Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3
Joined: Nov 2020
A
adkfina Offline OP
apprentice
OP Offline
apprentice
A
Joined: Nov 2020
for the sole reason being that It's not fun. The makers of Disco Elysium struggled with the concept of dice rolls and their solution was to make failure interesting and fun but this really isn't as it is

I know the counterargument here is that winning a challenging dice roll in itself should give the player a sense of satisfaction and is therefore fun, and you're counting on your players to show restraint and accept losses as they come. In reality it just lead to scum saving, no?

And not to misconstrue "fun" with eliminating challenge, a game mechanic can be challenging and fun as long as it's fair (Dark Souls for example). This is just RNG imo. Even if my abilities do factor into the results, I have no control over what's happening and there is a literal dice on the screen going *clink clonk* to a random number reinforcing that idea

At least add some flavor to losses that's all I'm asking, it would be a great improvement

Joined: Sep 2015
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Sep 2015
Sorry, but skill checks in dialogue are a fundamental part of RPGs since forever.
DnD is based on dice rolls and the result is random. Thats not a bug, thats the system.

Dark Souls is something different.
This is about player skill vs character skill.
Classic RPGs are about character skill. You tell your char what to do and the result depends on character stats and a random number.
Action games are about player skill. The result depends on your (the player) ability to press the right button with the right timing.
Both things are not exclusive and it is a spectrum and not an either this one or the other, but classic RPGs and action games are at opposing ends of the spectrum.

Last edited by Madscientist; 12/11/20 10:35 AM.

groovy Prof. Dr. Dr. Mad S. Tist groovy

World leading expert of artificial stupidity.
Because there are too many people who work on artificial intelligence already :hihi:
Joined: Feb 2020
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
I'd really like an option not to see these dices.

I understand than TT players (and probably lots of other players) love it but it's really immersion breaking to me and totally uninterresting.
I don't care having to manually roll a dice in a video game who can easily do it in the background

A single "check sucess" "check failed" with a line in the log showing the results is definitey enough to me.

EDIT : But I'm not sure that's really what you talk about. Checks in dialogs as "a part" of the game is great.

Last edited by Maximuuus; 12/11/20 10:33 AM.
Joined: Sep 2015
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Sep 2015
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
I'd really like an option not to see these dices.

I understand than TT players (and probably lots of other players) love it but it's really immersion breaking to me and totally uninterresting.
I don't care having to manually roll a dice in a video game who can easily do it in the background

A single "check sucess" "check failed" with a line in the log showing the results is definitey enough to me.

EDIT : But I'm not sure that's really what you talk about. Checks in dialogs as "a part" of the game is great.


I do not mind if they do not show the rolling dice, at least as an option.
But I definitely want to see the roll in the log.
I have just complained that the game log does not show the rolls for skill checks, only for combat stuff is it shown.


groovy Prof. Dr. Dr. Mad S. Tist groovy

World leading expert of artificial stupidity.
Because there are too many people who work on artificial intelligence already :hihi:
Joined: Mar 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Mar 2020
Originally Posted by Madscientist
Sorry, but skill checks in dialogue are a fundamental part of RPGs since forever.
DnD is based on dice rolls and the result is random. Thats not a bug, thats the system.

really? so where have they been all this time?


Larian's Biggest Oversight, what to do about it, and My personal review of BG3 EA
"74.85% of you stood with the Tieflings, and 25.15% of you sided with Minthara. Good outweighs evil, it seems."
Joined: Oct 2020
A
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
A
Joined: Oct 2020
-1

It's the one thing that makes this game something extra special, makes it feel like DnD, and I love it.
Ability scores in DnD isn't about "once I'm over this threshold I get this option" it's about: I will take a chance to see if I can change the outcome of this conversation.

Get with the program wink

Joined: Oct 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Aurgelmir
-1

It's the one thing that makes this game something extra special, makes it feel like DnD, and I love it.
Ability scores in DnD isn't about "once I'm over this threshold I get this option" it's about: I will take a chance to see if I can change the outcome of this conversation.

Get with the program wink


^ This ^

I like to have the chance of failure, otherwise success is meaningless. As for save scumming... that's something you choose to do, you can always choose not to save scum and stick with the results of the roll.

Larian will probably give a difficulty option for people like the OP, but by default it should be disabled.

Last edited by Kendaric; 12/11/20 11:57 AM.
Joined: Nov 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Nov 2020
I don't like them either. It just takes me out of the experience when, say, a character that in my head is good at persuasion fails every other persuasion check. Doesn't help that rerolls, for some reason, fail 8 times out of 10, even with 'easy' rolls (and sometimes they give the same bad number a few times on a row)

Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
Speaking about Disco Elysium, what they did right was having two types of rolls. Red check only allows one try but white check you were able to reroll when you level up or reach some milestone in story or finished a thought. This gives you much more control over rng.

I dont mind option to hide dialogue rolls and show them only in "combat" log. But the mechanic itself should stay. I am even advocating to show detailed roll including advantage or Guidance dice.

Joined: May 2014
D
member
Offline
member
D
Joined: May 2014
Make it take 10 for dialog check, and if it doesn't meet requirement, you are allowed to retry once to see if u can reach the DC.

Joined: Oct 2020
Tuv Offline
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
Does anyone know a game where not save scumming was incentivized and it actually worked? Undertale had one particular moment that was noticed. Disco Elysium apparently does it but just how did it succeed? I haven't played it

Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
Disco Elysium is like a fine aged wine in terms of dialogue. Hmmmm.

Comparing to BG3s PnP<dice rolls> skill checks archaic mechanic and puppet master nightmare inducing cringy cinematic dialogues.... is just not fair.
I dont mind missing a role for stuff that my character is no good at. But for specialized innate character skills/abilities there shouldn't even be a roll.
This system works for PNP or a DnD game simulation, which this game clearly isn't.

Last edited by mr_planescapist; 12/11/20 01:13 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
A
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
A
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Innateagle
I don't like them either. It just takes me out of the experience when, say, a character that in my head is good at persuasion fails every other persuasion check. Doesn't help that rerolls, for some reason, fail 8 times out of 10, even with 'easy' rolls (and sometimes they give the same bad number a few times on a row)


The thing is that in DnD you might still be good at it, but you are still talking to real people, and you might not hit the topic correctly etc.

I think a better compromise is to let us see the actual difficulty of a check BEFORE we choose. At the table a player can ask the DM, does it look like this guy is easy to convince? to get some idea of how difficult that particular check is.

Joined: Jan 2009
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2009
Originally Posted by Aurgelmir
The thing is that in DnD you might still be good at it, but you are still talking to real people, and you might not hit the topic correctly etc.

I think a better compromise is to let us see the actual difficulty of a check BEFORE we choose. At the table a player can ask the DM, does it look like this guy is easy to convince? to get some idea of how difficult that particular check is.



This would be a good place to allow for Insight checks in dialogue. A successfulInsight check could show the DC of the options. A failed Insight check reveals nothing.

In fact, Solasta actually does this itself - there are automatic insight checks in dialogue which, if passed, show the percentage chance of success with that option.

Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
This need not be an either/or case.

Some players like letting the dice influence the outcomes. It's the tabletop RPG experience. And importantly, it is the vision Larian wants to put forward.
But some players would like them gone or the DC of check greatly reduced, so they can call the shots.
Some players (that's me) will want to enjoy the game both ways.

The great thing about BG3 being a (mostly) solo video game and the Supreme Power Of Programming, is that Larian doesn't need exclude a part of the audience. They can simply include an option that says "trivialise all conversation skill checks", perhaps with a scale : you could move the DC of checks to x% of their current levels (with x between 0 and 200). It should come with a warning "this is not how we intended the game to be played", but that's all.
It's cheap to code. So I hope they'll do that.


Hoping we'll be able to create great assumptions-free Custom Characters and be given great roleplay options.
Joined: Nov 2020
A
adkfina Offline OP
apprentice
OP Offline
apprentice
A
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by Madscientist
Sorry, but skill checks in dialogue are a fundamental part of RPGs since forever.
DnD is based on dice rolls and the result is random. Thats not a bug, thats the system


Dialogue checks are great actually, it's the randomization I have an issue with. Planescape:Torment had dialogue checks too, I think, but it wasn't randomized, so maybe there's some artistic license to do it better if possible

Originally Posted by Kendaric
Originally Posted by Aurgelmir
-1

It's the one thing that makes this game something extra special, makes it feel like DnD, and I love it.
Ability scores in DnD isn't about "once I'm over this threshold I get this option" it's about: I will take a chance to see if I can change the outcome of this conversation.

Get with the program wink


^ This ^

I like to have the chance of failure, otherwise success is meaningless. As for save scumming... that's something you choose to do, you can always choose not to save scum and stick with the results of the roll.

Larian will probably give a difficulty option for people like the OP, but by default it should be disabled.


I just have an issue with the RNG mechanic and the failure outcomes as a minor second, not the difficulty. If anything the game is way too easy as it is.

Originally Posted by Drath Malorn
This need not be an either/or case.

Some players like letting the dice influence the outcomes. It's the tabletop RPG experience. And importantly, it is the vision Larian wants to put forward.
But some players would like them gone or the DC of check greatly reduced, so they can call the shots.
Some players (that's me) will want to enjoy the game both ways.

The great thing about BG3 being a (mostly) solo video game and the Supreme Power Of Programming, is that Larian doesn't need exclude a part of the audience. They can simply include an option that says "trivialise all conversation skill checks", perhaps with a scale : you could move the DC of checks to x% of their current levels (with x between 0 and 200). It should come with a warning "this is not how we intended the game to be played", but that's all.
It's cheap to code. So I hope they'll do that.


What I actually do want ideally is for my choices (background, skills or abilities) to have a direct impact, without an added RNG component getting in the way.

JE Sawyer on twitter was talking about changing the die roll to 2d6 instead of 1d20 as it makes character skills weigh more than the RNG itself (according to him). It's beyond my understanding but that could be close to what you're suggesting. I would obviously just rather have the option to disable the die completely, but I could be onboard with something like a different -more predictable- die system

Last edited by adkfina; 12/11/20 11:20 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
E
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
E
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by adkfina
Originally Posted by Madscientist
Sorry, but skill checks in dialogue are a fundamental part of RPGs since forever.
DnD is based on dice rolls and the result is random. Thats not a bug, thats the system


Dialogue checks are great actually, it's the randomization I have an issue with. Planescape:Torment had dialogue checks too I think, but it wasn't randomized, so maybe there's some artistic license to do it better if possible

Originally Posted by Kendaric
Originally Posted by Aurgelmir
-1

It's the one thing that makes this game something extra special, makes it feel like DnD, and I love it.
Ability scores in DnD isn't about "once I'm over this threshold I get this option" it's about: I will take a chance to see if I can change the outcome of this conversation.

Get with the program wink


^ This ^

I like to have the chance of failure, otherwise success is meaningless. As for save scumming... that's something you choose to do, you can always choose not to save scum and stick with the results of the roll.

Larian will probably give a difficulty option for people like the OP, but by default it should be disabled.


I just have an issue with the RNG mechanic and the failure outcomes as a minor second, not the difficulty. If anything the game is way too easy as it is.

Originally Posted by Drath Malorn
This need not be an either/or case.

Some players like letting the dice influence the outcomes. It's the tabletop RPG experience. And importantly, it is the vision Larian wants to put forward.
But some players would like them gone or the DC of check greatly reduced, so they can call the shots.
Some players (that's me) will want to enjoy the game both ways.

The great thing about BG3 being a (mostly) solo video game and the Supreme Power Of Programming, is that Larian doesn't need exclude a part of the audience. They can simply include an option that says "trivialise all conversation skill checks", perhaps with a scale : you could move the DC of checks to x% of their current levels (with x between 0 and 200). It should come with a warning "this is not how we intended the game to be played", but that's all.
It's cheap to code. So I hope they'll do that.


What I actually do want ideally is for my choices (background, skills or abilities) in character creation to have a direct impact, without an added RNG component getting in the way.

JE Sawyer on twitter was talking about changing the die roll to 2d6 instead of 1d20 as it makes character skills weigh more than the RNG itself (according to him). It's beyond my understanding but that could be close to what you're suggesting. I would obviously just rather have the option to disable the die completely, but I could be onboard with something like a different -more predictable- die system


there is a little cheat trainer out there that will allow you to win all checks.
until we have story mod implanted (no dice rolling)
its your only option.
or you just do like everyone do, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, save > reload, smile

Last edited by Evil_it_Self; 12/11/20 06:17 PM.

[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]
Joined: Jul 2014
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Jul 2014
If you dislike rolls why for the nine hells you play a D&D based game?

Joined: Nov 2020
A
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
A
Joined: Nov 2020
Not everyone reloads on a failed roll. And in some cases there can be an alternate sequence of events on failed roll (e.g. priestess' Gut dungeon).

Joined: Oct 2020
R
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
R
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Rieline
If you dislike rolls why for the nine hells you play a D&D based game?

This is a pointless argument, in how many games (even D&D) actually success in conversations depends only on whether you are lucky?
Besides, the game is not just for D&D fans.

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3

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