Larian Studios
To begin with, I know this idea is more suited for MOD than game suggestion.

Anyhow, it's not hard to agree that level 1-4 characters surviving in an environment full of Mindflayers, Red Dragons, Hell, Underdark, not to mention a level 1 archmage NPC, level 5 archdruid... (ridiculous is the only description I can give)

For the sake of (lore) coherence alone, the starting levels should be way higher (or given a choice for player), along with adjusting monster levels to be more "realistic".

The way I see it is the beginning of the game will be filled with NPC/monsters with lower levels (from the bandits to the goblin and gnolls encounters) then their levels would increase to match the player's level (hag and Gith patrol etc.)
I've made this suggestion as well. Other than a side conversation Wyll has with Gale about feeling weaker than he used to be, there's no mention why we're all level 1 given the background each of the companions has. It feels like we should be several levels higher. Or at least as part of the opening sequence, show part of our life force being sucked out or something more obvious on why we're starting out from scratch.
Umm, no, fully disagree.
You should work for every level you obtain, period.
And getting to level 2 is cake. 3 is not hard at all, and 4 is not hard at all, just takes a little more time. I would expect that same for each level afterwards.
But you want to start at level 10? How about Larian just give us God mode?
I do love to overpower bosses (it's the only way I can overcome both my really bad coordination and luck in dice rolls). Even in my first run it was an easy tasks. In my second run I reached level 4th without even finish the Thiefling/Goblins quests.

Obviously if you aim to reckless attack the goblin bosses, the pack of gnolls, the Hag, the minotaurs, you'll get flattened in a blink of the eye.

So, no. There's no need to have an higher starting level. (And I say this as a casual player who does not strategize on wich position make the pary members take, what order to use spells, but one that run in the enemy and just start hitting, and as a player who enjoy a easy ride).
Originally Posted by bullse
But you want to start at level 10? How about Larian just give us God mode?

NWN1 - HOTU has you starting at lv 15.
NWN2 - MOTB I beieve thta you start at lv 18(not sure)
BG2 - Has you starting around lv 7~8 (different classes required different XP to level up on 2e)

None of then give "God mode".
Levels in a videogame will differ from levels in a tabletop game.
That is not immersion breaking and the encounters are designed to grow in challenge over the cause of the game.
Just like in any other game.

Looking at familiar numbers being different is of no use. Lets focus on the big picture rather.

Easy for me to say maybe.
I am not a player of the "usual D&D".
But I must say I find the concept of certain beings bound to certain levels pretty uncreative, lazy and meaningless.

There is no reason a normal Waitress cannot kill any other Mindflayer if said squiddy does not see the femme fatale coming from behind with a Knife in her hand and she sinks the blade hilt-deep into its neck.
" B-but the challenge rating, th-the numbers, th-th... "
Dude they are just a wierd form of monster-mutation Humanoids and their armors looks like sh°°. grin

Their biggest defense are their psionic abilitys. Slip by that and they are WEAKLINGS.
Look how much they sweated when entering Avernus. Mindflayers too cannot escape the law of positioning. And their positioning was trash. grin


Even so, the Mindflayers are powerful in contrast to our starting characters.
So their glamour of might and power is well preserved I think.
Originally Posted by bullse
Umm, no, fully disagree.
You should work for every level you obtain, period.
And getting to level 2 is cake. 3 is not hard at all, and 4 is not hard at all, just takes a little more time. I would expect that same for each level afterwards.
But you want to start at level 10? How about Larian just give us God mode?

If you want to start at level 1, have beginner adventurers as characters and not vampires and chosen.
Originally Posted by SorcererVictor
Originally Posted by bullse
But you want to start at level 10? How about Larian just give us God mode?

NWN1 - HOTU has you starting at lv 15.
NWN2 - MOTB I beieve thta you start at lv 18(not sure)
BG2 - Has you starting around lv 7~8 (different classes required different XP to level up on 2e)

None of then give "God mode".

All the games you cited were sequels and/or expensions that had a previous game that you should/could play before playing that one. BG3 stands on its own.
Originally Posted by Ixal
Originally Posted by bullse
Umm, no, fully disagree.
You should work for every level you obtain, period.
And getting to level 2 is cake. 3 is not hard at all, and 4 is not hard at all, just takes a little more time. I would expect that same for each level afterwards.
But you want to start at level 10? How about Larian just give us God mode?

If you want to start at level 1, have beginner adventurers as characters and not vampires and chosen.


Astarion: not a full flegged vampire but a minion who was enslaved and tortured by his master until he was kidnapped by the ones that are diseminating tadpoles all around. Pretty sure a master vampire woudn't allow a toy he uses to please his own sadism to rise level [All things that came from the game back story of the pale elf]

Gale: he fuc*ed up the weave causing Mystral to abandon him, him to become unstable necrotic nuclear bomb who needs powerful artifacts to not explode, and he admitt how his meddling with the weave has costs him his might and his powers [again all in the game]

Wyll: he has a conflictual relationship woth his patron, furthermore said pathron has been kidnapped possibly by the culprits that are messing with netherese magic to make the tadpoles something able to resist the habilities of an arch druid and a powerful hag, again he complains how now, with the tie to his patron weakened, his powers are far from those that allow him to adventur and gain the name of Th blade of frontiers.

Laez'el: she is not special in anyway, she is a gith with due arrogance but we get that she is not so much when the githaky patrol is finally found, the leader of the patrol treats her like a low rank.

Shadowheart: her memories have been suppressed, what could made her forget part of her training [on her I don't know much because the way my toons act make her to close on hersef and not to open about her history]

The player character: it has a custom background so its up to you to decide why they are at level one.


From the facts above I don't get the complaining about the levels, nor from a combat point, nor from a narrative point of view. Indeed in both cases there's a solid case for the party starting at level one (in one case is how easy is to get to a level you can fight th ebosses easily, in the second case there are narrative reasons of why the companions are low level instead of powerful like the seasoned adventurers they are).
A vampire spawn is still a challenge 5 monster with build in regeneration, ect.
And Gale still would have all the knowledge he gained as chosen and as he can still cast magic at all he still would have his full spellcasting ability which would be a lot higher than level 1. Arcane magic is different from divine magic where the deity has to give you each spell.
From a game design standpoint, starting at level 1 (or possibly 2 or 3) makes a lot of sense. You start out without a lot of decisions while you're learning the basic mechanics of the game. As you level up (quickly, at first), you get to make choices about how you grow and add more abilities/spells depending on your choices. It's easy to understand these new abilities and spells because you're learning one or two at a time. The tools are simple, but that doesn't mean that they aren't interesting.

On the other hand, if you're starting at e.g. level 7, you have to make a ton of decisions right out of the gate, before you even understand how to play the game. A level 7 wizard has to choose 4 cantrips and 12 spells and an arcane tradition without having a good way to evaluate the differences between them. You can have defaults, but that doesn't help you when combat comes around and you have to choose between spells and cantrips or understand how spell slots work and why you might choose to upcast.

I get that people want to feel powerful. Folks who already know D&D and/or RPG video games (and these forums certainly select for that, by their nature) might feel comfortable bypassing that early learning. But when we hit release and the player base gets much wider, a lot of people are going to get frustrated and overwhelmed when you throw them in the deep end with a ton of options and insufficient experience to weigh those options.
I don't like the idea of a beginning at level 10.
Level 10 characters are totally different in comparison with lvl 1. They are OP, have many features, powerfull spells, abilities and proficiencies.
They also had chosen their subclasses...

We have to start at level 1 to feel this character is pur character, to learn how the game/classes works and to feel out progression from no one to hero.

On the other hand, I hate what you describe and have the same feeling about the consistency of the experience.

I agree with your statement but not with the solution.
Anyway nothing about this will change so talking about this is not constructive (I don't mean that you shouldn't of course... But I personnaly won't write lines and lines about something that is totally definitive)
And I want a starting character level of 40. I would be a better God for Minthara than the Absolute.

And this Shadow Heart, if she pisses me off I'll just kill Shar. This will force her to be more obedient.
Originally Posted by grysqrl
a lot of people are going to get frustrated and overwhelmed when you throw them in the deep end with a ton of options and insufficient experience to weigh those options.



[Linked Image from res.cloudinary.com]
Originally Posted by Gt27mustang
Originally Posted by SorcererVictor
Originally Posted by bullse
But you want to start at level 10? How about Larian just give us God mode?

NWN1 - HOTU has you starting at lv 15.
NWN2 - MOTB I beieve thta you start at lv 18(not sure)
BG2 - Has you starting around lv 7~8 (different classes required different XP to level up on 2e)

None of then give "God mode".

All the games you cited were sequels and/or expensions that had a previous game that you should/could play before playing that one. BG3 stands on its own.
You are blatantly wrong. By definition, BG THREE is a sequel to BG1 and BG2.

I fully agree with the OP and have made this exact point myself some months ago. The starting point of this game is completely unrealistic. As someone else mentioned in another forum, BG3 is attempting to recreate the player experience of playing BG2, but without BG1 ever having existed. Just as it would've been utterly ridiculous for a bunch of level 1 characters to awaken in Irenicus's dungeon in BG2, so too it is equally ridiculous for a bunch of level 1 characters to awaken on that nautiloid. Furthermore, the character backstories of every single one of the five origin companions is way beyond what would be realistic for a level 1 character.
I have the feeling Larian simply lacks the skillset to make engaging low level and simplistic content. And its something that definitely can be done, you don't need all superheroes combined to make something interesting. They always graps for the 'exciting' and 'uncommon' for anything they have been doing in this game. At the same time starting at a higher level would mean more development work for them (just think EA only having the game ready for 4 levels per class top and this would be not even enough to truely represent the origin characters - yeah, yeah, I know tadpole makes them weaker - doesn't sound at all like the cheapest ass excuse to make up for the discrepancy between lore and game), but it would also be a bad introduction to the story and especially for new players (face it most players won't have played BG1&2 or even D&D).


I don't think this is going to be addressed by Larian. I don't think they can change the story at this point and actually the leveling speed is probably the only thing I liked about BG3 besides art. It gives the right amount of leveling to quickly adjust your character. Once more classes are available and you add multiclassing it would be a interesting system to develop your characters in game. I really don't need a D&D game going for level 20... the best parts of D&D to me are up to level ~12... and once I kick out the origin characters and replace them with a custom party, I will have a lot less issues with this game.
I think it’s been well handled so far for levels 1-4. Would have expected a few kobolds, orcs etc but they may be still to come - then again they may get skipped.
Under dark could have come later as could the hook horrors, bulette etc minotaurs are ok if not a little overpowered (I’m not across 5e maybe they are right).
I just hope as we progress monsters and encounters are level appropriate- loving it at the moment.
I’ll save my judgement on the story etc until the full release as we are only in ea and that’s yet to be developed significantly
Originally Posted by Tarorn
I think it’s been well handled so far for levels 1-4. Would have expected a few kobolds, orcs etc but they may be still to come - then again they may get skipped.
Under dark could have come later as could the hook horrors, bulette etc minotaurs are ok if not a little overpowered (I’m not across 5e maybe they are right).
I just hope as we progress monsters and encounters are level appropriate- loving it at the moment.
I’ll save my judgement on the story etc until the full release as we are only in ea and that’s yet to be developed significantly

I think it's been okay. They need to fine tuned some of the encounters. The encounters that are really hard right now (not hard if you use Larian combat) is probably due to the level cap. At level 5, I don't see any encounter being an issue.

I think the main issue is, if our characters are starting at level 1 (which is fine and I like it) then our first exposure to world shouldn't be mind flayers. The problem is the story. Larian went big and threw a bunch of newb characters into a higher level scenario. Perhaps they could have started with all the characters in BG, leveling up through encounters in the city where we'd meet some of the companions before the tadpole. Later on, we can all be abducted by mind flayers and meeting some of the companions wouldn't be so odd since we already met some in the city.

To me, that would have been a more organic way to introduce the world. But alas, it bit too late for that now so we have to deal with what we have.
Completely agree with the premise that we're getting high CR encounters, with low level characters. However, instead of starting at level 10, I would argue to make pre-scenarios to level up our characters to around 5 before getting captured on the ship. Maybe like a prison island, haha.
The game could definitely use a prologue to get to level 3-4 before being captured. Not just to get more reasonable levels, but mainly because the custom character would need at least some basic storyline within Baldur'S Gate to have any kind of background besides a oneliners. Also actually playing these origin characters it would make sense to experience their story instead of just reading it... and once again the reason of us having origin characters is the reason why we won't see it happen or they would have to make several completely different prologues and that costs too many resources so here we are with this half-baked result.
The intro to the game shows you what's to come with mindflayers, while keeping you fighting CR 1 and 2 creatures. The premise seems outlandish, but that's just good Dnd and I wouldn't have it any other way. Nothing you are actually supposed to fight, without metagaming for an xp boost or going full chaotic stupid, is that much of a threat.

You leave the ship, and your first major enemies are... low lvl bandits, low lvl undead, and goblins. Wow, I can't remember if my DMs have ever been so cruel as to send us against some big scary bandits. What ever should I do? I'm gonna go save a cat stuck in a tree for some XP first, not sure if I'm willing to go into a fight designed for my level without getting the upper hand.
I would love to have a tutorial mission in the city that depends on your class and/or background.

Criminal rogue? Your mission is to go steal this thing from a locked chest somewhere. We're going to teach you how to pick locks, sneak and hide, about the advantage of initiating combat when your enemy doesn't know you're there, disarming traps, picking pockets, etc. So the tutorial leads you through the mission and, at the end (and maybe along the way) you have some choices to make that help to define who your character is: Are you stealing because you need the money or just for the thrill? Do you kill the guards or just knock them out? What is it that you just stole? Who did you steal it from? Are you going to sell it to the person who hired you? Keep it for yourself? Auction it off to the highest bidder? Give it away to someone who needs it?

Fighter? You're a city guard tracking down some criminals or maybe a pit fighter in a battle royale. You track down some hungry people that were just trying to steal some food - do you arrest them or let them go? Do you team up with other gladiators or try to get all of the glory for yourself? How gracious are you in victory/defeat?

Wizard? Going through trials in a magic tower or doing some kind of research. Do you revel in the power of your magic or is this all academic? How do you want to use what you are being trained in? What do you do when you learn some dark secret during your research?

Sorcerer? Who knows? Random nonsense just happens to you all the time. You have no control over it.

This tutorial could be preceded by a basic how-to-walk-around-and-interact-with-things section that all characters would do (so they don't have to write that up separately for every class or background). Then you learn your class-specific skills. Then you make some choices about who you are as a character. Then you get abducted.

More detailed combat tutorial (if needed) in the fight with Lae'zel against the imps. Then you level up - the game guides you through leveling and explains any new features you might gain. Continue the nautaloid as-is from there and you're well on your way to level 3 by the time you hit the ground.

Edit: Right now, your character starts out flat - almost entirely defined by the tadpole; you are what is happening to you and nothing more. By making some choices about your character early on (which could be mechanically meaningless or which might also impact e.g. your starting gear), it's easier to think of this as a well-rounded person who's going through a rough time, but has something to get back to. It makes for a more immersive story.
I really like the idea of vignette's or scenarios that are class specific, mainly because it provides a mechanism to get folks who are not familiar with DnD to understand the basics of their class. That said, I understand it would be quite the undertaking since we know the classes will grow beyond 6. if that is the case you can always break things down through intro scenarios along the lines of melee, arcane, and rogue, or something like that. Personally, I think it's an investment in the growth of the game the more people that try it, having no previous exposure to DnD, and get hooked.
Originally Posted by SorcererVictor
Originally Posted by bullse
But you want to start at level 10? How about Larian just give us God mode?

NWN1 - HOTU has you starting at lv 15.
NWN2 - MOTB I beieve thta you start at lv 18(not sure)
BG2 - Has you starting around lv 7~8 (different classes required different XP to level up on 2e)

None of then give "God mode".

Have you yet to understand what the max level in this game will be as intended by your DM Larian Studios?!?!?!
But you and others want to start at level 10?
Bwahahahahahahahaha, good luck with that short of a mod.
I don't want to start the game at level 10, but the game campaign itself feels like a higher level campaign.

Originally Posted by Xultep
I really like the idea of vignette's or scenarios that are class specific, mainly because it provides a mechanism to get folks who are not familiar with DnD to understand the basics of their class. That said, I understand it would be quite the undertaking since we know the classes will grow beyond 6. if that is the case you can always break things down through intro scenarios along the lines of melee, arcane, and rogue, or something like that. Personally, I think it's an investment in the growth of the game the more people that try it, having no previous exposure to DnD, and get hooked.

I agree strongly with that and also think the game needs to make more of an effort to introduce itself to people who are new to D&D

There is room in the plot to explain the PCs being somehow level drained back down to zero due to being mind flayed, if that's a thing that people need to suspend their disbelief. But things like having a background vignette could function as a tutorial. I think the way they set up there opening they could definitely handle a class starter before the main game launches.
I don't see how you guys can think this is a high level campaign. Basic enemies off the top of my head are Imps, goblins, humans, skeletons, gnolls, & spiders. None of those scream level 5 or higher...ever
Originally Posted by biomag
The game could definitely use a prologue to get to level 3-4 before being captured. Not just to get more reasonable levels, but mainly because the custom character would need at least some basic storyline within Baldur'S Gate to have any kind of background besides a oneliners. Also actually playing these origin characters it would make sense to experience their story instead of just reading it... and once again the reason of us having origin characters is the reason why we won't see it happen or they would have to make several completely different prologues and that costs too many resources so here we are with this half-baked result.
This is my feeling as well.
Originally Posted by fallenj
I don't see how you guys can think this is a high level campaign. Basic enemies off the top of my head are Imps, goblins, humans, skeletons, gnolls, & spiders. None of those scream level 5 or higher...ever

You forgot phase spiders, the matriarch, hag, redcaps, bulette, minotaurs could all be considered level 5 and up. The only reason they can be destroyed fairly easily is due to Larian combat.

In a straight up 5e ruleset fight, some of those encounters would be very challenging at levels 1-4.
Originally Posted by spectralhunter
Originally Posted by fallenj
I don't see how you guys can think this is a high level campaign. Basic enemies off the top of my head are Imps, goblins, humans, skeletons, gnolls, & spiders. None of those scream level 5 or higher...ever

You forgot phase spiders, the matriarch, hag, redcaps, bulette, minotaurs could all be considered level 5 and up. The only reason they can be destroyed fairly easily is due to Larian combat.

In a straight up 5e ruleset fight, some of those encounters would be very challenging at levels 1-4.

Those are in small numbers so a single or couple in one encounter would be considered low, while a large number of weaker creatures would equal that same encounter. (I couldn't remember the name for redcaps though, thanks) So again the campaign does not seem high end at the moment.

On a side note, you can hit level 4 before even doing the swamp, underdark, or whatever is passed the gith on the road, I actually haven't done any of those areas at all yet.
Originally Posted by fallenj
Originally Posted by spectralhunter
Originally Posted by fallenj
I don't see how you guys can think this is a high level campaign. Basic enemies off the top of my head are Imps, goblins, humans, skeletons, gnolls, & spiders. None of those scream level 5 or higher...ever

You forgot phase spiders, the matriarch, hag, redcaps, bulette, minotaurs could all be considered level 5 and up. The only reason they can be destroyed fairly easily is due to Larian combat.

In a straight up 5e ruleset fight, some of those encounters would be very challenging at levels 1-4.

Those are in small numbers so a single or couple in one encounter would be considered low, while a large number of weaker creatures would equal that same encounter. (I couldn't remember the name for redcaps though, thanks) So again the campaign does not seem high end at the moment.

On a side note, you can hit level 4 before even doing the swamp, underdark, or whatever is passed the gith on the road, I actually haven't done any of those areas at all yet.

I get your point and in all fairness, you are right. Goblins, gnolls and such are low level encounters. And the bulette, minotaurs are meant for 5th level characters which you should reach by the time you see them. I think it's more about timing and execution. You start off in the middle of a fight between mind flayers and gith. I think players should be eased into stuff like that instead of dropping it first. Let players get comfortable with the game with basic enemies like you noted then go nuts.

FYI, you don't just face one or two redcaps. Since you haven't encountered them yet, I won't go into details. Same with the phase spiders.
Originally Posted by spectralhunter
Originally Posted by fallenj
Originally Posted by spectralhunter
Originally Posted by fallenj
I don't see how you guys can think this is a high level campaign. Basic enemies off the top of my head are Imps, goblins, humans, skeletons, gnolls, & spiders. None of those scream level 5 or higher...ever

You forgot phase spiders, the matriarch, hag, redcaps, bulette, minotaurs could all be considered level 5 and up. The only reason they can be destroyed fairly easily is due to Larian combat.

In a straight up 5e ruleset fight, some of those encounters would be very challenging at levels 1-4.

Those are in small numbers so a single or couple in one encounter would be considered low, while a large number of weaker creatures would equal that same encounter. (I couldn't remember the name for redcaps though, thanks) So again the campaign does not seem high end at the moment.

On a side note, you can hit level 4 before even doing the swamp, underdark, or whatever is passed the gith on the road, I actually haven't done any of those areas at all yet.

I get your point and in all fairness, you are right. Goblins, gnolls and such are low level encounters. And the bulette, minotaurs are meant for 5th level characters which you should reach by the time you see them. I think it's more about timing and execution. You start off in the middle of a fight between mind flayers and gith. I think players should be eased into stuff like that instead of dropping it first. Let players get comfortable with the game with basic enemies like you noted then go nuts.

FYI, you don't just face one or two redcaps. Since you haven't encountered them yet, I won't go into details. Same with the phase spiders.

Swamp is a side story area that can be done at level 3-4, which from what little I've done / experienced, it's probably set for around that level (my multi-group did go to that area but it was rushed and never finished, we got a bug related to the fog causing ctd every time loading a save from that area) But that's just me guessing. Redcaps are equal to goblins as in they are a minor creature that can be spammed for level 3-4s, again I'm presuming (I'd have to get my books out and look but I only have 3.5 and 4th editions).

The phase spiders come in 2-3 groups, it has been a bit but if I recall you have the boss spider and two phase spiders in the main encounter plus additional groups (2-3) in the cave.

The intro of the game you only face imps, humans, and whatever the other creature is. The other two at the last encounter are setup to put a time limit at the end, make it feel short on time.

Now that I'm thinking about the whole battle at the ship, the items on the tables probably should be scattered on the floors instead of being on the table like they are.
Originally Posted by fallenj
Now that I'm thinking about the whole battle at the ship, the items on the tables probably should be scattered on the floors instead of being on the table like they are.

Why exactly?
Large scale battle, your on a flying ship and everything around is blown up but all the items on tables are nice and neat...really?
Yeah to be clear, I'm also not advocating for the game to start at a higher character level. I love the early character levels, where a lowly wolf can take down your character. It's why I prefer BG1 to BG2. What I'm saying is that the story as it is currently written is clearly not for a low-level party.
In my view the Level 1 start vs Goblins is a neat trick and the higher powers balanced by the Larva's secret powers where ever needed. The massive power gains in first levels are rewarding. And it is much easier for new players or people who never did pen & paper to get into this. Plus the story can be much longer before you hit massively disbalancing spells & rules like WISH. Larian designers already pointed to thess option ruin any early or midgame storyline balance.Thankfully lariaan didn't encapsule the stellar great storyline into some diabolo type endless hack & slay. In Neverwinter Nights you had to hack though endless dungeons of enemies to progress from 10 to 11 and beyond in a very slow paced piecemeal story. That wouldn't do any good to BG3 and still be true to D&D rules. The ship escape plot is a very well done tutorial teaching you game basics. Much better than Gorions Castle courtyard escape in BG1. Icewind dale is a good example what happens when you start high level on a shorter sstoryline. BG2 did have some start of it's own. Really appreaciated how intensly this storyline kicked off.
Originally Posted by bullse
Umm, no, fully disagree.
You should work for every level you obtain, period.
And getting to level 2 is cake. 3 is not hard at all, and 4 is not hard at all, just takes a little more time. I would expect that same for each level afterwards.
But you want to start at level 10? How about Larian just give us God mode?

You don't get it. Archdruid is supposed to be at lv 14 traditionally in D&D. Similarly, Archmage is at quite the hight level, probably around lv 10/12 , even more. Lv 1 is the level of a starting young man /woman going out of his/her village hunting for some wolves/ kobold. Very weak character, fighting very weak enemies. Level don't scale in DnD, you are a archdruid because you are lv 14 and because you rules a grove.
Lv1 is someone that has basically 0 adventure experience. Doesn't work well with a 200 years old vampire or a Wizard that is so brilliant he became one of Mistra Chosen lovers, or Wyll that already has the reputation of a hero for fighting giant.

Also, you started lv 7/8 in Baldurs gate 2 , because lorewise it was supposed to be following the storyline of the Bhaalspawn , and its take place after certains events. So its not like starting at a highter level is a new thing, either.
Originally Posted by Lumign
To begin with, I know this idea is more suited for MOD than game suggestion.

Anyhow, it's not hard to agree that level 1-4 characters surviving in an environment full of Mindflayers, Red Dragons, Hell, Underdark, not to mention a level 1 archmage NPC, level 5 archdruid... (ridiculous is the only description I can give)

For the sake of (lore) coherence alone, the starting levels should be way higher (or given a choice for player), along with adjusting monster levels to be more "realistic".

The way I see it is the beginning of the game will be filled with NPC/monsters with lower levels (from the bandits to the goblin and gnolls encounters) then their levels would increase to match the player's level (hag and Gith patrol etc.)


I think characters in this setting should start at around 5 or so, it would make the most sense. 10 is a bit of a stretch and very powerful and leaves little room for growth in the entirety of the game since in no way would it make sense if you were a level 20 god by the end.

I do agree 100% that it makes no sense that you start out as a level 1 adventurer in this very dangerous setting unless they tweaked the difficulty and story to make it more of the first act a survival game sort of like fort joy. In that case it could make sense that you were a level 1 adventurer and were avoiding fights for as long as you could until you got more training and gathered more relics and powerful artifacts to aid you.
Originally Posted by bullse
Umm, no, fully disagree.
You should work for every level you obtain, period.
And getting to level 2 is cake. 3 is not hard at all, and 4 is not hard at all, just takes a little more time. I would expect that same for each level afterwards.
But you want to start at level 10? How about Larian just give us God mode?

I think you are missing the point. The OP isnt promoting the idea of less difficulty or an easier game. He is saying to make the lore/situattion/immersion with the level of the party. Not in terms of difficulty. My suggestion would be that they create a story element that would explain why these seasoned adventurers are such a low level, considering they have what seems like a varied background and high level experience with magical items, and have fame for adventuring. These are clearly not Level 1 characters in any sense. Level 1 adventurers are adept at combat and know a skill or spell or two but in no way have they completed many adventures or have any sort of renown. If they have I believe they would be level 3 or 4 atleast.
I think the game is fine for starting off at lvl 1. It eases players into PC creation and game mechanics.

Apart from the initial ship sequence I think the party fights appropriate CR creatures for the adventure.

In terms of your companion backstory - I think it is fine at starting them at lvl 1, because 5e allows a lot of freedom with your background.

Lvl 1 Fighter is the same mechanically, even though a Fighter with the Soldier background probably would have seen more fights than a Fighter with the Anthropologist background. Hell, you can have a Knight background, trained all your life to be good in combat, and yet a Cobbler (Guild Artisan) can be as good of a fighter as you. And I am fine with that.
Originally Posted by gametester1
I think you are missing the point. The OP isnt promoting the idea of less difficulty or an easier game. He is saying to make the lore/situattion/immersion with the level of the party. Not in terms of difficulty. My suggestion would be that they create a story element that would explain why these seasoned adventurers are such a low level, considering they have what seems like a varied background and high level experience with magical items, and have fame for adventuring. These are clearly not Level 1 characters in any sense. Level 1 adventurers are adept at combat and know a skill or spell or two but in no way have they completed many adventures or have any sort of renown. If they have I believe they would be level 3 or 4 atleast.

No, I did not miss the OP's point(s). On the other hand, some of you have missed my point: Larian Studios (and internal testing) had indicated that the max level for BG3 would be in the neighborhood of 10-12 possibly a wee bit higher short of a modder creating a mod to bump it to say something like 18-20. To those of you advocating starting at level 10, what's the point in playing when a BG3 full release only has 3-4 Acts with a max level of 10-12?

Start at level 10.
End game at level 10-12.

What? Huh? Did I miss something here?
Come on people, use some common sense here cause this idea makes NO sense at all knowing what I have just indicated.
Originally Posted by bullse
Originally Posted by gametester1
I think you are missing the point. The OP isnt promoting the idea of less difficulty or an easier game. He is saying to make the lore/situattion/immersion with the level of the party. Not in terms of difficulty. My suggestion would be that they create a story element that would explain why these seasoned adventurers are such a low level, considering they have what seems like a varied background and high level experience with magical items, and have fame for adventuring. These are clearly not Level 1 characters in any sense. Level 1 adventurers are adept at combat and know a skill or spell or two but in no way have they completed many adventures or have any sort of renown. If they have I believe they would be level 3 or 4 atleast.

No, I did not miss the OP's point(s). On the other hand, some of you have missed my point: Larian Studios (and internal testing) had indicated that the max level for BG3 would be in the neighborhood of 10-12 possibly a wee bit higher short of a modder creating a mod to bump it to say something like 18-20. To those of you advocating starting at level 10, what's the point in playing when a BG3 full release only has 3-4 Acts with a max level of 10-12?

Start at level 10.
End game at level 10-12.

What? Huh? Did I miss something here?

It's our job to provide feedback about what we like and don't like. Some people are saying that the story feels poorly aligned with the level of the PC and companions. This is perfectly valid feedback.

It's up to Larian to decide what they do with that feedback. We have no idea how malleable their parameters are. It's not for us to say what is set in stone and what can be changed. Trying to speak on their behalf in this way is neither kind nor helpful.
Originally Posted by grysqrl
It's up to Larian to decide what they do with that feedback. We have no idea how malleable their parameters are. It's not for us to say what is set in stone and what can be changed. Trying to speak on their behalf in this way is neither kind nor helpful.

Excuse me, but I am not speaking on 'their behalf.'
I am merely stating what is known about the coming full release of BG3.
And whether you or anyone else doesn't think it is helpful or kind (like what?) that I present such, that sounds like a personal issue, one revolving around not handling the truth or facts.
Originally Posted by bullse
End game at level 10-12.

I thought it was 13+ do you have source? It has been a while since I watched the interviews.
Originally Posted by bullse
Originally Posted by gametester1
I think you are missing the point. The OP isnt promoting the idea of less difficulty or an easier game. He is saying to make the lore/situattion/immersion with the level of the party. Not in terms of difficulty. My suggestion would be that they create a story element that would explain why these seasoned adventurers are such a low level, considering they have what seems like a varied background and high level experience with magical items, and have fame for adventuring. These are clearly not Level 1 characters in any sense. Level 1 adventurers are adept at combat and know a skill or spell or two but in no way have they completed many adventures or have any sort of renown. If they have I believe they would be level 3 or 4 atleast.

No, I did not miss the OP's point(s). On the other hand, some of you have missed my point: Larian Studios (and internal testing) had indicated that the max level for BG3 would be in the neighborhood of 10-12 possibly a wee bit higher short of a modder creating a mod to bump it to say something like 18-20. To those of you advocating starting at level 10, what's the point in playing when a BG3 full release only has 3-4 Acts with a max level of 10-12?

Start at level 10.
End game at level 10-12.

What? Huh? Did I miss something here?
You're definitely missing the OP's and others' point.

The OP is not saying increase the starting level to 10. Rather, they (and others including me) are saying lower the starting story and character backgrounds level from 10 down to 1. There is currently a mismatch. The game and our characters are starting at level 1. But the story and companion backgrounds are at (about) level 10. So those should be rewritten to a more appropriate level 1.

You can certainly disagree that there is this mismatch (as some posters here have done). But nobody is asking for the game to start at level 10.
Originally Posted by fallenj
Originally Posted by bullse
End game at level 10-12.

I thought it was 13+ do you have source? It has been a while since I watched the interviews.
The only cap they explicitly stated was level 10, but since then they also came back to say "Nevermind, we'll probably go higher than that, since we are building more content than originally anticipated".
Which can mean anything between 11 and 14-15, I'm guessing.
Originally Posted by kanisatha
You can certainly disagree that there is this mismatch (as some posters here have done). But nobody is asking for the game to start at level 10.
I do agree that there's currently a mismatch, and this mismatch has also been a concern of mine about Larian that I already pointed out in previos threads (i.e. https://forums.larian.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Main=93583&Number=718792#Post718792 )

That said, people are also being incredibly disingenuous when they say "You start the game fighting dragons, demons and mindlflayers".
No, you fucking don't. You start the game being a perfect nobody who's WITNESSING a fight between demons, dragons and mindflayers, while passing by and trying to stay alive as out sight as much as possible.
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Originally Posted by bullse
Originally Posted by gametester1
I think you are missing the point. The OP isnt promoting the idea of less difficulty or an easier game. He is saying to make the lore/situattion/immersion with the level of the party. Not in terms of difficulty. My suggestion would be that they create a story element that would explain why these seasoned adventurers are such a low level, considering they have what seems like a varied background and high level experience with magical items, and have fame for adventuring. These are clearly not Level 1 characters in any sense. Level 1 adventurers are adept at combat and know a skill or spell or two but in no way have they completed many adventures or have any sort of renown. If they have I believe they would be level 3 or 4 atleast.

No, I did not miss the OP's point(s). On the other hand, some of you have missed my point: Larian Studios (and internal testing) had indicated that the max level for BG3 would be in the neighborhood of 10-12 possibly a wee bit higher short of a modder creating a mod to bump it to say something like 18-20. To those of you advocating starting at level 10, what's the point in playing when a BG3 full release only has 3-4 Acts with a max level of 10-12?

Start at level 10.
End game at level 10-12.

What? Huh? Did I miss something here?
You're definitely missing the OP's and others' point.

The OP is not saying increase the starting level to 10. Rather, they (and others including me) are saying lower the starting story and character backgrounds level from 10 down to 1. There is currently a mismatch. The game and our characters are starting at level 1. But the story and companion backgrounds are at (about) level 10. So those should be rewritten to a more appropriate level 1.

You can certainly disagree that there is this mismatch (as some posters here have done). But nobody is asking for the game to start at level 10.

There is a mismatch if the player decide that has to be.

All the companions backgrounds, once you start discovering their story, plenty justify the fact that they are at level one. Not to forget that a level one is however above the average sentient being in Faerun.

As I said before: Gale as messed up the weave and lost his connection with Mystral, he has done so much damage that being alive and at level one is a better outcome in comparison of what he could have got (nevertheless he still is in danger of explode); Will tried to take a step back from his contract with his patron, patron that has been kidnapped thus weakening his connection to the source of his powers; Astarion is not a full fledged vampire, he is a minion, a slave that Cazador used as entertainment fo lash out his sadistic aspects; Laez'el is a low rank gith; Shadowheart was sent in a mission that required her memory to be erased.

So how is it incoherent the fact that they are at level one?

About the supposed contradiction between the introductive cut scene and the subsequent fights. The vessel was a transport for kidnapped and infested beings, a ship that strays from its course and ends up in hell, then it crashes in a very casual place, so casual that it is at the center of a conspiracy that sees bugbears, drows, goblins allied, with the gobbos betraying their faith to follow a new cult, in this place the darkdruids are making their move, the hag has contacts and does affairs with people in Baldur's Gate, meanwhile the party find people like Volo (a comic relief but still a personality of note in Faerun), can make alliance with Hasrim (an arch druid) or Minthara, you have to interact with the Flaming Fist, the Zentharim.

All in the introduction.

As far as I can see there's a lot of coherence with the background of the companions (and in my case even too complex stuff for my freshly "graduated" Tav fighter), who were person of some social impact and find them selves in the middle of a conspiracy of such level that a demon of high level like Raphael decides to gave them a visit.

But again, if a players decides that there's an incoherence than incoherence there is.
Originally Posted by Bufotenina
There is a mismatch if the player decide that has to be.

All the companions backgrounds, once you start discovering their story, plenty justify the fact that they are at level one. Not to forget that a level one is however above the average sentient being in Faerun.

As I said before: Gale as messed up the weave and lost his connection with Mystral, he has done so much damage that being alive and at level one is a better outcome in comparison of what he could have got (nevertheless he still is in danger of explode); Will tried to take a step back from his contract with his patron, patron that has been kidnapped thus weakening his connection to the source of his powers; Astarion is not a full fledged vampire, he is a minion, a slave that Cazador used as entertainment fo lash out his sadistic aspects; Laez'el is a low rank gith; Shadowheart was sent in a mission that required her memory to be erased.

So how is it incoherent the fact that they are at level one?

About the supposed contradiction between the introductive cut scene and the subsequent fights. The vessel was a transport for kidnapped and infested beings, a ship that strays from its course and ends up in hell, then it crashes in a very casual place, so casual that it is at the center of a conspiracy that sees bugbears, drows, goblins allied, with the gobbos betraying their faith to follow a new cult, in this place the darkdruids are making their move, the hag has contacts and does affairs with people in Baldur's Gate, meanwhile the party find people like Volo (a comic relief but still a personality of note in Faerun), can make alliance with Hasrim (an arch druid) or Minthara, you have to interact with the Flaming Fist, the Zentharim.

All in the introduction.

As far as I can see there's a lot of coherence with the background of the companions (and in my case even too complex stuff for my freshly "graduated" Tav fighter), who were person of some social impact and find them selves in the middle of a conspiracy of such level that a demon of high level like Raphael decides to gave them a visit.

But again, if a players decides that there's an incoherence than incoherence there is.

Arcane magic does not mean the god has to grant you spells like with divine magic. If Gale can use the weave at all he would have access to all his normal spells. He would only lose chosen abilities like silver fire. Not to mention all the knowledge he would have.
Astarion is still a vampire spawn, meaning a monster with regeneration, claw and bite attacks, 80 HP, etc. And as it was already mentioned. Arch druids are a title you get at level 14.
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Originally Posted by Gt27mustang
Originally Posted by SorcererVictor
Originally Posted by bullse
But you want to start at level 10? How about Larian just give us God mode?

NWN1 - HOTU has you starting at lv 15.
NWN2 - MOTB I beieve thta you start at lv 18(not sure)
BG2 - Has you starting around lv 7~8 (different classes required different XP to level up on 2e)

None of then give "God mode".

All the games you cited were sequels and/or expensions that had a previous game that you should/could play before playing that one. BG3 stands on its own.
You are blatantly wrong. By definition, BG THREE is a sequel to BG1 and BG2.

I fully agree with the OP and have made this exact point myself some months ago. The starting point of this game is completely unrealistic. As someone else mentioned in another forum, BG3 is attempting to recreate the player experience of playing BG2, but without BG1 ever having existed. Just as it would've been utterly ridiculous for a bunch of level 1 characters to awaken in Irenicus's dungeon in BG2, so too it is equally ridiculous for a bunch of level 1 characters to awaken on that nautiloid. Furthermore, the character backstories of every single one of the five origin companions is way beyond what would be realistic for a level 1 character.

Did you read my post on solasta forum? Thats what i said there
Originally Posted by bullse
Originally Posted by gametester1
I think you are missing the point. The OP isnt promoting the idea of less difficulty or an easier game. He is saying to make the lore/situattion/immersion with the level of the party. Not in terms of difficulty. My suggestion would be that they create a story element that would explain why these seasoned adventurers are such a low level, considering they have what seems like a varied background and high level experience with magical items, and have fame for adventuring. These are clearly not Level 1 characters in any sense. Level 1 adventurers are adept at combat and know a skill or spell or two but in no way have they completed many adventures or have any sort of renown. If they have I believe they would be level 3 or 4 atleast.

No, I did not miss the OP's point(s). On the other hand, some of you have missed my point: Larian Studios (and internal testing) had indicated that the max level for BG3 would be in the neighborhood of 10-12 possibly a wee bit higher short of a modder creating a mod to bump it to say something like 18-20. To those of you advocating starting at level 10, what's the point in playing when a BG3 full release only has 3-4 Acts with a max level of 10-12?

Start at level 10.
End game at level 10-12.

What? Huh? Did I miss something here?
Come on people, use some common sense here cause this idea makes NO sense at all knowing what I have just indicated.


Yes, you still clearly missed the point.
Originally Posted by gametester1
Yes, you still clearly missed the point.

As I see you continue to miss mine. Cool beans huh?
It is worth noting that CR is a suggestion, not a rule. DMs can and do modify encounters to better fit the story they want to tell and the party they are running all the time.

Additionally, DnD is balanced around the idea that if you lose a fight you're just... Dead. Campaign over outside DM being generous with a means of returning to life. In Baldur's Gate we have the luxury of taking on higher difficulty fights without that being a concern, so CR as defined on the tabletop won't necessarily translate to "never, ever attempt this fight" in Baldur's Gate because we have the luxury of reloading if things go terribly wrong and trying again.

Video game balance and tabletop balance are quire different. And as for lore, our primary enemies in Act 1 are imps, humans, gnolls, and goblins. Also, after looking it up real fast:

Green hags, phase spiders, and minotaurs ae CR 3. Completely acceptable for when we meet them in the game.

So there's really not much in the game we're fighting right now that is dramatically beyond our party's ability to handle.
Originally Posted by bullse
Originally Posted by gametester1
Yes, you still clearly missed the point.

As I see you continue to miss mine. Cool beans huh?
\


No, you're just a troll.
Originally Posted by SaurianDruid
It is worth noting that CR is a suggestion, not a rule. DMs can and do modify encounters to better fit the story they want to tell and the party they are running all the time.

Additionally, DnD is balanced around the idea that if you lose a fight you're just... Dead. Campaign over outside DM being generous with a means of returning to life. In Baldur's Gate we have the luxury of taking on higher difficulty fights without that being a concern, so CR as defined on the tabletop won't necessarily translate to "never, ever attempt this fight" in Baldur's Gate because we have the luxury of reloading if things go terribly wrong and trying again.

Video game balance and tabletop balance are quire different. And as for lore, our primary enemies in Act 1 are imps, humans, gnolls, and goblins. Also, after looking it up real fast:

Green hags, phase spiders, and minotaurs ae CR 3. Completely acceptable for when we meet them in the game.

So there's really not much in the game we're fighting right now that is dramatically beyond our party's ability to handle.

And what D&D campaign has you fighting fiends and intellect devourers at level 1 without even prepping for an adventure? I think the bigger problem is that the story describes your party members as being adventurers with renown such as Will (Level 2) and Gale which are seasoned adventurers or wizards in Gales respect. These characters would not be level 1 in a D&D campaign.
Originally Posted by gametester1
Originally Posted by SaurianDruid
It is worth noting that CR is a suggestion, not a rule. DMs can and do modify encounters to better fit the story they want to tell and the party they are running all the time.

Additionally, DnD is balanced around the idea that if you lose a fight you're just... Dead. Campaign over outside DM being generous with a means of returning to life. In Baldur's Gate we have the luxury of taking on higher difficulty fights without that being a concern, so CR as defined on the tabletop won't necessarily translate to "never, ever attempt this fight" in Baldur's Gate because we have the luxury of reloading if things go terribly wrong and trying again.

Video game balance and tabletop balance are quire different. And as for lore, our primary enemies in Act 1 are imps, humans, gnolls, and goblins. Also, after looking it up real fast:

Green hags, phase spiders, and minotaurs ae CR 3. Completely acceptable for when we meet them in the game.

So there's really not much in the game we're fighting right now that is dramatically beyond our party's ability to handle.

And what D&D campaign has you fighting fiends and intellect devourers at level 1 without even prepping for an adventure? I think the bigger problem is that the story describes your party members as being adventurers with renown such as Will (Level 2) and Gale which are seasoned adventurers or wizards in Gales respect. These characters would not be level 1 in a D&D campaign.
Intellect devourers are CR 2 (expected to be fought by a level two party), you know https://media.wizards.com/2014/downloads/dnd/MM_IntellectDevourer.pdf
And imps, the only fiends we fight, are challenge rating 1 https://roll20.net/compendium/dnd5e/Imp#content

So both are fine to throw at level one characters as long as the enemies are well balanced (wounded intellect devourers, for example)
Download some mod that will alow you to start on higher level ...
Problem solved, next!
or - and this could handle a couple of issues, Larian starts us at somewhere between level 5 & 10 and instead of ending the game somewhere close to 10 or 13 we end at 20 (or close to it). I think this could help with multiple things. 1. They seemed to change the 5E rules in because in the early game, all most characters can do is one action, and this seems boring to them. If we start at a level where we have possible additonal attacks and etc. maybe this fixes that issue. 2. these characters all seem to be seasoned somewhat so it would make sense that they're not level one anyway. If it were redone this way, perhaps they'd also stick more closely to the 5e rules and in the early game, each character could do more.....this is most likely what the OP is talking about anyway, not starting at 10 and ending at 12 or 13....
I don't think starting at any other level than 1 makes sense as for the majority of people never played D&D. Even if you have, but you didn't play 5e you will be overwhelmed with class knowledge that you lack.

I honestly think Larian did a really good job of pacing the level ups - you get a handful of characters, all low level, you have time to ease into the roles, without being stuck in level 1 and 2 too long. Thinking back to Pathfinder, which I never played before Kingmaker, I was sometimes overwhelmed by the amount of class knowledge I had to learn to use my companions properly. That will be the experience for anyone who never touched 5e. Each level, each class means people need to read everything available to them before they can continue on - and for a good game easing the players into its rules is something extremely important or it leads to frustration. Expecting players to read the pen&paper rules to play a video game is unrealistic and would be lazy design. Not to mention pointless because the p&p is made to introduce players into it in the first place.


The issue to me is more the encounter design and story telling than playing low level characters. With Larian there is no mundane. No first steps to put everything into perspective. If you are new to D&D you get the feeling that Mind Flayers, Demons, Drow, hunting parties from Avernus, Red Dragons and so on, are daily occurances for everybody. Underdark is just the cave system next door children go to play, though maybe a bit dangerous. And yes, you can tell stories like these and each encounter is fine by itself, but all combined are at the point where to me it lacks pacing and there is no feeling into what a normal life would be. After act 1 there is nothing that can surprise you anymore - except elementals, you didn't see any of those.
In BG1 we had Elminster showing up all the time, always gave the the impression that there were bigger things going on behind the scenes. We also know that drizzt was in the area. So many hints on even tho we were important we were just a small part of a bigger game.
Made sense for a noob campaigne.
In bg 2 he told us we were the main act.
In TOB we were told to be more powerful.
The setting made sense.

Now we are the main act in a Mindflayer plot.
Mindflayer. The biggest threat to humanity.
We have high level druid leaders and dark druid wich could instant kill our lvl 3 chars. Nope we win.

Githyanki with reddragon nah fly away let the small fey handle that. Lucky. Still feel that group should be higher level

We start in freaking hell, so lucky a demigod character dont show up.nope just lvl 1 imps.

Posssible yes but unlikely.

A demonlprd wont send imps to a planartraveling mindflayer flying fortress.

Nothing in this setting makes sense to be a noob char.

I like the game but the setting is wrong,
The difference between good and awesome.
Bg3 is lilicor but i want hes brother whos a +15 hackmaster
Originally Posted by gametester1
And what D&D campaign has you fighting fiends and intellect devourers at level 1 without even prepping for an adventure? I think the bigger problem is that the story describes your party members as being adventurers with renown such as Will (Level 2) and Gale which are seasoned adventurers or wizards in Gales respect. These characters would not be level 1 in a D&D campaign.

As was pointed out by Zyr, these are CR 1-2 creatures that you're upset we end up fighting at level 1-2.

Gale and Wyll also both talk about having lost powers recently. A once mighty hero who suffered some loss of power is a perfectly acceptable character for level 1. Additionally level 1 in 5e is NOT a total noob. They are new to adventuring, but will likely be accomplished and capable warriors and wizards in their own right. Having a level in a class is a big deal in 5e. A 1st level fighter is already probably the best swordsman in his or her village. Someone a powerful lord would likely want to hire into their personal garrison.

Also, just in general to the thread; my last tabletop game started with a city on fire as it was being burned down by a full sized adult dragon and an army of kobolds and human cultists who were ransacking the place.

We were first level. This is an acceptable first level experience. And it is an official module for the game published by Wizards of the Coast.

Not all first level adventures start with killing rats in some guy's basement.
Originally Posted by Wyrmblade
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Originally Posted by Gt27mustang
All the games you cited were sequels and/or expensions that had a previous game that you should/could play before playing that one. BG3 stands on its own.
You are blatantly wrong. By definition, BG THREE is a sequel to BG1 and BG2.

I fully agree with the OP and have made this exact point myself some months ago. The starting point of this game is completely unrealistic. As someone else mentioned in another forum, BG3 is attempting to recreate the player experience of playing BG2, but without BG1 ever having existed. Just as it would've been utterly ridiculous for a bunch of level 1 characters to awaken in Irenicus's dungeon in BG2, so too it is equally ridiculous for a bunch of level 1 characters to awaken on that nautiloid. Furthermore, the character backstories of every single one of the five origin companions is way beyond what would be realistic for a level 1 character.

Did you read my post on solasta forum? Thats what i said there
Yes, and I thought it was very well said. smile
No I do not agree with this.

I like playing from low level and get attached to my character from level 1.

Ok regarding starting area Nautilus.

I get it can feel a bit nasty for some new players... but first of all it looks scary a bit but not difficult at all.
Tactics:
A. Avoid fire jump over them if need be.
B. Kill the imps simple to do it. Imps are like lowest end of creatures and not even near as powerful as an average Demon.
C. You can get US as at least temporary companion in addition to Lae Zel.
D. There are healing places in some rooms find them free healing if you are hurt.
E. If some player have misunderstood... in the last room when you enter room with Illithid you should not stay there forever simply do as you are told by Lae Zel.

Starting area is super easy. Yes it looks nasty but you dont need to fight anything really nasty there. Avoid aggro of harder enemies then say Imps. You can fuck it up however you in last room go very near the Enemy that is much more dangerous then an Imp... a little common sense here you do not need to fight everything in Nautilus as level 1...

After starting Nautilus? Well start with some less dangerous stuff and get your party to full strength i.e 4 characters in the party. Do not think you are CONAN THE BARBARIAN and solo go inside the Crypt grin.
I feel like starting the game at a fairly high level and then going back to 1, maybe right after the Nautoloid, would have been the coolest thing they could've done to make the whole tadpole 'weakening' deal, the companions' backstories and the actual gameplay compliment eachother.

It probably would have been too complicated and annoying, but i lowkey even like the idea of characters' level not actually being reset straight after escaping the ship but instead just losing xp (and lvls, and spells, ecc ecc) throughout all of Act 1.
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Originally Posted by Gt27mustang
Originally Posted by SorcererVictor
Originally Posted by bullse
But you want to start at level 10? How about Larian just give us God mode?

NWN1 - HOTU has you starting at lv 15.
NWN2 - MOTB I beieve thta you start at lv 18(not sure)
BG2 - Has you starting around lv 7~8 (different classes required different XP to level up on 2e)

None of then give "God mode".

All the games you cited were sequels and/or expensions that had a previous game that you should/could play before playing that one. BG3 stands on its own.
You are blatantly wrong. By definition, BG THREE is a sequel to BG1 and BG2.

I fully agree with the OP and have made this exact point myself some months ago. The starting point of this game is completely unrealistic. As someone else mentioned in another forum, BG3 is attempting to recreate the player experience of playing BG2, but without BG1 ever having existed. Just as it would've been utterly ridiculous for a bunch of level 1 characters to awaken in Irenicus's dungeon in BG2, so too it is equally ridiculous for a bunch of level 1 characters to awaken on that nautiloid. Furthermore, the character backstories of every single one of the five origin companions is way beyond what would be realistic for a level 1 character.

The games mentionned earlier told the continuations of stories, that started in the game(s) before that, often continuing with the same protagonist and more often than not, very close to each other in the timeline.

BG3 is, by definition, a sequel, yes. But it is a different campaign, with a different protagonist, wich tells a different story, a hundred years apart from the first one. I don't understand why the game should kick off with main character at higher levels, just because the previous games ended with a PC at level 30+ It makes zero sense when you think about it. Larian wants us to experience every rise in power of our (new)protagonist, wich they are entitled to, and like you I like BG1 better than 2 because, for me, levels 1-10 are what I like in DnD. I am more annoyed by the settings/encounters at the beginning of the game (the hells at level 1, the underdark at level ~2,...) but I can live with that.

As an exemple: in IWD1, you end the first game around 12-14th level. If you play the expensions, you gain even more levels because you continue with the same characters. If you start IWD2, wich is a direct sequel, you start back at level 1. Different characters, different story, different time,...
Originally Posted by Tuco
Originally Posted by fallenj
Originally Posted by bullse
End game at level 10-12.

I thought it was 13+ do you have source? It has been a while since I watched the interviews.
The only cap they explicitly stated was level 10, but since then they also came back to say "Nevermind, we'll probably go higher than that, since we are building more content than originally anticipated".
Which can mean anything between 11 and 14-15, I'm guessing.
Thanks Tuco
Originally Posted by Thieves Rule
I've made this suggestion as well. Other than a side conversation Wyll has with Gale about feeling weaker than he used to be, there's no mention why we're all level 1 given the background each of the companions has. It feels like we should be several levels higher. Or at least as part of the opening sequence, show part of our life force being sucked out or something more obvious on why we're starting out from scratch.
Feel like the real thing here is just to show your level going down or just add more dialog about it.
Originally Posted by Innateagle
I feel like starting the game at a fairly high level and then going back to 1, maybe right after the Nautoloid, would have been the coolest thing they could've done to make the whole tadpole 'weakening' deal, the companions' backstories and the actual gameplay compliment eachother.

It probably would have been too complicated and annoying, but i lowkey even like the idea of characters' level not actually being reset straight after escaping the ship but instead just losing xp (and lvls, and spells, ecc ecc) throughout all of Act 1.
Certainly interesting idea ...
I hope some moder will see this, but i cant see any RPG game where player loose his XP instead of getting them trough start of gameplay to be sucesfull. laugh

But i like that idea of fighting Nautiloid as higher level ... and reset by exiting it (after all, we were tadpoled, and hit in the head laugh )
Such taste of power is sometimes good, for example in Force Unleashed it worked perfectly, also it would be great for unexperienced player to try his choosen class at high level so they know what to expect, on the other hand it could be a bit overwhelming for them :-/ ...
I think you should write this to feedback directly so it dont get lost in here.
Originally Posted by Gt27mustang
BG3 is, by definition, a sequel, yes. But it is a different campaign, with a different protagonist, wich tells a different story, a hundred years apart from the first one. I don't understand why the game should kick off with main character at higher levels, just because the previous games ended with a PC at level 30+ It makes zero sense when you think about it. Larian wants us to experience every rise in power of our (new)protagonist, wich they are entitled to, and like you I like BG1 better than 2 because, for me, levels 1-10 are what I like in DnD. I am more annoyed by the settings/encounters at the beginning of the game (the hells at level 1, the underdark at level ~2,...) but I can live with that.
So then we actually agree. So why the hostility toward me?

The only difference between our takes, it seems, is that whereas you "can live with [the mismatch]," I find it very hard to do so. My immersion in the story and the setting is everything for me playing a cRPG, and this mismatch breaks my immersion and aggravates the heck out of me.
So having characters start at level 10 would most assuredly help keep that 'immersion' feel and curtail your aggravations, Kanisatha?

Best bet is for Larian to just have the game have an option to start with 'Easy mode' cause assuredly, with encounters being 'oh so difficult' and all, an 'Easy mode' would greatly aid those looking to maintain their immersion and aggravation sanity.

I am off to once again SOLO lonewolf wreck Act 1.....with my level 4..........
Originally Posted by bullse
So having characters start at level 10 would most assuredly help keep that 'immersion' feel and curtail your aggravations, Kanisatha?
Seriously, why don't you try reading people's posts before you respond to them. Show me where I have ever said I want characters to start at level 10? I have repeatedly said exactly the opposite, and even gone so far as to say it is precisely the lowest character levels in D&D that are the most fun to play for me. If you are unable to discern the nuances of what I and others like me are saying, that's on you. But stop misstating my positions.
Originally Posted by Gt27mustang
and like you I like BG1 better than 2 because, for me, levels 1-10 are what I like in DnD. I am more annoyed by the settings/encounters at the beginning of the game (the hells at level 1, the underdark at level ~2,...) but I can live with that.

As an exemple: in IWD1, you end the first game around 12-14th level. If you play the expensions, you gain even more levels because you continue with the same characters. If you start IWD2, wich is a direct sequel, you start back at level 1. Different characters, different story, different time,...
Well said! I like that this game start at level 1 and I am ok with that max level is likely to be level 10.
Of course if they make an expansion to this game that is separate from full release... then they could increase max level from level 10 to 15.

This is ridiculous demands for me to want high level characters because BG2 ended at high level.
The story is later in time not the same characters though example an Elf might live long time.
I disagree... You don't actually fight any mind flayers or dragons, only imps which as far as I know are relatively low level challenge.

I expressed my opinion about companion levels many times, but the short version of it is - they are not as powerful as they claim to be or want you to perceive them.
Originally Posted by Abits
I disagree... You don't actually fight any mind flayers or dragons, only imps which as far as I know are relatively low level challenge.

I expressed my opinion about companion levels many times, but the short version of it is - they are not as powerful as they claim to be or want you to perceive them.

Yeah thats the first problem, was in hell only fought imps, LUCKY
was on mindflayer legendary ship, no high level guards, LUCKY

Gale: Im a super powerful like imba archmage lover of mystra lvl 1 wizard Hero: ok? thats yeah ok dude suuure i belive you

Wyll: Im a hero to the people Blade of Frontiers probably heard of me? Hero: Cool is that that demon aura i sense from you? Wyll: no no im just regular hero Hero: Yeah i just saw you use eldrich blast you sure you got nothing to do with demons? Wyll: No NO NO trust me im an engineer! Stupid as fuck

Astarion: Hi im a awesome rogue Hero: Wow thats som HUGE fags you got there. Ast: no no no! later that night Ast: I just need a litte blood cause you see im a vampire but a good one! Like in twilight! But i love torture and killing. Also i lost all my game breaking powers so i can still be with you level one guys. LUCKY!

Dark druids trying to take over an groove but once again we get lucky they only sent lowlevel druids! LUCKY!

Gith knight with a red drago shows up but leavs before taking care of group needed to stay like 5s to disarm us LUCKY!

not to mention Raphael and Ast's master
everything thats happening are high level campaign stuff but me manage to survive anyway so freaking lucky its just not beliveble
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Originally Posted by Gt27mustang
BG3 is, by definition, a sequel, yes. But it is a different campaign, with a different protagonist, wich tells a different story, a hundred years apart from the first one. I don't understand why the game should kick off with main character at higher levels, just because the previous games ended with a PC at level 30+ It makes zero sense when you think about it. Larian wants us to experience every rise in power of our (new)protagonist, wich they are entitled to, and like you I like BG1 better than 2 because, for me, levels 1-10 are what I like in DnD. I am more annoyed by the settings/encounters at the beginning of the game (the hells at level 1, the underdark at level ~2,...) but I can live with that.
So then we actually agree. So why the hostility toward me?

The only difference between our takes, it seems, is that whereas you "can live with [the mismatch]," I find it very hard to do so. My immersion in the story and the setting is everything for me playing a cRPG, and this mismatch breaks my immersion and aggravates the heck out of me.

Thrust me, no hostility here, just defending my opinion.

As for the “mismatch”? I am also a “story and setting makes an RPG” kind of guy, where combat can take a backseat (I.e. Planescape) Buuuut I also like a good fight, and that is for these reasons that I can live with the slightly-off setting at the beginning of BG3. Honestly, aren’t you fed up with every DnD quest beginning in a tavern basement fighting rats? I thinks it’s a nice change of pace.
Originally Posted by Tarorn
I think it’s been well handled so far for levels 1-4. Would have expected a few kobolds, orcs etc but they may be still to come - then again they may get skipped.
Under dark could have come later as could the hook horrors, bulette etc minotaurs are ok if not a little overpowered (I’m not across 5e maybe they are right).
I just hope as we progress monsters and encounters are level appropriate- loving it at the moment.
I’ll save my judgement on the story etc until the full release as we are only in ea and that’s yet to be developed significantly


I'll have to agree with you that so far things are fine the way that they are. There are a few battles that we shouldn't be running into already like the Matriarch spiders for example which are around level 10 or 12 if you figure in the hit points of a fighter.
Originally Posted by DragonMaster69
Originally Posted by Tarorn
I think it’s been well handled so far for levels 1-4. Would have expected a few kobolds, orcs etc but they may be still to come - then again they may get skipped.
Under dark could have come later as could the hook horrors, bulette etc minotaurs are ok if not a little overpowered (I’m not across 5e maybe they are right).
I just hope as we progress monsters and encounters are level appropriate- loving it at the moment.
I’ll save my judgement on the story etc until the full release as we are only in ea and that’s yet to be developed significantly


I'll have to agree with you that so far things are fine the way that they are. There are a few battles that we shouldn't be running into already like the Matriarch spiders for example which are around level 10 or 12 if you figure in the hit points of a fighter.

I second that.
Originally Posted by Gt27mustang
As for the “mismatch”? I am also a “story and setting makes an RPG” kind of guy, where combat can take a backseat (I.e. Planescape) Buuuut I also like a good fight, and that is for these reasons that I can live with the slightly-off setting at the beginning of BG3. Honestly, aren’t you fed up with every DnD quest beginning in a tavern basement fighting rats? I thinks it’s a nice change of pace.
See, once again, why would you assume that just because I don't like how this game begins I want it to be fighting rats in a basement? I thought Larian was supposed to be all about being creative. If anything, this game's start *is* very similar to another game (just NOT a BG game), namely D:OS2.

If we are supposed to be mere "observers" to all that's happening in the first area involving all those very high CR creatures, as some here have said, then why not just make it all a cutscene and then move us directly into a starting area that is not only level appropriate but also story appropriate?
Originally Posted by Gt27mustang
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Originally Posted by Gt27mustang
BG3 is, by definition, a sequel, yes. But it is a different campaign, with a different protagonist, wich tells a different story, a hundred years apart from the first one. I don't understand why the game should kick off with main character at higher levels, just because the previous games ended with a PC at level 30+ It makes zero sense when you think about it. Larian wants us to experience every rise in power of our (new)protagonist, wich they are entitled to, and like you I like BG1 better than 2 because, for me, levels 1-10 are what I like in DnD. I am more annoyed by the settings/encounters at the beginning of the game (the hells at level 1, the underdark at level ~2,...) but I can live with that.
So then we actually agree. So why the hostility toward me?

The only difference between our takes, it seems, is that whereas you "can live with [the mismatch]," I find it very hard to do so. My immersion in the story and the setting is everything for me playing a cRPG, and this mismatch breaks my immersion and aggravates the heck out of me.

Thrust me, no hostility here, just defending my opinion.

As for the “mismatch”? I am also a “story and setting makes an RPG” kind of guy, where combat can take a backseat (I.e. Planescape) Buuuut I also like a good fight, and that is for these reasons that I can live with the slightly-off setting at the beginning of BG3. Honestly, aren’t you fed up with every DnD quest beginning in a tavern basement fighting rats? I thinks it’s a nice change of pace.

BG optinal Rat fighting in tutorial, BG2 no ratfighting but high level, NWN no ratfighting, NWN2 no ratfighting.
BG3 PnP version
DM: You wake up and se a MINDFLAYER!
Player: oh right im lvl 1 gues thats GG then 3s new record.
DM: But he just puts somekind of tadpole in your eye then leaves.
Player: Oh fucking great im turning Illithid. oh great dn did you forget i cand cast wish as a lvl freaking 1 sorc?
DM: Suddenly the there is a explosion and you break free from your imprisonment you realise your not in kansas anymore and the dead imp suggest you are in HELL!
Player: OK thats it im out!

yeah the start is the most stupid i have ver seen in an RPG Knights of xentar have better story.
Id prefer rats in basement.

its not hard to do like in bg1. Have a high level char like Gorion protect you. While elminster is around so im prety sure thats whats made the real high level baddies stay away.

not just luck a billion times
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Originally Posted by Gt27mustang
As for the “mismatch”? I am also a “story and setting makes an RPG” kind of guy, where combat can take a backseat (I.e. Planescape) Buuuut I also like a good fight, and that is for these reasons that I can live with the slightly-off setting at the beginning of BG3. Honestly, aren’t you fed up with every DnD quest beginning in a tavern basement fighting rats? I thinks it’s a nice change of pace.

See, once again, why would you assume that just because I don't like how this game begins I want it to be fighting rats in a basement? I thought Larian was supposed to be all about being creative. If anything, this game's start *is* very similar to another game (just NOT a BG game), namely D:OS2.

If we are supposed to be mere "observers" to all that's happening in the first area involving all those very high CR creatures, as some here have said, then why not just make it all a cutscene and then move us directly into a starting area that is not only level appropriate but also story appropriate?

You misunderstood. I was not saying YOU liked fighting rats in tavern basements, I was generalising, you could say. Its a better start than countless other RPGs, or a least, certainly different...

Its true though that you can fight your way to the helm, killing imps and weak intellect devourers, but from that point on, what happens next should definetly be a cutscene. No point in making us fight past the cambions. People are just going to try and cheese them, with no real rewards/consequences, and killing 3 cambions with a 2/3 persons team is just not realistic. Show us the power and intentions of the Cambions, and then move on.
Originally Posted by Wyrmblade
Originally Posted by Gt27mustang
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Originally Posted by Gt27mustang
BG3 is, by definition, a sequel, yes. But it is a different campaign, with a different protagonist, wich tells a different story, a hundred years apart from the first one. I don't understand why the game should kick off with main character at higher levels, just because the previous games ended with a PC at level 30+ It makes zero sense when you think about it. Larian wants us to experience every rise in power of our (new)protagonist, wich they are entitled to, and like you I like BG1 better than 2 because, for me, levels 1-10 are what I like in DnD. I am more annoyed by the settings/encounters at the beginning of the game (the hells at level 1, the underdark at level ~2,...) but I can live with that.
So then we actually agree. So why the hostility toward me?

The only difference between our takes, it seems, is that whereas you "can live with [the mismatch]," I find it very hard to do so. My immersion in the story and the setting is everything for me playing a cRPG, and this mismatch breaks my immersion and aggravates the heck out of me.

Thrust me, no hostility here, just defending my opinion.

As for the “mismatch”? I am also a “story and setting makes an RPG” kind of guy, where combat can take a backseat (I.e. Planescape) Buuuut I also like a good fight, and that is for these reasons that I can live with the slightly-off setting at the beginning of BG3. Honestly, aren’t you fed up with every DnD quest beginning in a tavern basement fighting rats? I thinks it’s a nice change of pace.

BG optinal Rat fighting in tutorial, BG2 no ratfighting but high level, NWN no ratfighting, NWN2 no ratfighting.
BG3 PnP version
DM: You wake up and se a MINDFLAYER!
Player: oh right im lvl 1 gues thats GG then 3s new record.
DM: But he just puts somekind of tadpole in your eye then leaves.
Player: Oh fucking great im turning Illithid. oh great dn did you forget i cand cast wish as a lvl freaking 1 sorc?
DM: Suddenly the there is a explosion and you break free from your imprisonment you realise your not in kansas anymore and the dead imp suggest you are in HELL!
Player: OK thats it im out!

yeah the start is the most stupid i have ver seen in an RPG Knights of xentar have better story.
Id prefer rats in basement.

its not hard to do like in bg1. Have a high level char like Gorion protect you. While elminster is around so im prety sure thats whats made the real high level baddies stay away.

not just luck a billion times

No, thanks. I don't want to start playing in the sewers or prison again... I've had enough.
© Larian Studios forums