Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 69 of 94 1 2 67 68 69 70 71 93 94
Joined: Sep 2020
Banned
Offline
Banned
Joined: Sep 2020
I don't see why it is such a bad thing that some people are disappointed that RTwP isn't the combat system. It seems like any time someone states a preference for RTwP they get jumped on for being "nostaligic" and wanting "outdated 2d graphics" as if that is what people are talking about.

I dunno, the deeper I dig in to these forums as a new user the more and more I see why there is a split in the community, and the less inclined I am to want to be a part of it.

Joined: Sep 2020
Location: California
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Sep 2020
Location: California
I hope you stick around. Any forum based around one particular company or game is bound to be an echo chamber. It's important to give an alternate viewpoint.

Joined: Sep 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by tsundokugames
I don't see why it is such a bad thing that some people are disappointed that RTwP isn't the combat system. It seems like any time someone states a preference for RTwP they get jumped on for being "nostaligic" and wanting "outdated 2d graphics" as if that is what people are talking about.

I dunno, the deeper I dig in to these forums as a new user the more and more I see why there is a split in the community, and the less inclined I am to want to be a part of it.


...but it's a debate between two options, which is a split not just in the BG3 community on these forums, but across every community where those two options are put against each other.
This topic is inherently going to be arguing opposing viewpoints.

But anyhow, I'm fine with either, honestly. I prefer pause in games where the AI customization allows for depth and sensible options that are better than "attack or "defense," but in general I prefer turn-based more because I feel more involved somehow, like I have to make the sum of all decisions in one go instead of constantly picking and poking. I guess turn-based is just more relaxed to me.


I don't want to fall to bits 'cos of excess existential thought.

Joined: Jul 2019
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Jul 2019
This debate is still going on? Holy fuck.

Joined: Mar 2020
Location: Belfast
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Mar 2020
Location: Belfast
Originally Posted by Omegaphallic
This debate is still going on? Holy fuck.

It's a Blood War.

Joined: Oct 2020
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: Oct 2020
I'm totally fine with turn based combat, I really don't get what people have against it.

Joined: May 2019
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: May 2019
Originally Posted by Valdorian
I'm totally fine with turn based combat, I really don't get what people have against it.

I guess much like I don't get what people have against RTwP and why anyone would like TB.

Joined: Aug 2020
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Aug 2020
I loved RTWP in 1 and 2. When I replay them I still love it. When I tried PoE I couldn't stand it and didn't enjoy Pathfinder:Kingmaker until I used the turn based mod, then the turn based edition. I guess as times passed , I'd rather a slower, less twitchy game so I'm more than fine with the change but there is the nostalgia of it so its understandable people would want real time. You can't please everyone so its smart for Larian to go with what they are most comfortable with.

Joined: Aug 2020
Location: Turkey
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: Aug 2020
Location: Turkey
Real time with pause; although i also quite liked and used to it, removes initiative's importance from game.

Also after DM'ing for 5e, GM'ing for Pathfinder 2.0 I realized, RtWp also can cause very different combat scenarios from tabletop, which all the rules of this game derives from.

Turn based is what the rules are developed upon, too many tids and bits will change because of adapting to a Computer Game but , this is quite fundamental.

Initiative can allow a wizard to go first, cast when there is still range and move away. RTWP destroys this advantage if someone comes into melee range before you can give order or etc. There are countless scenarios which it "breaks" the rules in unexpected ways.

So I stand with Turn-Based.


He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you.

Core i7-6900K, 64GB Ram, Rtx 2080, Soundblaster ZXR, lg-34GK950F-B,Logitech Z906 Thx.
Joined: Oct 2020
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: Oct 2020
If wizard can't cast spell cuz someone comes to him - just not let it. It's not like wizard alone there and you not have another party members to protect him. We can't have real time combat in tabletop because there're too many dice you must calculate at the same time for each action of every player and enemy. But computer can do that for less than a second. I like real time with pause combat simply because it's faster and looks more realistic, not like B-rated action movie when enemies approaching hero only one by one. You can attack and cast spells at the same time and situation could change every second. For coop you can discuss your tactics with party members and then act simultaneously: someone stabs enemy from behind while wizard cast spell and when spell ready fighter jumps on disoriented enemies. Something like that, not "Like in Middle Ages! You must wait your turn!" (c) E. Cartman South Park The Stick of Truth.
So please Larian add Real Time with Pause as an option. Like in RTwP RPGs we have turn-based mode nowadays!

Last edited by Dingor; 07/10/20 07:53 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: Oct 2020
RTwP team o/ (that will not help the debate I know ^^)

Joined: Apr 2016
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: Apr 2016
Originally Posted by Lanetolsun
Real time with pause; although i also quite liked and used to it, removes initiative's importance from game.

Also after DM'ing for 5e, GM'ing for Pathfinder 2.0 I realized, RtWp also can cause very different combat scenarios from tabletop, which all the rules of this game derives from.

Turn based is what the rules are developed upon, too many tids and bits will change because of adapting to a Computer Game but , this is quite fundamental.

Initiative can allow a wizard to go first, cast when there is still range and move away. RTWP destroys this advantage if someone comes into melee range before you can give order or etc. There are countless scenarios which it "breaks" the rules in unexpected ways.

So I stand with Turn-Based.


This take is probably closest to how I feel. Realistically the TTRPG was balanced for turn based, there for the system should be turn based. The reason why BG I and II weren't is because they wanted to more directly compete with Diablo from a gameplay perspective.

Joined: Oct 2020
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Valdorian
I'm totally fine with turn based combat, I really don't get what people have against it.


It's slow and you're a spectator for 90% of the combat.

BG2 had turn based combat, but you didn't have to sit through everyone's turns. It happened seamlessly to the player. The computer calculated everything, and if you didn't make a move, you got skipped. To me, this is the huge advantage computers bring to playing D&D and any other turn based game. You have the option of playing it in something resembling real time, while at the same time giving players the option to step through things in turns if so desired. Look at how Pillars of Eternity has accommodated both turn based and "rtwp" playstyles. Sometimes I want to play on a high level of difficulty, and if that's the case turn based mode might help me fight better. Sometimes I want to play casually and enjoy the game and storyline, and in that case "rtwp" lets me run through encounters quicker and keeps things flowing better.

I literally spent 30 minutes on some of the fights in DOS2 near the end because you had to wait for your turn for so long due to the number of enemies or CCs. That's not fun or engaging. It's like playing chess and the enemy gets 20 moves to your 1 move. But then half the time they CC you and you now have to wait 40 moves to do anything. I would've quit if I hadn't already invested so much time into the game by that point. And if you die and lose the fight, now you've wasted an hour on a fight that could've been repeated 5-10x in a rtwp mode.

If it was isometric I could kind of get behind turn based, but in an over the shoulder 3D game it's awful.

Yes, I realize it causes problems with initiative, but I'll trade that for not having to sit and wait my turn for 30 minutes. If I wanted to be a spectator I'd watch twitch streams of BG3.

Joined: Mar 2020
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Mar 2020
Originally Posted by Lindon
Originally Posted by Valdorian
I'm totally fine with turn based combat, I really don't get what people have against it.


It's slow and you're a spectator for 90% of the combat.

BG2 had turn based combat, but you didn't have to sit through everyone's turns. It happened seamlessly to the player. The computer calculated everything, and if you didn't make a move, you got skipped. To me, this is the huge advantage computers bring to playing D&D and any other turn based game. You have the option of playing it in something resembling real time, while at the same time giving players the option to step through things in turns if so desired. Look at how Pillars of Eternity has accommodated both turn based and "rtwp" playstyles. Sometimes I want to play on a high level of difficulty, and if that's the case turn based mode might help me fight better. Sometimes I want to play casually and enjoy the game and storyline, and in that case "rtwp" lets me run through encounters quicker and keeps things flowing better.

I literally spent 30 minutes on some of the fights in DOS2 near the end because you had to wait for your turn for so long due to the number of enemies or CCs. That's not fun or engaging. It's like playing chess and the enemy gets 20 moves to your 1 move. But then half the time they CC you and you now have to wait 40 moves to do anything. I would've quit if I hadn't already invested so much time into the game by that point. And if you die and lose the fight, now you've wasted an hour on a fight that could've been repeated 5-10x in a rtwp mode.

If it was isometric I could kind of get behind turn based, but in an over the shoulder 3D game it's awful.

Yes, I realize it causes problems with initiative, but I'll trade that for not having to sit and wait my turn for 30 minutes. If I wanted to be a spectator I'd watch twitch streams of BG3.



I agree that in turn-based combat fights can take a long time, but I totally disagree with your premise that we are just spectators in this mode. On the contrary, the reason I prefer turn based is because I can decide each action of my combatants, while in RTwP, I have to watch the battle unfold and pause a few times to use a spell or some other action, and i find this tedious. Ultimately, we should be asking Larian to develop a way for combats to be faster without taking the complexity out of the game, because clearly they are not going to get rid of turn-based combat, and i agree with them, since it is more efficient for a D&D CRPG.

Joined: Oct 2020
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Oct 2020
I like turn based if it follows the d&d rules, reactions (select what and when to use if the trigger happens not auto resolving), triggers, redied actions, and so on. If we have real d&d rules like in p&p turn base has sense.

If we are not following the core mechanics like that, or only half following them, turn based has no sense in my opinion.

We want to follow the official ruleset and thats why we use turn based, great, but follow the ruleset then.

Joined: Oct 2020
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Anung un Rama
Originally Posted by Lindon
Originally Posted by Valdorian
I'm totally fine with turn based combat, I really don't get what people have against it.


It's slow and you're a spectator for 90% of the combat.

BG2 had turn based combat, but you didn't have to sit through everyone's turns. It happened seamlessly to the player. The computer calculated everything, and if you didn't make a move, you got skipped. To me, this is the huge advantage computers bring to playing D&D and any other turn based game. You have the option of playing it in something resembling real time, while at the same time giving players the option to step through things in turns if so desired. Look at how Pillars of Eternity has accommodated both turn based and "rtwp" playstyles. Sometimes I want to play on a high level of difficulty, and if that's the case turn based mode might help me fight better. Sometimes I want to play casually and enjoy the game and storyline, and in that case "rtwp" lets me run through encounters quicker and keeps things flowing better.

I literally spent 30 minutes on some of the fights in DOS2 near the end because you had to wait for your turn for so long due to the number of enemies or CCs. That's not fun or engaging. It's like playing chess and the enemy gets 20 moves to your 1 move. But then half the time they CC you and you now have to wait 40 moves to do anything. I would've quit if I hadn't already invested so much time into the game by that point. And if you die and lose the fight, now you've wasted an hour on a fight that could've been repeated 5-10x in a rtwp mode.

If it was isometric I could kind of get behind turn based, but in an over the shoulder 3D game it's awful.

Yes, I realize it causes problems with initiative, but I'll trade that for not having to sit and wait my turn for 30 minutes. If I wanted to be a spectator I'd watch twitch streams of BG3.



I agree that in turn-based combat fights can take a long time, but I totally disagree with your premise that we are just spectators in this mode. On the contrary, the reason I prefer turn based is because I can decide each action of my combatants, while in RTwP, I have to watch the battle unfold and pause a few times to use a spell or some other action, and i find this tedious. Ultimately, we should be asking Larian to develop a way for combats to be faster without taking the complexity out of the game, because clearly they are not going to get rid of turn-based combat, and i agree with them, since it is more efficient for a D&D CRPG.


The problem is, you can build turn based on top of RTWP. It's the same thing. Good luck getting Larian to do the reverse and give us both the playstyle we prefer. If I wanted to play tabletop D&D with turns I would play tabletop.

Joined: Oct 2020
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Oct 2020
Not interested in this as a feature to be honest. D&D 5e is turned based initiative turn order, thats exactly what we have.

Joined: Jan 2009
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2009
Swen commented on this in a video from a day or two ago. Relevant part starts at 29:24:

https://www.twitch.tv/videos/763351879

30:03 - "There's much more tactical depth that we are able to put in there, that we wouldn't have been able to do in real-time-with-pause."

30:30 - "Actions, bonus actions, movement, manipulation of your actions, manipulation of your bonus actions, getting an extra action - all these things are lost when you make it real time."

Joined: Oct 2020
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by tsundokugames
I don't see why it is such a bad thing that some people are disappointed that RTwP isn't the combat system. It seems like any time someone states a preference for RTwP they get jumped on for being "nostaligic" and wanting "outdated 2d graphics" as if that is what people are talking about.

I dunno, the deeper I dig in to these forums as a new user the more and more I see why there is a split in the community, and the less inclined I am to want to be a part of it.


How is this even an argument? Game is based on DnD 5e.

DnD 5e is turn based combat.

Baldur's Gate 3 is turn based combat.

Boom, too easy

Joined: Oct 2020
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Jonneh
Not interested in this as a feature to be honest. D&D 5e is turned based initiative turn order, thats exactly what we have.

And I would like to see any tabletop game with actual real time battle. Maybe in distant future with VR... (but again that would be VR game not tabletop) but for now we have compter that can make all trows and calculations to make that happen and I can't understand why in COMPUTER game we must stick to the TABLETOP rules. If something prevent you from making good RTwP combat - just change or remove it from rules. It's not like Larian not changed tabletop rules for BG3 already so you can't say that it's 5e to the core.

Page 69 of 94 1 2 67 68 69 70 71 93 94

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