Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Canada
S
journeyman
OP Offline
journeyman
S
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Canada
Okay, I've looked up 'Ray of Frost' in the PHB for 5th Edition, and it's NOT supposed to make an icy patch on the ground. It's strictly cold damage.

Ground effects were an interesting mechanic in DoS2, but lay off it already for BG3. It's not needed, and it's making some fights harder than they should be.

And on Page 195 of the PHB, it specifically says that Shoving a creature is an Attack action, not a bonus action. Which explains why it seems so overpowered in BG3.

Just my two copper pieces. laugh


Joined: Oct 2020
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Oct 2020
The shove distance is also increased in BG3, and fall damage seems to be much higher.

But res tassured there are many people making those same complaints. smile

Joined: Oct 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Oct 2020
Using ray of frost to free water is something that in dnd would in most cases be left up to dm interpretation in heavier rp games most dms would let something like that apply just most players for games do not think outside the box. The idea behind the game was to make it similar to dnd where thinking outside the box is encouraged. Thus several mechanics. Not just ray of frost where this could be used.

Joined: Jan 2009
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2009
Originally Posted by acatlas
Using ray of frost to free water is something that in dnd would in most cases be left up to dm interpretation in heavier rp games most dms would let something like that apply just most players for games do not think outside the box. The idea behind the game was to make it similar to dnd where thinking outside the box is encouraged. Thus several mechanics. Not just ray of frost where this could be used.


However, I'm sure most DM's would object to "The spell freezes the gallons of blood which had spilled from the target after it took that 1 point of slashing damage".

Joined: Sep 2017
E
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
E
Joined: Sep 2017
I love the ground effects. I've been trying to figure out why people hate them so much. If they were removed I think I'd stop playing this game because it'd be so boring.

Joined: Oct 2020
S
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
S
Joined: Oct 2020
No. They don’t need changes

Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by acatlas
Using ray of frost to free water is something that in dnd would in most cases be left up to dm interpretation in heavier rp games most dms would let something like that apply just most players for games do not think outside the box. The idea behind the game was to make it similar to dnd where thinking outside the box is encouraged. Thus several mechanics. Not just ray of frost where this could be used.


That should really be the Shape Water cantrip for freezing water. Create Bonfire for creating a patch of fire. If they would just use the rules as written, they could have their surface effects. The attack cantrips are really just that, attacks, Pretty much so that Wizards don't need to carry around crossbows.

Joined: Jan 2009
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2009
Originally Posted by eikona
I love the ground effects. I've been trying to figure out why people hate them so much. If they were removed I think I'd stop playing this game because it'd be so boring.


It's because the game is trying to use Hit points, Armor Class, and Spell Slots from D&D 5e, which is based around the idea of attrition of health and other resources over encounters, and it's also using massive AoE attacks in every battle, unresistable status effects, surface damage, and high ground advantage from D:OS 2, which is based around the idea of being fully healed and fully charged for each encounter.

The two systems clash when used together. If Larian really wants to use AoE's, unresistable status effects, surfaces, and high ground advantage, it also has to change the parts which are designed based on a system which doesn't have those.


EDIT: There's more. Some spells target AC, other spells require the target to make saving throws. The spells which target AC are easier to hit because of lowered monster AC. Saving throws have not been altered. This means spells which require saving throws have not been rebalanced and are now underwhelming to use and are not effective. See Sacred Flame, Color Spray, Sleep - all of those feel very bad to use because they're much more ineffective than they should be.

Other spells are powerful because they require Concentration to be effective. Concentration is a saving throw. Saving throws are much easier to fail when there is unresistable, no-saving-throw-to-avoid damage and AoE attacks and explosions all over the place. This makes concentration spells less effective, AND LESS FUN TO USE.

Last edited by Stabbey; 18/10/20 01:40 PM. Reason: added more
Joined: Aug 2014
1
old hand
Offline
old hand
1
Joined: Aug 2014
Originally Posted by acatlas
Using ray of frost to free water is something that in dnd would in most cases be left up to dm interpretation in heavier rp games most dms would let something like that apply just most players for games do not think outside the box. The idea behind the game was to make it similar to dnd where thinking outside the box is encouraged. Thus several mechanics. Not just ray of frost where this could be used.

I would leave this in too.

But I would take a look at how much blood is spilled from every low damage attack. It has been exaggerated in BG3 just so you have more surfaces to manipulate.

You should have to make a choice between A) Hit creature as in PhB, only damage no surface OR B) Target the terrain under the opponent to make them roll Acrobatics or fall prone. No damage AND surface, that's just overpowering the cantrip.

And I would make sure the area frozen by a cantrip is small enough to not turn into AoE i.e. only under a single creature. There are more powerful spells that cost a spell slot and can manipulate larger areas. Burning Hands, Sleet Storm

Last edited by 1varangian; 18/10/20 06:26 AM.
Joined: Oct 2020
S
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
S
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Stabbey
Originally Posted by eikona
I love the ground effects. I've been trying to figure out why people hate them so much. If they were removed I think I'd stop playing this game because it'd be so boring.


It's because the game is trying to use Hit points, Armor Class, and Spell Slots from D&D 5e, which is based around the idea of attrition of health and other resources over encounters, and it's also using massive AoE attacks in every battle, unresistable status effects, surface damage, and high ground advantage from D:OS 2, which is based around the idea of being fully healed and fully charged for each encounter.

The two systems clash when used together. If Larian really wants to use AoE's, unresistable status effects, surfaces, and high ground advantage, it also has to change the parts which are designed based on a system which doesn't have those.


I see this complaint a lot but I've yet to hear a good explanation for why it's actually a bad idea beyond "5e handles it this way instead". There's nothing special about hp, ac, and vancian spellcasting that gets ruined by BG3's implentation of the rules. Numbers can be tuned to account for the added functionalities of some spells and the rest is just adjusting available resources. It's bizarre that "It's not the same as it is in 5e" is a reply to "I find it fun".

Joined: Oct 2020
P
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
P
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Sunfly
Originally Posted by Stabbey
Originally Posted by eikona
I love the ground effects. I've been trying to figure out why people hate them so much. If they were removed I think I'd stop playing this game because it'd be so boring.


It's because the game is trying to use Hit points, Armor Class, and Spell Slots from D&D 5e, which is based around the idea of attrition of health and other resources over encounters, and it's also using massive AoE attacks in every battle, unresistable status effects, surface damage, and high ground advantage from D:OS 2, which is based around the idea of being fully healed and fully charged for each encounter.

The two systems clash when used together. If Larian really wants to use AoE's, unresistable status effects, surfaces, and high ground advantage, it also has to change the parts which are designed based on a system which doesn't have those.


I see this complaint a lot but I've yet to hear a good explanation for why it's actually a bad idea beyond "5e handles it this way instead". There's nothing special about hp, ac, and vancian spellcasting that gets ruined by BG3's implentation of the rules. Numbers can be tuned to account for the added functionalities of some spells and the rest is just adjusting available resources. It's bizarre that "It's not the same as it is in 5e" is a reply to "I find it fun".


And they do tune the numbers to account for the added functionalities...on the monsters. Somehow my 8 HP wizard just doesn't feel "tuned" to account for unblockable fire damage that can't be avoided because the entire fucking floor is on fire for the next 50 turns. Nobody says to completely remove ground effects, at least not for the most part. Just tone them down already, not literally every single elemental spell in the game should create a patch of ice or fire

Last edited by Pupito; 18/10/20 07:53 AM.
Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
Played again BG2. Read throuh D&D2. Half of all the spells dont match, discriptions are different ect ect....
But somehow playing BG2 was an incredible experience, yet again. It FELT d&d.
BG3 doesnt have to be letter by letter a 5e game.

Last edited by mr_planescapist; 18/10/20 07:59 AM.
Joined: Jun 2014
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jun 2014
Originally Posted by mr_planescapist
Played again BG2. Read throuh D&D2. Half of all the spells dont match, discriptions are different ect ect....
But somehow playing BG2 was an incredible experience, yet again. It FELT d&d.
BG3 doesnt have to be letter by letter a 5e game.


Engine limitations, but some were quite awesome like spell sequencer.

Joined: Oct 2020
O
stranger
Offline
stranger
O
Joined: Oct 2020
Some changes are good, like False Life giving a set temporary HP number or Armor of Agathys lasting until the next long rest.

Picking through which are good and which aren't will be tough however...

Joined: Oct 2020
S
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
S
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Pupito
Originally Posted by Sunfly
Originally Posted by Stabbey
Originally Posted by eikona
I love the ground effects. I've been trying to figure out why people hate them so much. If they were removed I think I'd stop playing this game because it'd be so boring.


It's because the game is trying to use Hit points, Armor Class, and Spell Slots from D&D 5e, which is based around the idea of attrition of health and other resources over encounters, and it's also using massive AoE attacks in every battle, unresistable status effects, surface damage, and high ground advantage from D:OS 2, which is based around the idea of being fully healed and fully charged for each encounter.

The two systems clash when used together. If Larian really wants to use AoE's, unresistable status effects, surfaces, and high ground advantage, it also has to change the parts which are designed based on a system which doesn't have those.


I see this complaint a lot but I've yet to hear a good explanation for why it's actually a bad idea beyond "5e handles it this way instead". There's nothing special about hp, ac, and vancian spellcasting that gets ruined by BG3's implentation of the rules. Numbers can be tuned to account for the added functionalities of some spells and the rest is just adjusting available resources. It's bizarre that "It's not the same as it is in 5e" is a reply to "I find it fun".


And they do tune the numbers to account for the added functionalities...on the monsters. Somehow my 8 HP wizard just doesn't feel "tuned" to account for unblockable fire damage that can't be avoided because the entire fucking floor is on fire for the next 50 turns. Nobody says to completely remove ground effects, at least not for the most part. Just tone them down already, not literally every single elemental spell in the game should create a patch of ice or fire


Sounds like you need to work on positioning your wizard tbh.

Joined: Oct 2020
P
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
P
Joined: Oct 2020
I'm sorry, I didn't realize paid $60 to play "the floor is lava", I thought it was for Baldur's Gate 3, a D&D 5e game. Next time I'll just leave my entire party sitting on a rock somewhere while I go make a snack and hope the entire world is no longer on fire by the time I come back. If only I had known that this game required hour long breaks after every combat to wait for all the fire to go out.

Joined: Oct 2020
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Oct 2020
As an avid DOS player I have no problem with surfaces and kinda know how to play around them but sometimes the differences in outcomes from D&D5e to BG3 are staggering.

I mean, a goblin can try to throw an alchemical fire flask at me, roll a CRITICAL MISS and it still will set the ground around me on fire and make me take like 6 damage + 2 when I try to step out of the flame patch.

Any decent DM would make the flask pop open and pour on the goblin, slip out of his hand and land in the bushes or something to that extent on a critical miss.

In BG3 it still deals full damage. And that's what I have a problem with.

Joined: Oct 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Sunfly
Originally Posted by Stabbey
Originally Posted by eikona
I love the ground effects. I've been trying to figure out why people hate them so much. If they were removed I think I'd stop playing this game because it'd be so boring.


It's because the game is trying to use Hit points, Armor Class, and Spell Slots from D&D 5e, which is based around the idea of attrition of health and other resources over encounters, and it's also using massive AoE attacks in every battle, unresistable status effects, surface damage, and high ground advantage from D:OS 2, which is based around the idea of being fully healed and fully charged for each encounter.

The two systems clash when used together. If Larian really wants to use AoE's, unresistable status effects, surfaces, and high ground advantage, it also has to change the parts which are designed based on a system which doesn't have those.


I see this complaint a lot but I've yet to hear a good explanation for why it's actually a bad idea beyond "5e handles it this way instead". There's nothing special about hp, ac, and vancian spellcasting that gets ruined by BG3's implentation of the rules. Numbers can be tuned to account for the added functionalities of some spells and the rest is just adjusting available resources. It's bizarre that "It's not the same as it is in 5e" is a reply to "I find it fun".



Seems like you did not read the answer already given to you. Yes, you could balance it around for surface effects and away from 5e. But what is the point of making a 5e game, when you balance away from it? The thing that is special about HP/AC/Spellcasting that gets ruined is: the balance. All those things are balanced around each other and versus balanced encounters. 5e has done a pretty good job there and rebalancing it all again would in the end probably mean we get some kind of DOS:2 balance. Which is fine and fun, but distinctly NOT 5e.

You seem to have very little understanding how 5e works, which is fine, but maybe refrain from making those kind of statements then.

Joined: Oct 2017
B
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
B
Joined: Oct 2017
If it missed, and you are not on fire on start of your turn. Jump to dodge floor, you don't have damage then.

And every 10 meter there's floor effect, heroes jump and jump like grasshopper if I don't want to get damage from floor effects, and it feels super non-epic.

DOS2 can have much of floor effects since there's 4 action points (with some traits, and items there's 6AP), and scrolls for everyone (I think non-spell casters wouldn't use scrolls eventually), and there's gap-closer skill to avoid ground effect, and there's nail on shoes makes heroes slipped-immune. BG3 has only one action to deal with burning floor, or non spell-caster must jump like grasshopper if you don't want to get disadvantage of that.

I am really up to total floor effects if there's no much and makes sense like oil and alchole and some wooden object are flammable, ice spells can freeze water. (and it doesn't make slipped every time unlike grease, is just difficult terrain) DND is imaginary world, good DM should allow ground effects on situational circumstance, now BG3 there's fire on cobble stones, ray spell supposed to hit a target hits target and freeze under his/her/its feet and make them prone. It is just too much power to spell casters, and it makes controlling melees less fun in my opinion.

Last edited by Bugginity; 18/10/20 10:42 AM.
Joined: May 2020
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: May 2020
Originally Posted by KingTiki



Seems like you did not read the answer already given to you. Yes, you could balance it around for surface effects and away from 5e. But what is the point of making a 5e game, when you balance away from it? The thing that is special about HP/AC/Spellcasting that gets ruined is: the balance. All those things are balanced around each other and versus balanced encounters. 5e has done a pretty good job there and rebalancing it all again would in the end probably mean we get some kind of DOS:2 balance. Which is fine and fun, but distinctly NOT 5e.

You seem to have very little understanding how 5e works, which is fine, but maybe refrain from making those kind of statements then.


At some point you will have to accept that this isn't a TT game. It's a video game where there will be much more combat. Adjusting it so that the combat is more interesting is possibly the most important thing they do. They also have to adjust for a wide variety of competence on the part of the players- this will also require changing some rules.

I understand wanting the game to reflect 5e as much as possible. I want that, as well. But there will be changes, such as giving characters more mobility options to avoid surfaces. Homebrew is a thing, and you may wish to view BG3 as a 5e homebrew. View the game in it's totality rather than critique each and every rule change, otherwise you're just rules lawyering.

Page 1 of 2 1 2

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