SUGGESTION: Making misses more engaging - 27/01/21 09:34 PM
Here’s an idea I posited in an earlier thread – it’s received some positive feedback so I thought I’d surface it so it has a better chance of being seen.
This is not to debate RNG or whether there are too many misses in the game at this stage or not, that’s been discussed a lot elsewhere. I’m making a suggestion for a way to make misses less repetitive and keep the player more engaged when they do occur. It would be fantastic if Larian created animations for these outcomes, but as a minimum just changing the text that flashes up would work well.
Bear in mind currently there is no visual distinction between a near miss and a miss by a wide margin, unless you dig around in the combat log.
This concept may seem complicated from a tabletop standpoint, but would be very easy to code into a computer game. Here’s what I propose:
• If your attack roll totals 10 or less, you miss – at high levels you’ll never “miss†unless you roll a natural 1, assuming a +8 to hit or better
• If you roll between ten and their base AC from armor (say, 11 to 14) the attack is deflected
• If you roll between their base armor AC and their Dex mod (say, 15-16) the attack is dodged
• If the enemy is using a shield and you roll within 1-2 of their AC the attack is blocked
This could be built on for other scenarios (eg. Mage Armor, rings of protection etc but you get the idea).
Where it gets even more interesting is for a "tactical mode†Larian could hide enemy’s AC and the player needs to use these clues to assess how well they’re doing. If their attacks are being deflected a lot and they’re rolling reasonably well, they could deduce the enemy has a strong natural armor (as an example). This feels truer to regular D&D where the DM doesn’t reveal the enemy’s AC. Players will still be able to glean it eventually, and assess their chances without having to delve into the combat log.
“Missing" every time you fail to meet the enemy’s AC target just doesn’t feel very heroic. Combat in tabletop D&D is more abstract and you have the DM to describe how your arrow thuds into the enemy’s shield, you were so close! This brings BG3 a step closer to that, which in my opinion is a worthwhile and reasonable adjustment to make.
This is not to debate RNG or whether there are too many misses in the game at this stage or not, that’s been discussed a lot elsewhere. I’m making a suggestion for a way to make misses less repetitive and keep the player more engaged when they do occur. It would be fantastic if Larian created animations for these outcomes, but as a minimum just changing the text that flashes up would work well.
Bear in mind currently there is no visual distinction between a near miss and a miss by a wide margin, unless you dig around in the combat log.
This concept may seem complicated from a tabletop standpoint, but would be very easy to code into a computer game. Here’s what I propose:
• If your attack roll totals 10 or less, you miss – at high levels you’ll never “miss†unless you roll a natural 1, assuming a +8 to hit or better
• If you roll between ten and their base AC from armor (say, 11 to 14) the attack is deflected
• If you roll between their base armor AC and their Dex mod (say, 15-16) the attack is dodged
• If the enemy is using a shield and you roll within 1-2 of their AC the attack is blocked
This could be built on for other scenarios (eg. Mage Armor, rings of protection etc but you get the idea).
Where it gets even more interesting is for a "tactical mode†Larian could hide enemy’s AC and the player needs to use these clues to assess how well they’re doing. If their attacks are being deflected a lot and they’re rolling reasonably well, they could deduce the enemy has a strong natural armor (as an example). This feels truer to regular D&D where the DM doesn’t reveal the enemy’s AC. Players will still be able to glean it eventually, and assess their chances without having to delve into the combat log.
“Missing" every time you fail to meet the enemy’s AC target just doesn’t feel very heroic. Combat in tabletop D&D is more abstract and you have the DM to describe how your arrow thuds into the enemy’s shield, you were so close! This brings BG3 a step closer to that, which in my opinion is a worthwhile and reasonable adjustment to make.