Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
#715867 25/10/20 12:49 AM
Joined: Aug 2019
journeyman
OP Offline
journeyman
Joined: Aug 2019
One thing I've noticed in the EA, is that Advantage to hit or a check is being handed out at no resource cost. Presumably, this is to due to missing or failing not being fun. For example, one can simply walk behind a foe and receive advantage to attack in Larian's system. This design really belittles all the spells and class features that offer the player or their team-mates Advantage, or imposes Disadvantage on enemy rolls, that require resources to use. That makes these class features and spells, many allowing the foe a saving throw to shrug off the effect, more than redundant.

Since the Advantage/Disadvantage system is at the heart of 5e D&D, one would need to redesign all of these class features and spells. Is this even a tenable solution within the system? Now, I'm not of the mind that no changes need to be made in a system when it's transferred to a different medium, but I fear this breaks the system. 'Breaks the system" is not hyperbole, if one looks at how these abilities and spell effects work within the context of the system. These abilities and spells have a resource cost, are unique aspects of certain class/sub-classes, or require the expenditure of spells slots and the enemy to fail a save. What if the spells and abilities granted to you on level up are willy-nilly given to other characters at no resource or opportunity cost? This is what is happening, unfortunately.

Joined: Oct 2020
T
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
T
Joined: Oct 2020
There is GM leeway allowing for giving Advantage/Disadvantage for circumstances that they think fits.

Also, specifically, there are optional Facing rules on page 252 on the DMG that give advantage for attacking from the rear.

Last edited by Thrythlind; 25/10/20 03:08 AM.
Joined: Aug 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Aug 2020
Yeah and about 90% of the Facing rule wasn't implemented besides the Advantage. So, yeah, no. I've played 5e since release, never once has Facing *ever* been used. On-demand, no downside or expenditure of resources required Advantage is monumentally game breaking and invalidates *dozens and dozens* of spells and class abilities.

Joined: Oct 2020
Z
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Z
Joined: Oct 2020
Advantage isn't given often enough in core 5E. I'm a fan of how available it is in this one. It feels like something you can actually get if you just use your surrounding and circumstances, as opposed to something you can only get when you bribe the DM.

Joined: Oct 2020
T
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
T
Joined: Oct 2020
I also like that things like Fog Cloud prevent you from targeting enemies deep in it with ranged attacks. But yeah, I like high use of Advantage/Disadvantage...it encourages people moving about the field and doing things other than just "target X" every round and have fun with their turns. Maneuvering around enemies to gain flanking (I use flanking rather than facing...probably not a good idea to use both) or getting to where they can shove someone into something unfortunate (a group favorite for years now) and otherwise actively moving about the board to gain advantage rather than just rolling a die for an attack.

Plus, reading the facing rules, I don't see what they're not using from it. From what I can tell the components are:

Facing is chosen at end of movement/action. Can't be changed except on turn or by reaction.
Attacking from the rear nullifies shields and grants Advantage.
Some creatures don't have the same facings as others.
Rules on how to judge hexes that appear to be next to two different arcs.

That seems to all be handled in BG3.

Last edited by Thrythlind; 25/10/20 03:33 AM.
Joined: May 2014
D
member
Offline
member
D
Joined: May 2014
Originally Posted by Thrythlind
There is GM leeway allowing for giving Advantage/Disadvantage for circumstances that they think fits.

Also, specifically, there are optional Facing rules on page 252 on the DMG that give advantage for attacking from the rear.


The optional Facing rules says u can use your reaction to turn around and avoid being attack with advantage and this is not implemented, if someone walk behind of you, there's no shit you can do about it. And I also never played a TTRPG where facing has been used. The free advantage you get here has no downside, no resource cost. I think this should be changed if not removed.

If front/back has to be here, it shall at least trigger AoO, or allow the one being backstab to turn around as reaction, not just free advantage here.

Last edited by dunehunter; 25/10/20 04:09 AM.
Joined: May 2014
D
member
Offline
member
D
Joined: May 2014
Originally Posted by Zer0
Advantage isn't given often enough in core 5E. I'm a fan of how available it is in this one. It feels like something you can actually get if you just use your surrounding and circumstances, as opposed to something you can only get when you bribe the DM.


It is because the core 5e follows restrictly the design of bounded accuracy, and adding more tactical aspect to combat. You need to shove someone prone, or use spells like Faerie Fire to get advantage, not brainlessly walk to someone's back since advantage is very very strong. While here it's just free for melee attackers. What you said about using surrounding and circumstances is valid for high ground, but not for backstabbing. You DONT need surrounding or circumstiance to get backstab, you JUST walk behind a dude and attack him, no AoO, no resource, just free.

Last edited by dunehunter; 25/10/20 04:11 AM.
Joined: Jan 2009
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2009
Originally Posted by Thrythlind
There is GM leeway allowing for giving Advantage/Disadvantage for circumstances that they think fits.

Also, specifically, there are optional Facing rules on page 252 on the DMG that give advantage for attacking from the rear.


Citing that is ridiculous, because it is obvious that advantage is not supposed to be as cheap and easy on the tabletop as it is in BG 3.

For example, look at the Barbarian - they have a class feature - Reckless Attack - allowing them to take advantage on attacks in their turn in exchange for enemies having advantage on them for the next round. Now everyone on high ground has free advantage against them all the time. And they get advantage by walking or jumping behind an enemy, no need for Reckless attack.

You might "like it", but I don't care at all that you "like it". That's a subjective opinion - some people like a thing, while other people do not like the same thing. The fact is it is yet another arbitrary change Larian has made without considering the ripple effects it produces.

Last edited by Stabbey; 25/10/20 12:25 PM. Reason: typo, and slight rephrasing
Joined: Oct 2020
C
CMF Offline
member
Offline
member
C
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Stabbey
Originally Posted by Thrythlind
There is GM leeway allowing for giving Advantage/Disadvantage for circumstances that they think fits.

Also, specifically, there are optional Facing rules on page 252 on the DMG that give advantage for attacking from the rear.


Citing that is ridiculous, because it is obvious that advantage is not supposed to be as cheap and easy on the tabletop as it is in BG 3.

For example, took at the Barbarian - they have a class feature - Reckless Attack - allowing them to take advantage on their turn in exchange for enemies having advantage on them for the next round. Now everyone on high ground has free advantage against them all the time. And they get advantage by walking or jumping behind an enemy, no need for Reckless attack.

You might "like it", but I don't care at all that you "like it". That's a subjective opinion. The fact is it is yet another arbitrary change Larian has made without considering the ripple effects it produces.


I haven't seen many objective posts against the elevation and flanking rules applied in bg3, but this one is the most convincing to me that advantage should be far more limited. You actually have swayed me closer to the 5e crowd surprisingly.

Another thing I have noticed are spells that blind should provide advantage (unless I am reading 5e rules wrong). So that spell is also diminished in effect. Use of the buff/debuff system to apply advantage would create more team synergy. It does exist now, but is possibly overshadowed by flanking and elevation.

Last edited by CMF; 25/10/20 05:18 AM.
Joined: Aug 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Aug 2020
Some more objective analysis of why the Advantage rules (especially with regards to height but applicable here as well) -> https://forums.larian.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=707485

If you think Advantage is supposed to come from your DM, I feel sorry for you. There are lots of ways to try and get Advantage in 5e (Barbarian Reckless Attack, Faerie Fire, Tasha's Hideous Laughter, Monk Stunning Strike, Rogue Cunning Action Hide, Entangle Spell, literally dozens), but the difference is those sources of Advantage come with a *cost* or a *drawback*. Currently, Height and Backstab have zero cost and no downsides, it's just all benefit.

For a sense of how game breaking that is, and how much it throws the rest of the game out of balance, here is a great example:

The most powerful resource in all of 5e, and generally in all of D&D across 40+ years of balancing and development, is a *9th Level Spell*. That is the highest magic a player can cast, reserved for the strongest spells. You can literally wipe out an entire city with a single spell. You can alter the fabric of reality. You can *stop time* with it. It is the pinnacle of player power. What is one of the most popular uses of a 9th Level Spell?

Foresight. A spell that does nothing more than give you Advantage on everything for a day, and Enemies Disadvantage against you. That's it. That's all it does. That is how strong Advantage and Disadvantage are in 5e with its Bounding Accuracy system.

Joined: Oct 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by dunehunter
It is because the core 5e follows restrictly the design of bounded accuracy, and adding more tactical aspect to combat. You need to shove someone prone, or use spells like Faerie Fire to get advantage, not brainlessly walk to someone's back since advantage is very very strong. While here it's just free for melee attackers. What you said about using surrounding and circumstances is valid for high ground, but not for backstabbing. You DONT need surrounding or circumstiance to get backstab, you JUST walk behind a dude and attack him, no AoO, no resource, just free.


That's not entirely true, at least for movement that starts within the AoO range of the enemy. If my Rogue is standing right in front of an enemy and uses Jump to leap overhead to their rear for a backstab, it will trigger an AoO attack from that enemy. Same thing with a fighter who starts within AoO range and just circles around to the rear of the enemy for advantage. That also triggers an AoO attack. I see both things frequently in this game.

The problem right now is movement starting outside the enemy's AoO trigger range, and then entering that range while jumping or moving around to the rear. That should trigger an AoO and it doesn't. The only "free" melee attack from the rear should be when taking a path that starts behind the enemy, approaching from the back.

Joined: Sep 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by Frumpkis
Originally Posted by dunehunter
It is because the core 5e follows restrictly the design of bounded accuracy, and adding more tactical aspect to combat. You need to shove someone prone, or use spells like Faerie Fire to get advantage, not brainlessly walk to someone's back since advantage is very very strong. While here it's just free for melee attackers. What you said about using surrounding and circumstances is valid for high ground, but not for backstabbing. You DONT need surrounding or circumstiance to get backstab, you JUST walk behind a dude and attack him, no AoO, no resource, just free.

That's not entirely true, at least for movement that starts within the AoO range of the enemy. If my Rogue is standing right in front of an enemy and uses Jump to leap overhead to their rear for a backstab, it will trigger an AoO attack from that enemy. Same thing with a fighter who starts within AoO range and just circles around to the rear of the enemy for advantage. That also triggers an AoO attack. I see both things frequently in this game.

Uhhh, what? You should NOT be triggering AoOs for jumping over an enemy or moving around an enemy. If you are, then this is due to poor automatic pathfinding by the game and/or you not noticing that your character will move out of the threatened range before performing a jump. Make sure to check that a little arrow doesn't pop up below an enemy signaling that your proposed movement will provoke AoO. The only time you should provoke an AoO is when you *leave* an enemy's reach without disengaging. The game is coded correctly in this aspect.

Originally Posted by Frumpkis
The problem right now is movement starting outside the enemy's AoO trigger range, and then entering that range while jumping or moving around to the rear. That should trigger an AoO and it doesn't. The only "free" melee attack from the rear should be when taking a path that starts behind the enemy, approaching from the back.

I think you're saying that moving into an enemy's range should provoke AoO(?) If so, this is incorrect. Again, only moving *out of an enemy's reach should provoke.

Joined: Oct 2020
S
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
S
Joined: Oct 2020
The optional facing rules aren't exactly the pinnacle of balance either-in every game I've played with them combat becomes a conga line of death. Also enemies respond to stuff like the rogue attacking them from behind out of stealth by turning around and focusing on the rogue.

Ideally, your system would account for how many enemies are attacking a creature, and allow them to face one enemy for free. If another one attacks from the back, they have to choose to turn their back on the first guy, which should have a penalty-an AOO is ideal. This is somewhat hard to implement in the tabletop, but relatively easy in a system like BG3.

Joined: Oct 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
Uhhh, what? You should NOT be triggering AoOs for jumping over an enemy or moving around an enemy. If you are, then this is due to poor automatic pathfinding by the game and/or you not noticing that your character will move out of the threatened range before performing a jump. Make sure to check that a little arrow doesn't pop up below an enemy signaling that your proposed movement will provoke AoO.


I'm describing how the game currently works and what I've seen, not what should or shouldn't be happening. A jump from a starting point directly in front of an enemy to directly behind it, will often provoke an AoO.

Joined: Sep 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by Frumpkis
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
Uhhh, what? You should NOT be triggering AoOs for jumping over an enemy or moving around an enemy. If you are, then this is due to poor automatic pathfinding by the game and/or you not noticing that your character will move out of the threatened range before performing a jump. Make sure to check that a little arrow doesn't pop up below an enemy signaling that your proposed movement will provoke AoO.


I'm describing how the game currently works and what I've seen, not what should or shouldn't be happening. A jump from a starting point directly in front of an enemy to directly behind it, will often provoke an AoO.

My wording was ambiguous. I am saying that I can jump away behind people or circle around them without provoking. For me, the game's interpretation of AoOs is correct.

Are you sure that, in these jumping cases, that your character is not moving slightly (out of enemy range and thus provoking) *before* the jump? It is often difficult to tell, and sometimes the pathing will just let you jump immediately whereas sometimes it moves your character first. If you're sure that your characters are provoking from the jump itself, then this is a bug that is occurring for you and not for me (and important for Larian to know).

Additionally, in the game's current state, the auto pathing is dumb. If I click directly behind an enemy, my character will sometimes move out of range (provoking) then back into range while circling around them. However, if I manually take small steps, I can often successfully circle around an enemy without provoking. In either case, the game does correctly tell me if my movement would provoke (via the red arrow extending from an enemy's circle). This is a problem with pathing, not provoking AoOs.

Joined: Jul 2014
M
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
M
Joined: Jul 2014
Originally Posted by Frumpkis
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
Uhhh, what? You should NOT be triggering AoOs for jumping over an enemy or moving around an enemy. If you are, then this is due to poor automatic pathfinding by the game and/or you not noticing that your character will move out of the threatened range before performing a jump. Make sure to check that a little arrow doesn't pop up below an enemy signaling that your proposed movement will provoke AoO.


I'm describing how the game currently works and what I've seen, not what should or shouldn't be happening. A jump from a starting point directly in front of an enemy to directly behind it, will often provoke an AoO.

never happened for me, and i did that a lot.
and when you circle around, you have to be careful. look out for the red arrow, that is pointing outward from the enemy to you path. it means, that you leave their melee range and they get an AoO.

but back to topic.
larian doesn't care about game balance. or they have no idea, how to do that. just look at some of the magic items in the game.
bane on attacked enemy
+2d4 to magic attack rolls
+1d4 psychic damage per magic missile
ray of sickness as cantrip

just to name a few.
they either don't care or have no idea about balancing 5e.

Joined: Sep 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by mahe4
larian doesn't care about game balance. or they have no idea, how to do that. just look at some of the magic items in the game.
bane on attacked enemy
+2d4 to magic attack rolls
+1d4 psychic damage per magic missile
ray of sickness as cantrip

just to name a few.
they either don't care or have no idea about balancing 5e.

While I agree with you that there are significant balance problems with items/advantage, I think the weapon that applies bane is a really good item.
A.) It is one of the few reasons to encourage players to join the Absolute's cult: to use these cool magic items. Basically all the other "reasons" for joining the cult boil down to "I'm a sadistic person who only cares about hurting others, even at cost to my own safety" which is boring and dumb.
B.) It applies bane to an enemy, which is not terribly overpowered. I'm not sure if it allows a save (it should), if it requires concentration, or how long the effect is (should be for a single attack or until concentration broken)...

Joined: Jul 2014
M
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
M
Joined: Jul 2014
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
Originally Posted by mahe4
larian doesn't care about game balance. or they have no idea, how to do that. just look at some of the magic items in the game.
bane on attacked enemy
+2d4 to magic attack rolls
+1d4 psychic damage per magic missile
ray of sickness as cantrip

just to name a few.
they either don't care or have no idea about balancing 5e.

While I agree with you that there are significant balance problems with items/advantage, I think the weapon that applies bane is a really good item.
A.) It is one of the few reasons to encourage players to join the Absolute's cult: to use these cool magic items. Basically all the other "reasons" for joining the cult boil down to "I'm a sadistic person who only cares about hurting others, even at cost to my own safety" which is boring and dumb.
B.) It applies bane to an enemy, which is not terribly overpowered. I'm not sure if it allows a save (it should), if it requires concentration, or how long the effect is (should be for a single attack or until concentration broken)...

it applies on attack not on hit. that's what makes it broken, because you neither have a chance nor a resource involved.

Joined: Sep 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by mahe4
*snip* [The bane weapon] applies on attack not on hit. that's what makes it broken, because you neither have a chance nor a resource involved.

Ah yep that's a bit overpowered. It should apply on hit (or maybe only on a miss; in an "equalizing the playing field" effect?) and with a saving throw allowed.
Or apply only on a crit with no saving throw.

(I mean, there's also a X charges/day option that you could spend a charge to apply bane on a successful hit, but given how Larian doesn't want popup windows during combat this implementation is unlikely. And I don't want a specific "attack and apply bane if hit" button on the taskbar; it's already cluttered enough)

Joined: Jul 2014
M
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
M
Joined: Jul 2014
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
Originally Posted by mahe4
*snip* [The bane weapon] applies on attack not on hit. that's what makes it broken, because you neither have a chance nor a resource involved.

Ah yep that's a bit overpowered. It should apply on hit (or maybe only on a miss; in an "equalizing the playing field" effect?) and with a saving throw allowed.
Or apply only on a crit with no saving throw.

(I mean, there's also a X charges/day option that you could spend a charge to apply bane on a successful hit, but given how Larian doesn't want popup windows during combat this implementation is unlikely. And I don't want a specific "attack and apply bane if hit" button on the taskbar; it's already cluttered enough)

uh on miss would be really nice.

Page 1 of 2 1 2

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