are often a waste of time and resources. They're difficult to balance, and are largely considered a distraction.
2) This doesn't seem likely. Larian doesn't want to a cosmetic-only night and day cycle, which is the only way that's reasonably possible.
3) They could throw some skins up for different camp locations, that would be nice, but probably not a priority at this stage of EA.
4 & 5) Agreed.
6) Maybe some limitations, but this really depends on a lot of things.
7 & 8) Agreed.
9) I believe this will be coming eventually.
10) No. That's problematic and can lead to blocks if you cannot rest without food and you can't get any.
11) Sure, 2-3.
12) That sounds like it could be complicated or abusable.

Originally Posted by Svalr

I feel like I am playing a different game than others sometimes.
I've never noticed the AI using consumables.

They do

Originally Posted by ned7000

10) I've always hated tracking this in D&D. Partly because no one does it, partly because it's easy to spend your way out of it, and also because it means that when I DM I become the "bean counter" insisting that people track arrows. Worse, it sometimes feels more like Oregon Trail than D&D when everyone does this. It's challenging to make this fun at the table, let alone in a video game.

I agree, tracking supplies in PnP gets super tedious. But in a video game it can be done pretty easily, just have "rations" that you can buy/find. The game automatically keeps track of their weight and how much is used each rest. Not necessarily fun, but depending on the implementation it can be worth the super slight hassle for the gain in immersion and risk/reward decision making.

Originally Posted by ned7000

11) It would be nice if they removed the limit entirely. There's no hard limit to how many short rests you can have in a day (technically, 144 short rests would comprise an entire day, but that's hardly worth tracking).

Short rests are an hour, so you can have a max of 24.
Plus, if you want to gain the healing benefits from a short rest, you have to spend hit die. You only have your level worth of hit die at maximum. So realistically the limit is probably ~<5.

Originally Posted by Stabbey

10) No. That's problematic and can lead to blocks if you cannot rest without food and you can't get any.

Take inspiration from Kingmaker and make camping free if you do it in a town (Grove)? This would obviously require a change to the fast-travel and camping system, removing the stationary in-the-middle-of-nowhere camp...
But yeah, just slapping on a resource requirement to the current camping system might cause problems.

An option to camp overnight in a dungeon with an option to set a guard who does not rest, which removes the chance for an overnight random encounter surprising those asleep, would be cool and add that "chance" element for encounters.

I'm all for the improved realism of carrying food and arrows that need replenished. I always enjoy this added bit of planning. It makes adventures feel like real time is passing, encourages trips back to the main camp or town, and encourages taking stock of supplies in camp.

I think the night time rules in BG III, having it simply be dark when you camp and sleep, is an elegant and ingenious method, and I hope they keep it intact.

Height advantages and ground effects are logical, provide much more tactical consideration, and make the world seem more real. I like it.

Optional dice rolled attributes would be cool.

Traps and crafting them, for rogues, absolutely. Tripwires for camping would be great.

In all the important ways, BG III feels right to me as far as D&D goes. I've played every incarnation of the game since '77. The most important aspects of the game to me are the ability to travel wherever you wish in whatever direction you wish for a sense of real freedom of choice, the ability to creatively approach situations/encounters in different ways and directions, having ONE character that you roleplay as you, and the feeling that npcs are living, breathing beings.

All these things Larian Studio provides in glorious detail, So looking forward to more!

Feels like D&D to me just fine - what makes a game feel like D&D is down to the individual I think

I would agree in everything except 4.

I also think that camp does not completely work, but it is so interlaced with the narrative that will be very difficult to change it. But I would love to have the camp and the long rest mechanic sepparated somehow.
It would also be nice if a short break always had a chance to be attacked by some wandering creature andt to have a warning of a great risk when you want to have a short rest with enemies nearby insted of being prevented from doing it.

1) Random encounters
- Ehh, maybe - if it is rather rare and not that time consuming, fine. If it turns into Pokemon or Final Fantasy, no.
2) Night and day cycle
- Personally don't care. Either is fine.
3) Camping where you are, dungeon, woods etc.
- Agreed.
4) No height advantage in combat
- Mmmmh... Don't have much of an opinion. I do like the idea of tactical spots like height difference though. :x
5) No enemy HP bloat
- Honestly not sure what that is. :x I remain neutral.
6) limited fast travel
- Hmm... Maybe. Depends on how limited.
7) less consumerbles for trash mobs
- Don't really mind, but don't care if it is changed.
8) less ground effects
- I like ground effects though.

BUT! If it is directly opposing to what the spells are supposed to be like (like the firebolt / fireball example by Ned above) - then yes. That should be corrected.
9) dice rolled attributes on character creation
- Don't mind either way.
10) food per character per day (camping requirements aka supplies)
- I'll consider it if you give my ranger the option to fish. xd Please no arrow-supply though. q _ q
11) More short rests
- Don't mind either way.
12) Traps, crafting and setting of (no limit)
- Could be fun as long as it is not overwhelming. :x

Originally Posted by Soul-Scar

As the title says,

1) Random encounters
2) Night and day cycle
3) Camping where you are, dungeon, woods etc.
4) No height advantage in combat
5) No enemy HP bloat
6) limited fast travel
7) less consumerbles for trash mobs
8) less ground effects
9) dice rolled attributes on character creation
10) food per character per day (camping requirements aka supplies)
11) More short rests
12) Traps, crafting and setting of (no limit)

That's it pretty much. All with a few threads covering each topic. Anything else? Pretty much the gist ofthe feedback I am reading.

1. only if its optional
2. I would love this but technically speaking its not a must for d&d
3. Yes
4. No - i dont understand what so many have against height advantage - seems realistic enough to me
5. dont mind, what ever works for balance best
6. could someone explain what exactly do you have in mind when you talk about limiting fast travel?
7. Yes
8. less, but they should still have them since its fun when not over used
9. This was already confirmed by swen as something that's happening so its pointless requesting it here
10. Yes
11. Yes
12. dont mind, what ever works

Originally Posted by Balls

An option to camp overnight in a dungeon with an option to set a guard who does not rest, which removes the chance for an overnight random encounter surprising those asleep, would be cool and add that "chance" element for encounters.

I'm all for the improved realism of carrying food and arrows that need replenished. I always enjoy this added bit of planning. It makes adventures feel like real time is passing, encourages trips back to the main camp or town, and encourages taking stock of supplies in camp.

I think the night time rules in BG III, having it simply be dark when you camp and sleep, is an elegant and ingenious method, and I hope they keep it intact.

Height advantages and ground effects are logical, provide much more tactical consideration, and make the world seem more real. I like it.

Optional dice rolled attributes would be cool.

Traps and crafting them, for rogues, absolutely. Tripwires for camping would be great.

In all the important ways, BG III feels right to me as far as D&D goes. I've played every incarnation of the game since '77. The most important aspects of the game to me are the ability to travel wherever you wish in whatever direction you wish for a sense of real freedom of choice, the ability to creatively approach situations/encounters in different ways and directions, having ONE character that you roleplay as you, and the feeling that npcs are living, breathing beings.

All these things Larian Studio provides in glorious detail, So looking forward to more!

I appreciate your positivity.

I think players don't understand how advantages are so powerful in D&D and should be something you will spend resources on to get, not only some vertical movement you can easily set up before even combat starts.

That's why I think height shouldn't be an advantage. It's too powerful, a +1 or +2 flat bonus on a single roll would be much better and less impactful.

Just some clarification on the "summary" part of the original post. This isn't "my" specific summary but a gist of about 100 threads made from others (myself included however) regarding D&D.

I accept that many of these exceptions could be subject to difficulty setting or official mods like what Larian did in DOS2. The HP bloat is reference to the artificially high hit points most creatures and races have been given, especially goblins. Goblins are a pain because they swarm you in much higher numbers BUT they have really low HP like 4-8 unless you get a boss. You can realistically kill 5 goblins with a lv 3 magic missile but there maybe 20 of them. I can understand the HP bloat to prevent overly long turns and I personally don't care. I don't even want spells to be artificially scaled to do more damage as some have hinted at because this will just cause further balance issues.

Originally Posted by Nyanko

I think players don't understand how advantages are so powerful in D&D and should be something you will spend resources on to get, not only some vertical movement you can easily set up before even combat starts.

That's why I think height shouldn't be an advantage. It's too powerful, a +1 or +2 flat bonus on a single roll would be much better and less impactful.

This I do care about and the solution of a +1+2 seems like a good solution. Advantage is REALLY powerful and is a feature of many class feats. These height and backstab advantages are representitive of level 16+ characters in D&D with absolutely no downsides. I can accept "a bonus" from being 6 inches higher than someone but being slightly higher up doesn't give a double whammy advantage - you disadvantage - them + accuracy + backstab for all classes including spellcasters. This single mechanic throws the 5e rule book out the window regardling class benefits.

Just like the jump disengage + action. If you disengage an enemy you don't get to attack afterwards, that is why melee classes get close for AOO to stop archers/spellcasters. Classes like rogue get the ability to disengage as a bonus action as part of their kit, as every class can do this currently the rogue is pointless. I missed this from the list as this is a big deal.

The trap (12) was me being cheeky. Traps aren't a big thing in 5e but were in previous editions, I just want the ability to trap doors while progressing though a dungeon to prevent sneakies ganking you from behind. Also placing traps around camp os you don't get ambushed while sleeping that you collect in the morning. Just little things that add to "realism". Realism being an immersion thing, D&D is a game of the imagination.

I agree for some parts, for some others i dont. But i think the main reason is not one or two things. The main reason, this does not feel like DnD for the most part to me is, the completely broken combat system.
And take "broken" with a grain of salt. You can always rebalance changes by adjusting opponents. What larian did by blasting enemies health pools to stupid ammounts.
What bugs me, is that you get thrown at with features that in DnD are highly valuable and sometimes hard to achieve.
As explained in other thread, you basicly have advantage as a passive skill. Its harder not to have advantage, then to have advantage right now, as any melee char gets it for free 99% of the time. And any ranged char with decent movement aswell. What you end up with is fights, where your hitrate is constantly in the high 80s or above. Speaking D20 you generally hit on like a 4 or 5. Combine that with consistent damage output that does not require hitrolls (the hugely buffed cantrips and surface effects) and you can basicly very precisly calculate the outcome of any given option. But in DnD, especially in low level DnD, part of the charm is, that most of the time you have a chance of failure. To me thats the main reason it does not feel like DnD right now, and thats a combination of many homebrew larian rules, that heavily^10 impact the games balance.

for your points:

Originally Posted by Soul-Scar

As the title says,

1) Random encounters
=> Some like them, some do not. I generally like them in TT games, because the DM can always decide weather a RE would be a fun thing right now or not. I liked pathfinder kingmakers aproach. basicly on every rest outside and travel, you get a small chance of RE. Wich you can work against by camouflaging your camp, spotting the enemy ahead of time and sneakin through etc.
2) Night and day cycle
=> Would not be a must for me. Larian did very well working with lighting in dungeons. So you have many moments where darfvision or light spells come into play.
3) Camping where you are, dungeon, woods etc.
=> Its kind of a hard sell. Though i see where you are coming from, the game cannot react as a DM can. To me it feels also bonkers to rest close to a enemy fortress you attacked and not yet cleared and get away with it. or only get a RE. but thats the closest we got to "realistic" camping in any other pen and paper based game. Also i think the idea of the story driving camp was beautiful. I can very much live with that.
4) No height advantage in combat
=> sign
5) No enemy HP bloat
=> sign, as it would not be necessary if they rebalance closer to DnD.
6) limited fast travel
=> meh. I dont wanna run around for ages. On the tabletop players also call the location they wanna go, and they basicly "fast travel" there, unless something happens on the way. like if im in baldurs gate and want to go to elfsong, i dont roleplay the way. the PCs just get there.
7) less consumerbles for trash mobs
=> yeah, especially fire arrows and sht like that on simple goblins.
8) less ground effects
=sign
9) dice rolled attributes on character creation
=> disapprove. They used the buying mechanic from DnD and i like that. Its also easier to balance the game, as a player may get really nice rolls on the statline (or cheese it by tryin over and over again), and then their game experience might suffer bc they roflstomp everything, especially on low levels. perhaps as option if one likes it. but also this would not increase the "DnD" feeling. I think most ppl nowadays play pointbuy or stat-array systems. rolling abilities is oldskl.
10) food per character per day (camping requirements aka supplies)
=> again. does not change the "DnD" feeling for me. But would be a good way to limit camp cheesing, like kingmaker did it. also remove healing from food. like... "i am a mighty godly blessed cleric, i can heal you." "nah, fk right of, i have got a butcher, he heals more".
11) More short rests
=>sign
12) Traps, crafting and setting of (no limit)
=> dont rly care in terms of "DnD feeling".

Originally Posted by Soul-Scar

As the title says,

1) Random encounters
2) Night and day cycle
3) Camping where you are, dungeon, woods etc.
4) No height advantage in combat
5) No enemy HP bloat
6) limited fast travel
7) less consumerbles for trash mobs
8) less ground effects
9) dice rolled attributes on character creation
10) food per character per day (camping requirements aka supplies)
11) More short rests
12) Traps, crafting and setting of (no limit)

Agree with almost all of that with some modifications.

2. NIGHT/DAY CYCLE. Essential. Not having one worked in DOS, but it detracts too much from the game in BG3 for resting mechanics and story reasons. The original series had it too, so it feels like a big step down. Also ties into random encounters.

4. ADVANTAGE FLANKING/HIGHER GROUND: Remove as this makes combat too easy and DESTROYS class balance (martial classes buffed so much), but incentivise tactical movement to make combat more interesting. My suggestion:
Flanking: +1 (flank) or +2 attack (back).
Higher ground: Grant half cover (+2 AC/dex saves) to simulate the defensible aspect of higher ground. Also remove disadvantage on ranged attack roll vs. prone target on lower ground (unrealistic that a prone target is harder to hit when shooting down at them when an erect target in some cases would be a much smaller/harder target).

7. LESS LOOT: Less focus on items in general not only consumables. Right now it is excessive, character defining and diminishes focus on the character. It is also unrealistic and incentivise pack-mule looting which feels like a compulsive chore. Boring!

9. ROLLING ABILITY SCORES: Yes please. Apparently already decided that this will be implemented: https://twinfinite.net/2020/02/baldurs-gate-3-interview/

11. REST MECHANIC: Both short and long rest mechanics needs an overhaul. Warlocks are strongly nerfed vs. other casters by much too permissive long rest.

12. TRAPS: No need to further exacerbate the problem with way too many elemental effects/barrelmancy raised in 8). This is another relative buff to martial classes and furthers the imbalance.

Originally Posted by Soul-Scar

As the title says,

1) Random encounters
2) Night and day cycle
3) Camping where you are, dungeon, woods etc.
4) No height advantage in combat
5) No enemy HP bloat
6) limited fast travel
7) less consumerbles for trash mobs
8) less ground effects
9) dice rolled attributes on character creation
10) food per character per day (camping requirements aka supplies)
11) More short rests
12) Traps, crafting and setting of (no limit)

1) No, they don't add anything meaningful to the game, just slow down your story progression
2) Maybe? Doesn't really matter to me - I'd rather have a solid schedule for NPC's during the day than split the effort in between night/day
3) No, although I hope the camp will follow us through the game, changing depending how far in the story we progressed.
4) Maybe? I don't mind advantage or +/- static value, but verticality should have a mechanical impact considering its prominence in BG3
5) Don't think there is that much bloat - sure the goblins have it, but treat them as re-skinned bandits. Gnolls, bugbears and other creatures seem more inline with their MM counterparts.
6) Hard No - why waste my irl time to walk through non-story content. You don't narrate every step of your party in 5e, so you effectively fast travel.
7) Maybe? Don't think the are that much of a pain.
8) Ground effects are fine, maybe a bit less of them. Granted, ray of frost shouldn't just create a ice surface, but otherwise I am ok with it.
9) Hard No - how do you plan to balance the game? A DM can scale encounters on if your PC rolled high/low stats, the game can't. And if you want to be powerful - lower the difficulty.
10) No, extra busy work
11) Yes, 2 at least
12) No, in 5e your traps are limited only by your creativity, whereas in BG3 they are limited by what the devs put in the game. So why have something that can never compare to pnp.

Originally Posted by Soul-Scar

As the title says,

1) Random encounters
2) Night and day cycle
3) Camping where you are, dungeon, woods etc.
4) No height advantage in combat
5) No enemy HP bloat
6) limited fast travel
7) less consumerbles for trash mobs
8) less ground effects
9) dice rolled attributes on character creation
10) food per character per day (camping requirements aka supplies)
11) More short rests
12) Traps, crafting and setting of (no limit)

That's it pretty much. All with a few threads covering each topic. Anything else? Pretty much the gist ofthe feedback I am reading.

1) It's not fun getting rekt by a random encouter. Sure they could be piss easy but what would be the point then?
2) Not necessary but good to have nevertheless
3) Yes, makes sense
4) Height should only provide better line of sight, not give you any other advantage. Abusing shoves is one thing but advantage being the only reliable way how to deal damage is too much.
5) Agreed, there is no reason why a lvl 4 character shouldn't be able to oneshot a basic goblin
6) How limited? Having to walk everywhere is not fun
7) Yes, I don't want my inventory to be be cluttered with that stuff
8) Ground effects should only appear occasionaly or created by certain spells, the game uses them way too much atm
9) Sure why not
10) I don't see any point, how is that fun?
11) Agreed, the game should definitely be more generous with short rests, I'm thinking atleast 3 per day
12) I don't personally see any appeal in that kind of gameplay, but if there is enough demand then sure why not

Originally Posted by Soul-Scar

As the title says,

1) Random encounters
2) Night and day cycle
3) Camping where you are, dungeon, woods etc.
4) No height advantage in combat
5) No enemy HP bloat
6) limited fast travel
7) less consumerbles for trash mobs
8) less ground effects
9) dice rolled attributes on character creation
10) food per character per day (camping requirements aka supplies)
11) More short rests
12) Traps, crafting and setting of (no limit).

1) Maybe. If they are meaningful and maybe tied into resting in an unsafe area. Otherwise No
2) Maybe. If it is again tied into resting,
3) Perhaps the environment of the camp can change, and likelihood of random encounters
4) 100%. King of the hill is terrible. I would throw in backstab just for being behind, flanked is better
5) 100%. No bloat and put AC back to intended. Allow people to miss and give spells back their power.
6) Don't like this one. Maybe fast travel takes up more of the day, or has a chance for random encounter.
7) Less consumable in general. Food is abundant OP to heal reducing the need for Health potions. The is so many special arrows, scrolls, potions even at level 1-4, just so abundant and makes getting things mundane. Also limit what special arrows/potions/spell slots enemies have. Give special enemy these special items and a limited amount, not every day goblins
8) 100%. This is not DOS, this is BG3 and D&D 5e. Slipping on ice ending your turn. Firebolt dealing extra 3d4 fire damage. These should be limited to the higher end spells that are meant to dictate the battlefield. Also limit the amount of barrels, don't let PCs stack them up next to enemies to trivialize combat.
9) Sure. Let people create however they want. You can even let people manually put in scores up to 20 if they want to play gods.
10) Yes. As above remove food. Or tie it to camping. Don't make them mini infinite health potions.
11) I agree if this is meant to be more MEANINGFUL short rests... Right now there is no point because you can Long Rest whenever and wherever. This buffs things that reset on long rest and nerfs anything that resets on short rest. There needs to be a system in place to limit Long Rests!

This is just the tip of the iceberg. Push is too strong and a bonus action. Disengage needs to be a separate an action from jump. Jump has to be free, not disengage and take up/require movement. So much more!

Pointless procedurally generated random encounters would really go a long way to making the game feel more like a re-loading simulator

The way I would solve "save scumming to avoid random encounters on rest" is this: The roll for the NEXT rest's random encounter happens right after you rest. You have no idea whether or not there will be a random encounter next time, until you actually rest. And when you do, it's too late to save scum it, since the roll already happened long ago.

But then you have simply made your procedurally generated pointless random encounters unavoidable, which seems like a you have made your game worse, rather than better.

Originally Posted by Soul-Scar

As the title says,

1) Random encounters
2) Night and day cycle
3) Camping where you are, dungeon, woods etc.
4) No height advantage in combat
5) No enemy HP bloat
6) limited fast travel
7) less consumerbles for trash mobs
8) less ground effects
9) dice rolled attributes on character creation
10) food per character per day (camping requirements aka supplies)
11) More short rests
12) Traps, crafting and setting of (no limit)

1) Only for trying to rest in an unsafe place... Resting is too easy right now. 5ed is balance around multiple encounters between rests. Casters need this to keep them from burning every spell every fight. Instant teleport to a safe place to rest is not DnD. Your DM !@#$ing over your careful plans to try to rest in the dungeon is!!
2) don't care
3) Yes, and this goes with #1.
4) Please! google height advantage... it effects arrow range/power, and endurance from having to run up a hill and then fight. It has no impact on a fire bolt, or most other spells.
5) Please. It breaks balance in game and nerfs casters.
6) Having to walk to the nearest gate to use them would be fine..
7) I have not noticed this as an issue yet.
8) Yes tone it down please and base it on DnD things instead of DOS2 things. But I love the potential it has for say cone of cold, and fire ball...
9) No thanks. DnD is based on point buy now generally. And if your DM does stat rolls then they only let you roll once... How is a video game only gonna let you roll once? re-rolling till your get three 18s is not DnD, but it is bad game design.
10) don't care.
11) Yes - this is currently a nerf to warlocks.
12) don't care.

I would say 6) limited fast travel make sense if there is a possibility of 1) Random encounters, if not it is just a total waste of time.
I have another 13th point:
- Make the story focused on the player character, not on the Larian's NPC, it is not Larian who are playing the game, it's us. (sure they can if they want to

)

Originally Posted by Soul-Scar

As the title says,

1) Random encounters
2) Night and day cycle
3) Camping where you are, dungeon, woods etc.
4) No height advantage in combat
5) No enemy HP bloat
6) limited fast travel
7) less consumerbles for trash mobs
8) less ground effects
9) dice rolled attributes on character creation
10) food per character per day (camping requirements aka supplies)
11) More short rests
12) Traps, crafting and setting of (no limit)

That's it pretty much. All with a few threads covering each topic. Anything else? Pretty much the gist of the feedback I am reading.

Wait; do you guys not use ground hazards; consumable and height advantage in your table top games?

i agree with some of the other points though.

I think itâ€™s quite odd how a lot of people kinda forget that many of the mechanics in the game - you donâ€™t need to use !
Donâ€™t like barrels, donâ€™t use em, donâ€™t like food - donâ€™t eat it, think xyz build is to overpowered donâ€™t use it....
The game is pitching at a wide audience & there is a heap of choice - play it your own way & enjoy it - remember not all things in game were designed with just a particular individual in mind.

Originally Posted by Soul-Scar

As the title says,

1) Random encounters
2) Night and day cycle
3) Camping where you are, dungeon, woods etc.
4) No height advantage in combat
5) No enemy HP bloat
6) limited fast travel
7) less consumerbles for trash mobs
8) less ground effects
9) dice rolled attributes on character creation
10) food per character per day (camping requirements aka supplies)
11) More short rests
12) Traps, crafting and setting of (no limit)

That's it pretty much. All with a few threads covering each topic. Anything else? Pretty much the gist ofthe feedback I am reading.

1) Yes. Make the world feel dangerous, alive and less scripted.
2) Yes. I want to steal things, do shady deals and hunt vampires at night. Also, see 1.
3) Yes. Immersion. Let me camp in the Blighted Town after it has been cleared. Or use an abandoned camp site. Or camp with the Tieflings at the Druid Grove.
4) Less height advantage in combat. The full advantage/disadvantage swing is way too much. As is constantly shoving your opponents down. I want to play D&D, not king of the hill.
5) Use D&D stats for monsters
6) Yes, please get rid of free magic teleportation to camp and a rune teleportation system in the game world that is clearly made for the player instead of anyone in Faerun. Immersion again, fourth wall.
7) Yes. And less exploding magic arrows period.
8) Yes. They are annoying and nerf concentration spells to oblivion. Much too abundant.
9) Doesn't work in a crpg where you just roll until you get uber stats. Point of rolling is that you do it once.
10) Long rest should have a gold tax. Solasta has rations and I think it's more tedious than fun.
11) Two or three
12) -

Originally Posted by Soul-Scar

As the title says,

1) Random encounters
2) Night and day cycle
3) Camping where you are, dungeon, woods etc.
4) No height advantage in combat
5) No enemy HP bloat
[...]

Let's re-iterate differently. I mentioned the ruleset, but maybe it's something else. What do you mean exactly by "feel like D&D"? What's your reference, another D&D game, a tabletop game you've played (and that will depend a lot on the DM's style...), the ruleset as described in the Player's Handbook?

Because this question is very subjective if you don't set the reference, and you'll get a different answer from everyone.

Originally Posted by Redglyph

Originally Posted by Soul-Scar

As the title says,

1) Random encounters
2) Night and day cycle
3) Camping where you are, dungeon, woods etc.
4) No height advantage in combat
5) No enemy HP bloat
[...]

Let's re-iterate differently. I mentioned the ruleset, but maybe it's something else. What do you mean exactly by "feel like D&D"? What's your reference, another D&D game, a tabletop game you've played (and that will depend a lot on the DM's style...), the ruleset as described in the Player's Handbook?

Because this question is very subjective if you don't set the reference, and you'll get a different answer from everyone.

Feel like D&D - Ever changing world with random events, non-static NPC's that do normal stuff not stand about like lemons doing the same animation for eternity. Make the world "feel" alive and lived in. Move dead bodies or have wild animals eat them or something. The ability to talk to every object isn't realistic, who does that? "Realistic" combat that doesn't envolve throwing 600lb barrels of gunpowder 80 feet and a world that doesn't literally explode where ever you go. Hey look the enemy is coming, quick climb a tree, stack some boxes, stand on a single step we need to be at least 6 inches higher to win. That type of thing.

BG1&2 "felt" like D&D. ToEE "felt" like D&D. NWN "felt" like D&D. BG3 does not, not because of the divinity engine either. It doesn't "feel" like D&D because it isn't. BG was released 22 years ago, even though it is dated as f it still gives you the impression of a dynamic world in the D&D universe. After 22 years you expect to move forward not slap a lick of a paint on DDOS2 and call it BG3.

Originally Posted by Tarorn

I think itâ€™s quite odd how a lot of people kinda forget that many of the mechanics in the game - you donâ€™t need to use !
Donâ€™t like barrels, donâ€™t use em, donâ€™t like food - donâ€™t eat it, think xyz build is to overpowered donâ€™t use it....
The game is pitching at a wide audience & there is a heap of choice - play it your own way & enjoy it - remember not all things in game were designed with just a particular individual in mind.

Why would we need any rules then? Why not have infinite actions? Why not infinite spell slots? Don't like it, don't use it. Why have any sort of difficulty? A player could choose to limit himself to not using certain mechanics to make it more challenging.

Games have rules for a reason. Not using an obviously effective mechanic doesn't feel like choosing your playstyle, it feels like shooting yourself in the foot to fix the gameplay.

There are two main problems to this:
- "a player can just not do it" is a shitty excuse for bad game balance
- a game is made up from mechanics and mechanics create a certain "gameplay type/environment" and a certain "feel/tone"; a grounded tactical game feels completely different from a game overloaded with explosions, ground effects and what have you; it also strains believability

Originally Posted by Uncle Lester

Originally Posted by Tarorn

I think itâ€™s quite odd how a lot of people kinda forget that many of the mechanics in the game - you donâ€™t need to use !
Donâ€™t like barrels, donâ€™t use em, donâ€™t like food - donâ€™t eat it, think xyz build is to overpowered donâ€™t use it....
The game is pitching at a wide audience & there is a heap of choice - play it your own way & enjoy it - remember not all things in game were designed with just a particular individual in mind.

Why would we need any rules then? Why not have infinite actions? Why not infinite spell slots? Don't like it, don't use it. Why have any sort of difficulty? A player could choose to limit himself to not using certain mechanics to make it more challenging.

Games have rules for a reason. Not using an obviously effective mechanic doesn't feel like choosing your playstyle, it feels like shooting yourself in the foot to fix the gameplay.

There are two main problems to this:
- "a player can just not do it" is a shitty excuse for bad game balance
- a game is made up from mechanics and mechanics create a certain "gameplay type/environment" and a certain "feel/tone"; a grounded tactical game feels completely different from a game overloaded with explosions, ground effects and what have you; it also strains believability

I second this. A game is not supposed to be a challenge against yourself but a challenge against mechanics set by the game rules. And it's even more so the case as it's a multiplayer game. Rules have to be the same for everyone to be a fair and fun experience.

Imagine if the chess championship organizers were stating: "Ok from now on, you can move the pieces any way you want. But if you want more difficulty, you can keep the standard moves". It would become such a mess.

Originally Posted by Nyanko

Originally Posted by Uncle Lester

Originally Posted by Tarorn

I think itâ€™s quite odd how a lot of people kinda forget that many of the mechanics in the game - you donâ€™t need to use !
Donâ€™t like barrels, donâ€™t use em, donâ€™t like food - donâ€™t eat it, think xyz build is to overpowered donâ€™t use it....
The game is pitching at a wide audience & there is a heap of choice - play it your own way & enjoy it - remember not all things in game were designed with just a particular individual in mind.

Why would we need any rules then? Why not have infinite actions? Why not infinite spell slots? Don't like it, don't use it. Why have any sort of difficulty? A player could choose to limit himself to not using certain mechanics to make it more challenging.

Games have rules for a reason. Not using an obviously effective mechanic doesn't feel like choosing your playstyle, it feels like shooting yourself in the foot to fix the gameplay.

There are two main problems to this:
- "a player can just not do it" is a shitty excuse for bad game balance
- a game is made up from mechanics and mechanics create a certain "gameplay type/environment" and a certain "feel/tone"; a grounded tactical game feels completely different from a game overloaded with explosions, ground effects and what have you; it also strains believability

I second this. A game is not supposed to be a challenge against yourself but a challenge against mechanics set by the game rules. And it's even more so the case as it's a multiplayer game. Rules have to be the same for everyone to be a fair and fun experience.

Imagine if the chess championship organizers were stating: "Ok from now on, you can move the pieces any way you want. But if you want more difficulty, you can keep the standard moves". It would become such a mess.

Pawn takes pawn - checkamate in one move lol. Good analogy

.

I have exactly this discussion in another thread. By flaging a bad game design an optional and you-don't-need-to-use-it is very weak argument, invalidating existence of rules at all. This is Player vs Environment (PvE) type of game, where you are playing against the game, not against other players and certainly not against yourself.

And to the topic question, did really nobody mention painted and possibly custom portraits? And I would love them on the right side of the screen too, haha.

Mostly agreed with the random encounters. I do recall when in Fallout 2 the topic was related to a mission
a) You helped and killed a bad guy.
b) At a random point the brothers come in 3 encounters and hunt you.

Can be done via random creatures or also adventuring parties... could be triggered upon rest and easily made optional. Only thing is that these should not happen to often...

Regarding random encounters in BG2 I especially liked when you met Drizzt and when you met a group of adventurers who impersonate your group.

Oh and we certainly need to hear: You must gather your party before venturing forth.

Originally Posted by Uncle Lester

Games have rules for a reason. Not using an obviously effective mechanic doesn't feel like choosing your playstyle, it feels like shooting yourself in the foot to fix the gameplay.

There are two main problems to this:
- "a player can just not do it" is a shitty excuse for bad game balance
- a game is made up from mechanics and mechanics create a certain "gameplay type/environment" and a certain "feel/tone"; a grounded tactical game feels completely different from a game overloaded with explosions, ground effects and what have you; it also strains believability

Completely agree. Rules and restrictions MAKE the game. I want to play D&D with a DM telling me what I can and can't do. I don't want to be my own DM.