Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 90 of 94 1 2 88 89 90 91 92 93 94
Joined: Apr 2022
A
stranger
Offline
stranger
A
Joined: Apr 2022
Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD
Originally Posted by Alexlotr
Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD
I wonder why ...
There is not much difference in combat between 4 and 6 members ...

Except you come to your turn more often, and it takes less rounds to finish the batte ... but beyond that? O_o
The same "logic" can be applied to arguing for 2 members instead of 4.

There is not much difference in combat between 2 and 4 members ...

Except you come to your turn more often, and it takes less rounds to finish the batte ... but beyond that? O_o
I require elaboration ...
Since our math is obviously not working the same way ...

Lets say you have 4 enemies ... and 4 member group ...
So half (4/8) of turns is yours ...

Then lets say you have 4 enemies ... and 6 member group ...
So 6/10 turns is yours ... 6 > 4 ...

Then lets say you have 4 enemies ... and 2 member group ...
So third (2/6) of turns is yours ...

In what universe is both "more often" ? O_o

Who said both? I compare 2 different cases - arguing for 4 vs 6 and agruing for 2 vs 4. And the arguments in those cases can be the same.

4 has no objective advantages over 3, 5, 6 or 2. It's just a limit for the sake of a limit. They should allow us to change it. And we're not asking for 200 party memebers.

6 was the max group size in BG 1-2 so...

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
Originally Posted by Alexlotr
Who said both?
You did:

Originally Posted by Alexlotr
Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD
Except you come to your turn more often, and it takes less rounds to finish the batte ...
Except you come to your turn more often, and it takes less rounds to finish the batte ...


Short coment on my English. smile

Anyway ... i cast Eldritch Blast!
Joined: Apr 2022
A
stranger
Offline
stranger
A
Joined: Apr 2022
Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD
Originally Posted by Alexlotr
Who said both?
You did:

Originally Posted by Alexlotr
Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD
Except you come to your turn more often, and it takes less rounds to finish the batte ...
Except you come to your turn more often, and it takes less rounds to finish the batte ...
Wrong. I compare 2 different cases - arguing for 4 vs 6 and agruing for 2 vs 4. And the arguments in those cases can be the same.

4 has no objective advantages over 3, 5, 6 or 2. It's just a limit for the sake of a limit. They should allow us to change it. And we're not asking for 200 party memebers.

6 was the max group size in BG 1-2 so...

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
Originally Posted by Alexlotr
And the arguments in those cases can be the same.
And i ask: HOW?


Short coment on my English. smile

Anyway ... i cast Eldritch Blast!
Joined: Oct 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Archaven
Originally Posted by GM4Him
Originally Posted by geala
I'm for 4 in the party. Look below, really wanna more?


Exploring the Dungeon
[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]




(main reason for 4 is for me, I don't want to deal with 6, no more Pathfinder etc. please. 6 is ok for RTC, 4 is good for TBC)

Ok. So. Here we go again.

If we go with Party of 4 max, I CANNOT have a party of 6. I am limited and I don't get what I want.

If we go with party of 6 max, I get what I want and so do you. Why? Because if you don't want 6 people in your party because it's just too much, you can tell whoever to shove it and go away. YOU can tell Lae'zel, "Sorry, we're full up."

So, everyone wins with party of 6. Based on poll, if we go with party of 4, a majority of people don't win with party of 4 because a majority of people want party of 6.

It's no different from those who want to solo the entire game. It's built for a party, but they choose to run around by themselves because they can and like the challenge.

All we want is the OPTION built by Larian, not mods because many of us hate them, to play as a party of 6. Then give us difficulty settings, as promised, so if we think party of 6 is too easy, we can up the difficulty. Everyone wins. Everyone is happy.

Party of 4. Not everyone is happy.

+1
Its really just as simple as this. Not sure why Larian wants to push their agenda on restricting with 4.
Probaly because of mutiplayer and or split screen? Maybe even due to the horribal chain control system they use for consoles... i guess we will never know, because Sven doesn't have the courage to just say it?>

Btw what game is in the screenshot?:)

Last edited by Lastman; 26/04/22 08:33 AM.
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
Originally Posted by Lastman
Probaly because of mutiplayer and or split screen? Maybe even due to the horribal chain control system they use for consoles...
Actualy theese problems GM4Him had allready covered in his past suggestions that are somewhere in this mess, so maybe you missed those. laugh

Both multiplayer and split screen problems are tied only to amount of PC players ...
So IF (and i know its a big if) Larian would allow us 6 members, party with limitation of 4 player max ...

There would be no problem at all. smile


Short coment on my English. smile

Anyway ... i cast Eldritch Blast!
Joined: Jul 2017
G
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
G
Joined: Jul 2017
Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD
Originally Posted by geala
I'm for 4 in the party.
As far as i know (and i would dare to claim that i do) nobody ever asked that game should be reworked to disable 4 member party.

So ... you mind even that option?
And if so ... why?

That's easy. A party of 6 would make rework of the encounters necessary, despite what friends of the party of 6 say. I'm not sure a proper balance for the party of 4 play would result, I doubt it. You cannot simply take DnD rules and experience because the monsters and combat rules are changed in BG3, what many mourn about. So, although I'm usually always for more options and variety, here I prefer to be very egoistic and say, it's good as it is.

BTW why a party of only 6? Because it is in the DnD rules? Why not a party of 8 or 10, for the lovers of variety. Many more interesting characters and classes to enjoy. It's just a little bit of adjustment, seemingly.

Last edited by geala; 27/04/22 10:34 AM.
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
Originally Posted by geala
A party of 6 would make rework of the encounters necessary, despite what friends of the party of 6 say.
Even when "friends of the party of 6" (minus GM4Him ... he is lobing for 5e stats strongly in many topics) litteraly said that they dont want any encoutners rework?

I mean that is exactly the result you get if you are using the mod ...
Your amount of party members is incerased by 2 ... NOTHING else changes ... sure, it screws many things in game, especialy around ballance ... and that is EXACTLY and PRECISELY the reason "friends of the party of 6" suggested that there should be warning sign next to this option clearly stating:
"WARNING: This game was created and ballanced for party of 4 ... if you pick this option, you will not have that kind of experience we planned for you ... but feel free to, if you wish it anyway."

So no rework of the encounters (or any other rule in fact) is necessary. wink


Originally Posted by geala
BTW why a party of only 6? Because it is in the DnD rules?
I dont think it is rules ...
Its more like *the* number people are used to, doubt there is any deeper reason. laugh

Also there is that small and insignificant fact that Swen himself claimed that they *know* that most people *will* require party of 6, since they are used to that from previous BG games (and many others) so they shall create whole UI with this in mind and friendly to any 6member party mod ...
And some us simply come to conclusion that since all the mod do is change single value from 4 to 6 ... it would be really nice gesture from Larian if they would include its function to game itself. smile


Originally Posted by geala
Why not a party of 8 or 10
Using the mod, we can create party of 8 top ... since there is no more characters right now and once you started with 4 custom characters, you cant recruit anyone else for some reason. laugh

I tryed it once ... it was ... well, not bad, but also not exactly good ... combat was soooooo fucking trivial, so many enemies didnt even get a change to attack me i was able to loot half of the map and still was not encumbered, i had so many spellslots so i could wipe out half of the map and still have some reserves. laugh
All said figuratively ofc ...
Anyway it was not exactly fun for me ... but if someone wants it, why not ... the mod is right there. laugh


Short coment on my English. smile

Anyway ... i cast Eldritch Blast!
Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by geala
That's easy. A party of 6 would make rework of the encounters necessary, despite what friends of the party of 6 say.
No, a rework of encounters isn't necessary.

As @Rag says above, the absolute minimum Larian could do is simply allow an OPTIONAL max party size of 6 without making ANY additional changes. For people who play with a party of 4, the game is exactly the same. For people who play with a party of 6, either their game is easier or they increase the game difficulty (BG3 will almost certainly include difficulty options) to compensate.

If Larian wants to do slightly more work, a relatively easy balancing is to adjust exp gain for differently-sized parties. A party of 6 gains less exp - and thus levels up more slowly - than a party of 4, which would work to balance combats. E.g., 4 level-3 characters vs 6 level-2 characters are roughly similar in power.

Joined: Jul 2017
G
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
G
Joined: Jul 2017
Without a rework of the encounters the highest difficulty would be a joke for the party of 6 players. They (or some) would accuse Larian to be a liar about the proposed masochistic "Way of the uber Damned", being a cakewalk in the game. Or not?

If the only change to the game were that a party of 6 could be used, why not.

It could also lead to some interesting forum talk later, about the option, it's users, about self restriction and why you can change it/cannot change it during playthroughs for example. grin

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
Originally Posted by geala
Or not?
Nope ...
As long as there is warning telling people that turning this option on will affect their difficiulty in the way that *may* potentialy make the game incredibly trivial.

Of course some fools will complain anyway, but by present of that warning there would be clear proof that they are fools. laugh


Short coment on my English. smile

Anyway ... i cast Eldritch Blast!
Joined: May 2019
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: May 2019
Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD
Originally Posted by geala
Or not?
Nope ...
As long as there is warning telling people that turning this option on will affect their difficiulty in the way that *may* potentialy make the game incredibly trivial.

Of course some fools will complain anyway, but by present of that warning there would be clear proof that they are fools. laugh
+1

Joined: Mar 2013
A
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
A
Joined: Mar 2013
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
Originally Posted by geala
That's easy. A party of 6 would make rework of the encounters necessary, despite what friends of the party of 6 say.
No, a rework of encounters isn't necessary.

As @Rag says above, the absolute minimum Larian could do is simply allow an OPTIONAL max party size of 6 without making ANY additional changes. For people who play with a party of 4, the game is exactly the same. For people who play with a party of 6, either their game is easier or they increase the game difficulty (BG3 will almost certainly include difficulty options) to compensate.

If Larian wants to do slightly more work, a relatively easy balancing is to adjust exp gain for differently-sized parties. A party of 6 gains less exp - and thus levels up more slowly - than a party of 4, which would work to balance combats. E.g., 4 level-3 characters vs 6 level-2 characters are roughly similar in power.

+1
Most games have difficulty settings. Even in DOS2 IIRC. If there are custom settings that would even be better. I'm sure there probably be modders to "enhance" the combat encounters hence i believe a max party of 6 would be really enjoyable. Those who wanted 4 they can still play the way they want. Everyone wins.

Joined: Jul 2017
G
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
G
Joined: Jul 2017
Originally Posted by Lastman
...


Btw what game is in the screenshot?:)


Just read it now, it's not a game but simply a picture made by me (with Daz studio, I'm not an artist), loosely based on some games and typical group dynamics. wink

Joined: Jan 2021
E
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
E
Joined: Jan 2021
I'm interested in how will they manage party structure with just 4 characters and classes like druid/bard. I feel I already feel shoehorned into cleric/fighter/rogue/mage type of class for my main.

Joined: Jul 2017
G
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
G
Joined: Jul 2017
On the current difficulty level (which is named "Classic" in the game) any class could be played as main to master the fights, in my opinion. A lot of the custom rule choices of Larian make group roles less defined and certain classes less mandatory, which you can like or not.

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
I just recently started to replay Dragon Age: Origins ...
I like when my party is, lets say fiting rather than perfectly effective ... so was thinking that my Dwarf would make perfect party with Oghren, Shale and Sten ... then i find out that playing as 4 Warriors is impossible (unless you play on Easy). -_-

So if we dont get option to have bigger party in BG-3 ... wich would be sad. :-/
I hope that at least we get some more options so our party can fit better together thematicaly. laugh

Last edited by RagnarokCzD; 05/05/22 11:12 AM.

Short coment on my English. smile

Anyway ... i cast Eldritch Blast!
Joined: Mar 2013
A
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
A
Joined: Mar 2013
Originally Posted by EstherEloise
I'm interested in how will they manage party structure with just 4 characters and classes like druid/bard. I feel I already feel shoehorned into cleric/fighter/rogue/mage type of class for my main.

biggest problem for me as well. i find myself that for solasta i absolutely need pally, cleric and a wizard. so i only left with 1 slot. really i don't have much room for others.

Joined: Jan 2009
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2009
I definitely would be more comfortable with a party size of at least 5, strictly because it feels like the game needs to fill the roles of: Melee Fighter, Healer, Trap/Lock Wrangler, Ranged Attacker, Controller, and Multiple Target Damage. Now, 5e does have options to allow for flexibility, which allow for people to double up on some of those roles, but limits on class proficencies and ability score modifiers providing bonuses to skill proficencies can limit how useful that can be. Especially of note is how some skills are not represented at all in Backgrounds, and others are in many different backgrounds (although that issue can be somewhat fixed by allowing for backgrounds to customize your skill proficencies). Solasta just outright told the player in character creation that "X skill/language is not used in-game, so if you're taking that, it'll only be for flavor."

That said, Solasta also goes with a 4-person team and they have fewer options overall. I'm playing that game and trying out different party configurations to see how well I can cover roles with different parties and backgrounds. My first team was Barbarian/Cleric/Rogue/Sorcerer. My second team is Fighter/Druid/Ranger/Wizard. I'm sure there are more teams I can try and maybe the 4-person limit will feel fine in both Solasta and BG 3.

However, Solasta also is fairly strict with the rules on enemy HP, AC, saving throws, and options, and that can make a big difference.

Last edited by Stabbey; 10/05/22 02:23 PM.
Joined: Mar 2013
A
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
A
Joined: Mar 2013
due to the problem with concentration i find alot of stuffs are not being used and hence more party characters defintely helps. for one putting a sorceror? for twinning that may be really great. Btw.. i'm not sure how action surge works in baldur's gate 3. actually i havent try action surge in solasta either. so if action surge grants additional action in one turn that means a fighter with 2 attacks can have 4 with action surge. as extra attacks are based on attack action. so having 2 actions would mean having 2 attack actions. how is it supposed work actually?

Last edited by Archaven; 11/05/22 03:14 PM.
Page 90 of 94 1 2 88 89 90 91 92 93 94

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