Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Joined: Jan 2021
T
journeyman
OP Offline
journeyman
T
Joined: Jan 2021
After browsing the steam forums + reviews and reddit, I've seen lots of players, especially those who played Divinity series or other RPG, complaining about not being able to get desired results during the dialogues.
I know that a lot of people do love the dice rolls and I must say, that they are a core feature of Dungeons and Dragons games. So, to have everyone happy, right before we start the campaign, we could select:
- option for static rolls, like in Divinity 2 OS, when the skill check is always the same and instead of rolling the dice + applying bonuses, only our bonuses thanks to proficiency selected during the creating (like +2 to persuasion rolls) and ability bonuses count. (levels could also play a part)
- option to reduce the rolls by dividing the difficulty check by 2 and rounding it down (same being applied to the roll), so that your bonuses due to having proficiency and ability bonuses + artifacts are felt as more powerful.
If DC is for example 15, our base chance to succeed is to roll 15,16,17,18,19,20 . (30% Having +3 bonus adds 12,13,14 to the list, increasing the chance by 15% to 45%.
With halved DC, and halved roll, we would need to get 7 or more, to succeed (out of 10). Base chance is 40%, with +3 from persuasion increasing it to 70%.
- same system as right now, to satisfy hardcore dnd fans.
- option for unlimited re-rolling of the DC

The tadpole power would still work no matter what system the player would select, due to providing alternate dialogues, with more information being told to us, and giving the player additional experience (thanks to mindreading), at the cost of storyline consequences. (representing increased power at the cost of personality)

My personal thoughts were:
- Some of the options have unrealistcally high requirements for the skill check, which effecively locks the option from being used. Example -> checks requiring you to roll 20 or close to it. It's almost a dead in-game content atm, to have 5-15% of getting desired result, so that if a certain dialogue interaction interests us, we have to save-scum or check youtube to even know about what is it. If we do not choose to save scum, and we replay the game for 6 th time, on same dialogue, we can still fail and not see the desired result. This discourages trying to explore the game again, on a different path.
- Game encourages picking high charisma/intelligence characters way too heavily to minimise the "murder-hobo" style of play. Allowing companions to roll the dice for us, in specific situation would fix the problem.
- Locking out less of the options behind the DC could make it a little better
- Adding the possiblity for more dialogues, to use another DC if the one that we selected has failed, like if we do not convince NPC to tell us what we need, we can intimidate him to do so.
- Storyline and player choices having connections to DC could make sense -> example is
Gale being conflicted due to us siding with goblins, but we have high/medium approval. Dice roll is easier then, if we choose to persuade the wizard. This is already implemented in certain cases - if you romance Minthara and treat her well, game shows that she is conflicted and attached to us, so we succeed every time with persuasion check, no matter what do we get as a roll (I had +4 bonus from the priest of Loviathar, the DC was 5. Without the buff, DC was 1, so it's guaranteed success)
- More quests should provide the points to re-roll the DC
- Saving during the dialogues, which is planned for now, will make save-scumming, if someone wants it, less tedious. Or just check what the other option does.
- Possibly adding some of the re-roll points right at the start of the game.

What are the thoughts of the others about this not so easy and certainly controversial topic?

Last edited by TheOnlyRealTav; 07/01/21 07:02 AM.
Joined: Oct 2020
S
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
S
Joined: Oct 2020
I'm new to dnd so it did surprise me how little ability modifiers impacts our dice rolls. When I made my character have +4 persuasion I expected them to be really persuasive in game but that's not necessarily the case.

For example if the target is 20 with +4 ability modifier +4 reduces the target to 16 so it only helps if you specifically rolled a 16,17,18,19. The other 16 outcomes would have failed or succeeded even if you had 0 ability mod. That's an 80% chance that +4 ability mod doesn't help at all with your roll which seems high to me.

I know it can't be changed because its dnd but I'm hoping there will be mods that allow us to double the strength of ability modifiers, it would make our skill choices more impactful while reducing our chance of failure if we invest in the appropriate skills.

Otherwise, I think Larian is already handling it the correct way by giving us multiple chances to pass dialogue checks in some situations.

Joined: Nov 2020
Location: Austria
member
Offline
member
Joined: Nov 2020
Location: Austria
Originally Posted by Saberem
I'm new to dnd so it did surprise me how little ability modifiers impacts our dice rolls. When I made my character have +4 persuasion I expected them to be really persuasive in game but that's not necessarily the case.

For example if the target is 20 with +4 ability modifier +4 reduces the target to 16 so it only helps if you specifically rolled a 16,17,18,19. The other 16 outcomes would have failed or succeeded even if you had 0 ability mod. That's an 80% chance that +4 ability mod doesn't help at all with your roll which seems high to me.

I know it can't be changed because its dnd but I'm hoping there will be mods that allow us to double the strength of ability modifiers, it would make our skill choices more impactful while reducing our chance of failure if we invest in the appropriate skills.

Otherwise, I think Larian is already handling it the correct way by giving us multiple chances to pass dialogue checks in some situations.

Yes, this is true, but what you are overlooking:
When you have a DC of 20, then without the +4 you would need a 20 to pass the check. That's a chance of only 5%!
With +4 you can roll a 16,17,18,19 & 20, that's a chance of 25%, or in other words, 500% better than before!

Generally speaking, a DC of 20 is rather difficult. In most situations I have encountered in BG3, I would say a DC of 10 or 15 tops would be far more appropriate.

Besides: I really hope Larian corrects the display of DCs and their modifiers, because you don't subtract bonuses from the DC but add to the dice roll.

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Well for some check you dont need charisma/intelligence, but you need strength or dexterity, so that each character in a certain situation will have a better chance of success, there is logic in this. Although, if you want to be diplomatic, then of course you will have to make a character with high charisma, but this does not mean that you have no chance without it.


I don't speak english well, but I try my best. Ty
Joined: Jan 2021
T
journeyman
OP Offline
journeyman
T
Joined: Jan 2021
Originally Posted by daMichi
Originally Posted by Saberem
I'm new to dnd so it did surprise me how little ability modifiers impacts our dice rolls. When I made my character have +4 persuasion I expected them to be really persuasive in game but that's not necessarily the case.

For example if the target is 20 with +4 ability modifier +4 reduces the target to 16 so it only helps if you specifically rolled a 16,17,18,19. The other 16 outcomes would have failed or succeeded even if you had 0 ability mod. That's an 80% chance that +4 ability mod doesn't help at all with your roll which seems high to me.

I know it can't be changed because its dnd but I'm hoping there will be mods that allow us to double the strength of ability modifiers, it would make our skill choices more impactful while reducing our chance of failure if we invest in the appropriate skills.

Otherwise, I think Larian is already handling it the correct way by giving us multiple chances to pass dialogue checks in some situations.

Yes, this is true, but what you are overlooking:
When you have a DC of 20, then without the +4 you would need a 20 to pass the check. That's a chance of only 5%!
With +4 you can roll a 16,17,18,19 & 20, that's a chance of 25%, or in other words, 500% better than before!

Generally speaking, a DC of 20 is rather difficult. In most situations I have encountered in BG3, I would say a DC of 10 or 15 tops would be far more appropriate.

Besides: I really hope Larian corrects the display of DCs and their modifiers, because you don't subtract bonuses from the DC but add to the dice roll.


No matter what honestly, I see no point in setting DC of more than 15 for anything, because like I have said, the result is that some of in-game content ends up as being in-accessible without huge dosage of luck or just save-scumming.
Even if chance is 5 times bigger, it's still ends up being very low, so it's not much of a help there.
Most of the dice-rolls dialogues should have an option to try multiple attributes/skills, with a failure still letting us use the other options.
In other DnD games, that I have played (Neverwinter series), the DC rolling during dialogues was a thing as well and even having very high persuasion didn't guarantee succeeding the check.
Homever still more than not, you did succeed, if you did invest in social skills of your character, quite the opposite of the case that we got here (from 5% to 25%, which means very rare -> rare).

Joined: Nov 2020
Location: Austria
member
Offline
member
Joined: Nov 2020
Location: Austria
Yeah that's true. I would never hide story behind a skill check, but rather use it for difficult situations, e.g. classically when you want to bribe a guard.
And yes, of course, there should always be more possibilities, like intimidation, persuasion, etc.

Also absolutely necessary would be that you can choose which member of your party makes the roll.

What was also already pointed out in these forums, is that No DM would let a player roll consecutive checks.
One problem, one DC, one DC roll.

Joined: Nov 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Nov 2020
Sometimes multiple checks in succession are a thing. In DND 4e you would have skill challenges that would require X successes before Y failures, but in dialogue it can feel well frustrating to pass the first check but then fail the second.

Joined: Jan 2021
T
journeyman
OP Offline
journeyman
T
Joined: Jan 2021
Originally Posted by CJMPinger
Sometimes multiple checks in succession are a thing. In DND 4e you would have skill challenges that would require X successes before Y failures, but in dialogue it can feel well frustrating to pass the first check but then fail the second.
Do you mean for example that if we fail to persuade XYZ character, we can still try to let' s say intimidate him/her?

Joined: Nov 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by TheOnlyRealTav
Originally Posted by CJMPinger
Sometimes multiple checks in succession are a thing. In DND 4e you would have skill challenges that would require X successes before Y failures, but in dialogue it can feel well frustrating to pass the first check but then fail the second.
Do you mean for example that if we fail to persuade XYZ character, we can still try to let' s say intimidate him/her?

Not what I was getting at but often it feels like failing a check just blocks you out of other options so that would be pretty good to have, when it makes sense switching gears and trying a different check might help make it feel less restrictive, maybe doing a small penalty to that subsequent check cause you failed the previous one if they still want a penalty?

Joined: Jun 2020
old hand
Online Content
old hand
Joined: Jun 2020
Progressive checks are a tool that DMs can use in a lot of different situations, but they pop up in social situations more than others. This is a concept that transcends editions - it's as present in 5th as it was in earlier ones because it stands more or less in the DM's personal hands, rather than a hard-ruled thing.

The general ideal is that, except in obvious or extreme circumstances, for a difficult, progressing or complicated task (such as navigating a delicate social situation, or convincing the guards that you really should be let into that room) doing poorly or well on one check alone shouldn't be an absolute failure or an easy success, but that each check influences how the conversation progresses. Doing poorly on a first check shouldn't absolutely lock you out of progressing, or throw you into a fail state - but it will make climbing back out of the hole you dug harder, and if you continue to screw up, you'll fail for certain. Similarly, a good first check may not make the guards fall over themselves to let you pass, but it would certainly be likely to assure, allay or endear them to your situation, making it easier to convince them as the conversation progresses.

We don't have 'progressive checks' in BG3 at the moment - we have 'successive checks', which are more or less a dick move from any DM. Successive checks, like BG3 uses in many places, are checks that you have to pas one after the other, and any failure at any point catapults you into the exact same fail state as failing the first one (or not trying at all). These are checks that you ultimately have a completely minuscule chance of passing, even though each individual check might only be moderate, because you only have to fail one, any one, to end up at the same spot as if you never tried. It is the tool of a DM who has already decided how the conversation is going to go, and is just going to brow beat you with checks until you fail one and they can jump to the outcome they want.

Last edited by Niara; 09/01/21 02:59 AM.
Joined: Jan 2021
T
journeyman
OP Offline
journeyman
T
Joined: Jan 2021
Originally Posted by CJMPinger
Originally Posted by TheOnlyRealTav
Originally Posted by CJMPinger
Sometimes multiple checks in succession are a thing. In DND 4e you would have skill challenges that would require X successes before Y failures, but in dialogue it can feel well frustrating to pass the first check but then fail the second.
Do you mean for example that if we fail to persuade XYZ character, we can still try to let' s say intimidate him/her?

Not what I was getting at but often it feels like failing a check just blocks you out of other options so that would be pretty good to have, when it makes sense switching gears and trying a different check might help make it feel less restrictive, maybe doing a small penalty to that subsequent check cause you failed the previous one if they still want a penalty?

Sometimes it really, really sucks for pretty important parts of the game to be locked behind a single check. Or some important lore fact.
Gale being conflicted during the goblin party situation, can make you lose him thanks to a single DC if you fail it.
Or:
The hint given that the friendly skeleton is Jergal, is locked behind ridiculous DC.
And:
Some extra interactions/alternative dialogues or scenes, for example during romances, are locked behind very high DC as well to the point of being unreal to happen. Lae'zel and Minthara come to mind almost instantly. Or Astarion feeding on your blood/Injuried mind flayer second interaction. The last 2 had a DC of more than 15 during my gameplay and both fo them, if failed, kill your player character. It makes little to no sense as well, for Astarion to kill our character during said cutscene. If he follows us because his chance of survival is higher, is he really going to throw it straight to the trash bin because now he can drink a little more of the blood? It would be better to make our character wake up weakened and with penalty to the health, until another long rest.

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
There's a thread already about d20 and skill checks Use search

This is a copy/paste of what I said on the other thread.

BG3:
Based off BG3 you can't get any better than a 17 for ability score (doesn't matter if you have a +2, +1, or nothing), so ability modifier is going to be +3. There is no skill points in this edition only proficiency which can be gained via background, racial, or class. At level one for proficiency is a +2, generally any race/class can achieve this +5 right from character creation.

Leveling up you gain +1 ability score at: 4th, 8th, 12th, 16th, and 19th. Proficiency goes up by one at: 5th, 9th, 13th, and 17th.

level 1: Ability Mod:+3 Pro: +2 = +5
level 10: Ability Mod: +4 Pro: +4 = +8
level 20: Ability Mod: +6 Pro: +6 = +12

Social skill challenges don't normally go up, so the higher level you go the better you get at said skill. This also doesn't include spells or potions that can give you the upper hand at skill checks.

Now normally in a d&d game you don't cap at 17 so the ability mod for racials actually comes more into effect giving possibly a 18 or 20 ability score. Class features seem to be missing, off the freebe pdf you can get from d&d beyond rogues get a expertise feature at level one. Which doubles skill proficiencies for 2 skills or 1 skill plus thieves tools.

Probably more junk I'm missing but I hit my limit on researching. Over all you have a problem with BG3 and how they implemented the 5e rules, 5e rules period, or just d&d all together. I'd recommend go finding another game if you don't like the d20 system in d&d.

Edit* Oh I did forget about inspiration points where you can spend a point to give yourself advantage in a skill check.

Edit2* Digging through the PDF and looks like 5e does cap your ability scores at 17 at least for point buy (racial mods included) rolls still can be 18s, interesting

Originally Posted by TheOnlyRealTav
- option for static rolls, like in Divinity 2 OS, when the skill check is always the same and instead of rolling the dice + applying bonuses, only our bonuses thanks to proficiency selected during the creating (like +2 to persuasion rolls) and ability bonuses count. (levels could also play a part)
- option to reduce the rolls by dividing the difficulty check by 2 and rounding it down (same being applied to the roll), so that your bonuses due to having proficiency and ability bonuses + artifacts are felt as more powerful.
If DC is for example 15, our base chance to succeed is to roll 15,16,17,18,19,20 . (30% Having +3 bonus adds 12,13,14 to the list, increasing the chance by 15% to 45%.
With halved DC, and halved roll, we would need to get 7 or more, to succeed (out of 10). Base chance is 40%, with +3 from persuasion increasing it to 70%.
- same system as right now, to satisfy hardcore dnd fans.
- option for unlimited re-rolling of the DC

It's a d&d game, d&d uses d20, if you don't like it go play something else. Now I do know a lot of people asking for skill check modifier to be applied to your roll vs subtracting from DC. I'm pretty sure there was some major problems with this but I don't really remember off hand.

I'm pretty sure you said something about save scumming but I can't find it for the life of me. Anyway just encase, devs mentioned more favorable results if you reload multi times.

Last edited by fallenj; 09/01/21 06:00 AM.
Joined: Jan 2021
T
journeyman
OP Offline
journeyman
T
Joined: Jan 2021
Originally Posted by fallenj
There's a thread already about d20 and skill checks Use search

This is a copy/paste of what I said on the other thread.

BG3:
Based off BG3 you can't get any better than a 17 for ability score (doesn't matter if you have a +2, +1, or nothing), so ability modifier is going to be +3. There is no skill points in this edition only proficiency which can be gained via background, racial, or class. At level one for proficiency is a +2, generally any race/class can achieve this +5 right from character creation.

Leveling up you gain +1 ability score at: 4th, 8th, 12th, 16th, and 19th. Proficiency goes up by one at: 5th, 9th, 13th, and 17th.

level 1: Ability Mod:+3 Pro: +2 = +5
level 10: Ability Mod: +4 Pro: +4 = +8
level 20: Ability Mod: +6 Pro: +6 = +12

Social skill challenges don't normally go up, so the higher level you go the better you get at said skill. This also doesn't include spells or potions that can give you the upper hand at skill checks.

Now normally in a d&d game you don't cap at 17 so the ability mod for racials actually comes more into effect giving possibly a 18 or 20 ability score. Class features seem to be missing, off the freebe pdf you can get from d&d beyond rogues get a expertise feature at level one. Which doubles skill proficiencies for 2 skills or 1 skill plus thieves tools.


Probably more junk I'm missing but I hit my limit on researching.


I must admit that your research is pretty impressive.

Quote
Over all you have a problem with BG3 and how they implemented the 5e rules, 5e rules period, or just d&d all together. I'd recommend go finding another game if you don't like the d20 system in d&d.
I will disagree here, since games adjust the rules, so that they become more enjoyable. Examples of BG3 adjustements done to improve the gameplay:
- Food heals a little bit of health
- Long rests are unlimited and there are no random encounters
- Many classess feature additional abilities and tweaks
- Height, light, positioning influences the chance to hit
- Range of bows is much more limited than on tabletop.

I've never said that I dislike the d20 system either.

Quote
After browsing the steam forums + reviews and reddit, I've seen lots of players, especially those who played Divinity series or other RPG, complaining about not being able to get desired results during the dialogues.
I know that a lot of people do love the dice rolls and I must say, that they are a core feature of Dungeons and Dragons games. So, to have everyone happy, right before we start the campaign, we could select:

So basically, if you read it once again, you could decide if you want to play exactly how is it right now, with d20 rolls, or with easier/more predictable rolls. Or possibility to re-roll over and over.
That means that people who love rolling the dice as it works currently, aren't affected at all. What changes, is that now if player has a desire to omit this, he can choose to do so. Therefore I do not understand the issue that you have with it, since adding new options doesn't affect those who don't want to use them at all. That's why I wrote there, that everyone will be happy, since people who want to play the game like the tabletop, can play it like the tabletop. Those who want the results of DC mechanics be more impacted by your character, simliar to how it was in previous editions, or just have more typical rpg-style dialogues, can also have that.


Quote
It's a d&d game, d&d uses d20, if you don't like it go play something else. Now I do know a lot of people asking for skill check modifier to be applied to your roll vs subtracting from DC. I'm pretty sure there was some major problems with this but I don't really remember off hand.

It's a game based on D&D and not every D&D mechanic translates well into the game, either because they would be too hard to implement or just plain overpowered, like the Wish spell. Same as written above applies as well, I have never said that I dislike the d20.


Quote
My personal thoughts were:
- Some of the options have unrealistcally high requirements for the skill check, which effecively locks the option from being used. Example -> checks requiring you to roll 20 or close to it. It's almost a dead in-game content atm, to have 5-15% of getting desired result, so that if a certain dialogue interaction interests us, we have to save-scum or check youtube to even know about what is it. If we do not choose to save scum, and we replay the game for 6 th time, on same dialogue, we can still fail and not see the desired result. This discourages trying to explore the game again, on a different path.
- Game encourages picking high charisma/intelligence characters way too heavily to minimise the "murder-hobo" style of play. Allowing companions to roll the dice for us, in specific situation would fix the problem.
- Locking out less of the options behind the DC could make it a little better
- Adding the possiblity for more dialogues, to use another DC if the one that we selected has failed, like if we do not convince NPC to tell us what we need, we can intimidate him to do so.
- Storyline and player choices having connections to DC could make sense -> example is
Gale being conflicted due to us siding with goblins, but we have high/medium approval. Dice roll is easier then, if we choose to persuade the wizard. This is already implemented in certain cases - if you romance Minthara and treat her well, game shows that she is conflicted and attached to us, so we succeed every time with persuasion check, no matter what do we get as a roll (I had +4 bonus from the priest of Loviathar, the DC was 5. Without the buff, DC was 1, so it's guaranteed success)
- More quests should provide the points to re-roll the DC
- Saving during the dialogues, which is planned for now, will make save-scumming, if someone wants it, less tedious. Or just check what the other option does.
- Possibly adding some of the re-roll points right at the start of the game

This is what I thought about d20 system. Not that it's broken or unfitting, it's just that current implementation of it in the game isn't exactly fleshed out. You can imagine what will happen if the Gale situation goes bad, most of people will just reload to not be denied from having an interesting storyline. Which is a waste of time. DC as high as 20 is also pointless, because it will almost never succeed and some pretty interesting dialogues or interactions are locked behind it.


Quote
I'm pretty sure you said something about save scumming but I can't find it for the life of me. Anyway just encase, devs mentioned more favorable results if you reload multi times.

I will copy it here, so that you can easily read it again, if you wish.

Quote
No matter what honestly, I see no point in setting DC of more than 15 for anything, because like I have said, the result is that some of in-game content ends up as being in-accessible without huge dosage of luck or just save-scumming.

Quote
- Saving during the dialogues, which is planned for now, will make save-scumming, if someone wants it, less tedious. Or just check what the other option does.

Edit, I forgot to mention this.
https://www.reddit.com/r/baldursgate/comments/ieip8n/bg3_do_you_like_the_dice_rolls_during_dialogs/
Sample size of 384, which shows that noticeable part of the players (31%), who like the game, aren't exactly fans of how dialogues are handled right now. Forcing to save scum is hinted as a common problem. Not all things have to go perfectly, but in many times dice rolls are ridiculously high right now, so much that the option is basically unrealistic to happen.
In the post, I have written my feelings about d20 and also an options on how to make everyone happy - fans of both current dice rolling, easier dice rolling or static options.
If homever, 1/3 of players are going to completely ignore certain game mechanics, let them do this. Games are made to be enjoyed after all.

Last edited by TheOnlyRealTav; 09/01/21 08:24 AM.
Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by TheOnlyRealTav
Therefore I do not understand the issue that you have with it, since adding new options doesn't affect those who don't want to use them at all.
Its a waste of time when they are already doing adjustments to reloads for save scumming; features require people to code the game & ui elements.

Originally Posted by TheOnlyRealTav
It's a game based on D&D and not every D&D mechanic translates well into the game, either because they would be too hard to implement or just plain overpowered, like the Wish spell. Same as written above applies as well, I have never said that I dislike the d20.
We are not talking about some side feature, we are talking about actual core feature of d&d, a d20 roll. You might have not said you dislike d20 but you are very forward about changing such a feature (possibly in multi ways) so you can have the perfect play, closer to favorable outcomes for every social encounter.

Quote
No matter what honestly, I see no point in setting DC of more than 15 for anything, because like I have said, the result is that some of in-game content ends up as being in-accessible without huge dosage of luck or just save-scumming.

Presuming DC's can be adjusted, really don't care about that.

Game is level based, you are not going to go to the swamp at level 1 and hope to beat the npcs their. DC checks can be made as a stopper so people have to come back at higher level (just a idea / example).

If you know the DC is going to be high, use a potion, spell, inspiration point (advantage on roll). That is what these are for to help with rolls.

Last edited by fallenj; 09/01/21 03:03 PM.
Joined: Dec 2020
Z
stranger
Offline
stranger
Z
Joined: Dec 2020
The reality is that it's not a great system for a videogame. Tabletop D&D keeps it because it is easy to run at a table and doesn't disrupt the flow of the game, but if I were making the game I'd ditch the entire 5e skill system and replace it with something else.

The extremely thin and uninteresting skill system is one of 5e's weakest points anyway, I don't see why anyone would want to put in the time and effort to replicate it.

Last edited by ZetaZeta; 09/01/21 06:28 PM.
Joined: Dec 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Dec 2020
Originally Posted by TheOnlyRealTav
It makes little to no sense as well, for Astarion to kill our character during said cutscene. If he follows us because his chance of survival is higher, is he really going to throw it straight to the trash bin because now he can drink a little more of the blood? It would be better to make our character wake up weakened and with penalty to the health, until another long rest.

As far as failed the roll with Astarion it makes sense to have to roll in that situation:
He's a vampire who has been forced to feed on animals for 2 centuries. The moment he has his (first?) chance to feed on humans is probably overpowering. I believe he is written in that scene to lose himself to that bloodlust, and it makes perfect sense.

Last edited by AvatarOfSHODAN; 09/01/21 08:27 PM.
Joined: Nov 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Nov 2020
I wouldn't ditch it, just make it that failing once doesn't lock you out, give players options to go further if they fail one Persuasion check. Many tables (not all) don't make it that you fail your goal immediately for failing one roll, so I don't think the game should either.

Joined: Jan 2021
7
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
7
Joined: Jan 2021
Originally Posted by CJMPinger
I wouldn't ditch it, just make it that failing once doesn't lock you out, give players options to go further if they fail one Persuasion check. Many tables (not all) don't make it that you fail your goal immediately for failing one roll, so I don't think the game should either.

Yeah I like this. Like seeing Kagha go to kill the child after you fail the persuasion check you could have the option to trigger combat then and there to save the kid. It lands you with a straight worse outcome, but at least there's still choice within your failure rather than sitting and passively watching as a kid dies.

Joined: Jan 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Jan 2020
Originally Posted by ZetaZeta
The reality is that it's not a great system for a videogame. Tabletop D&D keeps it because it is easy to run at a table and doesn't disrupt the flow of the game, but if I were making the game I'd ditch the entire 5e skill system and replace it with something else.

The extremely thin and uninteresting skill system is one of 5e's weakest points anyway, I don't see why anyone would want to put in the time and effort to replicate it.

I would agree. D&D has always been highly abstract to make it playable on TT. The high variance randomness is part of the charm on TT but is at odds with the preferences of the majority of videoame players.

Of course, there is actually no need for dialog options of BG3 to use skill checks at all; that is Larian's choice. My main criticisms are not about the D20 skill check rolls, but the lack of any consequence or difficulty hints before selecting options.

Joined: Mar 2020
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Mar 2020
Soo true...outwitted by the fool who rolled a natural 20.

Inspiration points are the answer Larian came up with...perhaps more opportunities to get them?

Page 1 of 2 1 2

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