Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 7 of 10 1 2 5 6 7 8 9 10
Joined: Oct 2021
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2021
That the story will be as boring as it is now. Hopefully it won't as we're still stuck in Act I.

Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
Tuco Offline OP
veteran
OP Offline
veteran
Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
Originally Posted by Icelyn
That is one of my favorite changes they made!
I love casting 2 spells in the same turn! rpg007
I know, I know.
You are a big fan of everything that is super-convenient, mechanically broken, unbalanced, easy to exploit and trivializes difficulty.

Joined: Jul 2021
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Jul 2021
Originally Posted by Tuco
Originally Posted by Icelyn
That is one of my favorite changes they made!
I love casting 2 spells in the same turn! rpg007
I know, I know.
You are a big fan of everything that is super-convenient, mechanically broken, unbalanced, easy to exploit and trivializes difficulty.

She's a cheerleader; pay her no heed. Better yet: there is an "Ignore User" feature just waiting to be utilized.

Joined: Oct 2021
Z
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Z
Joined: Oct 2021
Icelyn: Has a positive opinion of a mechanic in a game she purchased.
This forum: you fool. you absolute buffoon. you think you can challenge me in my own realm? you think you can rebel against my authority? you dare come into my house and upturn my dining chairs and spill coffee grounds in my Keurig? you thought you were safe in your chain mail armor behind that screen of yours. I will take these laminate wood floor boards and destroy you. I didn’t want war. but i didn’t start it.

I find the hypocrisy in this thread regarding tone, positivity, and negativity to be palpable. This game has serious flaws, but half of you go into "positive" threads complaining about the IRREDEEMABLY and fundamentally broken and shitty nature of the game and absolutely shitting on anyone trying to get some constructive positivity out of an overwhelmingly naysaying and negative forum for some semblance of future direction, and not staying on topic, and then if someone complains about it, all of a sudden you are the voices of virtuous criticism and everyone else is a bunch of yes-men. But when someone makes an offhand comment disagreeing with you about something you dislike that they happen to like, all of a sudden they're a cheerleader? That's completely arbitrary and self-righteous. Maybe people don't think like you, and you're hardly the arbiter of good taste.

Also, and I cannot stress this enough, someone having a different opinion on what makes something fun is not a personal slight against you people. If your response to anyone having different minor tastes than you is to mute them or call them a cheerleader, I think you shouldn't be on forums. And Ragitsu, on that basis, Icelyn is as much a cheerleader as you are a petulant child.


Remember the human:
Joined: Mar 2021
M
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
M
Joined: Mar 2021
Originally Posted by Kendaric
That we won't get a real D&D game and it will be up to the modders to fix the game to actually feel and play like a D&D game.

That's my greatest fear for BG3 at the moment. I have other worries as well, of course, but those are comparatively minor like hating most of the companions.

I don't think you know what D&D is, so let me explain.

D&D is a DM and players using a rather bad system based on what was popular 3000 years ago, now what makes it special is the DM and players, because the DM can do whatever he wants with the "rules" and the players engagement can make magic.

In a computer game you get one of those books with multiple choices, where a DM has unlimited choices, you may get multiplayer, but it's still lacking a DM, so choice limited and there is virtually no "roleplaying" to create the "magic", as everyone is locked into a story.

So what we have is a hopefully good visual novel with multiple choice mechanics, using a horrible (on computers) D&D system.

Joined: Oct 2021
Z
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Z
Joined: Oct 2021
Originally Posted by Miravlix
Originally Posted by Kendaric
That we won't get a real D&D game and it will be up to the modders to fix the game to actually feel and play like a D&D game.

That's my greatest fear for BG3 at the moment. I have other worries as well, of course, but those are comparatively minor like hating most of the companions.

I don't think you know what D&D is, so let me explain.

D&D is a DM and players using a rather bad system based on what was popular 3000 years ago, now what makes it special is the DM and players, because the DM can do whatever he wants with the "rules" and the players engagement can make magic.

In a computer game you get one of those books with multiple choices, where a DM has unlimited choices, you may get multiplayer, but it's still lacking a DM, so choice limited and there is virtually no "roleplaying" to create the "magic", as everyone is locked into a story.

So what we have is a hopefully good visual novel with multiple choice mechanics, using a horrible (on computers) D&D system.
The key is to copy a developers brain into a computer like in SOMA and have an AI DM based on an actual human brainscan. Honestly, I think there's a horror story in there, about a fully conscious mind being copied into a video game to serve the rest of eternity as a DM, all for the sake of a more cohesive cRPG experience.


Remember the human:
Joined: Jul 2021
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Jul 2021
Originally Posted by Miravlix
D&D is a DM and players using a rather bad system based on what was popular 3000 years ago

In fact, it's so bad, it has persisted for nearly fifty years, indirectly spawned a host of imitators, helped keep the tabletop roleplaying game market afloat and provided countless hours of entertainment. Anyhow, as of this moment, the version of 5e D&D in Larian's attempt is closer to an M.C. Escher interpretation of the rules (as opposed to the rules simply as written).

Joined: Feb 2022
Location: UK
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Feb 2022
Location: UK
Originally Posted by Zerubbabel
Icelyn: Has a positive opinion of a mechanic in a game she purchased.
This forum: you fool. you absolute buffoon. you think you can challenge me in my own realm? you think you can rebel against my authority? you dare come into my house and upturn my dining chairs and spill coffee grounds in my Keurig? you thought you were safe in your chain mail armor behind that screen of yours. I will take these laminate wood floor boards and destroy you. I didn’t want war. but i didn’t start it.

I find the hypocrisy in this thread regarding tone, positivity, and negativity to be palpable. This game has serious flaws, but half of you go into "positive" threads complaining about the IRREDEEMABLY and fundamentally broken and shitty nature of the game and absolutely shitting on anyone trying to get some constructive positivity out of an overwhelmingly naysaying and negative forum for some semblance of future direction, and not staying on topic, and then if someone complains about it, all of a sudden you are the voices of virtuous criticism and everyone else is a bunch of yes-men. But when someone makes an offhand comment disagreeing with you about something you dislike that they happen to like, all of a sudden they're a cheerleader? That's completely arbitrary and self-righteous. Maybe people don't think like you, and you're hardly the arbiter of good taste.

Also, and I cannot stress this enough, someone having a different opinion on what makes something fun is not a personal slight against you people. If your response to anyone having different minor tastes than you is to mute them or call them a cheerleader, I think you shouldn't be on forums. And Ragitsu, on that basis, Icelyn is as much a cheerleader as you are a petulant child.

Yes, @Icelyn you do you! This forum is all the better for your positivity and enthusiasm for the game, which badly needs some sunshine and rainbows to balance out the b*tching. Which is not to say I only want sunshine and rainbows. The b*tching is important and interesting too.

I'm not sure whether, though, some of the folk here don't realise or just don't care when they're crossing the line from robust debate into being insulting, or whether there are personal or cultural factors at play here and I and others are seeing unpleasantness when it's not intended. But the effect on the mood here can occasionally be really chilling.

Joined: Jul 2021
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Jul 2021
[Linked Image from pbs.twimg.com]

Joined: Oct 2021
Z
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Z
Joined: Oct 2021

I don't even hate when Tuco does his usual Tuco dialogue because he's still got a point to make. I disagree with Tuco a lot, but I think he makes valid and fair contributions to discussions about the game and its shortcomings. I do enjoy praising the chain system as a means of summoning him, though. I just wish the "negativists" would give "positivists" the benefit of the doubt like "positivists" do for the "negativists," but apparently that's too much to ask. Did I miss out on something before joining the forum in an active capacity? Did Icelyn kick a puppy or something? I don't agree with what Icelyn has to say all the time, but I don't hate her for it, or even think less of her. For example, I think Halsin is a boring character and wouldn't mind seeing less of him, but I can see why Icelyn likes him.

Hell, don't get me wrong. 99% of the time I enjoy Tuco's points and Ragitsu's points. And JandK's points. And Ragnarok's points. They all have valid things to say about video games in general, gaming systems and their consistency, and what makes a good game. I don't understand why people can't look at Icelyn's tastes and be like, "Well, those tastes are not my own, and here is my reasoned argument for why my tastes lead to a more cohesive experience, but I understand why, knowing what you value and the kind of experience you and other players are pursuing, you might prefer the way Larian has already gone." It's not admitting ideological defeat. It's not cowing in the face of opposition or dissent. It's just recognizing the basic fact that video games are multifaceted pieces of media that appeal to many different types of people and tastes, thus leading to people enjoying remarkably different things about the game, thus leading to heavily divergent philosophies on what makes a game good. It's much better than the refrain of, "I think objectively; therefore, I am objective." If I like something Larian did in BG3 (a game I happily paid for and logged plenty of hours in), I don't think it makes me a fanboy or a cheerleader to say, "I like the execution of this mechanic." Hell, there are games I fucking hate about which I can find something to praise.

I have a broader philosophy about feedback, though. I think feedback which is 100% negative for a work such as this is not constructive. If we say no to EVERYTHING, we aren't giving the Larian team any actionable direction and our posts amount to a great screaming into the void of "We hate everything." We have to affirm SOMETHING (not a lot, maybe a few things) to provide a sense of direction. The overwhelming majority of feedback can be negative, but some positive feedback is necessary to provide a semblance of direction, a base on which one can make modifications. Prior to WWII, some countries repaired damaged planes by simply repairing the points of damage when the plane landed. During WWII, instead of repairing the points of damage from the landing planes, the engineers reinforced the undamaged points of landing aircraft, reasoning that if the planes were still landing, the vital points must not have been hit. Reinforcing what still works is an important part of feedback, and sometimes we disagree about it, just as sometimes we disagree about what should be added or removed. But, again, heavily divergent philosophies about what makes a game good. It is important to understand what is reasoned argument and what is simply taste. And that no one is lesser for following another school of thought, provided they can provide a reasoned explanation. Which brings me to explanatory power. But I think everyone's had enough of my feedback philosophy.



Remember the human:
Joined: Jun 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jun 2020
Originally Posted by Tuco
Originally Posted by Icelyn
I love casting 2 spells in the same turn! rpg007
I know, I know.

To be fair to Icelyn, folks who know me might be justified in thinking of me as one of the strongest proponents of sticking to the written rules where possible and as faithfully as reasonably possible for the game's translation... and others might go further and consider me one of the strongest "5e is an ideal system" debaters on this forum (I'm not, and it's not - it's definitely got its problems), but I am also a strong proponent of the more or less arbitrary bonus action casting limitation rule being completely abolished and forgotten about, as long as the restriction remains for quicken spell specifically (without locking out reaction spells on the same turn, too). The universal Ba casting restriction does not need to exist in the 5e system, and only harms enjoyable gameplay.

Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
Originally Posted by Niara
Originally Posted by Tuco
Originally Posted by Icelyn
I love casting 2 spells in the same turn! rpg007
I know, I know.

To be fair to Icelyn, folks who know me might be justified in thinking of me as one of the strongest proponents of sticking to the written rules where possible and as faithfully as reasonably possible for the game's translation... and others might go further and consider me one of the strongest "5e is an ideal system" debaters on this forum (I'm not, and it's not - it's definitely got its problems), but I am also a strong proponent of the more or less arbitrary bonus action casting limitation rule being completely abolished and forgotten about, as long as the restriction remains for quicken spell specifically (without locking out reaction spells on the same turn, too). The universal Ba casting restriction does not need to exist in the 5e system, and only harms enjoyable gameplay.

I've stuck up for 5e a lot too, but sometimes I must agree that it is just plain annoying when your powerful spells are locked out because you cast a BA spell. Having the ability in BG3 does make it a bit less restrictive and more fun. Still, there are certain abuses that can be done which unbalance the game.

But, you know, one player recently said to me, "Magic is about breaking rules - the rules of nature. So why can't it just be unbalanced? Nothing about magic is really "fair" or "balanced". That's what makes it magic."

So what if a player can Misty Step behind a line of enemies and then lightning bolt them in the same turn? Let the mage shine.

Of course, if the enemies start Misty Step into advantageous positions and then also blasting PCs with fireballs or whatever, that could get real bad real fast. That's what I worry about.

Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Spoilering my responses to @Niara and @GM4Him about casting multiple spells per turn, because it's getting off topic
Originally Posted by Niara
...I am also a strong proponent of the more or less arbitrary bonus action casting limitation rule being completely abolished and forgotten about, as long as the restriction remains for quicken spell specifically (without locking out reaction spells on the same turn, too). The universal Ba casting restriction does not need to exist in the 5e system, and only harms enjoyable gameplay.
While we're on this topic, I'll assert that haste (and potions of speed) should not allow you to cast a spell with the extra action, if only to prevent spellcasters from always casting it on themselves.

Originally Posted by GM4Him
But, you know, one player recently said to me, "Magic is about breaking rules - the rules of nature. So why can't it just be unbalanced? Nothing about magic is really "fair" or "balanced". That's what makes it magic."

So what if a player can Misty Step behind a line of enemies and then lightning bolt them in the same turn? Let the mage shine.
That "what" is that D&D and BG3 are party-based games and it doesn't feel good to play character/class that is vastly underpowered relative to other players' characters. Sure, if Larian/WotC want to create a game where you can only play as super-powerful spellcasters, go ahead! These are basically what the DOS games are; fighters get cool spells too. But D&D 5e has fairly normal martials in the mix who will be left behind (even more) if spellcasters are buffed.

...Although, since martials can use spell scrolls in BG3, I suppose BG3 IS a game where everyone's a spellcaster...

Related to this thread's topic and the above, a big fear I have is that separate classes will become even more blurred together in BG3's final release. Everyone can shove/use magic scrolls/easily hide/etc, so there won't be a use for synergy between different classes as every character can do ~everything. I like distinct class roles, thanks.

Joined: Jul 2021
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Jul 2021
Quote
doesn't feel good to play character/class that is vastly underpowered relative to other players' characters

In older editions, this wasn't an issue: the warriors had their time to shine, just like the mages/priests. Nowadays, Wizards of the Coast is all about worshiping at the almighty altar of "balance".

Joined: Apr 2022
A
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
A
Joined: Apr 2022
Originally Posted by Zerubbabel
Icelyn: Has a positive opinion of a mechanic in a game she purchased.
This forum: you fool. you absolute buffoon. you think you can challenge me in my own realm? you think you can rebel against my authority? you dare come into my house and upturn my dining chairs and spill coffee grounds in my Keurig? you thought you were safe in your chain mail armor behind that screen of yours. I will take these laminate wood floor boards and destroy you. I didn’t want war. but i didn’t start it.

I find the hypocrisy in this thread regarding tone, positivity, and negativity to be palpable. This game has serious flaws, but half of you go into "positive" threads complaining about the IRREDEEMABLY and fundamentally broken and shitty nature of the game and absolutely shitting on anyone trying to get some constructive positivity out of an overwhelmingly naysaying and negative forum for some semblance of future direction, and not staying on topic, and then if someone complains about it, all of a sudden you are the voices of virtuous criticism and everyone else is a bunch of yes-men. But when someone makes an offhand comment disagreeing with you about something you dislike that they happen to like, all of a sudden they're a cheerleader? That's completely arbitrary and self-righteous. Maybe people don't think like you, and you're hardly the arbiter of good taste.

Also, and I cannot stress this enough, someone having a different opinion on what makes something fun is not a personal slight against you people. If your response to anyone having different minor tastes than you is to mute them or call them a cheerleader, I think you shouldn't be on forums. And Ragitsu, on that basis, Icelyn is as much a cheerleader as you are a petulant child.

>some constructive positivity
? What's so constructive about "I love casting 2 spells in the same turn!"? What's actually constructive is pointing out that WotC themselves explicitly said that GMs should be VERY cautious when giving playes an oppurtunity to cast 2 non-cantrip spells in one turn and that general rules do not allow it for a very good reason.

>someone having a different opinion on what makes something fun is not a personal slight against you people
It depends. All in all, this is a game in development and feedback might yet affect the final product. So in some sense those BAD and WRONG opinions affect all.
Also, some people condider heroin fun. Some consider kicking homeless cats fun. And? It's not wrong to find something (that someone else finds fun) wrong.

>I think you shouldn't be on forums
I think you shouldn't be on the forums.

Originally Posted by Zerubbabel

I don't even hate when Tuco does his usual Tuco dialogue because he's still got a point to make. I disagree with Tuco a lot, but I think he makes valid and fair contributions to discussions about the game and its shortcomings. I do enjoy praising the chain system as a means of summoning him, though. I just wish the "negativists" would give "positivists" the benefit of the doubt like "positivists" do for the "negativists," but apparently that's too much to ask. Did I miss out on something before joining the forum in an active capacity? Did Icelyn kick a puppy or something? I don't agree with what Icelyn has to say all the time, but I don't hate her for it, or even think less of her. For example, I think Halsin is a boring character and wouldn't mind seeing less of him, but I can see why Icelyn likes him.

Hell, don't get me wrong. 99% of the time I enjoy Tuco's points and Ragitsu's points. And JandK's points. And Ragnarok's points. They all have valid things to say about video games in general, gaming systems and their consistency, and what makes a good game. I don't understand why people can't look at Icelyn's tastes and be like, "Well, those tastes are not my own, and here is my reasoned argument for why my tastes lead to a more cohesive experience, but I understand why, knowing what you value and the kind of experience you and other players are pursuing, you might prefer the way Larian has already gone." It's not admitting ideological defeat. It's not cowing in the face of opposition or dissent. It's just recognizing the basic fact that video games are multifaceted pieces of media that appeal to many different types of people and tastes, thus leading to people enjoying remarkably different things about the game, thus leading to heavily divergent philosophies on what makes a game good. It's much better than the refrain of, "I think objectively; therefore, I am objective." If I like something Larian did in BG3 (a game I happily paid for and logged plenty of hours in), I don't think it makes me a fanboy or a cheerleader to say, "I like the execution of this mechanic." Hell, there are games I fucking hate about which I can find something to praise.

I have a broader philosophy about feedback, though. I think feedback which is 100% negative for a work such as this is not constructive. If we say no to EVERYTHING, we aren't giving the Larian team any actionable direction and our posts amount to a great screaming into the void of "We hate everything." We have to affirm SOMETHING (not a lot, maybe a few things) to provide a sense of direction. The overwhelming majority of feedback can be negative, but some positive feedback is necessary to provide a semblance of direction, a base on which one can make modifications. Prior to WWII, some countries repaired damaged planes by simply repairing the points of damage when the plane landed. During WWII, instead of repairing the points of damage from the landing planes, the engineers reinforced the undamaged points of landing aircraft, reasoning that if the planes were still landing, the vital points must not have been hit. Reinforcing what still works is an important part of feedback, and sometimes we disagree about it, just as sometimes we disagree about what should be added or removed. But, again, heavily divergent philosophies about what makes a game good. It is important to understand what is reasoned argument and what is simply taste. And that no one is lesser for following another school of thought, provided they can provide a reasoned explanation. Which brings me to explanatory power. But I think everyone's had enough of my feedback philosophy.

>I do enjoy praising the chain system as a means of summoning him, though
So you post disingenious oponions to stir people. You're a troll.

Joined: Jul 2021
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Jul 2021
What's with the spoilers?

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
Originally Posted by The_Red_Queen
sunshine and rainbows
And confetti!

Last edited by RagnarokCzD; 25/08/22 06:48 AM.

In the words of the senior NCO instructor at cadet battalion:
“If you ain’t cheating you ain’t trying. And if you got caught you didn’t try hard enough!”
Joined: Jul 2021
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Jul 2021
Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD
Originally Posted by The_Red_Queen
sunshine and rainbows
And confetti!

*looks at your avatar*

Sunshine, huh?

Joined: Mar 2022
S
member
Offline
member
S
Joined: Mar 2022
Someone voicing a one line postive opinion leading to an entiere page of encyclopedic posts about why he is factually wrong, now this is a Larian forum moment.

Joined: Jul 2022
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Jul 2022
Originally Posted by Alexlotr
What's actually constructive is pointing out that WotC themselves explicitly said that GMs should be VERY cautious when giving playes an oppurtunity to cast 2 non-cantrip spells in one turn and that general rules do not allow it for a very good reason

LOL what? It is the equivalent of saying: this influencer said this therefore it is constructive.

Page 7 of 10 1 2 5 6 7 8 9 10

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5