Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 4 of 4 1 2 3 4
Joined: May 2019
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: May 2019
Originally Posted by Wyrmblade
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Originally Posted by Gt27mustang
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
Yes, and I thought it was very well said. smile

Joined: Dec 2020
Location: Finland
T
addict
Offline
addict
T
Joined: Dec 2020
Location: Finland
No I do not agree with this.

I like playing from low level and get attached to my character from level 1.

Ok regarding starting area Nautilus.

I get it can feel a bit nasty for some new players... but first of all it looks scary a bit but not difficult at all.
Tactics:
A. Avoid fire jump over them if need be.
B. Kill the imps simple to do it. Imps are like lowest end of creatures and not even near as powerful as an average Demon.
C. You can get US as at least temporary companion in addition to Lae Zel.
D. There are healing places in some rooms find them free healing if you are hurt.
E. If some player have misunderstood... in the last room when you enter room with Illithid you should not stay there forever simply do as you are told by Lae Zel.

Starting area is super easy. Yes it looks nasty but you dont need to fight anything really nasty there. Avoid aggro of harder enemies then say Imps. You can fuck it up however you in last room go very near the Enemy that is much more dangerous then an Imp... a little common sense here you do not need to fight everything in Nautilus as level 1...

After starting Nautilus? Well start with some less dangerous stuff and get your party to full strength i.e 4 characters in the party. Do not think you are CONAN THE BARBARIAN and solo go inside the Crypt grin.

Last edited by Terminator2020; 02/01/21 03:28 PM.
Joined: Nov 2020
Banned
Offline
Banned
Joined: Nov 2020
I feel like starting the game at a fairly high level and then going back to 1, maybe right after the Nautoloid, would have been the coolest thing they could've done to make the whole tadpole 'weakening' deal, the companions' backstories and the actual gameplay compliment eachother.

It probably would have been too complicated and annoying, but i lowkey even like the idea of characters' level not actually being reset straight after escaping the ship but instead just losing xp (and lvls, and spells, ecc ecc) throughout all of Act 1.

Joined: Apr 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Apr 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.

The games mentionned earlier told the continuations of stories, that started in the game(s) before that, often continuing with the same protagonist and more often than not, very close to each other in the timeline.

BG3 is, by definition, a sequel, yes. But it is a different campaign, with a different protagonist, wich tells a different story, a hundred years apart from the first one. I don't understand why the game should kick off with main character at higher levels, just because the previous games ended with a PC at level 30+ It makes zero sense when you think about it. Larian wants us to experience every rise in power of our (new)protagonist, wich they are entitled to, and like you I like BG1 better than 2 because, for me, levels 1-10 are what I like in DnD. I am more annoyed by the settings/encounters at the beginning of the game (the hells at level 1, the underdark at level ~2,...) but I can live with that.

As an exemple: in IWD1, you end the first game around 12-14th level. If you play the expensions, you gain even more levels because you continue with the same characters. If you start IWD2, wich is a direct sequel, you start back at level 1. Different characters, different story, different time,...

Last edited by Gt27mustang; 02/01/21 04:42 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Tuco
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.
Thanks Tuco

Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Thieves Rule
I've made this suggestion as well. Other than a side conversation Wyll has with Gale about feeling weaker than he used to be, there's no mention why we're all level 1 given the background each of the companions has. It feels like we should be several levels higher. Or at least as part of the opening sequence, show part of our life force being sucked out or something more obvious on why we're starting out from scratch.
Feel like the real thing here is just to show your level going down or just add more dialog about it.

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
Originally Posted by Innateagle
I feel like starting the game at a fairly high level and then going back to 1, maybe right after the Nautoloid, would have been the coolest thing they could've done to make the whole tadpole 'weakening' deal, the companions' backstories and the actual gameplay compliment eachother.

It probably would have been too complicated and annoying, but i lowkey even like the idea of characters' level not actually being reset straight after escaping the ship but instead just losing xp (and lvls, and spells, ecc ecc) throughout all of Act 1.
Certainly interesting idea ...
I hope some moder will see this, but i cant see any RPG game where player loose his XP instead of getting them trough start of gameplay to be sucesfull. laugh

But i like that idea of fighting Nautiloid as higher level ... and reset by exiting it (after all, we were tadpoled, and hit in the head laugh )
Such taste of power is sometimes good, for example in Force Unleashed it worked perfectly, also it would be great for unexperienced player to try his choosen class at high level so they know what to expect, on the other hand it could be a bit overwhelming for them :-/ ...
I think you should write this to feedback directly so it dont get lost in here.

Last edited by RagnarokCzD; 03/01/21 01:18 AM.

Short coment on my English. smile

Anyway ... i cast Eldritch Blast!
Joined: May 2019
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: May 2019
Originally Posted by Gt27mustang
BG3 is, by definition, a sequel, yes. But it is a different campaign, with a different protagonist, wich tells a different story, a hundred years apart from the first one. I don't understand why the game should kick off with main character at higher levels, just because the previous games ended with a PC at level 30+ It makes zero sense when you think about it. Larian wants us to experience every rise in power of our (new)protagonist, wich they are entitled to, and like you I like BG1 better than 2 because, for me, levels 1-10 are what I like in DnD. I am more annoyed by the settings/encounters at the beginning of the game (the hells at level 1, the underdark at level ~2,...) but I can live with that.
So then we actually agree. So why the hostility toward me?

The only difference between our takes, it seems, is that whereas you "can live with [the mismatch]," I find it very hard to do so. My immersion in the story and the setting is everything for me playing a cRPG, and this mismatch breaks my immersion and aggravates the heck out of me.

Joined: Dec 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Dec 2020
So having characters start at level 10 would most assuredly help keep that 'immersion' feel and curtail your aggravations, Kanisatha?

Best bet is for Larian to just have the game have an option to start with 'Easy mode' cause assuredly, with encounters being 'oh so difficult' and all, an 'Easy mode' would greatly aid those looking to maintain their immersion and aggravation sanity.

I am off to once again SOLO lonewolf wreck Act 1.....with my level 4..........

Joined: May 2019
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: May 2019
Originally Posted by bullse
So having characters start at level 10 would most assuredly help keep that 'immersion' feel and curtail your aggravations, Kanisatha?
Seriously, why don't you try reading people's posts before you respond to them. Show me where I have ever said I want characters to start at level 10? I have repeatedly said exactly the opposite, and even gone so far as to say it is precisely the lowest character levels in D&D that are the most fun to play for me. If you are unable to discern the nuances of what I and others like me are saying, that's on you. But stop misstating my positions.

Joined: Dec 2020
Location: Finland
T
addict
Offline
addict
T
Joined: Dec 2020
Location: Finland
Originally Posted by Gt27mustang
and like you I like BG1 better than 2 because, for me, levels 1-10 are what I like in DnD. I am more annoyed by the settings/encounters at the beginning of the game (the hells at level 1, the underdark at level ~2,...) but I can live with that.

As an exemple: in IWD1, you end the first game around 12-14th level. If you play the expensions, you gain even more levels because you continue with the same characters. If you start IWD2, wich is a direct sequel, you start back at level 1. Different characters, different story, different time,...
Well said! I like that this game start at level 1 and I am ok with that max level is likely to be level 10.
Of course if they make an expansion to this game that is separate from full release... then they could increase max level from level 10 to 15.

This is ridiculous demands for me to want high level characters because BG2 ended at high level.
The story is later in time not the same characters though example an Elf might live long time.

Last edited by Terminator2020; 03/01/21 06:10 PM.
Joined: Mar 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Mar 2020
I disagree... You don't actually fight any mind flayers or dragons, only imps which as far as I know are relatively low level challenge.

I expressed my opinion about companion levels many times, but the short version of it is - they are not as powerful as they claim to be or want you to perceive them.


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: Dec 2020
W
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
W
Joined: Dec 2020
Originally Posted by Abits
I disagree... You don't actually fight any mind flayers or dragons, only imps which as far as I know are relatively low level challenge.

I expressed my opinion about companion levels many times, but the short version of it is - they are not as powerful as they claim to be or want you to perceive them.

Yeah thats the first problem, was in hell only fought imps, LUCKY
was on mindflayer legendary ship, no high level guards, LUCKY

Gale: Im a super powerful like imba archmage lover of mystra lvl 1 wizard Hero: ok? thats yeah ok dude suuure i belive you

Wyll: Im a hero to the people Blade of Frontiers probably heard of me? Hero: Cool is that that demon aura i sense from you? Wyll: no no im just regular hero Hero: Yeah i just saw you use eldrich blast you sure you got nothing to do with demons? Wyll: No NO NO trust me im an engineer! Stupid as fuck

Astarion: Hi im a awesome rogue Hero: Wow thats som HUGE fags you got there. Ast: no no no! later that night Ast: I just need a litte blood cause you see im a vampire but a good one! Like in twilight! But i love torture and killing. Also i lost all my game breaking powers so i can still be with you level one guys. LUCKY!

Dark druids trying to take over an groove but once again we get lucky they only sent lowlevel druids! LUCKY!

Gith knight with a red drago shows up but leavs before taking care of group needed to stay like 5s to disarm us LUCKY!

not to mention Raphael and Ast's master
everything thats happening are high level campaign stuff but me manage to survive anyway so freaking lucky its just not beliveble


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: Apr 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Apr 2020
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Originally Posted by Gt27mustang
BG3 is, by definition, a sequel, yes. But it is a different campaign, with a different protagonist, wich tells a different story, a hundred years apart from the first one. I don't understand why the game should kick off with main character at higher levels, just because the previous games ended with a PC at level 30+ It makes zero sense when you think about it. Larian wants us to experience every rise in power of our (new)protagonist, wich they are entitled to, and like you I like BG1 better than 2 because, for me, levels 1-10 are what I like in DnD. I am more annoyed by the settings/encounters at the beginning of the game (the hells at level 1, the underdark at level ~2,...) but I can live with that.
So then we actually agree. So why the hostility toward me?

The only difference between our takes, it seems, is that whereas you "can live with [the mismatch]," I find it very hard to do so. My immersion in the story and the setting is everything for me playing a cRPG, and this mismatch breaks my immersion and aggravates the heck out of me.

Thrust me, no hostility here, just defending my opinion.

As for the “mismatch”? I am also a “story and setting makes an RPG” kind of guy, where combat can take a backseat (I.e. Planescape) Buuuut I also like a good fight, and that is for these reasons that I can live with the slightly-off setting at the beginning of BG3. Honestly, aren’t you fed up with every DnD quest beginning in a tavern basement fighting rats? I thinks it’s a nice change of pace.

Joined: Nov 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by Tarorn
I think it’s been well handled so far for levels 1-4. Would have expected a few kobolds, orcs etc but they may be still to come - then again they may get skipped.
Under dark could have come later as could the hook horrors, bulette etc minotaurs are ok if not a little overpowered (I’m not across 5e maybe they are right).
I just hope as we progress monsters and encounters are level appropriate- loving it at the moment.
I’ll save my judgement on the story etc until the full release as we are only in ea and that’s yet to be developed significantly


I'll have to agree with you that so far things are fine the way that they are. There are a few battles that we shouldn't be running into already like the Matriarch spiders for example which are around level 10 or 12 if you figure in the hit points of a fighter.

Joined: Apr 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Apr 2020
Originally Posted by DragonMaster69
Originally Posted by Tarorn
I think it’s been well handled so far for levels 1-4. Would have expected a few kobolds, orcs etc but they may be still to come - then again they may get skipped.
Under dark could have come later as could the hook horrors, bulette etc minotaurs are ok if not a little overpowered (I’m not across 5e maybe they are right).
I just hope as we progress monsters and encounters are level appropriate- loving it at the moment.
I’ll save my judgement on the story etc until the full release as we are only in ea and that’s yet to be developed significantly


I'll have to agree with you that so far things are fine the way that they are. There are a few battles that we shouldn't be running into already like the Matriarch spiders for example which are around level 10 or 12 if you figure in the hit points of a fighter.

I second that.

Joined: May 2019
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: May 2019
Originally Posted by Gt27mustang
As for the “mismatch”? I am also a “story and setting makes an RPG” kind of guy, where combat can take a backseat (I.e. Planescape) Buuuut I also like a good fight, and that is for these reasons that I can live with the slightly-off setting at the beginning of BG3. Honestly, aren’t you fed up with every DnD quest beginning in a tavern basement fighting rats? I thinks it’s a nice change of pace.
See, once again, why would you assume that just because I don't like how this game begins I want it to be fighting rats in a basement? I thought Larian was supposed to be all about being creative. If anything, this game's start *is* very similar to another game (just NOT a BG game), namely D:OS2.

If we are supposed to be mere "observers" to all that's happening in the first area involving all those very high CR creatures, as some here have said, then why not just make it all a cutscene and then move us directly into a starting area that is not only level appropriate but also story appropriate?

Joined: Dec 2020
W
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
W
Joined: Dec 2020
Originally Posted by Gt27mustang
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Originally Posted by Gt27mustang
BG3 is, by definition, a sequel, yes. But it is a different campaign, with a different protagonist, wich tells a different story, a hundred years apart from the first one. I don't understand why the game should kick off with main character at higher levels, just because the previous games ended with a PC at level 30+ It makes zero sense when you think about it. Larian wants us to experience every rise in power of our (new)protagonist, wich they are entitled to, and like you I like BG1 better than 2 because, for me, levels 1-10 are what I like in DnD. I am more annoyed by the settings/encounters at the beginning of the game (the hells at level 1, the underdark at level ~2,...) but I can live with that.
So then we actually agree. So why the hostility toward me?

The only difference between our takes, it seems, is that whereas you "can live with [the mismatch]," I find it very hard to do so. My immersion in the story and the setting is everything for me playing a cRPG, and this mismatch breaks my immersion and aggravates the heck out of me.

Thrust me, no hostility here, just defending my opinion.

As for the “mismatch”? I am also a “story and setting makes an RPG” kind of guy, where combat can take a backseat (I.e. Planescape) Buuuut I also like a good fight, and that is for these reasons that I can live with the slightly-off setting at the beginning of BG3. Honestly, aren’t you fed up with every DnD quest beginning in a tavern basement fighting rats? I thinks it’s a nice change of pace.

BG optinal Rat fighting in tutorial, BG2 no ratfighting but high level, NWN no ratfighting, NWN2 no ratfighting.
BG3 PnP version
DM: You wake up and se a MINDFLAYER!
Player: oh right im lvl 1 gues thats GG then 3s new record.
DM: But he just puts somekind of tadpole in your eye then leaves.
Player: Oh fucking great im turning Illithid. oh great dn did you forget i cand cast wish as a lvl freaking 1 sorc?
DM: Suddenly the there is a explosion and you break free from your imprisonment you realise your not in kansas anymore and the dead imp suggest you are in HELL!
Player: OK thats it im out!

yeah the start is the most stupid i have ver seen in an RPG Knights of xentar have better story.
Id prefer rats in basement.

its not hard to do like in bg1. Have a high level char like Gorion protect you. While elminster is around so im prety sure thats whats made the real high level baddies stay away.

not just luck a billion times


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: Apr 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Apr 2020
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Originally Posted by Gt27mustang
As for the “mismatch”? I am also a “story and setting makes an RPG” kind of guy, where combat can take a backseat (I.e. Planescape) Buuuut I also like a good fight, and that is for these reasons that I can live with the slightly-off setting at the beginning of BG3. Honestly, aren’t you fed up with every DnD quest beginning in a tavern basement fighting rats? I thinks it’s a nice change of pace.

See, once again, why would you assume that just because I don't like how this game begins I want it to be fighting rats in a basement? I thought Larian was supposed to be all about being creative. If anything, this game's start *is* very similar to another game (just NOT a BG game), namely D:OS2.

If we are supposed to be mere "observers" to all that's happening in the first area involving all those very high CR creatures, as some here have said, then why not just make it all a cutscene and then move us directly into a starting area that is not only level appropriate but also story appropriate?

You misunderstood. I was not saying YOU liked fighting rats in tavern basements, I was generalising, you could say. Its a better start than countless other RPGs, or a least, certainly different...

Its true though that you can fight your way to the helm, killing imps and weak intellect devourers, but from that point on, what happens next should definetly be a cutscene. No point in making us fight past the cambions. People are just going to try and cheese them, with no real rewards/consequences, and killing 3 cambions with a 2/3 persons team is just not realistic. Show us the power and intentions of the Cambions, and then move on.

Last edited by Gt27mustang; 05/01/21 07:00 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Wyrmblade
Originally Posted by Gt27mustang
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Originally Posted by Gt27mustang
BG3 is, by definition, a sequel, yes. But it is a different campaign, with a different protagonist, wich tells a different story, a hundred years apart from the first one. I don't understand why the game should kick off with main character at higher levels, just because the previous games ended with a PC at level 30+ It makes zero sense when you think about it. Larian wants us to experience every rise in power of our (new)protagonist, wich they are entitled to, and like you I like BG1 better than 2 because, for me, levels 1-10 are what I like in DnD. I am more annoyed by the settings/encounters at the beginning of the game (the hells at level 1, the underdark at level ~2,...) but I can live with that.
So then we actually agree. So why the hostility toward me?

The only difference between our takes, it seems, is that whereas you "can live with [the mismatch]," I find it very hard to do so. My immersion in the story and the setting is everything for me playing a cRPG, and this mismatch breaks my immersion and aggravates the heck out of me.

Thrust me, no hostility here, just defending my opinion.

As for the “mismatch”? I am also a “story and setting makes an RPG” kind of guy, where combat can take a backseat (I.e. Planescape) Buuuut I also like a good fight, and that is for these reasons that I can live with the slightly-off setting at the beginning of BG3. Honestly, aren’t you fed up with every DnD quest beginning in a tavern basement fighting rats? I thinks it’s a nice change of pace.

BG optinal Rat fighting in tutorial, BG2 no ratfighting but high level, NWN no ratfighting, NWN2 no ratfighting.
BG3 PnP version
DM: You wake up and se a MINDFLAYER!
Player: oh right im lvl 1 gues thats GG then 3s new record.
DM: But he just puts somekind of tadpole in your eye then leaves.
Player: Oh fucking great im turning Illithid. oh great dn did you forget i cand cast wish as a lvl freaking 1 sorc?
DM: Suddenly the there is a explosion and you break free from your imprisonment you realise your not in kansas anymore and the dead imp suggest you are in HELL!
Player: OK thats it im out!

yeah the start is the most stupid i have ver seen in an RPG Knights of xentar have better story.
Id prefer rats in basement.

its not hard to do like in bg1. Have a high level char like Gorion protect you. While elminster is around so im prety sure thats whats made the real high level baddies stay away.

not just luck a billion times

No, thanks. I don't want to start playing in the sewers or prison again... I've had enough.


I don't speak english well, but I try my best. Ty
Page 4 of 4 1 2 3 4

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