Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 28 of 28 1 2 26 27 28
Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
The Reddit post is excellent, as are many comments on it! Great to post it here!

In regards to the reaction system, there is clearly a divide, although it seems most agree the current system is lacking. Optional ways of dealing with it would be great, so you can have the current or popups, which according to quite a few isn't at all slowing down or disturbing but rather giving options during the enemy turns. Perhaps there are other ways though? Like maybe time slowing down and a "reaction button" lighting up that you can click and then you get popups with options, but if you don't click during the time window, nothing happens or the pre-selected reactions occur? Then you could set that "reaction time" window up and down in options, or turn it off? I don't know, but I am sure there are other ways to implement these things rather than just popups.

Joined: Oct 2020
R
enthusiast
Online Content
enthusiast
R
Joined: Oct 2020
The best solution would be a DA-like system. In DAO, you were able to determine how NPCs are supposed to work in combat.
It was a prioritized system and I think it would have worked pretty well in BG3.
Of course it wouldn't be perfect, but it would always be better than the current and much nicer than the Solasta's system.

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Well, I still would like several options most of all. That's clearly the best for all involved. Me personally, I would choose a Solasta-like system any day. So, having multiple options clearly is the absolutely best route for everyone =)

Joined: Jun 2018
F
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
F
Joined: Jun 2018
Hey, I'm the one who posted the reddit discussion here. I do believe there are good arguments on the reaction system for those who want pop ups and those who do not. I don't know what the best option would be, but I am open to test it myself once Larian implements it into the game.

However I think one thing we can all agree on, is that shove and jump are huge problems when it comes to balance. Even throwing enemies is incredibly powerful and often overlooked. Yes we all know its fun. But there comes a point where shoving a minotaur from stealth is simply too much.

Shove can be stronger than spells since it can insta-kill almost anything and its only a bonus action.
Jump allows the player to ignore attacks of opportunity and get advantage on every single attack.
Candles and Torches allow weapon users to deal an additional 1d4 fire damage on every single attack. Simply drop it from your inventory, dip your weapon, pick the torch or candle up after the battle. This can be done anywhere, at any time. Its too powerful and I don't think this is intended design. It also makes poison bottles obsolete.
(Of course unlimited long rests are a huge balance issue too, I could write an entire essay on this and have done so already, but lets keep this discussion for another thread...)
Gaining advantage is way too easy via high ground and/or attacking from behind. This creates another problem: Imagine you are playing a Warlock and you have the decision to use a spell Slot and a full action on Faery fire or Darkness to give yourself advantage. Why would you ever waste your spell slots like that if you can simply get to the high ground? Warlocks have a tadpole ability for a free teleport. Or you can use a magic item for a free cast of misty step. Or simply run and jump.
In my opinion, there can certainly be bonuses to attacking from high ground. But advantage is too powerful. Maybe +1 or +2 on attack rolls, but not more!

I think everyone will understand that while DnD 5e is not perfectly balanced, things are designed the way they are for good reason. And sadly, the game is suffering in terms of enjoyment and balance simply because Larian decided to deviate from the rules. Not all of those deviations are neccesary.

I think advantage from high ground vs casting Faeri fire is one of the best examples of how Larian's design hurts the balance of the game, but also limits the options for players. If things stay the way they are currently, I don't see myself ever casting Faery fire or Darkness.

Also lets not forget that the Darkness Spell prevents the player from casting spells and doing ranged attacks while inside Darkness, even with Devil's Sight. And it also blocks projectiles from passing through.
This is another deviation from the rules. And many of use voiced their opinion about this already. This is a severe nerf to Darkness and frankly its not even worth it to use this spell as a Warlock now. We do not have Hexblade and we do not have pact of the blade. Casting Darkness to make some dagger attacks is a very poor use of your spell slot and the opportunity cost is too high. You could be doing much better things with your action and spell slot. This is sadly another example of how deviation from the rules has made a spell worse than it should be, just like Faery Fire.

Last edited by feedback_wizard; 09/04/21 02:35 PM.
Joined: Mar 2021
member
Offline
member
Joined: Mar 2021
Originally Posted by Rhobar121
The best solution would be a DA-like system. In DAO, you were able to determine how NPCs are supposed to work in combat.
It was a prioritized system and I think it would have worked pretty well in BG3.
Of course it wouldn't be perfect, but it would always be better than the current and much nicer than the Solasta's system.

DAO's tactics system worked because the game was RTwP, in fact, it's probably the best implementation of RTwP that still allows some measure of control of the characters.

It would be a poor choice for any turn-based game.

Last edited by Grudgebearer; 09/04/21 02:35 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
https://forums.larian.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=768999#Post768999


Excellent points! I do agree with all of them. I am glad that all those things are being discussed in multiple forums too, it's a great way to get Larian's attention I hope. =)
Jumping, shoving, throwing, high ground, "backstab" and reactions are widely discussed topics, but I would also add that monster types and even summons and wild shape forms do not use the stats of the PHB. In many cases, perhaps that's fine, but I am also thinking that it does screw up some things aswell, balance-wise.

Joined: Oct 2020
R
enthusiast
Online Content
enthusiast
R
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Grudgebearer
Originally Posted by Rhobar121
The best solution would be a DA-like system. In DAO, you were able to determine how NPCs are supposed to work in combat.
It was a prioritized system and I think it would have worked pretty well in BG3.
Of course it wouldn't be perfect, but it would always be better than the current and much nicer than the Solasta's system.

DAO's tactics system worked because the game was RTwP, in fact, it's probably the best implementation of RTwP that still allows some measure of control of the characters.

It would be a poor choice for any turn-based game.

I don't see a better solution to the reaction system

Joined: Mar 2021
member
Offline
member
Joined: Mar 2021
Originally Posted by Rhobar121
I don't see a better solution to the reaction system

A tactics tree like DOA would never automate reactions better than the player just being given the opportunity to stop and choose.

It's not a solution to your wish for the reaction system to not exist. The entire point of a reaction, is to give the player the opportunity to break and "react" accordingly. If you don't want to be able to do that, a solution would be to have a toggle switch to disable reactions for that character.

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Well, there could be multiple options. A "stop and choose" system, or an automated system, or reactions off.

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
They could keep the reaction system and remove healthbars on enemies so people can stop meta gaming they need that OA specifically on one creature over another.

Joined: Aug 2014
1
addict
Offline
addict
1
Joined: Aug 2014
Since RANGERS are being changed, would it be possible to get a non-spellcasting, non-magical Ranger archetype at level 2? You know.. Aragorn? Why do all Rangers have to be spellcasters?

I'd just like to play a lightly armored warrior with lots of skills, tracking, mobility, stealth, favored enemies, worldly knowledge, all that flavor. But no magic!

And the Wasteland Wanderer resistances to elemental damage in BG3 are too powerful and feel too magical. A skill should translate into a Save bonus. Resistance to something implies magic or a natural physiological resistance like Tieflings' resistance to Fire because they are half infernal. I don't think Rangers should get resistances, at least not at level 1.

Last edited by 1varangian; 10/04/21 10:07 AM.
Joined: Nov 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by 1varangian
Since RANGERS are being changed, would it be possible to get a non-spellcasting, non-magical Ranger archetype at level 2? You know.. Aragorn? Why do all Rangers have to be spellcasters?

I'd just like to play a lightly armored warrior with lots of skills, tracking, mobility, stealth, favored enemies, worldly knowledge, all that flavor. But no magic!

And the Wasteland Wanderer resistances to elemental damage in BG3 are too powerful and feel too magical. A skill should translate into a Save bonus. Resistance to something implies magic or a natural physiological resistance like Tieflings' resistance to Fire because they are half infernal. I don't think Rangers should get resistances, at least not at level 1.

Tbh, I'd rather them just move to Tasha's guide stuff with ranger, having it that when you level you have the option of normal PHB or the Tasha's option.
And Rangers in dnd, even back in 2e, would eventually get some form of casting due to their connection with nature. They are less Aragorn and more a cross between Fighter and Druid, that said I would like to see some more of the ranger subclasses added cause I think a few are more martial than others, though all do get magic in some form.

The lightly armored warrior with lots of skills and such can be done with fighter I think. If multiclassing is added you could get one level of ranger and the rest in any martial class, giving you the flavorful level 1 abilities if ranger while having the magic less lightly armored warrior steal thing about.

Last edited by CJMPinger; 10/04/21 10:21 AM.
Joined: Jan 2021
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Jan 2021
Adding this in here. Original Post
Surfaces should be behaving more to the core rules. Please, give the player oil flasks they can buy from a vendor, not near-weightless oil barrels. Please let the player have an action to extinguish immediate flames from throwables.

Originally Posted by DragonSnooz
Originally Posted by Sordak
>surfaces, i dont mind.t hey are good.
the only reason people dont like them is because the Original Sin games had them
>break concentration, good. Positioning should be extremeley important for casters and quite frankly they are incredibly overtuned in 5e anyway.
Adding in some clarifications to help the discussion.

Surfaces are native to D&D, you can create surfaces in 5e with oil flask + produce flame. The issue is that surfaces are massively buffed by borrowed code from Divinity: Original Sin. Surfaces need to behave more like rules-as-written. Oil Flask

On positioning though, with high ground Advantage and low ground disadvantage casters rarely get to choose their positioning. That's the other side of the discussion. The player could be safely positioning their casters, but the game is incentivizing them to do otherwise.
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
About surfaces I'm not going to talk about DoS... I don't care but you're wrong according to me because it completely break the concentration mechanic. Your concentration is broken all the time so all those spells are close to useless.
When you dodge the arrow or the potion, the fire surface is still created under your feet so you always take damages. This is a problem for concentration spells but not only...

It's very much a rule implementation issue. Surfaces shouldn't be breaking concentration.

EDIT: Also, where's our DC 10 dex check to extinguish the flames? Alchemist's Fire
Baldur's Gate 3 needs a patch just for rule implementation.

Joined: Oct 2020
M
stranger
Offline
stranger
M
Joined: Oct 2020
The bow and crossbow must have diffrerent distance.

SHORT Bow 80/320
lONG bOW 150/600

CROSSBOW LIGHT 80/320
CROSSBOW HEAVY 100/400

IN BG3 IT THE SAME FOR ALL RANGE WEAPON HOPE THAT WILL BE FIX THESE

Page 28 of 28 1 2 26 27 28

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