Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 3 of 4 1 2 3 4
Joined: Jan 2017
G
addict
Offline
addict
G
Joined: Jan 2017
Originally Posted by bullse
Originally Posted by gametester1
I think you are missing the point. The OP isnt promoting the idea of less difficulty or an easier game. He is saying to make the lore/situattion/immersion with the level of the party. Not in terms of difficulty. My suggestion would be that they create a story element that would explain why these seasoned adventurers are such a low level, considering they have what seems like a varied background and high level experience with magical items, and have fame for adventuring. These are clearly not Level 1 characters in any sense. Level 1 adventurers are adept at combat and know a skill or spell or two but in no way have they completed many adventures or have any sort of renown. If they have I believe they would be level 3 or 4 atleast.

No, I did not miss the OP's point(s). On the other hand, some of you have missed my point: Larian Studios (and internal testing) had indicated that the max level for BG3 would be in the neighborhood of 10-12 possibly a wee bit higher short of a modder creating a mod to bump it to say something like 18-20. To those of you advocating starting at level 10, what's the point in playing when a BG3 full release only has 3-4 Acts with a max level of 10-12?

Start at level 10.
End game at level 10-12.

What? Huh? Did I miss something here?

It's our job to provide feedback about what we like and don't like. Some people are saying that the story feels poorly aligned with the level of the PC and companions. This is perfectly valid feedback.

It's up to Larian to decide what they do with that feedback. We have no idea how malleable their parameters are. It's not for us to say what is set in stone and what can be changed. Trying to speak on their behalf in this way is neither kind nor helpful.

Joined: Dec 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Dec 2020
Originally Posted by grysqrl
It's up to Larian to decide what they do with that feedback. We have no idea how malleable their parameters are. It's not for us to say what is set in stone and what can be changed. Trying to speak on their behalf in this way is neither kind nor helpful.

Excuse me, but I am not speaking on 'their behalf.'
I am merely stating what is known about the coming full release of BG3.
And whether you or anyone else doesn't think it is helpful or kind (like what?) that I present such, that sounds like a personal issue, one revolving around not handling the truth or facts.

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by bullse
End game at level 10-12.

I thought it was 13+ do you have source? It has been a while since I watched the interviews.

Joined: May 2019
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: May 2019
Originally Posted by bullse
Originally Posted by gametester1
I think you are missing the point. The OP isnt promoting the idea of less difficulty or an easier game. He is saying to make the lore/situattion/immersion with the level of the party. Not in terms of difficulty. My suggestion would be that they create a story element that would explain why these seasoned adventurers are such a low level, considering they have what seems like a varied background and high level experience with magical items, and have fame for adventuring. These are clearly not Level 1 characters in any sense. Level 1 adventurers are adept at combat and know a skill or spell or two but in no way have they completed many adventures or have any sort of renown. If they have I believe they would be level 3 or 4 atleast.

No, I did not miss the OP's point(s). On the other hand, some of you have missed my point: Larian Studios (and internal testing) had indicated that the max level for BG3 would be in the neighborhood of 10-12 possibly a wee bit higher short of a modder creating a mod to bump it to say something like 18-20. To those of you advocating starting at level 10, what's the point in playing when a BG3 full release only has 3-4 Acts with a max level of 10-12?

Start at level 10.
End game at level 10-12.

What? Huh? Did I miss something here?
You're definitely missing the OP's and others' point.

The OP is not saying increase the starting level to 10. Rather, they (and others including me) are saying lower the starting story and character backgrounds level from 10 down to 1. There is currently a mismatch. The game and our characters are starting at level 1. But the story and companion backgrounds are at (about) level 10. So those should be rewritten to a more appropriate level 1.

You can certainly disagree that there is this mismatch (as some posters here have done). But nobody is asking for the game to start at level 10.

Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
Originally Posted by fallenj
Originally Posted by bullse
End game at level 10-12.

I thought it was 13+ do you have source? It has been a while since I watched the interviews.
The only cap they explicitly stated was level 10, but since then they also came back to say "Nevermind, we'll probably go higher than that, since we are building more content than originally anticipated".
Which can mean anything between 11 and 14-15, I'm guessing.


Party control in Baldur's Gate 3 is a complete mess that begs to be addressed. SAY NO TO THE TOILET CHAIN
Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
Originally Posted by kanisatha
You can certainly disagree that there is this mismatch (as some posters here have done). But nobody is asking for the game to start at level 10.
I do agree that there's currently a mismatch, and this mismatch has also been a concern of mine about Larian that I already pointed out in previos threads (i.e. https://forums.larian.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Main=93583&Number=718792#Post718792 )

That said, people are also being incredibly disingenuous when they say "You start the game fighting dragons, demons and mindlflayers".
No, you fucking don't. You start the game being a perfect nobody who's WITNESSING a fight between demons, dragons and mindflayers, while passing by and trying to stay alive as out sight as much as possible.

Last edited by Tuco; 01/01/21 11:12 PM.

Party control in Baldur's Gate 3 is a complete mess that begs to be addressed. SAY NO TO THE TOILET CHAIN
Joined: Oct 2020
B
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
B
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Originally Posted by bullse
Originally Posted by gametester1
I think you are missing the point. The OP isnt promoting the idea of less difficulty or an easier game. He is saying to make the lore/situattion/immersion with the level of the party. Not in terms of difficulty. My suggestion would be that they create a story element that would explain why these seasoned adventurers are such a low level, considering they have what seems like a varied background and high level experience with magical items, and have fame for adventuring. These are clearly not Level 1 characters in any sense. Level 1 adventurers are adept at combat and know a skill or spell or two but in no way have they completed many adventures or have any sort of renown. If they have I believe they would be level 3 or 4 atleast.

No, I did not miss the OP's point(s). On the other hand, some of you have missed my point: Larian Studios (and internal testing) had indicated that the max level for BG3 would be in the neighborhood of 10-12 possibly a wee bit higher short of a modder creating a mod to bump it to say something like 18-20. To those of you advocating starting at level 10, what's the point in playing when a BG3 full release only has 3-4 Acts with a max level of 10-12?

Start at level 10.
End game at level 10-12.

What? Huh? Did I miss something here?
You're definitely missing the OP's and others' point.

The OP is not saying increase the starting level to 10. Rather, they (and others including me) are saying lower the starting story and character backgrounds level from 10 down to 1. There is currently a mismatch. The game and our characters are starting at level 1. But the story and companion backgrounds are at (about) level 10. So those should be rewritten to a more appropriate level 1.

You can certainly disagree that there is this mismatch (as some posters here have done). But nobody is asking for the game to start at level 10.

There is a mismatch if the player decide that has to be.

All the companions backgrounds, once you start discovering their story, plenty justify the fact that they are at level one. Not to forget that a level one is however above the average sentient being in Faerun.

As I said before: Gale as messed up the weave and lost his connection with Mystral, he has done so much damage that being alive and at level one is a better outcome in comparison of what he could have got (nevertheless he still is in danger of explode); Will tried to take a step back from his contract with his patron, patron that has been kidnapped thus weakening his connection to the source of his powers; Astarion is not a full fledged vampire, he is a minion, a slave that Cazador used as entertainment fo lash out his sadistic aspects; Laez'el is a low rank gith; Shadowheart was sent in a mission that required her memory to be erased.

So how is it incoherent the fact that they are at level one?

About the supposed contradiction between the introductive cut scene and the subsequent fights. The vessel was a transport for kidnapped and infested beings, a ship that strays from its course and ends up in hell, then it crashes in a very casual place, so casual that it is at the center of a conspiracy that sees bugbears, drows, goblins allied, with the gobbos betraying their faith to follow a new cult, in this place the darkdruids are making their move, the hag has contacts and does affairs with people in Baldur's Gate, meanwhile the party find people like Volo (a comic relief but still a personality of note in Faerun), can make alliance with Hasrim (an arch druid) or Minthara, you have to interact with the Flaming Fist, the Zentharim.

All in the introduction.

As far as I can see there's a lot of coherence with the background of the companions (and in my case even too complex stuff for my freshly "graduated" Tav fighter), who were person of some social impact and find them selves in the middle of a conspiracy of such level that a demon of high level like Raphael decides to gave them a visit.

But again, if a players decides that there's an incoherence than incoherence there is.

Joined: Jul 2009
I
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
I
Joined: Jul 2009
Originally Posted by Bufotenina
There is a mismatch if the player decide that has to be.

All the companions backgrounds, once you start discovering their story, plenty justify the fact that they are at level one. Not to forget that a level one is however above the average sentient being in Faerun.

As I said before: Gale as messed up the weave and lost his connection with Mystral, he has done so much damage that being alive and at level one is a better outcome in comparison of what he could have got (nevertheless he still is in danger of explode); Will tried to take a step back from his contract with his patron, patron that has been kidnapped thus weakening his connection to the source of his powers; Astarion is not a full fledged vampire, he is a minion, a slave that Cazador used as entertainment fo lash out his sadistic aspects; Laez'el is a low rank gith; Shadowheart was sent in a mission that required her memory to be erased.

So how is it incoherent the fact that they are at level one?

About the supposed contradiction between the introductive cut scene and the subsequent fights. The vessel was a transport for kidnapped and infested beings, a ship that strays from its course and ends up in hell, then it crashes in a very casual place, so casual that it is at the center of a conspiracy that sees bugbears, drows, goblins allied, with the gobbos betraying their faith to follow a new cult, in this place the darkdruids are making their move, the hag has contacts and does affairs with people in Baldur's Gate, meanwhile the party find people like Volo (a comic relief but still a personality of note in Faerun), can make alliance with Hasrim (an arch druid) or Minthara, you have to interact with the Flaming Fist, the Zentharim.

All in the introduction.

As far as I can see there's a lot of coherence with the background of the companions (and in my case even too complex stuff for my freshly "graduated" Tav fighter), who were person of some social impact and find them selves in the middle of a conspiracy of such level that a demon of high level like Raphael decides to gave them a visit.

But again, if a players decides that there's an incoherence than incoherence there is.

Arcane magic does not mean the god has to grant you spells like with divine magic. If Gale can use the weave at all he would have access to all his normal spells. He would only lose chosen abilities like silver fire. Not to mention all the knowledge he would have.
Astarion is still a vampire spawn, meaning a monster with regeneration, claw and bite attacks, 80 HP, etc. And as it was already mentioned. Arch druids are a title you get at level 14.

Joined: Dec 2020
W
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
W
Joined: Dec 2020
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Originally Posted by Gt27mustang
Originally Posted by SorcererVictor
Originally Posted by bullse
But you want to start at level 10? How about Larian just give us God mode?

NWN1 - HOTU has you starting at lv 15.
NWN2 - MOTB I beieve thta you start at lv 18(not sure)
BG2 - Has you starting around lv 7~8 (different classes required different XP to level up on 2e)

None of then give "God mode".

All the games you cited were sequels and/or expensions that had a previous game that you should/could play before playing that one. BG3 stands on its own.
You are blatantly wrong. By definition, BG THREE is a sequel to BG1 and BG2.

I fully agree with the OP and have made this exact point myself some months ago. The starting point of this game is completely unrealistic. As someone else mentioned in another forum, BG3 is attempting to recreate the player experience of playing BG2, but without BG1 ever having existed. Just as it would've been utterly ridiculous for a bunch of level 1 characters to awaken in Irenicus's dungeon in BG2, so too it is equally ridiculous for a bunch of level 1 characters to awaken on that nautiloid. Furthermore, the character backstories of every single one of the five origin companions is way beyond what would be realistic for a level 1 character.

Did you read my post on solasta forum? Thats what i said there


I... live! Flesh and blood and bone! I am alive! Ha-ha! I swore I would scratch and crawl my way back into the world of the living... and I have done it!
Joined: Dec 2020
G
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
G
Joined: Dec 2020
Originally Posted by bullse
Originally Posted by gametester1
I think you are missing the point. The OP isnt promoting the idea of less difficulty or an easier game. He is saying to make the lore/situattion/immersion with the level of the party. Not in terms of difficulty. My suggestion would be that they create a story element that would explain why these seasoned adventurers are such a low level, considering they have what seems like a varied background and high level experience with magical items, and have fame for adventuring. These are clearly not Level 1 characters in any sense. Level 1 adventurers are adept at combat and know a skill or spell or two but in no way have they completed many adventures or have any sort of renown. If they have I believe they would be level 3 or 4 atleast.

No, I did not miss the OP's point(s). On the other hand, some of you have missed my point: Larian Studios (and internal testing) had indicated that the max level for BG3 would be in the neighborhood of 10-12 possibly a wee bit higher short of a modder creating a mod to bump it to say something like 18-20. To those of you advocating starting at level 10, what's the point in playing when a BG3 full release only has 3-4 Acts with a max level of 10-12?

Start at level 10.
End game at level 10-12.

What? Huh? Did I miss something here?
Come on people, use some common sense here cause this idea makes NO sense at all knowing what I have just indicated.


Yes, you still clearly missed the point.

Joined: Dec 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Dec 2020
Originally Posted by gametester1
Yes, you still clearly missed the point.

As I see you continue to miss mine. Cool beans huh?

Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
It is worth noting that CR is a suggestion, not a rule. DMs can and do modify encounters to better fit the story they want to tell and the party they are running all the time.

Additionally, DnD is balanced around the idea that if you lose a fight you're just... Dead. Campaign over outside DM being generous with a means of returning to life. In Baldur's Gate we have the luxury of taking on higher difficulty fights without that being a concern, so CR as defined on the tabletop won't necessarily translate to "never, ever attempt this fight" in Baldur's Gate because we have the luxury of reloading if things go terribly wrong and trying again.

Video game balance and tabletop balance are quire different. And as for lore, our primary enemies in Act 1 are imps, humans, gnolls, and goblins. Also, after looking it up real fast:

Green hags, phase spiders, and minotaurs ae CR 3. Completely acceptable for when we meet them in the game.

So there's really not much in the game we're fighting right now that is dramatically beyond our party's ability to handle.

Joined: Dec 2020
G
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
G
Joined: Dec 2020
Originally Posted by bullse
Originally Posted by gametester1
Yes, you still clearly missed the point.

As I see you continue to miss mine. Cool beans huh?
\


No, you're just a troll.

Joined: Dec 2020
G
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
G
Joined: Dec 2020
Originally Posted by SaurianDruid
It is worth noting that CR is a suggestion, not a rule. DMs can and do modify encounters to better fit the story they want to tell and the party they are running all the time.

Additionally, DnD is balanced around the idea that if you lose a fight you're just... Dead. Campaign over outside DM being generous with a means of returning to life. In Baldur's Gate we have the luxury of taking on higher difficulty fights without that being a concern, so CR as defined on the tabletop won't necessarily translate to "never, ever attempt this fight" in Baldur's Gate because we have the luxury of reloading if things go terribly wrong and trying again.

Video game balance and tabletop balance are quire different. And as for lore, our primary enemies in Act 1 are imps, humans, gnolls, and goblins. Also, after looking it up real fast:

Green hags, phase spiders, and minotaurs ae CR 3. Completely acceptable for when we meet them in the game.

So there's really not much in the game we're fighting right now that is dramatically beyond our party's ability to handle.

And what D&D campaign has you fighting fiends and intellect devourers at level 1 without even prepping for an adventure? I think the bigger problem is that the story describes your party members as being adventurers with renown such as Will (Level 2) and Gale which are seasoned adventurers or wizards in Gales respect. These characters would not be level 1 in a D&D campaign.

Last edited by gametester1; 02/01/21 04:45 AM.
Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by gametester1
Originally Posted by SaurianDruid
It is worth noting that CR is a suggestion, not a rule. DMs can and do modify encounters to better fit the story they want to tell and the party they are running all the time.

Additionally, DnD is balanced around the idea that if you lose a fight you're just... Dead. Campaign over outside DM being generous with a means of returning to life. In Baldur's Gate we have the luxury of taking on higher difficulty fights without that being a concern, so CR as defined on the tabletop won't necessarily translate to "never, ever attempt this fight" in Baldur's Gate because we have the luxury of reloading if things go terribly wrong and trying again.

Video game balance and tabletop balance are quire different. And as for lore, our primary enemies in Act 1 are imps, humans, gnolls, and goblins. Also, after looking it up real fast:

Green hags, phase spiders, and minotaurs ae CR 3. Completely acceptable for when we meet them in the game.

So there's really not much in the game we're fighting right now that is dramatically beyond our party's ability to handle.

And what D&D campaign has you fighting fiends and intellect devourers at level 1 without even prepping for an adventure? I think the bigger problem is that the story describes your party members as being adventurers with renown such as Will (Level 2) and Gale which are seasoned adventurers or wizards in Gales respect. These characters would not be level 1 in a D&D campaign.
Intellect devourers are CR 2 (expected to be fought by a level two party), you know https://media.wizards.com/2014/downloads/dnd/MM_IntellectDevourer.pdf
And imps, the only fiends we fight, are challenge rating 1 https://roll20.net/compendium/dnd5e/Imp#content

So both are fine to throw at level one characters as long as the enemies are well balanced (wounded intellect devourers, for example)

Last edited by zyr1987; 02/01/21 05:28 AM. Reason: clarify

Lover of non-haughty elves and non-smutty lesbian romance
"1404. I will not spoil the adventure's mandatory ambush by using the cheesy tactic of a "scout"." - From "Things Mr. Welch is no longer allowed to do in a (tabletop) RPG"
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
veteran
Online Embarrased
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
Download some mod that will alow you to start on higher level ...
Problem solved, next!


I liked original spellcasting system more ... frown

Anyway ... i cast Eldritch Blast!
Joined: Oct 2020
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Oct 2020
or - and this could handle a couple of issues, Larian starts us at somewhere between level 5 & 10 and instead of ending the game somewhere close to 10 or 13 we end at 20 (or close to it). I think this could help with multiple things. 1. They seemed to change the 5E rules in because in the early game, all most characters can do is one action, and this seems boring to them. If we start at a level where we have possible additonal attacks and etc. maybe this fixes that issue. 2. these characters all seem to be seasoned somewhat so it would make sense that they're not level one anyway. If it were redone this way, perhaps they'd also stick more closely to the 5e rules and in the early game, each character could do more.....this is most likely what the OP is talking about anyway, not starting at 10 and ending at 12 or 13....

Joined: Oct 2020
B
member
Offline
member
B
Joined: Oct 2020
I don't think starting at any other level than 1 makes sense as for the majority of people never played D&D. Even if you have, but you didn't play 5e you will be overwhelmed with class knowledge that you lack.

I honestly think Larian did a really good job of pacing the level ups - you get a handful of characters, all low level, you have time to ease into the roles, without being stuck in level 1 and 2 too long. Thinking back to Pathfinder, which I never played before Kingmaker, I was sometimes overwhelmed by the amount of class knowledge I had to learn to use my companions properly. That will be the experience for anyone who never touched 5e. Each level, each class means people need to read everything available to them before they can continue on - and for a good game easing the players into its rules is something extremely important or it leads to frustration. Expecting players to read the pen&paper rules to play a video game is unrealistic and would be lazy design. Not to mention pointless because the p&p is made to introduce players into it in the first place.


The issue to me is more the encounter design and story telling than playing low level characters. With Larian there is no mundane. No first steps to put everything into perspective. If you are new to D&D you get the feeling that Mind Flayers, Demons, Drow, hunting parties from Avernus, Red Dragons and so on, are daily occurances for everybody. Underdark is just the cave system next door children go to play, though maybe a bit dangerous. And yes, you can tell stories like these and each encounter is fine by itself, but all combined are at the point where to me it lacks pacing and there is no feeling into what a normal life would be. After act 1 there is nothing that can surprise you anymore - except elementals, you didn't see any of those.

Joined: Dec 2020
W
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
W
Joined: Dec 2020
In BG1 we had Elminster showing up all the time, always gave the the impression that there were bigger things going on behind the scenes. We also know that drizzt was in the area. So many hints on even tho we were important we were just a small part of a bigger game.
Made sense for a noob campaigne.
In bg 2 he told us we were the main act.
In TOB we were told to be more powerful.
The setting made sense.

Now we are the main act in a Mindflayer plot.
Mindflayer. The biggest threat to humanity.
We have high level druid leaders and dark druid wich could instant kill our lvl 3 chars. Nope we win.

Githyanki with reddragon nah fly away let the small fey handle that. Lucky. Still feel that group should be higher level

We start in freaking hell, so lucky a demigod character dont show up.nope just lvl 1 imps.

Posssible yes but unlikely.

A demonlprd wont send imps to a planartraveling mindflayer flying fortress.

Nothing in this setting makes sense to be a noob char.

I like the game but the setting is wrong,
The difference between good and awesome.
Bg3 is lilicor but i want hes brother whos a +15 hackmaster


I... live! Flesh and blood and bone! I am alive! Ha-ha! I swore I would scratch and crawl my way back into the world of the living... and I have done it!
Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by gametester1
And what D&D campaign has you fighting fiends and intellect devourers at level 1 without even prepping for an adventure? I think the bigger problem is that the story describes your party members as being adventurers with renown such as Will (Level 2) and Gale which are seasoned adventurers or wizards in Gales respect. These characters would not be level 1 in a D&D campaign.

As was pointed out by Zyr, these are CR 1-2 creatures that you're upset we end up fighting at level 1-2.

Gale and Wyll also both talk about having lost powers recently. A once mighty hero who suffered some loss of power is a perfectly acceptable character for level 1. Additionally level 1 in 5e is NOT a total noob. They are new to adventuring, but will likely be accomplished and capable warriors and wizards in their own right. Having a level in a class is a big deal in 5e. A 1st level fighter is already probably the best swordsman in his or her village. Someone a powerful lord would likely want to hire into their personal garrison.

Also, just in general to the thread; my last tabletop game started with a city on fire as it was being burned down by a full sized adult dragon and an army of kobolds and human cultists who were ransacking the place.

We were first level. This is an acceptable first level experience. And it is an official module for the game published by Wizards of the Coast.

Not all first level adventures start with killing rats in some guy's basement.

Page 3 of 4 1 2 3 4

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