Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Joined: Oct 2020
G
Goleeb Offline OP
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
G
Joined: Oct 2020
It would be nice to see a mode that is more faithful to 5e rules. Like disengage being an action, and wizzard's only learning wizard spells. No advantage for height, or being behind someone. Just making it a straight roll plus to hit vs AC. It might make the game a bit slower, and more difficult, but that would be nice. While your at it separating disengage, and jump would be nice. Also consider adding dodge to the actions list.

Joined: Jan 2009
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2009
Adding a second mode or an "option" to the game would mean needing to make two completely separate builds for testing balance and mechanics, and to support both modes. That is essentially doubling the workload of the design and QA teams, and doubling the time and resources needed, and likely reducing the quality of both.

That is more work than essentially reverting a lot of their changes closer to 5e and then making smaller tweaks from there to keep it closer to 5e, but still fun for most people.

Joined: Oct 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Oct 2020
Fun is relative term. People are here for the DnD 5e rules not some bastardisation of it.

And if this is done for testing then its not a waste of time or resources but valuable information gathering.

Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by xMardeRx
Fun is relative term. People are here for the DnD 5e rules not some bastardisation of it.

And if this is done for testing then its not a waste of time or resources but valuable information gathering.

Hi, I'm not here because it's 5e. The name has more to do with why I'm here than being D&D or what edition of D&D.

Joined: Oct 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by robertthebard
Originally Posted by xMardeRx
Fun is relative term. People are here for the DnD 5e rules not some bastardisation of it.

And if this is done for testing then its not a waste of time or resources but valuable information gathering.

Hi, I'm not here because it's 5e. The name has more to do with why I'm here than being D&D or what edition of D&D.


Hi I am here for DnD and 5e.

Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by xMardeRx
Originally Posted by robertthebard
Originally Posted by xMardeRx
Fun is relative term. People are here for the DnD 5e rules not some bastardisation of it.

And if this is done for testing then its not a waste of time or resources but valuable information gathering.

Hi, I'm not here because it's 5e. The name has more to do with why I'm here than being D&D or what edition of D&D.


Hi I am here for DnD and 5e.

Excellent, I won't try to force what I want to play on you, and you can do the kindness of not doing the same to me, deal?

Joined: Oct 2020
G
Goleeb Offline OP
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
G
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by xMardeRx
Fun is relative term. People are here for the DnD 5e rules not some bastardisation of it.

And if this is done for testing then its not a waste of time or resources but valuable information gathering.


Considering neither of us are actively developing the game let's not pretend to understand the development cost of features. That's why this is posted in the feedback, and suggestions section where the developers can read it, and discuss it themselves. Also if you have played pillars of eternity two they offer two different game modes, and they aren't an extremely large studio. So it's more than possible. The question is there enough community interest to make the feature worth the development cost.

Joined: Oct 2020
G
Goleeb Offline OP
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
G
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by robertthebard
Originally Posted by xMardeRx
Originally Posted by robertthebard
Originally Posted by xMardeRx
Fun is relative term. People are here for the DnD 5e rules not some bastardisation of it.

And if this is done for testing then its not a waste of time or resources but valuable information gathering.

Hi, I'm not here because it's 5e. The name has more to do with why I'm here than being D&D or what edition of D&D.


Hi I am here for DnD and 5e.

Excellent, I won't try to force what I want to play on you, and you can do the kindness of not doing the same to me, deal?


This is exactly what I have been seeing. Some people love the fast fun gameplay style larian studios is doing, and some people want a more authentic 5e experience. I hope if it's possible we can have both.


Joined: Oct 2020
Z
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Z
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Goleeb

This is exactly what I have been seeing. Some people love the fast fun gameplay style larian studios is doing, and some people want a more authentic 5e experience. I hope if it's possible we can have both.


If it's just "fast fun" vs. "authentic 5e" then different difficulties will do already. If the "fast fun" group wants their system with challenging opponents then one group will be dissatisfied in the end.


Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
I know where you are coming from OP. I'm also afraid we will be stuck with the current larian la se faire interpretation of e5 rule. This is why we have EA imo. They wanted our response to the game current states. i don't think us giving criticisms of the game is being negative. Let me reiterating that i love DOS2 1200 hrs played on it, but I'm here for dnd 5e not dos2. I have faith in Larian to make changes to their combst system that honor the core mechanic of 5e. I guess we'll see where we are in couple months.

Last edited by Madoric; 18/10/20 03:59 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
G
stranger
Offline
stranger
G
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by robertthebard
Originally Posted by xMardeRx
Originally Posted by robertthebard
Originally Posted by xMardeRx
Fun is relative term. People are here for the DnD 5e rules not some bastardisation of it.

And if this is done for testing then its not a waste of time or resources but valuable information gathering.

Hi, I'm not here because it's 5e. The name has more to do with why I'm here than being D&D or what edition of D&D.


Hi I am here for DnD and 5e.

Excellent, I won't try to force what I want to play on you, and you can do the kindness of not doing the same to me, deal?


You realize that asking for an option to choose to have 5e core rules (or not) is the exact opposite of "forcing what I want to play on you", right?

Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by gish


You realize that asking for an option to choose to have 5e core rules (or not) is the exact opposite of "forcing what I want to play on you", right?

Indeed, and you'll notice that I didn't try to say anything like that, I merely commented on the post that made the assertion that people were here for 5e. That has nothing to do with why I bought the game. I'm sure I'm not alone, just as I'm sure that there are people here thinking they'd have a perfect table top recreation of 5e rules in a cRPG. They'll be disappointed, of course, because that's simply not possible, at least, not in a SP campaign. There's no DM to arbitrate rule interpretations, for one thing. I came to see what this iteration of Baldur's Gate brought to the table, as someone that played the first two, a lot. What I didn't come here expecting was a 1 to 1 translation of the rules, because I know, from playing both table top and assorted other PC games based around D&D that we can't ever get that.

Hope I didn't break this, quote tree was too deep.

Joined: Oct 2020
C
stranger
Offline
stranger
C
Joined: Oct 2020
Instead of asking for a traditional 5e option, wouldn't it be better to point out the flaws of the game that don't sink up with 5e so that they can be made to match better?

Joined: Jan 2009
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2009
Originally Posted by gish
You realize that asking for an option to choose to have 5e core rules (or not) is the exact opposite of "forcing what I want to play on you", right?


You don't realize that an "OHPSHUN" still needs to be implemented, tested, balanced, and supported by the developer, and that increases the workload for the same amount of content.

Crewell's idea is the better way to approach this:

Originally Posted by Crewell
Instead of asking for a traditional 5e option, wouldn't it be better to point out the flaws of the game that don't sink up with 5e so that they can be made to match better?


Joined: Oct 2020
G
Goleeb Offline OP
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
G
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Stabbey
Originally Posted by gish
You realize that asking for an option to choose to have 5e core rules (or not) is the exact opposite of "forcing what I want to play on you", right?


You don't realize that an "OHPSHUN" still needs to be implemented, tested, balanced, and supported by the developer, and that increases the workload for the same amount of content.

Crewell's idea is the better way to approach this:

Originally Posted by Crewell
Instead of asking for a traditional 5e option, wouldn't it be better to point out the flaws of the game that don't sink up with 5e so that they can be made to match better?



The problem is there are a vast many problems with their interpretation of 5e, and it seems to be an intentional game design choice. The problem is these choices make the game much easier.

Disengage being a bonus actions is extremely powerful, and it's free. It's insanely easy to get advantage on attacks, and advantage is considered to be essentially +5 to a check. Not to mention some of the overpowered items. All in all it would take a redesign to make the game more challenging ,and might take away all the fun people are having with the current system. Not to mention how insane casing multiple high level spells a turn is, or rogues getting extra bonus actions is way op. In all they are making 5e much easier by just giving away power.

Joined: Jan 2009
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2009
Lots of people are saying that. You seem to believe that Larian has no intention of listening to any of it. If that's true, then their decision to release Early Access at all is questionable.

I do not believe that is true. They didn't need the hassle of dealing with all the complaining on forums if they aren't actually interested in making changes.

Joined: Oct 2020
G
stranger
Offline
stranger
G
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Stabbey
Originally Posted by gish
You realize that asking for an option to choose to have 5e core rules (or not) is the exact opposite of "forcing what I want to play on you", right?


You don't realize that an "OHPSHUN" still needs to be implemented, tested, balanced, and supported by the developer, and that increases the workload for the same amount of content.



You don't think Larian has already done that?

Its well known that Larian increased the HP and lowered the AC of enemies in order to keep players from missing so often. How would they know to do that if they didn't already test the 5e rules? In fact, I remember reading a quote saying that they did test with full 5e rules but found that players missed too often which was the exact reason why they decided to decrease AC and then balance it by increasing HP. So they've already done it. And the "development" would just be changing some numbers around, the equivalent of having multiple difficulty settings which every game already does. In fact, the original BG had a difficulty setting called Core which emulated the core 2e rules, so its already part of the franchise.

Not to mention that 5e has already been developed by WotC since 2014 and has already had thousands if not millions of playtest hours by people actually playing it. Larian would just have to input the numbers. Let players have the option to miss more often if they want to.

And even if it did take significant development time (which I doubt), it would be a worthwhile investment because it would please a lot of fans. People like me who don't care about Divinity and who don't care about a sequel to Baldur's Gate. A lot of people have been wanting a video game implementation of 5e since its inception and that was one of the main selling points of thus game.

Last edited by gish; 19/10/20 01:53 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
P
member
Offline
member
P
Joined: Oct 2020
I am here for 5E D&D. I don't mind implementing facing, but it should use the DMG rules.

And while I agree on most things — disengage/jump, cantrip splash, wizards can't heal — I'm totally with advantage for height. I find it makes the set-piece battles interesting and fun. And, it's actually not unreasonable given what the DMG says about when to give advantage.

Joined: Jan 2009
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2009
Originally Posted by gish
You don't think Larian has already done that?

Its well known that Larian increased the HP and lowered the AC of enemies in order to keep players from missing so often. How would they know to do that if they didn't already test the 5e rules? In fact, I remember reading a quote saying that they did test with full 5e rules but found that players missed too often which was the exact reason why they decided to decrease AC and then balance it by increasing HP. So they've already done it. And the "development" would just be changing some numbers around, the equivalent of having multiple difficulty settings which every game already does. In fact, the original BG had a difficulty setting called Core which emulated the core 2e rules, so its already part of the franchise.

Not to mention that 5e has already been developed by WotC since 2014 and has already had thousands if not millions of playtest hours by people actually playing it. Larian would just have to input the numbers. Let players have the option to miss more often if they want to.

And even if it did take significant development time (which I doubt), it would be a worthwhile investment because it would please a lot of fans. People like me who don't care about Divinity and who don't care about a sequel to Baldur's Gate. A lot of people have been wanting a video game implementation of 5e since its inception and that was one of the main selling points of thus game.


I never said that Larian never tested the game. However, when you're only testing something internally, you can lose perspective. In this video talking about D:OS 2, Swen commented that the QA testers played the game so many times that it got too easy, so they started playing with a party of 3 instead of a party of 4 for added challenge, and so when players actually started playing with parties of four, the balance was off.

In addition, Larian has left many things the same as in 5e (HP & AC on player characters and saving throws, spells which are balanced around saving throws instead of attack rolls, etc.), and those things are based on 5e rules, not the Larian-changed rules, which means they are not properly balanced at the moment.

I'm not saying that Larian is incapable of adding a 5e mode, just the reality that it will take time and resources. And given that the game's current rules are obviously in need of balance, the simplest approach is to try going closer to 5e rules and tweaking from there, instead of going farther from 5e rules and needing to make additional changes to handle their previous changes.

Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by robertthebard
Originally Posted by xMardeRx
Fun is relative term. People are here for the DnD 5e rules not some bastardisation of it.

And if this is done for testing then its not a waste of time or resources but valuable information gathering.

Hi, I'm not here because it's 5e. The name has more to do with why I'm here than being D&D or what edition of D&D.

Eh? The game has nothing to do with the BG franchise past it's name.


I am here to discuss a video game. Please do not try to rope me into anything other than that. Thank you.
Page 1 of 2 1 2

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