Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 80 of 96 1 2 78 79 80 81 82 95 96
Joined: Mar 2013
A
addict
Offline
addict
A
Joined: Mar 2013
Originally Posted by GM4Him
Has anyone tried this? I'm thinking of giving it a go and was just wondering.

https://www.reddit.com/r/BaldursGat...se_the_party_size_limit_in_3_minutes_or/

thanks for sharing. that's really cool. however the problem lies deeper with larian's slow pacing animation, the annoyance of the chaining/unchaining and the number of enemies / stats balance with more party members. it's kinda sad seeing larian still want to cling to it's old 4 party formula. i believe their decision was mainly for the multiplayer (which sadly doesn't interest me).

hopefully there will be some kind folks who can do some battle rebalance mod? with more enemies on screen and stats to compensate for the extra party characters.
i completed pathfinder wrath of righteous with 6 party characters and 1-2 animal companions! in turn-based!. odd i dont feel the pacing being slow there.

maybe larian should learn something from owlcat.

Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
Based on testing via tabletop, all they'd have to do is give monsters proper stats and a 6 party size would work just fine.

Example: start game with 4 instead of 1. Meet Lae'zel. Party of 5. Fight 3 imps with proper 5e stats - sting, invisibility and resistance - balanced first encounter. Not too hard for 5. Good first battle to get you used to the game. Meet Shadowheart. Party of 6. Fight 3 and then 3 more enemies, 2 imps + hellsboar each fight... Balanced for 6 with proper stats. Not too hard but certainly not easy for level 1.

On beach. 3 intellect devourers with proper stats, party of 5 with Shadowheart. Tough fight, but doable as long as you follow SH advice and keep your distance.

So they wouldn't need more enemies. Just proper 5e stats for a party of 6 max.

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
veteran
Online Embarrased
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
Originally Posted by GM4Him
Not too hard for 5.
Maybe 5 characters in experienced player(s) hands ...

I wonder what would happen with your house of cards if you would switch them with some completely new player with wrong stats and litteraly no idea what to do. :-/


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: Feb 2021
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
The game tells you what to do. If you're a new player and you don't listen when Shadowheart tells you to keep your distance, that's on you. The DM can't make it more clear how you should handle the fight than to have an NPC tell you to keep your distance.

And they could use this as a teachable moment. They could have more tool tips to guide you through this battle and use it to explain how to handle creatures with resistance and so forth.

House of cards still standing. 😃

Last edited by GM4Him; 10/12/21 02:38 PM.
Joined: Mar 2013
A
addict
Offline
addict
A
Joined: Mar 2013
the way i see it if larian ever do something with the "toilet chain" then there may still be hope for expanded party characters. are there mods out there to replace toilet chain at all?

Last edited by Archaven; 13/12/21 12:23 PM.
Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
I tried the 6 party size mod. Didn't work. Now my game crashes more frequently. Not sure if it's related, but I'm thinking of wiping out my game and reinstalling it because of this.

I hate mods for this reason. That's why I want Larian to just give us the option to go 6 party members. Don't make us have to play around with potentially game-crashing mods just so we can play the game with 6 party members. And even IF it did work, the stats for the monsters are still nerfed, so a party of 6 would make the game so easy that it'd be completely boring.

We need a party of 6 option AND a D&D 5e Core Rules & Stats option so that the monsters are tougher, like they should be, and therefore the game is not so easy with a party of 6.

Joined: May 2019
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: May 2019
Originally Posted by GM4Him
I tried the 6 party size mod. Didn't work. Now my game crashes more frequently. Not sure if it's related, but I'm thinking of wiping out my game and reinstalling it because of this.

I hate mods for this reason. That's why I want Larian to just give us the option to go 6 party members. Don't make us have to play around with potentially game-crashing mods just so we can play the game with 6 party members. And even IF it did work, the stats for the monsters are still nerfed, so a party of 6 would make the game so easy that it'd be completely boring.

We need a party of 6 option AND a D&D 5e Core Rules & Stats option so that the monsters are tougher, like they should be, and therefore the game is not so easy with a party of 6.
I feel exactly the same way about mods. More often than not they are problematic. But I'm just not at all interested in playing this game without a 6-person party. frown

Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
The more I play the game, the more the 4 party restriction bugs me. I have to frequently go back to camp, boot someone, invite another character, just so I can trigger certain dialogues and quests.

I play a fighter and don't need Lae'zel so much, but I have to boot someone else just to invite her so she will interrogate Zorru or interact with the Gith Patrol. I have to boot someone to make sure Wyll is in my party at the windmill and goblin camp to learn more about Mizora. I need to boot someone in Blighted Village school and statue to trigger Shadowheart dialogue.

And with my favorite party of 4 custom characters in multiplayer mode, I get NOTHING. I can't even trigger a SINGLE one of these dialogues. Not 1. Why? Because all 4 party slots are custom characters and I can't boot them to allow any origin characters at all.

It's frustrating.

Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by GM4Him
The more I play the game, the more the 4 party restriction bugs me. I have to frequently go back to camp, boot someone, invite another character, just so I can trigger certain dialogues and quests.

I play a fighter and don't need Lae'zel so much, but I have to boot someone else just to invite her so she will interrogate Zorru or interact with the Gith Patrol. [...]
In regions where we're allowed to fast travel (so basically everywhere) it wouldn't be a bad idea for there to be a party-swap button. Click that button, swap two characters, done. At the very least, you shouldn't have to actually speak with characters to swap them. That's just such a needlessly tedious implementation.

Joined: Mar 2013
A
addict
Offline
addict
A
Joined: Mar 2013
as much as i wanted 6 party characters sadly i don't think larian would want to do it. the way i see it they always like to bully players with restricted max of party of 4 while swarming you with a huge number of enemies less you abuse the barrelmancy and their elements combo crowd control and they call it difficulty.

Joined: Dec 2021
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: Dec 2021
I think a 4-char party *could* be fine. Currently I'm running Wizard, Wizard, Fighter, Cleric (MC, Gale, Lae'zel, Shadowheart) and I can pick locks and disarm traps just fine mostly. Still, I might go with a Rogue MC next time to make some things easier. (I can't stand Astarion. No chance.)

Like others already noted, 5e rules don't seem to be very rigid with regard to the roles of characters, so you can do lots of interesting things.

Of course I would still love 6 characters based on a few simple facts like:

1. It will feel more like the old Infinity Engine games.
2. More NPCs to chose from during each run, so you get to experience more of them per run.
3. Possibly more versatile and strategic combat as you have more characters to control.

However I'm not sure if it could be implemented well with the way the game looks so far. The following concerns come to mind:

1. The more characters in one party, the more interactions there can be, opening the gates for more bugs / logical inconsistencies in the way characters react to each other in dialogue. That said, the characters don't feel ALL that lively to me anyway right now (not sure if I've ever seen a character react to another character's reaction to my main character, if you know what I mean).
2. More characters to control means longer combat rounds. (You might say, but you will kill the enemy quicker. Well obviously there will have to be more enemies or beefier enemies to balance things. Hence longer fights.)
3. In some spots the characters are already at their limits regarding how well they can automatically follow your main character. Two more party members might make their movement very cumbersome and frustrating.

All in all, I'm undecided. It could be great theoretically, but the implementation might be very tricky/risky, ending up with more disadvantages.

Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by Taylan
2. More characters to control means longer combat rounds. (You might say, but you will kill the enemy quicker. Well obviously there will have to be more enemies or beefier enemies to balance things. Hence longer fights.)
If you have one thing that decreases fight times (killing the enemy quicker) and another thing that increases fight times (stronger enemies), each by unknown amounts, it's impossible to say whether the total time will increase or decrease.

Additionally, assuming you have <6 players, each player will control more characters during combat. So each player will be actually participating in combat for the same (in the case of more enemies) or a higher (in the case of stronger enemies) percentage of time. In the latter case, combat will feel faster as there will be less time spent watching enemies take their turns. This ties into your "benefit #3."

Joined: Mar 2013
A
addict
Offline
addict
A
Joined: Mar 2013
Originally Posted by GM4Him
I tried the 6 party size mod. Didn't work. Now my game crashes more frequently. Not sure if it's related, but I'm thinking of wiping out my game and reinstalling it because of this.

I hate mods for this reason. That's why I want Larian to just give us the option to go 6 party members. Don't make us have to play around with potentially game-crashing mods just so we can play the game with 6 party members. And even IF it did work, the stats for the monsters are still nerfed, so a party of 6 would make the game so easy that it'd be completely boring.

We need a party of 6 option AND a D&D 5e Core Rules & Stats option so that the monsters are tougher, like they should be, and therefore the game is not so easy with a party of 6.

yeap i wanted this as well. not to mentioned the possibilities of mods abandonment. like newer patches may render some mods not working, etc. definitely in favor of 6 party characters in bg3. but too bad i don't think larian will budge. they are set in stone with their 4 party DOS2 formula. the 4 has a reason IMHO. they want to artificially make the game harder so that they have more enemies to bully you and if more party characters proven to be more fun in single player, that will be a disaster for larian as their theme for gather your party.. essentially for multiplayer. so no.. the way i see it they wont do it.

Joined: Mar 2013
A
addict
Offline
addict
A
Joined: Mar 2013
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
Originally Posted by Taylan
2. More characters to control means longer combat rounds. (You might say, but you will kill the enemy quicker. Well obviously there will have to be more enemies or beefier enemies to balance things. Hence longer fights.)
If you have one thing that decreases fight times (killing the enemy quicker) and another thing that increases fight times (stronger enemies), each by unknown amounts, it's impossible to say whether the total time will increase or decrease.

Additionally, assuming you have <6 players, each player will control more characters during combat. So each player will be actually participating in combat for the same (in the case of more enemies) or a higher (in the case of stronger enemies) percentage of time. In the latter case, combat will feel faster as there will be less time spent watching enemies take their turns. This ties into your "benefit #3."

with increased party characters, they may need to rebalance combat too. with more enemies and stats changes. larian formula has always been bullying the players and force them with abusing terrain/elements and barrelmancy. that's their winning formula. also.. the number of encounters are limited.. very limited and no random encounter. so i would say it make sense to really makes each fight memorable.

Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
Originally Posted by Archaven
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
Originally Posted by Taylan
2. More characters to control means longer combat rounds. (You might say, but you will kill the enemy quicker. Well obviously there will have to be more enemies or beefier enemies to balance things. Hence longer fights.)
If you have one thing that decreases fight times (killing the enemy quicker) and another thing that increases fight times (stronger enemies), each by unknown amounts, it's impossible to say whether the total time will increase or decrease.

Additionally, assuming you have <6 players, each player will control more characters during combat. So each player will be actually participating in combat for the same (in the case of more enemies) or a higher (in the case of stronger enemies) percentage of time. In the latter case, combat will feel faster as there will be less time spent watching enemies take their turns. This ties into your "benefit #3."

with increased party characters, they may need to rebalance combat too. with more enemies and stats changes. larian formula has always been bullying the players and force them with abusing terrain/elements and barrelmancy. that's their winning formula. also.. the number of encounters are limited.. very limited and no random encounter. so i would say it make sense to really makes each fight memorable.

I've tabletop tested it. They would just need to make enemies using 5e stats and use XP split so 6 party members wouldn't be level 5 by the end of the surface portion. 6 level 4 characters using proper stats would balance combat out a lot more. Some enemies like the Gith Patrol actually wouldn't need any rework. They're already tough enough.

As for the beginning, they have made enemies too weak for multiplayer. 4 players + Shadowheart against 3 proper intellect devourers would be a solid challenging fight. 1 player + Shadowheart against 3 is insane, so they nerfed them. This is true for imps as well. So, I suggest they again stabilize it by making players start with 4 custom characters and/or origin. So your base party size is 5 or 6. The customs are already defaulted so if you don't want to tweak them just alter the first, accept the rest, and start playing. Don't like the customs? First chance you get, dump them at camp. They can simply be your tutorial characters.

This would make it so multiplayer and single player are pretty much the same and monsters are balanced for both,

Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
Right now, the game is geared for single player. It is not really geared for multiplayer. In Multiplayer, enemies in the beginning are too easy. You can't trigger ANY origin story dialogues or have any origin characters in the party.

Party of 6 would fix this. Keep multiplayer limit at 4 and allow 2 more slots for origin characters.

Last edited by GM4Him; 14/12/21 01:44 PM.
Joined: Mar 2013
A
addict
Offline
addict
A
Joined: Mar 2013
my wild guess would be they do not want the disparity on number of party characters between single player and multiplayer. if single player proven much more enjoyable than said multiplayer with 6 party characters, they would be slapping themselves in the face. restricting it to 4 makes the game more accessible to general audience. having more party characters would be a nightmare for them especially if larian's goal is to market the game to multi-platform be it on consoles and handheld. it certainly won't be an enjoyable experience for casuals especially if they have to control too many party characters.

that is the sole reason why they want it to gimped the game and forced it as a party of 4 (which you have exposed them of gimping the stats). best hope really would be mods but i really hope larian will really do the game justice and allow 6 party characters. looks how successful with pathfinder wrath of the righteous. they should learn from owlcat honestly.

Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
Originally Posted by Archaven
my wild guess would be they do not want the disparity on number of party characters between single player and multiplayer. if single player proven much more enjoyable than said multiplayer with 6 party characters, they would be slapping themselves in the face. restricting it to 4 makes the game more accessible to general audience. having more party characters would be a nightmare for them especially if larian's goal is to market the game to multi-platform be it on consoles and handheld. it certainly won't be an enjoyable experience for casuals especially if they have to control too many party characters.

that is the sole reason why they want it to gimped the game and forced it as a party of 4 (which you have exposed them of gimping the stats). best hope really would be mods but i really hope larian will really do the game justice and allow 6 party characters. looks how successful with pathfinder wrath of the righteous. they should learn from owlcat honestly.

But what doesn't make sense is if they are gearing it for multiplayer then they are truly shooting themselves in the foot with 4. You literally miss a LOT of origin character interaction with 4 player multiplayer because you CAN'T have a single origin character in your party. At least if they allowed 6, you could have 2 origin characters in the party and 4 players would still get the experience of all the origin character stories. As it is currently, you are severely restricted in 4 player multiplayer.

And it really makes no sense. Four characters should never equal a maximum full party. That makes no logical sense other than that this is a video game and the designers don't want anything more than a party of four. The only time four would max out a party is if the entire mission was some sort of super secretive stealth mission. Most of the Encounters in this game are not stealth missions.

Joined: Mar 2013
A
addict
Offline
addict
A
Joined: Mar 2013
Originally Posted by GM4Him
Originally Posted by Archaven
my wild guess would be they do not want the disparity on number of party characters between single player and multiplayer. if single player proven much more enjoyable than said multiplayer with 6 party characters, they would be slapping themselves in the face. restricting it to 4 makes the game more accessible to general audience. having more party characters would be a nightmare for them especially if larian's goal is to market the game to multi-platform be it on consoles and handheld. it certainly won't be an enjoyable experience for casuals especially if they have to control too many party characters.

that is the sole reason why they want it to gimped the game and forced it as a party of 4 (which you have exposed them of gimping the stats). best hope really would be mods but i really hope larian will really do the game justice and allow 6 party characters. looks how successful with pathfinder wrath of the righteous. they should learn from owlcat honestly.

But what doesn't make sense is if they are gearing it for multiplayer then they are truly shooting themselves in the foot with 4. You literally miss a LOT of origin character interaction with 4 player multiplayer because you CAN'T have a single origin character in your party. At least if they allowed 6, you could have 2 origin characters in the party and 4 players would still get the experience of all the origin character stories. As it is currently, you are severely restricted in 4 player multiplayer.

And it really makes no sense. Four characters should never equal a maximum full party. That makes no logical sense other than that this is a video game and the designers don't want anything more than a party of four. The only time four would max out a party is if the entire mission was some sort of super secretive stealth mission. Most of the Encounters in this game are not stealth missions.

perhaps the issue is getting more players in multiplayer would be a tedium? would they need to rebalance the stats or more enemies with 6 players? also i'm not sure how DOS2 multiplayer works as i have never played multiplayer in DOS2. i only play for the singleplayer. if each player has to wait for the current player to end turn, that may be a nightmare? otherwise they may have a forced timer for each player to act without causing frustration of other players? imagine if one of them AFK (away from keyboard) we all know where that leads to. so with 6 party in multiplayer it may be a nightmare.

i'm definitely all in for 6 party in the single player. i don't care or mind if it's 4 in multiplayer. hopefully larian would yield and listen to our pleas. also, they may do away with their toilet chain if they allow more than 4 but seeing larian repeating the same thing with BG3 like as in DOS2, that shows how much they want to cling to their old system.

Last edited by Archaven; 15/12/21 03:19 PM.
Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
Let me clarify when I say that they just need to use proper D&D 5e stats and a party of 6 would work just fine:

Here is a breakdown of the encounters:

3 Imps in Prologue with Lae'zel - Party of 4 custom + Lae'zel. Add Us if you want, still works with a party of 6. What doesn't work is 3 imps with only 1 custom character + Lae'zel and/or Us, so they had to nerf the imps.

3 imps on deck and any fight with an intellect devourer. A single Intellect Devourer is a challenge for a party of 5 or 6 Level 1 characters using standard 5e rules and stats, but not too hard for a tutorial. Again, they nerfed these fights to make them work for party of 4.

2 imps + hellsboar. Same. 3 Intellect Devourers on the beach with party of 4 + Shadowheart. Same. All nerfed for party of 1 custom + Lae'zel and/or Shadowheart.

Fishermen with Mind Flayer in nautiloid. Lame fight regardless. Whether you use any kind of 5e stats or not, this fight will be super easy for 4 or 6 party size. Makes no difference. Then again, it doesn't seem like it's supposed to be hard, so good either way.

Gimblebock, Mari and Barton and mercenaries using Bandit and Bandit Captain stats (Gimblebock, Mari and Barton being Captains). Using 5e stats would work just fine with a party of 6 for these fights. Again, what doesn't work is party of 4. In the beginning, these characters were really hard to defeat in like Patch 1 and 2. Why? I think it's because they were originally created for a party of 6, and they had to nerf them too in order to make them work with party of 4.

Dank Crypt skeletons - These are all homebrew anyway. So this battle is fine whether you have 4 or 6. Spellcasting skeletons that hurl magic missiles and put characters to sleep, etc. is tough. The battle would certainly be easier with 6, but since this is early game, an easier battle at this point wouldn't be so bad. Keep in mind, at this point in the game, beginner players will think they should sleep as little as possible, so battles should be easier until they learn that it's okay to sleep. The tadpole is dormant... for now.

At the grove gate, battle becomes more interesting when using Bugbear Chieftain stats as opposed to what they're using. This coupled with actual Goblin Boss stats with an AI that uses Redirect Attack would make either a party of 4 or party of 6 more challenging here. I think the homebrew booyahg works well. That said, frankly, this battle need more goblins because it's too easy regardless of 4 or 6 party size. Your ally to enemy ratio is too high right now. You have Zevlor, several tieflings, Wyll, Aradin and his two cronies and your party all teaming up against only five goblins, a worg and a bugbear. You have more on your side than they do! Why is everyone acting like you just saved the grove from some huge army of goblins? So, regardless, this fight needs a rebalancing anyway. We need maybe twice as many goblins, and if you don't use a bugbear chief, we need another bugbear and maybe even another worg. This should be a tough fight, but Zevlor and his people on the wall have the advantage because the goblins have to only use ranged to hit them. Aradin and his two goons should be hard to save based on the reactions everyone gives you. So that you, the player, aren't overwhelmed, enemy AI should focus archers and booyahg on tieflings on the wall. The goblin boss, bugbears and worgs should focus on Aradin and his two minions. You basically attack from behind, so only those you attack should turn and start fighting you. In this way, you can lure enemies away from killing the NPC's you're trying to save. Having a party of 6 would certainly allow the player more of an opportunity to really feel like they are saving the grove from a large goblin raiding party with 10 goblins (including 1 boss and 1 booyahg), 2 bugbears and 2 worgs.

Harpy fight is just fine whether party of 4 or 6. This is actually probably one of the most 5e battles in the game.

Owlbear fight. Party of 6 would probably be too much for the owlbear and cub. Probably would have to add a second owlbear for a party of 6. Enter, the Papa.

Goblins in Blighted Village. Party of 4 or 6, doesn't really matter. They're ambushing you on the rooftops. Therefore, ranged is supreme here. It takes a bit for melee characters to get to the goblins to even attack them, especially now that they have Nimble Escape. So, a party of 6 would make this fight easier, but this is a minor fight. Should it really be super hard? Remember, the less difficult the fights are, the less a player should long rest, which goes along more with the story. This fight, as is, whether party of 4 or 6, should chip away at the party enough to be a decent encounter but not leave the party in a position that they need to long rest immediately after. A party of 6 ensures this idea more than a party of 4.

Same is true for every encounter in the Blighted Village. They're pretty much fine as is. Party of 6 would just make them far less volatile. For example, the battle at the windmill can go VERY poorly with a party of 4 if you roll badly on initiative. You can find your entire party dead before you even get a chance to go. It's happened to me. Party of 6 increases your chances of at least standing a chance in this fight; especially if you don't know the trick about how to end it quickly. Bugbears and ogres are the same. Party of 6 only gives you, the player, a better chance of surviving without having to practically die with each fight and then long rest immediately after.

Hag and Bog. Same scenario. Proper stats for wood woads and mud mephits work well with a party of 6. They are nerfed for party of 4 and don't act like proper wood woads and mud mephits. Redcaps wouldn't be such a brutal fight with 6 party members (keeping in mind I'm talking about new player experience as well... not just people who have played the game for 100+ hours and know all the tricks to beating them). The hag herself would not be such a volatile fight where I feel like I'm probably going to have to reload at least a couple of times just to beat her. Same with her 4 mask minions. THAT fight can be truly brutal, especially with Vengeance.

The Gith Patrol. I don't need to say anything further, but I will. Party of 4, I've been taken out in just a turn or two before and had to reload simply because of bad RNG. Party of 6 stabilizes this encounter and allows for some room for bad RNG. Party of 4 leave literally no room for mistakes or bad RNG. You make a mistake or have bad RNG, and you're reloading. Guaranteed.

Same is true for the gnolls, though that fight is a bit more forgiving. The Tyrites, if you fight them, are also fine as is whether party of 4 or 6. Certainly easier with party of 6, but the fights would be more stabilized and less RNG.

And they absolutely killed the skeleton battle outside the necromancer's lair. They need to put it back the way it was in like Patch 1 and let us have a party of 6. Then the encounter would be fun, unique and challenging. The necromancer's journal makes it sound like he's got some tough guardians to face the zulkiers with should they show up, but from experience, this fight is so not scary even in the remotest sense for a party of 4. It's baby mode now. Again, put it back to the skeletons running to like 9 different caskets and springing up all those skeletons against you. Then give us a party of 6 so we can fight them all successfully without nerfing them. That was a tough fight, but I enjoyed it was it was. It was quite unique and made a lot more sense once upon a time.

The phase spiders I've talked about at length. Party of 6 would work fine with proper phase spider stats. Of course, mama would be a homebrewed nightmare, and her babies would be homebrewed as well because there are no stats for those. However, the 2 phase spider minions in the lair and the 2 with the ettercaps should be ninja melee assassins popping up out of nowhere unexpectedly and attacking at close range. This would be a fun set of encounters with a party of 6 especially if they went back to having mama hatch ALL her 18 baby eggs in the lair. Party of 6, hatch all 18 eggs, phase spiders with proper stats. This would be awesome.

The massive goblin fights including fights against the bosses. Again, so much less volatile with a party of 6. They'd still be hard, especially if you upped the levels on the bosses. Let's face it, Larian is going to have to up their levels when EA is over because they are going to be too baby once you're not capped at level 5. Right now, I can reach level 5 by doing all the missions in the game BEFORE I face the goblin leaders. So, imagine fighting the goblin leaders and the entire camp at level 5 instead of 4. Yeah. Gut, Ragzlin and Minthara are going to need level boosts or those fights are going to be way too easy.

If you lure Minthara to the grove to fight here there, too easy as is. There needs to be a rebalance. The last several times I did this fight, I slaughtered everything including Minthara without the gate even so much as losing half its health. We just kept pegging enemies and blowing them up from a distance. They never even got close.

And once you reach the Underdark, the current imbalances are even worse. Party of 6 with proper stats would balance those out, but they'd still need tweaking. For example, the duergar in Blighted Village. There's only 4. A party of 4 level 2's could probably take them if you're strategic enough. Throw a party of 4 level 5's at them, which you will likely be level 5 by that point, and this battle will be so easy you'll hardly even know you fought it.

Are you seeing what I'm getting at here? Regardless, most of the fights need to be rebalanced whether it is a party of 4 or 6. In fact, the balance of most of their encounters would only be benefited from a party of 6 and proper 5e stats.

Page 80 of 96 1 2 78 79 80 81 82 95 96

Moderated by  Nicou 

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