Larian Studios
Disengage as a bonus action allows us to avoid 100% of attacks of opportunity.

When you're playing ranged characters In BG3 it's usually easy to avoid melee combats for a few reasons :
- the low number of melee enemies in proportion of ranged ennemies
- the map design and the verticality. Melee enemies have to spend entire turns to get your ranged characters (and/or simply bug and don't know what to do - early access)
- the very limited numbers of walking ennemies that could surprised us and start combats in an unexpected way.

But on top of that whatever the battlefield, whatever our position, whatever our class and so on... being able to avoid all of them broke the whole concept and it's tactical value.
By giving players the ability to avoid easily 100% of the AOO, we simply teach them very quickly not to care about this mechanic. AOO problem? Don't worry, just jump !

Attacks of opportunity are a key element of melee classes both offensively and defensively.
You'll try to reach ranged ennemies to annoy them and eventually have a free attack against them.
On the other hand you may also try to protect your own ranged characters to avoid them being engaged and you'll often have to think about your position to gain / not suffer AOO.

In Baldur's Gate 3 you can use AOOs offensively, but the whole tactical side of the defensive aspect is reduced to "don't worry, just jump"
Good position, intercepting ennemies, protecting your allies... It doesn't really matter in the game because everyone can disengage for free not to suffer the threatened status and/or AOO.

Good positions - intercepting the enemy - protecting your allies from melee... This usually don't really matter in BG3 and this is excessively lame.

On top of that it does not really feel engaging for the higher difficulty levels.

AOO are one of those things you have to think about at higher difficulty levels. On a normal difficulty level it's a bonus or a slight offset depending on our actions.
On higher difficulty level AOO and the battlefield control related are something you have to care about, to understand and to play with.

This is what attacks of opportunity are for: to give melee characters the ability to control the battlefield with their AOO.
Their position should really matter and their gameplay rely A LOT on AOO. That's a part of what makes them interresting and fun to play / to face.

There's obvisouly a problem according to me because the few melee characters are always trying to rush our wizards. That's boring but that's related to the AI and nothing else.

Attacks of opportunity should be an important part of the gameplay with melee characters and in BG3, it's very cheap especially defensively.

Players are not stupid and after their first fail they'll know the map / the position that could help them (if they didn't recon first)
"our position matter" would be even more true if it wasn't only to become highground gods.

I'm fine with something "easier" for newcomers but at this point, better remove all AOO... it totally unbalance combats and make our characters even more powerfull compared to the AI.

I'm usually a big fan of melee characters from the 1H+shield fighter to the dualwielder ranger, the dexterity based cleric or anything else... But really, in BG3 their gameplay is very limited.
This game deserve strong foundations before trying to make things harder/easier and breaking one of the main appeal of melee character does not look "strong" at all to me.
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
I'm fine with something "easier" for newcomers but at this point, better remove all AOO... it totally unbalance combats and make our characters even more powerfull compared to the AI.

Why not just fix the problem and make Jump provoke AOO? That way it keeps the tactical aspect of it.
And for the hundredth time: +1

Disengage should be a full action. I don’t even understand how somebody could have come with the idea to make it a bonus action. It requires a total misunderstanding of how combat works in dnd.
Honestly i get hit by AOO quite often ... but its usualy bcs i didnt notice that my character need to move little bit to cast/shoot, and then s/he get smashed ...
So i would not say that with disengage for everyone AOO is completely wasted ...

But, over and over ... i agree with OP.
I would also appreciate being able to jump without need to spend Bonus Action.
And i would certainly not mind if Disengage become ability of certain classes. (If i get that right)
Originally Posted by Reckem
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
I'm fine with something "easier" for newcomers but at this point, better remove all AOO... it totally unbalance combats and make our characters even more powerfull compared to the AI.

Why not just fix the problem and make Jump provoke AOO? That way it keeps the tactical aspect of it.

Because if jump provoke AOO, it's not a disengage anymore smile

Originally Posted by VenusP
And for the hundredth time: +1

Disengage should be a full action. I don’t even understand how somebody could have come with the idea to make it a bonus action. It requires a total misunderstanding of how combat works in dnd.

I guess it's more a misunderstanding of how melee combat works in many games than specificaly in DnD lol

Originally Posted by Ragnarojavascript: void(0)kCzD
Honestly i get hit by AOO quite often ... but its usualy bcs i didnt notice that my character need to move little bit to cast/shoot, and then s/he get smashed ...
So i would not say that with disengage for everyone AOO is completely wasted ...

But, over and over ... i agree with OP.
I would also appreciate being able to jump without need to spend Bonus Action.
And i would certainly not mind if Disengage become ability of certain classes. (If i get that right)

Should the game actions be designed considering players will sometimes make mistake ? I'm sure the answer is no :p

- Disengage decouple from jump.
- Disengage as an action
- Jump as a bonus action or better as a free action part of your movement would be my choice (and as a part of movement it would provoke an AOO)
You forgot no sentinel
Originally Posted by Abits
You forgot no sentinel

Good point. I add it.
This is something I never really realized but you're right. We can easily ambush our ennemies but we are never really surprised.
I think most of these changes are for two things.
The first is to give the player more things to do on his turn (including shove) and the second is probably more important to speed up the fights.
Each round the player has to spend on disangage instead of offensive action extends the fight quite a bit.

You may think that this is not a big problem, but reading some opinions according to some people the fight is still too slow.
The question is whether this group of players is really big enough to justify this change.
I see only one way out: to make different modes for different groups of players. It is important though that the game should be equally good balanced for each mode.
Originally Posted by Rhobar121
Each round the player has to spend on disangage instead of offensive action extends the fight quite a bit.
That's a double edged sword though. What also extands the fight, is not being able to lock enemies down. I can't tell you how annoyed I was at goblin archers, who could jump out of engagement, run across entire screen, climb up and take a shot at me with advantage. What makes attack of opportunity easy to ignore for you, also makes it easy to ignore for enemies. Disengage is a tool and a choice - and there are limited bonus actions squichy characters like Wizards can use to protect themselves or escape.

I am currently playing Solasta, and I am afraid I have to wholeheartedly joint "Larian, why you mess up a perfectly fine system?!" I won't mention reactions, which, you know, work in Solasta. Push/jump seemed bad, when I didn't experience what actual 5e feels like, but now the decision puzzles me even further. And outside few encounters (like those -annoying Flying Snakes) I don't feel like Solasta encounters drag for longer then BG3.
Originally Posted by Wormerine
Originally Posted by Rhobar121
Each round the player has to spend on disangage instead of offensive action extends the fight quite a bit.
That's a double edged sword though. What also extands the fight, is not being able to lock enemies down. I can't tell you how annoyed I was at goblin archers, who could jump out of engagement, run across entire screen, climb up and take a shot at me with advantage. What makes attack of opportunity easy to ignore for you, also makes it easy to ignore for enemies. Disengage is a tool and a choice - and there are limited bonus actions squichy characters like Wizards can use to protect themselves or escape.

I am currently playing Solasta, and I am afraid I have to wholeheartedly joint "Larian, why you mess up a perfectly fine system?!" I won't mention reactions, which, you know, work in Solasta. Push/jump seemed bad, when I didn't experience what actual 5e feels like, but now the decision puzzles me even further. And outside few encounters (like those -annoying Flying Snakes) I don't feel like Solasta encounters drag for longer then BG3.

Goblins have free disengage though.
+1

We need a real, full action, disengage with it's own animations. Would be pretty nice if short races were able to hero-limbo under the legs of the taller races.
I am so sick of wading into the fray getting plucked with Arrows so I can get within MELEE range of that F'ing Goblin archer just so he can on his turn; Disengage, take a few steps and then pluck me up the arse again. Disengage should be a FULL ACTION, Jump should provoke an AOO. Cant we just follow the rules of 5e as written on this? They, (DnD), have spent decades trying to perfect combat, why would we change this?

1. Either this Goblin stands his ground and tries to shoot me.
2. The Goblin switches to melee and takes a swing.
3. The Goblin disengages and runs his sorry arse away from me.
4. The Goblin tries to move away from me to make a shot at me, THEREBY provoking an AOO.
BUT NEVER NEVER NEVER
5. The Goblin cheeses away from me with a BOGUS bonus action of Disengage or Jump and then Laughs as he get full benefit of shooting an arrow at from safe distance.
Calling BS on option 5.
Originally Posted by sanctifiedwarrio
I am so sick of wading into the fray getting plucked with Arrows so I can get within MELEE range of that F'ing Goblin archer just so he can on his turn; Disengage, take a few steps and then pluck me up the arse again. Disengage should be a FULL ACTION, Jump should provoke an AOO. Cant we just follow the rules of 5e as written on this? They, (DnD), have spent decades trying to perfect combat, why would we change this?

1. Either this Goblin stands his ground and tries to shoot me.
2. The Goblin switches to melee and takes a swing.
3. The Goblin disengages and runs his sorry arse away from me.
4. The Goblin tries to move away from me to make a shot at me, THEREBY provoking an AOO.
BUT NEVER NEVER NEVER
5. The Goblin cheeses away from me with a BOGUS bonus action of Disengage or Jump and then Laughs as he get full benefit of shooting an arrow at from safe distance.
Calling BS on option 5.

Yeah, this bothers me as well. However aren't rogues supposed to have disengage as a bonus action? They get Cunning Action at level two which allows this. Do the Goblin Archers maybe count as rogues?
Originally Posted by Rhobar121
I think most of these changes are for two things.
The first is to give the player more things to do on his turn (including shove) and the second is probably more important to speed up the fights.
Each round the player has to spend on disangage instead of offensive action extends the fight quite a bit.

You may think that this is not a big problem, but reading some opinions according to some people the fight is still too slow.
The question is whether this group of players is really big enough to justify this change.

Shove is an other thread but if I may agree that combats are too slow, I strongly disagree that combats are faster because you always have a bonus action, especially disengage.

Is that faster to use your bonus actions to disengage first, move and then use your action rather than moving, watching the AOO and then use your action ?
It's not faster, it's just easier.

And is that faster to click the disengage as a bonus action button rather than i.e :

- Using Mysty step as a bonus action to disengage
- Using a spell that push your ennemies like thunderwave to be disengaged and deal damages
- Using shield of faith as a bonus action to increase your AC
- Using shocking grasp to deal damages on touch before eventually moving
- Using this exact same bonus action when you're playing a lvl 2 rogue

It's never faster, it's just brainless and repetitive.

Players are not stupid and you don't have to dive DEEP in the PHB or in a massive encyclopedia to understand what spells, features and conditions are usefull for... if the game explains it well.

There are tons of possibilities and spells and whatever you want in D&D for everything.
They could also eventually add a "disengage as a bonus action" feature for specific classes that actually have features that doesn't really work in the game if necessary.

If combats are too slow in BG3, it's definitely not because DnD is lacking possibilities to disengage.

I don't have any references for the TT but I guess it's the same than in other video games that uses the 5th edition : you don't really have to use the disengage action very often.
At least, less than in BG3... Finally that's maybe a reasons why combats are slow in BG3...

Originally Posted by Blackheifer
Originally Posted by sanctifiedwarrio
I am so sick of wading into the fray getting plucked with Arrows so I can get within MELEE range of that F'ing Goblin archer just so he can on his turn; Disengage, take a few steps and then pluck me up the arse again. Disengage should be a FULL ACTION, Jump should provoke an AOO. Cant we just follow the rules of 5e as written on this? They, (DnD), have spent decades trying to perfect combat, why would we change this?

1. Either this Goblin stands his ground and tries to shoot me.
2. The Goblin switches to melee and takes a swing.
3. The Goblin disengages and runs his sorry arse away from me.
4. The Goblin tries to move away from me to make a shot at me, THEREBY provoking an AOO.
BUT NEVER NEVER NEVER
5. The Goblin cheeses away from me with a BOGUS bonus action of Disengage or Jump and then Laughs as he get full benefit of shooting an arrow at from safe distance.
Calling BS on option 5.

Yeah, this bothers me as well. However aren't rogues supposed to have disengage as a bonus action? They get Cunning Action at level two which allows this. Do the Goblin Archers maybe count as rogues?

Goblins can use disengage as a bonus action in DnD. That's why these specific creatures are the only one to use it in BG3.
I agree that it's very frustrating. There are A LOT of goblins archers and casters.

I guess it would be less a problem if there were more focus melee creatures.
I guess more melee focussed creatures would lead to less disengage... After all, they don't need to disengage so often... (archers switching to melee when engaged would be cool too)
Copy of post I made a few days ago. Post was lost in the thread I originally posted it in and applies here as well.


I'd like to comment on this portion rq as I feel it may have been tweaked/changed in patch 4. Previous to P4 I had never seen any enemy, other than a goblin, use jump. However during my last 2 playthroughs(both AFTER P4) I've had a few different things start jumping around.

Ogress/Bugbear encounter: I tried having Lazeal and my ranger hold the doorway and the ranger's pet spider filling the interior with webs. First round the Bugbear passed it's save and ran up to Lazeal and started swinging. On its second turn it leaped over Lazeal and the ranger out the doorway to run after Shadowheart who I had in the backfield.

Hag Fight: This was just over the weekend trying out a 3 custom toon party + Lazeal. Here I had 2 different Redcaps use jump, 1 did it 2 turns in a row. I engaged the Hag in her house on one of the back upper floors in the little alcove where I could attempt to trap her in place with Lazeal and Menacing Strike. It worked perfectly and I unloaded on the Hag until the first Redcap got in the house. It ended it's turn halfway from the door to the first set up stairs. I used a ranger's spider to drop a web over the entrance area of the house, basically covering the whole entrance from a few feet in the door to the first set of steps, which enwebbed the Redcap. The next round I finished off the Hag and moved my ranger & Lazeal upstairs to the highest level of the house at the top of the ladder down to the forge area. I left my cleric and druid on the level where the hag died and moved the spider to the center of the next level down(where the smaller ladder is to the entrance overhang area and back patio door). The Redcap jumped out of the web on its turn to the bottom of the entrance stairs then headed right and down the next set of stairs to the forge level headed for the ladder back there. My ranger and Lazeal stayed up where they were and picked it off before it got to them.

The next Redcap that came in ended its turn just inside the house but before the web. I had my spider at the top of the stairs to the level it was on and the spider model is so big I took up the entire top of the stairs. Behind it a bit I placed my cleric and druid on the same level as the spider at the base of the stairs up to where I killed the Hag. On its next turn the Redcap used jump to clear the web entirely and land on the first set of stairs and took a left on the first platform toward the stairs leading up to the spider but ended its turn before reaching the base of the stairs. My cleric and druid were just using crossbows while they waited for it to get closer. On its next turn the Redcap used jump to leap over the spider, up onto our level and come take a swing at my druid both on the same turn.


Idk if that is something special for Redcaps or if Larian is maybe starting to give the AI the same options as PCs.
Originally Posted by Blackheifer
Originally Posted by sanctifiedwarrio
I am so sick of wading into the fray getting plucked with Arrows so I can get within MELEE range of that F'ing Goblin archer just so he can on his turn; Disengage, take a few steps and then pluck me up the arse again. Disengage should be a FULL ACTION, Jump should provoke an AOO. Cant we just follow the rules of 5e as written on this? They, (DnD), have spent decades trying to perfect combat, why would we change this?

1. Either this Goblin stands his ground and tries to shoot me.
2. The Goblin switches to melee and takes a swing.
3. The Goblin disengages and runs his sorry arse away from me.
4. The Goblin tries to move away from me to make a shot at me, THEREBY provoking an AOO.
BUT NEVER NEVER NEVER
5. The Goblin cheeses away from me with a BOGUS bonus action of Disengage or Jump and then Laughs as he get full benefit of shooting an arrow at from safe distance.
Calling BS on option 5.

Yeah, this bothers me as well. However aren't rogues supposed to have disengage as a bonus action? They get Cunning Action at level two which allows this. Do the Goblin Archers maybe count as rogues?


Every Goblin has Nimble Escape. "The goblin can take the Disengage or Hide action as a bonus action on each of its turns." In the case of the Goblins, this is 100% consistent with how it works in 5e
Originally Posted by Reckem
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
I'm fine with something "easier" for newcomers but at this point, better remove all AOO... it totally unbalance combats and make our characters even more powerfull compared to the AI.

Why not just fix the problem and make Jump provoke AOO? That way it keeps the tactical aspect of it.

First off, agree with the OP. Disengage should not be a bonus action as a general mechanic.

Secondly, Jump. This is harder to discuss. Jumping in D&D in some limited cases only uses part of your movement or requires a Full Action. But both these cases are not bonus actions.

Jump adds huge changes to mobility not found in the tabletop. Removing the disengage is a start. Even after that, Jump itself likely requires addressing.

Not hopeful this will change. This critic has been there since early access release with no mention on their thoughts or plans regarding it. I will still keep bring it up with each large feedback post.
Originally Posted by JiruoVX
Not hopeful this will change.
Looking forward to the next community update which is supposed to shed some light on how Larian process the feedback from players. There are so many things that have been discussed to death that I am failing to believe they wouldn’t be addressed in some way.
+1 for full action disengage

I'm also looking forward to the next community update, hopefully its not focusing only on story feedback, but feedback on mechanics.
+1 Agree with the OP and most people here
Disengage should be it's own separate full-action. At least an option given via a different game mode.
Just another person reminding that goblins have Disengage as a bonus action in 5e, not just in BG3.
Originally Posted by Eugerome
Just another person reminding that goblins have Disengage as a bonus action in 5e, not just in BG3.

Yes, Goblins are fine less if they have the bonus action jump.
Originally Posted by JiruoVX
Originally Posted by Eugerome
Just another person reminding that goblins have Disengage as a bonus action in 5e, not just in BG3.

Yes, Goblins are fine less if they have the bonus action jump.
Goblins having bonus action jump&disengage is practically RAW, as jumping is a free part of movement. The issue here would be if they could use this jump to gain free extra movement, but that would imply a much more intelligent AI than I've seen so far in BG3.

It'd be interesting if Larian implemented the "hide" bonus action for goblins. The game could make the goblins literally invisible/untargetable unless one of the PCs succeeded on their perception check or moved so that the goblin was directly in an unobscured line-of-sight. Of course, the main reason to "hide" is to gain advantage on your attack, which is ~irrelevant with Height/Backstab advantage...
I agree jumping should be part of movement. But jumping currently isn't which is a problem.
And jumping gives you far more distance and range then it likely should without high Str/Athletics or spells.

But we both agree jumping shouldn't give you more total distance.
The game is still in early access; is it possible that Larian intends to refine the movement and action systems before full release, including making Disengage, Shove, etc. more consistent with 5E? Do we have evidence that this change was deliberate and permanent?
Originally Posted by Machinus
The game is still in early access; is it possible that Larian intends to refine the movement and action systems before full release, including making Disengage, Shove, etc. more consistent with 5E? Do we have evidence that this change was deliberate and permanent?
This decision was definitely deliberate. I don't see how it could have possibly an accident..??

Swen has talked about Shove in an interview and how much he likes it, so it's almost certainly permanent. https://www.destructoid.com/stories...-druids-and-baldur-s-gate-3-624779.phtml
Originally Posted by Interview
"In [interviewer's] own experience, I've been loving the ability to push, shove, and throw things to manipulate the world with my Githyanki Warrior, and those mechanics are something [Swen] says he's happy people are grappling with."
I read that interview, but there are other parts of the game that are clearly incomplete and need to be added later. I don't see that it is conclusive that they will not fix the action requirements. Consider the rough state of many other basic features like dual-wielding, long/short rests, and status effects, how they are also still experimenting with the game, i.e. initiative grouping. It could mean they will alter the mechanic later.

Shove and dash are clearly defined in 5E and have requirements based on attributes and actions. I would be surprised if they just ignored all of this in the final version. Giving free auto-succeed abilities out of class eliminates class identity and unbalances the game, so I hope they read these threads.
Originally Posted by Machinus
I read that interview, but there are other parts of the game that are clearly incomplete and need to be added later. I don't see that it is conclusive that they will not fix the action requirements. Consider the rough state of many other basic features like dual-wielding, long/short rests, and status effects, how they are also still experimenting with the game, i.e. initiative grouping. It could mean they will alter the mechanic later.

Shove and dash are clearly defined in 5E and have requirements based on attributes and actions. I would be surprised if they just ignored all of this in the final version. Giving free auto-succeed abilities out of class eliminates class identity and unbalances the game, so I hope they read these threads.
I agree that it isn't conclusive evidence that they won't fix Shove, Jump, etc. I just don't think there's any concrete sign that they will fix them, whereas there are signs that Larian likes things how they are. The most relevant example: bringing Jeremy Crawford onto Panel from Hell 2 for effectively the sole reason of giving WotC's blessing for Larian to make any changes they want to "adapt 5e to a video game".

I hope to be proven wrong here. Hopefully this upcoming community update will directly discuss Larian's homebrew changes, the reason behind them, the feedback they've received, and whether Larian is considering any changes.
Let's not forget they gave almost every enemy some form of teleport that doesn't trigger aoo's.

What's the point of engaging a minotaur or hook horror in melee if they're all going to jump straight to Gale or wherever they want without drawing an aoo from your fighter?

That combined with the AI that actively avoids targeting high AC targets makes for really dumb combat.

And they actually changed the system to work this way from the default 5e logic where melee and zone of control matter. So they must think this is somehow better. I'm not convinced this is the best developer to be making tactical combat even though mostly everything else is top notch.
Originally Posted by 1varangian
Let's not forget they gave almost every enemy some form of teleport that doesn't trigger aoo's.

What's the point of engaging a minotaur or hook horror in melee if they're all going to jump straight to Gale or wherever they want without drawing an aoo from your fighter?

That combined with the AI that actively avoids targeting high AC targets makes for really dumb combat.

And they actually changed the system to work this way from the default 5e logic where melee and zone of control matter. So they must think this is somehow better. I'm not convinced this is the best developer to be making tactical combat even though mostly everything else is top notch.
This is probably why they changed mirror image to grant +9 AC instead of giving you 3 mirror images (and also made mage armor more powerful). In testing, they found that enemies, with the teleport abilities + AI + various auto-damaging attacks, were always going for and murdering the squishy mages in the back. So Larian decided to change spells so that mages' AC would be increased, preventing the AI from targeting them.

That's the only reason I can think of for this change to mirror image, besides just not wanting to animate it..
Almost every ennemies is not really true but yes, ennemies that can teleport means that a bunch of offensive AOO are useless.

And as mrfuji said it probably is another consequence of something. Once again.
Moderator note: please don't quote pages of someone else's post just to add +1.
© Larian Studios forums