Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 6 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Joined: Mar 2021
member
Offline
member
Joined: Mar 2021
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Please, read the previous messages before assuming things^^
I'm shouting in every threads about combats that they should remove advantages from highground and backstab (and I did it on this page once again).

On the other hand if many players have fun with barrels and shoving, why should we ask Larian to remove their fun ? And why should those players settle for a story mode ?
Just open your mind, there's something beautifull between RAW and BG3.

Are you really trying to gaslight on a forum?

Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Highground has to matter even if it definitely shouldn't be a god mode.

High ground doesn't have to provide any advantage. It doesn't in 5E, and there's not basis for it in BG3, except that Larian has put it in the game.

Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by Grudgebearer
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Originally Posted by Grudgebearer
You [Maximuuus], like Larian, seem don't seem to understand the significance, that Advantage gives in 5e, that's why it is applied sparingly in combat scenarios.

As it stands now, the only thing that applying Advantage to ranged attacks at height succeeds at is, overbalancing ranged combat, and creating a scenario where getting to high ground is paramount in every encounter.
Please, read the previous messages before assuming things^^
I'm shouting in every threads about combats that they should remove advantages from highground and backstab (and I did it on this page once again). <snip>

Are you really trying to gaslight on a forum?
Hah, yeah, that'd be pretty foolish of Maximuuus to gaslight us when there is ample evidence of their words on previous pages.

Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Why would you remove highground ? What would be the point of taking a good position in your system ?
I'm all for a better balance and various difficulty level but what you ask is a complete other system with bonus actions that becomes actions depending your choice (UI ?), a useless verticality except to shove, specific creatures for every mode, an action to heal (maybe) 1HP,...
Being 100% faithfull to the rules is not necessary and as you described it, it looks boring to me.

The game has to be balanced first and it has to have strong foundations.
Tweaks could then increase/decrease the difficulty (i.e +1/+2/+3 for highground, +0/+1/+2 ennemie's AC, +0/+1/+2 to allied ST or such things, barrel weight 100%,70%,20%,...).
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Advantage is not the only bonuses highground could give (and it shouldn't give advantage).

Highground has to matter even if it definitely shouldn't be a god mode. Delete the whole concept of verticality and positionning for the sake of "D&D 5e" is a bad idea.
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
The starting point should be a balanced homebrewed campaign, not a 100% RAW campaign.

The whole maps are designed with verticality. It has to matter whetever the game difficulty but obviously it shouldn't give advantage for many reasons.

Highground should be another bonus they can decrease when the difficulty increase. Highground should also always increase the range of ranged weapons.
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Highground : no more advantages and disadvantages.
- Ranged increased (range weapons only)
- Options : Flat bonus (0/+1/+2/...)
=> Solved issues : useless features/spells/possibilities
=> Solved issues : missing too much

Joined: Mar 2021
member
Offline
member
Joined: Mar 2021
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
Hah, yeah, that'd be pretty foolish of Maximuuus to gaslight us when there is ample evidence of their words on previous pages.

Maybe you should go back a little farther, and brush up on the conversation that started the discussion?

Here, I'll make it easy for you...

[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]

Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by Grudgebearer
Maybe you should go back a little farther, and brush up on the conversation that started the discussion?

Here, I'll make it easy for you...
Cool. That's irrelevant to the claim of gaslighting. You are claiming that Maximuuus wants High Ground Advantage to be in the game and doesn't understand the problems with Advantage.

Maximuuus is arguing that there should be some high ground bonus that is not advantage (+1/+2), especially since so much of the Larian maps are built around verticality. Which is a fair point and it's disengenous to misrepresent his argument as "High Ground Advantage or nothing."

One of Maximuuus's suggestions is that High Ground Advantage should just be replaced with only a range increase for ranged weapons, which is a pretty good suggestion. That would be a nice mix of
-already implemented in DOS, so easy for Larian to do
-doesn't waste the verticality present in BG3 maps
-not too powerful, in that it doesn't invalidate Advantage-granting spells & abilities and also doesn't affect bounded accuracy
It is true that height does not give a range increase according to 5e RAW, but that alone is not a good argument against Larian implementing it

Edit: The goal should be to balance the various difficulty options so that high difficulty forces you to make tactical decisions, and height can and should be one of these considerations. The problem right now is that it's too powerful (Advantage) for its cost (movement, sometimes 0 if you're just climbing a ladder), so getting high ground & backstab is always correct. If it height was modified to only give increased range and maybe a +1 bonus, jump+disengage was removed from the game, and ladders were difficult terrain that might require dashing to climb, then choosing to take high ground might become a real tactical choice with benefits and drawbacks.

Last edited by mrfuji3; 23/04/21 01:16 AM.
Joined: Nov 2020
O
OcO Offline
member
Offline
member
O
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Originally Posted by GM4Him
Yeah, I'm all about this right now, but what about these Difficulty Level Settings:

1. Story Mode = Backstab, High Ground, Barrel Throwing, and all the things we have now. Loaded Dice by default, more inspiration points by default, unlimited long rests, etc. Game doesn't change much from current state except maybe more inspiration points handed out like candy at Halloween for those who hate failing on dialogue rolls and inspiration can be used for combat too so players can gain extra help in combat. Also, maybe less enemies in various areas like the Necromancer Lair, Spider Lair, etc.

2. D&D 5e Mode = Actual 5e rules implemented. No backstab or higher ground, etc. Potions are Actions. No food during combat. True RNG. No loaded dice. Enemies have true 5e stats like accurate HP and AC. Disengage is an Action. I mean full blown D&D 5e experience. Game is harder because it is full blown rules with no cheese and nerf.

3. Dungeon Master Mode = Like 5e except even harder for those who are insanely good. This mode would be for people who truly know all the weaknesses of every enemy and they can exploit them really well. More enemies with more HP and AC and so forth.

Why would you remove highground ? What would be the point of taking a good position in your system ?

Of the 3 listed options I'd probably be playing on #3 DM mode myself if those were all that was offered. I would love to see a more detailed options menu like that in the post with Solasta's menu though. I would much rather have options built into the base game than have to mod it in later.

I do want to comment on "the point" of taking high ground even if there was no innate mechanical advantage applied for doing so. Even though it is not 5e, I can see the argument for an increase to the range for crossbows/bows due to simple physics but personally feel/will play with no bonus is needed. Holding a higher position is already a tactical advantage in a few ways.

1. Shoving/blasting an enemy so they take fall damage is obvious and there are multiple ways to do that, everyone gets at least 1 in the form of the Shove bonus action. Changing the Shove option from bonus to full doesn't change the fact that fall damage itself is no joke in BG3.

2. Limited access/choke points. Whether it be a ladder or a stair like structure built into the terrain getting squishy toons to high ground allows you to use a tankier toon or 2 to hold the access route and keep the enemy's melee off your peeps.

3. LoS manipulation. In many places if I'm on higher ground I can fire down at an enemy and then move back out of their LoS so they can not return fire. You can add going into stealth with that but often isn't needed so long as you have enough space on your level to just back up enough the terrain blocks any return fire/spells and abusing the stealth in the game is a bit cheesy to me so I don't bother.

High ground is already the better position before you start adding game mechanical advantages to that.

Joined: Mar 2021
member
Offline
member
Joined: Mar 2021
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
Originally Posted by Grudgebearer
Maybe you should go back a little farther, and brush up on the conversation that started the discussion?

Here, I'll make it easy for you...
Cool. That's irrelevant to the claim of gaslighting. You are claiming that Maximuuus wants High Ground Advantage to be in the game and doesn't understand the problems with Advantage.

Maximuuus is arguing that there should be some high ground bonus that is not advantage (+1/+2), especially since so much of the Larian maps are built around verticality. Which is a fair point and it's disengenous to misrepresent his argument as "High Ground Advantage or nothing."

One of Maximuuus's suggestions is that High Ground Advantage should just be replaced with only a range increase for ranged weapons, which is a pretty good suggestion. That would be a nice mix of
-already implemented in DOS, so easy for Larian to do
-doesn't waste the verticality present in BG3 maps
-not too powerful, in that it doesn't invalidate Advantage-granting spells & abilities and also doesn't affect bounded accuracy
It is true that height does not give a range increase according to 5e RAW, but that alone is not a good argument against Larian implementing it

Edit: The goal should be to balance the various difficulty options so that high difficulty forces you to make tactical decisions, and height can and should be one of these considerations. The problem right now is that it's too powerful (Advantage) for its cost (movement, sometimes 0 if you're just climbing a ladder), so getting high ground & backstab is always correct. If it height was modified to only give increased range and maybe a +1 bonus, jump+disengage was removed from the game, and ladders were difficult terrain that might require dashing to climb, then choosing to take high ground might become a real tactical choice with benefits and drawbacks.

Jesus dude I even gave you the starting point, and you still couldn't follow the conversation.

He started out asking why in a suggested difficulty mode titled "D&D 5e mode", that height advantage would be removed, as if the reasons weren't obvious in the name of the suggested difficulty mode, that it being 5e rules, which do not apply any sort of bonus or Advantage to ranged attacks from a raised position. Then went on to suggest that, regardless of the difficulty mode, that some bonus had to be ascribed to ranged attacks from height, and then ended his diatribe by saying that he was against Advantage for ranged attacks from height.

Maximuuus can write all the novellas that he wants, describing what he feels to be the perfect game, and it still will not back up his statement that "Highground has to matter even if it definitely shouldn't be a god mode.". Not getting a +1 to hit because you climbed your toon onto a box is not going to demolish any sense of tactics in the combat, and it especially wouldn't matter in a 5E difficulty mode if Larian is ever capable of actually implementing one, because height does not impart any bonuses under 5e rules.

Last edited by Grudgebearer; 23/04/21 02:39 AM.
Joined: Mar 2021
member
Offline
member
Joined: Mar 2021
Come on, you two. Don't me make me pull this thing over.

Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by OcO
I do want to comment on "the point" of taking high ground even if there was no innate mechanical advantage applied for doing so. Even though it is not 5e, I can see the argument for an increase to the range for crossbows/bows due to simple physics but personally feel/will play with no bonus is needed. Holding a higher position is already a tactical advantage in a few ways.

1. Shoving/blasting an enemy so they take fall damage is obvious and there are multiple ways to do that, everyone gets at least 1 in the form of the Shove bonus action. Changing the Shove option from bonus to full doesn't change the fact that fall damage itself is no joke in BG3.

2. Limited access/choke points. Whether it be a ladder or a stair like structure built into the terrain getting squishy toons to high ground allows you to use a tankier toon or 2 to hold the access route and keep the enemy's melee off your peeps.

3. LoS manipulation. In many places if I'm on higher ground I can fire down at an enemy and then move back out of their LoS so they can not return fire. You can add going into stealth with that but often isn't needed so long as you have enough space on your level to just back up enough the terrain blocks any return fire/spells and abusing the stealth in the game is a bit cheesy to me so I don't bother.

High ground is already the better position before you start adding game mechanical advantages to that.
Good points. Having high ground is beneficial even without mechanical bonuses for these reasons. Especially #1, and I like that it comes with a corresponding risk that you get blasted off of high ground.

The effectiveness of #2 and #3 are reduced since all goblins can disengage and a some other monsters are given a jump+disengage ability. I'm also not sure if you can physically completely block off a ladder with just a single character. I feel like I've tried to set one of my guys at the top of a ladder, but enemies are still able to climb up past them...? But yeah, one of the convienient things about D&D is that you can split up your move before & after an attack, and thus return to cover.

The effectiveness of #3 is also lessened because ladders take ~0 movement, allowing enemies to reach you more easily. It'd be nice if ladders did cost at least normal movement (double would make more sense); then using Misty Step to reach high ground would be much more useful in getting yourself up to a place where enemies can't reach.

Originally Posted by OcO
Of the 3 listed options I'd probably be playing on #3 DM mode myself if those were all that was offered. I would love to see a more detailed options menu like that in the post with Solasta's menu though. I would much rather have options built into the base game than have to mod it in later.
I would definitely like difficulty options as or more detailed as Solasta's. Customize your experience, choosing whatever bonuses (or lack therof) you wanted for high ground + etc.

Last edited by mrfuji3; 23/04/21 02:55 AM.
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Rugby, UK
Cleric of Innuendo
Offline
Cleric of Innuendo
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Rugby, UK
Let's drop the posturing and willy-waving on this thread, thanks.

Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
I don't know what "willy-waving" means so I hope it's not something I'll do.

Gm4's suggestion was :
- a story mode = a unchallenging mode
- a RAW mode = a strict RAW mode that exclude anything that don't belongs to D&D.
- an extreme RAW mode.

When reading "remove highground" you may understand "remove advantage from highground" and I may understand "remove any bonuses from highground".

Your words and quote and screenshot won't make your assumptions stronger because I have the same opinion since monthes : highground shouldn't give an Advantage.

On the other hand in a tactical TB game and even more - in a world build with A LOT of verticality - it would be stupid not to offer players mechanics to play with higher ground
(or to limit them to a boring and unchallenging story mode).

I find shove OP and I'd like them to tone it down.
I hate that we have an Advantage going higher and I'd like other bonuses. But as many players I like that being higher (or not) mean something.

As OcO said you already have (very) situational bonuses and that's cool but very limited.

RAW or not, a better range make sense and is an interresting bonus in tactical games.
On the other hand a lot of players complain that we're missing too often and I guess that's why they implemented advantages for highground and backstab.
A flat bonus is something that allow players to miss less and that can be easily custom for everyone to play with or without it.

Last edited by Maximuuus; 23/04/21 12:48 PM.
Joined: Sep 2017
G
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
G
Joined: Sep 2017
Also, can we add the Inspiration Point farm.

The first iteration of EA, those points were much rarer. However, due to complaining about RNG fails (as almost all Larian changes have been spawned from dice and RNG complaints), Larian put in excess Inspiration Points for re-rolls.

I would like those points to be very rare and for difficult quest lines. Between loaded dice and these points, it is now almost impossible not to get the result you want. And yes, I know that is the goal of Larian in the first place.

They want to have 5e and the illusion of dice but give you 4395340540 ways to circumvent and manipulate it so that, essentially, the presence of a dice mechanic is irrelevant.

Joined: Mar 2021
member
Offline
member
Joined: Mar 2021
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
I don't know what "willy-waving" means so I hope it's not something I'll do.

Gm4's suggestion was :
- a story mode = a unchallenging mode
- a RAW mode = a strict RAW mode that exclude anything that don't belongs to D&D.
- an extreme RAW mode.

When reading "remove highground" you may understand "remove advantage from highground" and I may understand "remove any bonuses from highground".

Your words and quote and screenshot won't make your assumptions stronger because I have the same opinion since monthes : highground shouldn't give an Advantage.

On the other hand in a tactical TB game and even more - in a world build with A LOT of verticality - it would be stupid not to offer players mechanics to play with higher ground
(or to limit them to a boring and unchallenging story mode).

I find shove OP and I'd like them to tone it down.
I hate that we have an Advantage going higher and I'd like other bonuses. But as many players I like that being higher (or not) mean something.

As OcO said you already have (very) situational bonuses and that's cool but very limited.

RAW or not, a better range make sense and is an interresting bonus in tactical games.
On the other hand a lot of players complain that we're missing too often and I guess that's why they implemented advantages for highground and backstab.
A flat bonus is something that allow players to miss less and that can be easily custom for everyone to play with or without it.

You are equating the removal of a bonus for ranged attack from high ground, with removing combat tactics. You have nothing to support your opinion, other than "you believe that high ground should give "some bonus", while completely ignoring the inherent benefit of getting to high ground, less chance of a ranged character being pulled into melee, and greater chance of maintaining concentration spells.

Getting to high ground does not make a person more accurate with a ranged weapon.

Last edited by Grudgebearer; 23/04/21 02:55 PM.
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
Originally Posted by Grudgebearer
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
I don't know what "willy-waving" means so I hope it's not something I'll do.

Gm4's suggestion was :
- a story mode = a unchallenging mode
- a RAW mode = a strict RAW mode that exclude anything that don't belongs to D&D.
- an extreme RAW mode.

When reading "remove highground" you may understand "remove advantage from highground" and I may understand "remove any bonuses from highground".

Your words and quote and screenshot won't make your assumptions stronger because I have the same opinion since monthes : highground shouldn't give an Advantage.

On the other hand in a tactical TB game and even more - in a world build with A LOT of verticality - it would be stupid not to offer players mechanics to play with higher ground
(or to limit them to a boring and unchallenging story mode).

I find shove OP and I'd like them to tone it down.
I hate that we have an Advantage going higher and I'd like other bonuses. But as many players I like that being higher (or not) mean something.

As OcO said you already have (very) situational bonuses and that's cool but very limited.

RAW or not, a better range make sense and is an interresting bonus in tactical games.
On the other hand a lot of players complain that we're missing too often and I guess that's why they implemented advantages for highground and backstab.
A flat bonus is something that allow players to miss less and that can be easily custom for everyone to play with or without it.

You are equating the removal of a bonus for ranged attack from high ground, with removing combat tactics. You have nothing to support your opinion, other than "you believe that high ground should give "some bonus", while completely ignoring the inherent benefit of getting to high ground, less chance of a ranged character being pulled into melee, and greater chance of maintaining concentration spells.

Getting to high ground does not make a person more accurate with a ranged weapon.

I agree with the last sentence even if it does not matter.
Yes, removing bonuses from highground reduce combat tactics. Exactly like giving the best D&D bonus for highground reduce combat tactics.

The flat bonus suggestion many talked about allow you to play with or without any bonuses so I can't understand your point.

"The inherent benefit" seriously don't make me laugh with your exemples. It looks like my experience with the game is far from yours.

Last edited by Maximuuus; 23/04/21 04:12 PM.
Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by gaymer
Also, can we add the Inspiration Point farm.

The first iteration of EA, those points were much rarer. However, due to complaining about RNG fails (as almost all Larian changes have been spawned from dice and RNG complaints), Larian put in excess Inspiration Points for re-rolls.

I would like those points to be very rare and for difficult quest lines. Between loaded dice and these points, it is now almost impossible not to get the result you want. And yes, I know that is the goal of Larian in the first place.

They want to have 5e and the illusion of dice but give you 4395340540 ways to circumvent and manipulate it so that, essentially, the presence of a dice mechanic is irrelevant.
+1 for inspiration being a rare reward for difficult quest lines or optional encounters. Idk exactly how many we current get in EA, but 2-4 seems like a reasonable amount for EA. Maybe 1-2 that most everyone gets from the main quests and then another 1-2 that are rare and only ~half or less of players get?

Joined: Nov 2020
O
OcO Offline
member
Offline
member
O
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
Originally Posted by OcO
I do want to comment on "the point" of taking high ground even if there was no innate mechanical advantage applied for doing so. Even though it is not 5e, I can see the argument for an increase to the range for crossbows/bows due to simple physics but personally feel/will play with no bonus is needed. Holding a higher position is already a tactical advantage in a few ways.

1. Shoving/blasting an enemy so they take fall damage is obvious and there are multiple ways to do that, everyone gets at least 1 in the form of the Shove bonus action. Changing the Shove option from bonus to full doesn't change the fact that fall damage itself is no joke in BG3.

2. Limited access/choke points. Whether it be a ladder or a stair like structure built into the terrain getting squishy toons to high ground allows you to use a tankier toon or 2 to hold the access route and keep the enemy's melee off your peeps.

3. LoS manipulation. In many places if I'm on higher ground I can fire down at an enemy and then move back out of their LoS so they can not return fire. You can add going into stealth with that but often isn't needed so long as you have enough space on your level to just back up enough the terrain blocks any return fire/spells and abusing the stealth in the game is a bit cheesy to me so I don't bother.

High ground is already the better position before you start adding game mechanical advantages to that.
Good points. Having high ground is beneficial even without mechanical bonuses for these reasons. Especially #1, and I like that it comes with a corresponding risk that you get blasted off of high ground.

The effectiveness of #2 and #3 are reduced since all goblins can disengage and a some other monsters are given a jump+disengage ability. I'm also not sure if you can physically completely block off a ladder with just a single character. I feel like I've tried to set one of my guys at the top of a ladder, but enemies are still able to climb up past them...? But yeah, one of the convienient things about D&D is that you can split up your move before & after an attack, and thus return to cover.

The effectiveness of #3 is also lessened because ladders take ~0 movement, allowing enemies to reach you more easily. It'd be nice if ladders did cost at least normal movement (double would make more sense); then using Misty Step to reach high ground would be much more useful in getting yourself up to a place where enemies can't reach.

Originally Posted by OcO
Of the 3 listed options I'd probably be playing on #3 DM mode myself if those were all that was offered. I would love to see a more detailed options menu like that in the post with Solasta's menu though. I would much rather have options built into the base game than have to mod it in later.
I would definitely like difficulty options as or more detailed as Solasta's. Customize your experience, choosing whatever bonuses (or lack therof) you wanted for high ground + etc.

You are correct on trying to hold the top of a ladder. I haven't been able to make that work either, the enemy always just shuffles around whomever is standing up top. However, I have successfully held ladders from the bottom. That is how I took out the goblin city on my first play through. I had Lazeal stand at the bottom of the ladder right behind where the goblin stands to officiate the chicken chase event with the rest of my toons at the top of the ladder raining down death. None of the enemies got past Lazeal and climbed up the ladder. I used the same tactic to fight the group of oath breakers looking for Karlach, Lazeal held the base of the ladder in the main room and the rest of my toons where up top. It may indeed be possible for enemies to reach past and climb anyway,, but I haven't seen it happen yet.

Joined: Mar 2021
member
Offline
member
Joined: Mar 2021
Originally Posted by Grudgebearer
You are equating the removal of a bonus for ranged attack from high ground, with removing combat tactics. You have nothing to support your opinion, other than "you believe that high ground should give "some bonus", while completely ignoring the inherent benefit of getting to high ground, less chance of a ranged character being pulled into melee, and greater chance of maintaining concentration spells.

Getting to high ground does not make a person more accurate with a ranged weapon.

How does high ground help maintain concentration?

Joined: Sep 2017
G
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
G
Joined: Sep 2017
Originally Posted by footface
Originally Posted by Grudgebearer
You are equating the removal of a bonus for ranged attack from high ground, with removing combat tactics. You have nothing to support your opinion, other than "you believe that high ground should give "some bonus", while completely ignoring the inherent benefit of getting to high ground, less chance of a ranged character being pulled into melee, and greater chance of maintaining concentration spells.

Getting to high ground does not make a person more accurate with a ranged weapon.

How does high ground help maintain concentration?

Indirectly, of course. If people on low ground have disadvantage to attack = less chance to hit = more chance to maintain concentration.

Joined: Sep 2017
G
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
G
Joined: Sep 2017
Anywho, we know that high ground is way too important for the way combat works. And Larian designed the game with convenient high ground spots for every encounter. Like, it is soooo obvious they made sure to put high ground in every encounter.

There are literally no combat spots that are completely flat. The game is intended for the human to take high ground and exploit the homebrew advantage. They did not even try to make it organic at all.

Joined: Nov 2020
O
OcO Offline
member
Offline
member
O
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by gaymer
Originally Posted by footface
Originally Posted by Grudgebearer
You are equating the removal of a bonus for ranged attack from high ground, with removing combat tactics. You have nothing to support your opinion, other than "you believe that high ground should give "some bonus", while completely ignoring the inherent benefit of getting to high ground, less chance of a ranged character being pulled into melee, and greater chance of maintaining concentration spells.

Getting to high ground does not make a person more accurate with a ranged weapon.

How does high ground help maintain concentration?

Indirectly, of course. If people on low ground have disadvantage to attack = less chance to hit = more chance to maintain concentration.

It can also be used to block LoS so enemy ranged can't attack at all by backing up. Some times arrows/bolts can still target you if the terrain blockage isn't enough for the arc, but most spells require a straight line LoS and won't arc up and over like that.

Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by OcO
You are correct on trying to hold the top of a ladder. I haven't been able to make that work either, the enemy always just shuffles around whomever is standing up top. However, I have successfully held ladders from the bottom. That is how I took out the goblin city on my first play through. I had Lazeal stand at the bottom of the ladder right behind where the goblin stands to officiate the chicken chase event with the rest of my toons at the top of the ladder raining down death. None of the enemies got past Lazeal and climbed up the ladder. I used the same tactic to fight the group of oath breakers looking for Karlach, Lazeal held the base of the ladder in the main room and the rest of my toons where up top. It may indeed be possible for enemies to reach past and climb anyway,, but I haven't seen it happen yet.
Ah, good to know! I assume it has something to do with ladders not actually being surfaces you can stop in the middle of. If an enemy can begin climbing a ladder, then they have to be able to get off at the top or else that'd break the game/otherwise have wonky results.

Similarly, I imagine you could stand at the top of a ladder and prevent enemies from climbing down. You just can't stand at the top of a ladder and prevent enemies from climbing up, or the the bottom of the ladder to prevent enemies from climbing down...

To move this thread somewhat more on topic, it'd be neat if "ladder climbing speed" was a toggle option.
Instant / Costs Normal Movement / Costs Double Movement (Difficult Terrain)

Page 6 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

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