Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Joined: Oct 2020
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Vynticator
Elemental surfaces are fun, make the map layout and positioning absolutely crucial, and allow for much more tactical play.


I disagree. I think the abundance of surfaces forces the available tactics down a narrow path and prevents actual ingenuity in combat.

Joined: Sep 2017
member
Offline
member
Joined: Sep 2017
Absolutely no DnD-based C-RPG (I'm not talking about MMOs like Neverwinter, or Action-RPGs like BG: Dark Alliance, but proper DnD-based computer roleplaying games in which you create characters and do combat by the rules) has bent the rules to the extent BG3 EA currently does.

All previous DnD-based RPGs have stuck very closely to the ruleset, and only made simplifcations or omissions where it was either not feasible to include the mechanic in a video game, or where the applications of a specific spell were too broad to realize all of them in a scripted way.

Larian's approach right now seems to be like "eh, we've looked at the PHB but actually we think a lot of this won't be fun for most players, so we change a lot". I remember Swen saying during the early days the even wanted to change how hit chance and HP work. Apparently they took a few steps back from that, but not nearly enough for my taste. And don't get me started on the overabundance of surfaces. They were fun for a more 'wacky' RPG like the DOS games, but not so much in a DnD setting.

I think at this point it would be good to hear from Larian what their approach will be. Either to include a difficulty / gameplay option "5E by the rules", or just outright tell us they will take a lot liberties whenever it suits them. As much as I'd prefer the first scenario: if the second one came to pass, at least then we'll know, and can stop listing differences.

Last edited by endolex; 18/10/20 12:23 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
B
stranger
Offline
stranger
B
Joined: Oct 2020
Surfaces aren't a departure from D&D rules, they just don't come up so much in tabletop D&D games. There's nothing particularly stopping you from throwing oil around and flinging a firebolt at it.

Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
Originally Posted by Sunfly
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
D&D exists for about 45 years so yes, it's a bible and it looks like the 5th edition is really appreciated by role playing players. I trust them and I'd lobe this game to become a true BG and D&D experience.


I didn't realize all of those players were still playing the unaltered first edition, I guess it really is hard to improve perfection though.


Oh.sorry, maybe I should have said the company that created / worked / build D&D over 4 decades have years of experience about balancing their games. I like DoS 2 but it has a terrible balance and that's really not the same experience, especially in it's combat mecanics.

As someone else said the problem is that their base material to start working on BG3 is NOT D&D, it's DoS.
You can feel it absolutely everywhere in the game.
I'm not saying the game is bad, it has an awesome potential to become as good as it want to. But they have to start thinking about something different.

They have 2 awesome RPG names in their catalog... It's time to really create another experience instead of a huge upgrade.

They have to stick to the rules as much as they can and deal with that constraint if they want to create a D&D experience. BG is definitely not a game in which everything burn and in which every combat is a spectacle and a challenge. I think a little bit more sobriety and personnality could really lead to an amazing experience for everyone.

Last edited by Maximuuus; 18/10/20 06:21 PM.
Joined: Jan 2009
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2009
Originally Posted by Vynticator
Rather too many people here getting frothy over changes from core 5e rules. Larian do their own version of 5e rules. Elemental surfaces are fun, make the map layout and positioning absolutely crucial, and allow for much more tactical play. Some people get hung up on minute differences from 5e: maybe enjoy the game as it is, if it doesn't work in the game, then critique it in those terms. 5e isn't a bible and it's not useful to be fundamentalist.



I played D:OS 1 and D:OS 2. I enjoyed D:OS 1 and D:OS 2. This is a bad "hot take". I'd even call it a strawman argument.


  • For starters, Larian themselves have advertised this game as being based on the D&D 5e ruleset. They did not say "Based on the Divinity: Original Sin rules."
  • Don't tell people to stop complaining about the differences between 5e and this game. Larian does Early Access for a reason, which is specifically to get feedback. If you like the system as it is now, great, fine, that's feedback, and you are free to give it. Don't tell others to shut up.
  • I will now explain the reason for the complaints. It is not a reflexive, knee-jerk aversion to change.
  • Divinity: Original Sin 2 is balanced on the idea of being fully charged with all abilities available for each and every combat. Tactics are King.
  • Dungeons and Dragons 5th Edition is balanced on being fully charged after a long rest, and then having resources and options slowly whittled down over the course of a day. Resource Management is King.
  • BG 3 is using Hit points, Armor Class, and Spell Slots for players from D&D 5e. They are using the Concentration mechanic from D&D 5e.
  • Monster HP in BG 3 is usually higher, Monster AC is usually lower, and Ability scores remain the same.
  • D&D's HP, AC and Concentration is not balanced around the idea of status-inflicting surfaces, status-inflicting attacks, and AoE attacks to be as prevalent as they are in BG 3.
  • Just about every single surface effect in D&D has some kind of saving throw to resist for half or no damage. There is no such thing as a guaranteed hit from a surface in 5e, but there is in BG3.
  • Concentration spells are balanced around a roll under 10 or half the damage losing concentration. The more checks you have to make, the greater the chance you will fail. You are far more likely to fail checks because you're doing a lot more of them.
  • Enemy HP is way up, enemy AC is way down. This makes spells balanced around on hitting AC more reliable. This makes spells which affect a certain amount of enemy HP far worse, such as Sleep and Color Spray, because they can affect fewer enemies.
  • Enemy saving throws remain the same. This makes spells balanced around enemies failing a saving throw will seem to suck more because they're doing less damage. Example: Sacred Flame - it does 1d8 - an average of 4.5. Fire Bolt does an average damage of 13.5 from what's supposed to be a 1d10 spell.
  • Armor Class is based around advantage being relatively rare. Statistically speaking, Advantage is an effective +4 (Disadvantage an effective -4). Constant advantage from high ground is and disadvantage from low ground means those on the high ground are dealing more damage, those on the low ground are missing more and dragging battles out longer than would be normal.
  • And I'm even leaving out bonus action shoves, disengages, and hides.
  • Larian has changed many things from 5e, but have left other things as standard. That does not work. The systems have different design goals in mind.


Last edited by Stabbey; 18/10/20 08:50 PM. Reason: tweaks
Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by mr_planescapist
Exactly my thought. Whats that undying obsession to be word for word like the books?! Have you guys even played BG2?.?
I recently played again BG2. Read throuh D&Dadv.2e . Half of all the spells dont match, discriptions are different ect ect....
But somehow playing BG2 was an incredible experience, as I remembered it.. It FELT d&d.The ATMOSPHERE is spot on.
BG3 doesnt have to be letter by letter a 5e game to be great.

Yes we complained about it at the time and where given a clear cut and thorough explanation as to why the changes where made and a lot of it involved technical limitations and feedback from testing. There where some glaring oversights in some parts but so much was improved by their changes that it was an even trade and eventually people decided that it was the better of two lesser choices. These technicalities are no longer an issue and yet they are choosing to outright ignore the feedback and issue by issuing a blanket statement with no explanation or validation as to why they made these choices. Most people just want a real answer.

Furthermore, the older games where not turn based and thus did not have to consider the devil in the details that is known as the action economy. 5e was built around the concept of the action economy and has already been play tested thoroughly by a pool of candidates much wider and much more diverse than the player base of Larian studios by the publisher holding the licensing rights and bankrolling the project. While this does not necessarily mean it is better consider that many kinks have been worked out while many detractors(how strong dex is as a stat for example) have been addressed by neither. In fact, it hasn't even been acknowledged. Do you not think that it is worth an explanation for why they chose to go this way as it is counterintuitive and seems to only demand more work with less consideration in lieau of the fact that we are considering spending money on it?

Last edited by Argonaut; 18/10/20 07:28 PM.

I am here to discuss a video game. Please do not try to rope me into anything other than that. Thank you.
Joined: Oct 2020
S
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
S
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Stabbey
Originally Posted by Vynticator
Rather too many people here getting frothy over changes from core 5e rules. Larian do their own version of 5e rules. Elemental surfaces are fun, make the map layout and positioning absolutely crucial, and allow for much more tactical play. Some people get hung up on minute differences from 5e: maybe enjoy the game as it is, if it doesn't work in the game, then critique it in those terms. 5e isn't a bible and it's not useful to be fundamentalist.



I played D:OS 1 and D:OS 2. I enjoyed D:OS 1 and D:OS 2. This is a completely idiotic "hot take".


  • For starters, Larian themselves have advertised this game as being based on the D&D 5e ruleset. They did not say "Based on the Divinity: Original Sin rules."
  • Don't tell people to stop complaining about the differences between 5e and this game. Larian does Early Access for a reason, which is specifically to get feedback. If you like the system as it is now, great, fine, that's feedback, and you are free to give it. Don't tell others to shut up.
  • I will now explain the reason for the complaints. It is not a reflexive, knee-jerk aversion to change.
  • Divinity: Original Sin 2 is balanced on the idea of being fully charged with all abilities available for each and every combat. Tactics are King.
  • Dungeons and Dragons 5th Edition is balanced on being fully charged after a long rest, and then having resources and options slowly whittled down over the course of a day. Resource Management is King.
  • BG 3 is using Hit points, Armor Class, and Spell Slots for players from D&D 5e. They are using the Concentration mechanic from D&D 5e.
  • Monster HP in BG 3 is usually higher, Monster AC is usually lower, and Ability scores remain the same.
  • D&D's HP, AC and Concentration is not balanced around the idea of status-inflicting surfaces, status-inflicting attacks, and AoE attacks to be as prevalent as they are in BG 3.
  • Just about every single surface effect in D&D has some kind of saving throw to resist for half or no damage. There is no such thing as a guaranteed hit from a surface.
  • Concentration spells are balanced around a roll under 10 or half the damage losing concentration. The more checks you have to make, the greater the chance you will fail. You are far more likely to fail checks because you're doing a lot more of them.
  • Enemy HP is way up, enemy AC is way down. This makes spells balanced around on hitting AC more reliable. This makes spells which affect a certain amount of enemy HP far worse, such as Sleep and Color Spray, because they can affect fewer enemies.
  • Enemy saving throws remain the same. This makes spells balanced around enemies failing a saving throw will seem to suck more because they're doing less damage. Example: Sacred Flame - it does 1d8 - an average of 4.5. Fire Bolt does an average damage of 13.5 from what's supposed to be a 1d10 spell.
  • Armor Class is based around advantage being relatively rare. Statistically speaking, Advantage is an effective +4 (Disadvantage an effective -4). Constant advantage from high ground is and disadvantage from low ground means those on the high ground are dealing more damage, those on the low ground are missing more and dragging battles out longer than would be normal.
  • Larian has changed many things from 5e, but have left other things as standard. That does not work. The systems have different design goals in mind.



What a sober review of how bad those features from DOS2 impact the game balance. Couldn't do it better.

One thing is to add some flavouring in the game as they've done with the weapon skills that recharge every long rest (it even could be every short rest and it would be also ok). Other thing is completely break the essence of DnD which is based in progression (resource and action economy/management). I don't want to fight battles wiith full spell slots and full health. I want to regret decisions I've made with me resources by casting that Guiding Bolt in a minion and now have to deal with a bigger threat without it.

I'll list some refurbished Larians features that they added to the game because they think they are key success factors for every game:

High ground advantage
Itemmancy - Thousands of items - Quality over quantity
Surfaces
The necessity of having plenty of actions to do in one turn
The necessity of having battles that feels epics all the time
The comprehension that battle skills are a must - just rolling a sword attack is boring
Magical Arrows - because archers are boring
Infinite rest - because a game without bedrolls are nothing but a bad game
Particles - because a game without particles sounds too 20's
Lack of freedom - because you are going to make clever decisions that I've added in the game whether you want it or not.
No sense of attachment - I encourage you to respec your character whenever you want. No regrets.
No punishing - Everything can and will be fixable

Well, I can spend the rest of my day listing how they've built the game over DOS2 but there'll always be someone too fanboy to see.

I guess the main problem is that everyone is trying not to hurt Larians feelings while losing the capacity to think rationally.





Joined: Oct 2020
P
stranger
Offline
stranger
P
Joined: Oct 2020
The big issues aren't that the game has some tweaks from 5e, changes were inevitable. The issues are the changes to the action economy and the excessive explosive/flammable barrels, and cantrips being better than leveled spells. Eldritch Blast is already incredibly powerful in regular 5e. With the changes to the health and AC of enemies, it becomes the best damage spell in the game.

Firebolt should not automatically light the target on fire, even on a miss. Stealth shouldn't be automatic outside of line of sight. You shouldn't be able to cart around fifty barrels that explode if you look at them funny. Gunpowder is supposed to be rare in D&D, and should also exist for a reason other than to be a bomb in a fight. Hell, oil should be relatively rare in D&D, and a lot heavier than what the barrels of oil claim to be. The size of the barrels looks to be about equivalent to a standard "55 Gallon" barrel. 55 Gallons of water is 460lbs. Moreover, gunpowder isn't explosive except when confined tightly or in large quantities. The barrel should either be too big to move easily, or not be explosive. The barrels should also have more than 1 hp. The barrels of wine should also not be flammable, it takes high proof alcohol to burn, not random ale or wine you find in the wilderness.

Everyone and their mother has complained about disengage being a bonus action. But the fact that it is also tied to jump is also an issue, both because of issues with pathing, and because it negates blocking movement using intelligent positioning. Also piles of surface effects isn't "tactical" unless it's a relatively rare resource. Not all over every single encounter, and not something you can cart around in your pocket.

Joined: Jan 2018
X
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
X
Joined: Jan 2018
Yeah I have to agree OP, it seems like people coming in with certain expectations are really quite aggressively against the changes.

I didn't come in with any expectations about the balance of skills or how closely it would match the system they based the combat on.
There are points where some improvement can be made, I swear most people are playing solo and getting messed up by allies being chained rather than things that universally affect everyone that's playing.

I just played the game, had a bunch of fun playing the game and I'm confident that the game will keep being very enjoyable even with the rule changes that Larian have made. I was very surprised to see such a negative reception to the combat when it's been such a blast for me.


Joined: Oct 2020
D
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
D
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Zorax
A changed ruleset might be fun but while the DnD 5e ruleset is balanced the stuff Larian is throwing at us is not. And with every deviation they have to balance more, time they could use better to improve the game at other points (e.g. story). And by the way there are already enough threads about DnD vs Larian rules so if you have something useful to contribute do it there. If you read these threads you will also see that there are a lot less fundamentalists than you think and many DnD folllowers have valid reasons to question Larians approach.



This, also, Larian advertised this as using the 5E ruleset, so no, I won't be getting over how they are messing that up. Larian used it as a big selling point. You and all the rest who don't care if the 5E rules are being badly implemented, and the game worse off for it, go sit in a corner, shut up, and wait for DOS3 instead of telling us to get over Larian failing to deliver on their promises. Also, Larian screws up way more than it fixes going off the rails and doing their own interpretation of 5E. WOTC already put 5E through a crapton of balance testing and errata to get it working as well as it does. Encouraging and supporting Larian half-assing the implementation is inviting them to unnecessarily reinvent the wheel, cause needless balance issues they failed to foresee by their bad changes to rules that have undergone years and years of testing and scrutiny in its own game, and wasting all the rest of our time while we re-test new, poor implementations of half baked changes from Larian (and that's for rules changes made on purpose, not just poorly understood and implemented ones). Larian could have a really good game here, if it sticks more faithfully to D&D 5E, and not try to make some hybrid of 5E meets DOS.

Last edited by Dominemesis; 19/10/20 12:44 AM.
Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Garod
Originally Posted by override367
Originally Posted by Vynticator
Rather too many people here getting frothy over changes from core 5e rules. Larian do their own version of 5e rules. Elemental surfaces are fun, make the map layout and positioning absolutely crucial, and allow for much more tactical play. Some people get hung up on minute differences from 5e: maybe enjoy the game as it is, if it doesn't work in the game, then critique it in those terms. 5e isn't a bible and it's not useful to be fundamentalist.


The changes make the game worse

The optimum tactical play in this game is to run 4 tiefling wizards spamming magic missiles, because it ignores all the ill conceived changes to targeting they've made, and you have fire resistance to deal with the entire world being on fire all of the time


Well if you look at combat you could say the same for D&D the optimum is to run 4 Druids who cast woodland beings and polymorph them into t-rex. or some other insane builds.. that's not the point in D&D and that's not the point in BG3


No, the point is running 4 Barrelmancers with lots of grease bottles.

Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
I stopped playing DnD at 3.0/3.5 so I really can't complain about the rules in 4th edition or 5th edition, since I don't know what was changed. What is the difference between the rules used in Baldurs Gate 3 and 5th Edition?

Joined: Oct 2020
W
stranger
Offline
stranger
W
Joined: Oct 2020
I agree with the general sentiment that Larian has very much Micheal bay-ed the hell out of BG3. Its all about its big battles with fire and explosions with every moment being another attempt at an over the top epic moment. That can be cool but not all the time as it is currently.

Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
@iszaryn
It's a lot, too much to cover in a post.
https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/29tysg/35e_to_5e_summary_of_differences/ covers quite a lot of it if you are interested.


I am here to discuss a video game. Please do not try to rope me into anything other than that. Thank you.
Joined: Oct 2020
O
stranger
Offline
stranger
O
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Stabbey
Originally Posted by Vynticator
Rather too many people here getting frothy over changes from core 5e rules. Larian do their own version of 5e rules. Elemental surfaces are fun, make the map layout and positioning absolutely crucial, and allow for much more tactical play. Some people get hung up on minute differences from 5e: maybe enjoy the game as it is, if it doesn't work in the game, then critique it in those terms. 5e isn't a bible and it's not useful to be fundamentalist.



I played D:OS 1 and D:OS 2. I enjoyed D:OS 1 and D:OS 2. This is a bad "hot take". I'd even call it a strawman argument.


  • For starters, Larian themselves have advertised this game as being based on the D&D 5e ruleset. They did not say "Based on the Divinity: Original Sin rules."
  • Don't tell people to stop complaining about the differences between 5e and this game. Larian does Early Access for a reason, which is specifically to get feedback. If you like the system as it is now, great, fine, that's feedback, and you are free to give it. Don't tell others to shut up.
  • I will now explain the reason for the complaints. It is not a reflexive, knee-jerk aversion to change.
  • Divinity: Original Sin 2 is balanced on the idea of being fully charged with all abilities available for each and every combat. Tactics are King.
  • Dungeons and Dragons 5th Edition is balanced on being fully charged after a long rest, and then having resources and options slowly whittled down over the course of a day. Resource Management is King.
  • BG 3 is using Hit points, Armor Class, and Spell Slots for players from D&D 5e. They are using the Concentration mechanic from D&D 5e.
  • Monster HP in BG 3 is usually higher, Monster AC is usually lower, and Ability scores remain the same.
  • D&D's HP, AC and Concentration is not balanced around the idea of status-inflicting surfaces, status-inflicting attacks, and AoE attacks to be as prevalent as they are in BG 3.
  • Just about every single surface effect in D&D has some kind of saving throw to resist for half or no damage. There is no such thing as a guaranteed hit from a surface in 5e, but there is in BG3.
  • Concentration spells are balanced around a roll under 10 or half the damage losing concentration. The more checks you have to make, the greater the chance you will fail. You are far more likely to fail checks because you're doing a lot more of them.
  • Enemy HP is way up, enemy AC is way down. This makes spells balanced around on hitting AC more reliable. This makes spells which affect a certain amount of enemy HP far worse, such as Sleep and Color Spray, because they can affect fewer enemies.
  • Enemy saving throws remain the same. This makes spells balanced around enemies failing a saving throw will seem to suck more because they're doing less damage. Example: Sacred Flame - it does 1d8 - an average of 4.5. Fire Bolt does an average damage of 13.5 from what's supposed to be a 1d10 spell.
  • Armor Class is based around advantage being relatively rare. Statistically speaking, Advantage is an effective +4 (Disadvantage an effective -4). Constant advantage from high ground is and disadvantage from low ground means those on the high ground are dealing more damage, those on the low ground are missing more and dragging battles out longer than would be normal.
  • And I'm even leaving out bonus action shoves, disengages, and hides.
  • Larian has changed many things from 5e, but have left other things as standard. That does not work. The systems have different design goals in mind.


Yeah, this guy gets it. Well written, couldnt agree more.

Joined: Oct 2020
K
stranger
Offline
stranger
K
Joined: Oct 2020
[/quote]


I played D:OS 1 and D:OS 2. I enjoyed D:OS 1 and D:OS 2. This is a bad "hot take". I'd even call it a strawman argument.


  • For starters, Larian themselves have advertised this game as being based on the D&D 5e ruleset. They did not say "Based on the Divinity: Original Sin rules."
  • Don't tell people to stop complaining about the differences between 5e and this game. Larian does Early Access for a reason, which is specifically to get feedback. If you like the system as it is now, great, fine, that's feedback, and you are free to give it. Don't tell others to shut up.
  • I will now explain the reason for the complaints. It is not a reflexive, knee-jerk aversion to change.
  • Divinity: Original Sin 2 is balanced on the idea of being fully charged with all abilities available for each and every combat. Tactics are King.
  • Dungeons and Dragons 5th Edition is balanced on being fully charged after a long rest, and then having resources and options slowly whittled down over the course of a day. Resource Management is King.
  • BG 3 is using Hit points, Armor Class, and Spell Slots for players from D&D 5e. They are using the Concentration mechanic from D&D 5e.
  • Monster HP in BG 3 is usually higher, Monster AC is usually lower, and Ability scores remain the same.
  • D&D's HP, AC and Concentration is not balanced around the idea of status-inflicting surfaces, status-inflicting attacks, and AoE attacks to be as prevalent as they are in BG 3.
  • Just about every single surface effect in D&D has some kind of saving throw to resist for half or no damage. There is no such thing as a guaranteed hit from a surface in 5e, but there is in BG3.
  • Concentration spells are balanced around a roll under 10 or half the damage losing concentration. The more checks you have to make, the greater the chance you will fail. You are far more likely to fail checks because you're doing a lot more of them.
  • Enemy HP is way up, enemy AC is way down. This makes spells balanced around on hitting AC more reliable. This makes spells which affect a certain amount of enemy HP far worse, such as Sleep and Color Spray, because they can affect fewer enemies.
  • Enemy saving throws remain the same. This makes spells balanced around enemies failing a saving throw will seem to suck more because they're doing less damage. Example: Sacred Flame - it does 1d8 - an average of 4.5. Fire Bolt does an average damage of 13.5 from what's supposed to be a 1d10 spell.
  • Armor Class is based around advantage being relatively rare. Statistically speaking, Advantage is an effective +4 (Disadvantage an effective -4). Constant advantage from high ground is and disadvantage from low ground means those on the high ground are dealing more damage, those on the low ground are missing more and dragging battles out longer than would be normal.
  • And I'm even leaving out bonus action shoves, disengages, and hides.
  • Larian has changed many things from 5e, but have left other things as standard. That does not work. The systems have different design goals in mind.

[/quote]

I agree with this for sureI have not played any of the D:OS games but I am a old school DnD player but I have not played 5E. To me I do like some aspects of the game but one thing that has bothered me is mobs always throwing grease and fire bombs multiple times in battles. I'm not sure if there are any saving throws at all I haven't checked. It would be nice if their was. I don't really ever remember having mobs throwing so much stuff and elemental stuff being such a focus in playing the table top games. Maybe it was the DM that didn't give them the ability to do so or Larian is just being too liberal with these weapons. The occasional one to spice things up is fine but It gets tiring to deal with this what feels like every battle.

I'm not too familiar with 5E and how they deal with spells and spell slots, but I feel a bit confused on how things work. I guess I'm used to the 3.5 way of doing things and seeing the spell slots for each level and then adding in which spells I want to use. I like how Neverwinter Nights by Bioware handled the spells. Maybe once I play more and get a more understanding of things It will make more sense. But I also think it would be cool to adapt in some 3.5 stuff.

That being said the rest of the game so far I like, the story is enjoyable, character customization is great, but I just have this feeling that just doesn't feel like DnD to me.

Joined: Oct 2020
V
stranger
Offline
stranger
V
Joined: Oct 2020

Originally Posted by Iszaryn
I stopped playing DnD at 3.0/3.5 so I really can't complain about the rules in 4th edition or 5th edition, since I don't know what was changed. What is the difference between the rules used in Baldurs Gate 3 and 5th Edition?


There are about 4 or 5 posts in this thread that list differences. But I'll name a few just because.

Cantrips: extra effects that Larian added are OP and make cantrips better than some first or second level spells.
Enermy Armor and health: There are clear rules already established for this so I don't understand why they are having so much trouble.
Advantage on High ground and Disadvantage from lowground. No real rule in D&D for high ground that I can think of offhand. If they made it a +/- 1-2 modifier instead it would be a lot less of an issue.
So many surfaces. Yes, surfaces can happen if you are creative and prepared in D&D, but that requires resources and preparing, not just walking into a room and seeing there are twelve barrels and every enemy has a fire arrow or bomb.
Disengage in D&D is a full action unless you are a rogue or have another class ability like step of the wind that lets you use a resource and do it as a bonus action, and it isn't tied to jumping.

A positive change is that weapons have a bonus effect that you can use once a day or more if it is higher quality. Which gives some variety to weapon attacks, I think they should lean into this and maybe expand the list of options later on for martial characters.


Reality is Merely and Illusion, Albeit a very persistant one - Albert Einstein
Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
The builds in Pillars of Eternity 2 for example were based on Specific Legendary Gear.

Joined: Oct 2020
S
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
S
Joined: Oct 2020
At first I was concerned about Larian doing BG3 because I simply couldn't appreciate DOS2 mechanically and history wise.

DOS2 have several flaws in my opinion which makes it a bad game, yet I'm not going to go deeper in it.

Then I've heard they were being aided by WotC and using 5e rule set, and I got quite confident that we would see a good quality game. I've even bought Early Access so I could support them and provide as much feedback as possible.
How can you ruin something that already survived the tests of time? Well, they did it.

Larian claims that their are deeply involved in that culture of feedback, yet we haven't been asked what we would expect of that new house rules and that's currently their big mistake in this project so far.

I always though that the worst part of Larian was this culture of adding way too much content which lead to lack of personality in general. They lacks so much in personality that the respec feature is present in the game and anyone can be anything at anytime. It's okay for DOS where there's no typical classes? Maybe. Its certainly not for DnD.

The sense of progression is broken.
The sense of class is broken.
And finally the sense of attachment is broken.

Summarizing I'm going to keep complaining about those dumb decisions not solely because its not RAW DnD5e which they've promised us but because this game is unbalanced as fuck because of this decisions.


Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
As it stands the 5e ruleset is whatever they feel like it so none of this is a surprise for some of us.

Page 2 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

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