Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 8 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Joined: Dec 2020
Location: Finland
T
addict
Offline
addict
T
Joined: Dec 2020
Location: Finland
Originally Posted by Seiryu Suta
You're making an assumption we're all here because of BG 1&2. I'd be willing to wager most of the people getting the game are here for the Larian Brand.
We do not have statistics here why people are here. However BG1 and BG2 fans certainly seem more or less eager to post and be active on the Baldurs Gate 3 threads. If there are players that never want to try BG1 or BG2 whatever it is their choice and I respect that.

Larian Studios? I do know generally DOS2 was a success and actually in game reviews it was super success. Larian Studios is a good company in Belgium Europe. I am fine with Larian studios developing this game. Larian Studios sounds better then some company that I hardly no nothing about or that developed some game that was not successful recently.

I have never posted on these forums due to DOS2 or any other Larian games. If there are forum member that have posted 100+ posts on DOS 2 or any other Larian game specific forums whatever it is their choice. During DOS2 I was simply passively looking very rarely at forums and not actively posting anything though I did play DOS2 though did not finish that game. On the other hand I did not even finish Pillars of Eternity 2 (I did finish POE1) and both of them are not Dungeons Dragons.
The reason I am here is because Baldurs Gate 3 and yes I am fan of BG1 and BG2 and Dungeons Dragons.

Last edited by Terminator2020; 31/01/21 06:48 AM.
Joined: Mar 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Mar 2020
I'm here for BG1 and 2. I hadn't even considered playing DOS until I learned that Larian got the license. It's clear that the OP would prefer to play DOS3 and they will likely get that chance at some point.

Myself, I want to play BG and D&D.

Larian has repeatedly said they didn't expect the sales numbers they received and It's pretty clear that the unexpected boost in EA sales came from the BG / D&D name. Which is why nearly all the devs made a pitch to WotC. Same thing happened with Beamdog -- when they first came out with the EEs it crashed the servers and then back up servers and then there was so much demand on the back ups to the back ups that download speeds took 3-4 hours.

Joined: Nov 2020
U
stranger
Offline
stranger
U
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by Seiryu Suta
Originally Posted by Ayvah
Imagine it's 2010. For the first time in almost a decade, you hear news that there's a new XCOM game being developed.

This is the XCOM you're told you're going to get.

Imagine it's 2018, and you've been waiting 6 years for a sequel to Diablo III.

The XCOM we were promised in 2010 eventually became The Bureau: XCOM Declassified. Despite modeling itself on the popular FPS genre, it was not a success story. However, the negative reaction to its announcement triggered the development of a more traditional XCOM sequel/remake, in the form of XCOM: Enemy Unknown, which was so successful that it revitalised an entire genre.

It became the "popular game" that everyone else copies. Now we have Gears of War tactics games and Mario tactics games, etc.


In 2010, you could have argued that XCOM style tactics games were dead. Nobody likes them and they're just bad game design. And yet, fans demanded that XCOM be the best it can be while staying true to its brand/niche, instead of just playing it safe by becoming a different game entirely.

Imagine jumping onto a Diablo forum in 2017 and asking for the next Diablo game to be a mobile phone game, and then trying to hide your subjective preference for mobile games by saying "it's objectively true that mobile games are more popular than PC games".

In fact, don't imagine.

I really find it odd that there's any need for a discussion around the popularity or financial success of the original Baldur's Gate games. Those games are why we're all here.
....Literally stating 1 mechanic should change. Not anywhere close to your exaggeration.

You're making an assumption we're all here because of BG 1&2. I'd be willing to wager most of the people getting the game are here for the Larian Brand.

Haven't the slightest idea what XCom is, sounds like a shooter game, closest I come to playing a shooter game is Fallout.


Changing that one mechanic has a huge impact on balance and gameplay in general.

BG brand is bigger than Larian, they already stated that being able to make BG3 is huge to them.

Xcom is an RPG/strategy game.

Joined: Aug 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Aug 2020
Firstly, yes the one mechanic Seirryu is asking to change would very dramatically alter how the game would work, such that it would cause ripple-effects that would require changes throughout the game-I made a post earlier that went into how extensive the ripples could be.

Secondly I'm here as a mix of both Larian and the Baldurs Gate title. I liked Divinity: Original Sin and while I liked a lot about the sequel, for some reason I kept bouncing off it hard and never being able to really enjoy it-I've never managed to get past Fort Joy before losing interest despite the game having a whole lot of stuff I like on paper. I love turn-based combat in cRPGs, I like D&D okay, and I don't want to deal with the more archaic aspects of Baldurs Gate 1&2 to experience them, so I came here hoping that the combination of 5E rules, turn based combat, and Larian already proving they can make good games would lead to something I would enjoy playing. And for the most part that's been true, although I definitely have my issues with it, that I've outlined various times within the forum.

Joined: Sep 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by Seiryu Suta
You're making an assumption we're all here because of BG 1&2. I'd be willing to wager most of the people getting the game are here for the Larian Brand.
Never played a Larian game before. Also tried to play BG 1 and 2 after getting this one but I can't get into them. I usually play TPS and survival games. I am only here for EA because I like DnD and Larian wanted people to test the evil path, which to me meant there would be a more thought out story with consequences and not shoving the hero path down our throats.

Joined: Dec 2020
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Dec 2020
Per-Rest abilities add a strategy to the game, that removal would reduce the game. It's fun having to think about when to use what abilities, that's why it's been a core mechanic of pretty much all RPGs to have items or abilities you can run out of.
Games that have, use ability when it's recharged so you just span them are fun sure, but because of being different games with different reasons.
It's not old or new either, both systems have always been around but with different purposes and for different experiences and a BG-RPG style game without per-rest wouldn't be as fun. You'd need a completely new system to add the strategy and risk to make up for it or else it'd just be a game built on a per rest model that doesn't have one.

Last edited by Starshine; 31/01/21 08:14 AM.
Joined: Jan 2021
Location: Netherlands
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Jan 2021
Location: Netherlands
Originally Posted by Seiryu Suta
You're making an assumption we're all here because of BG 1&2. I'd be willing to wager most of the people getting the game are here for the Larian Brand.

But that is making equal assumptions about people being here for the Larian brand. Sure, the forum activity could easily be a vocal minority but if you say you make assumptions one way, you also cannot make assumptions the other way. I personally know more people who share my thoughts and wanted either a BG game or a 5e DND game rather than a Larian game.

I myself am here for the 5e experience game that was promised/advertised. I love the old BG games and enjoyed DOS (Though.. I think 1 was the far better game. Even though 2 was more polished combat wise, I feel it was just an "okay" game. Popular as it filled a niche and was flashy). It is why I am here on the forum as well, I wasn't for DOS1 and 2 even though I did play those a fair bit.

I do think if you advertise/promise a game as something specific (in this case being a BG game and a 5e experience) then I feel it is something you should stick to. It has its own ruleset and mechanics and even with its flaws (No system is without flaws really), it IS the system you have chosen. For a cooldown system, the game should have been DOS3, or any other custom ruleset (Like PoE did).

Last edited by TheFoxWhisperer; 31/01/21 09:50 AM.
Joined: Dec 2020
S
apprentice
OP Offline
apprentice
S
Joined: Dec 2020
Originally Posted by TheFoxWhisperer
But that is making equal assumptions about people being here for the Larian brand. Sure, the forum activity could easily be a vocal minority but if you say you make assumptions one way, you also cannot make assumptions the other way. I personally know more people who share my thoughts and wanted either a BG game or a 5e DND game rather than a Larian game.

Actually the 'Vocal Minority' is what's going on in the forums. To try and say that's what skews the conversation to 1 side of the purist mentality, is a can of worms that I don't want to bother with opening. I could state that purists are a huge group of people on most gaming forums, but that's anecdotal, and spending my time trying to find data and statistics to prove that, is not something I care to do, or get into.

However, there is a big * here, Larian recently made a game, and grew its own, some could say grass-roots, fanbase. BG 1&2 are 20yrs old.

Originally Posted by Umsche
BG brand is bigger than Larian, they already stated that being able to make BG3 is huge to them.
20 years ago, maybe.

Huge to them because....they are fans of the game, is the most likely reason. Not because they are some dad's garage company, getting a huge deal that makes or breaks them.

Originally Posted by Grey Ghost
Secondly I'm here as a mix of both Larian and the Baldur's Gate title.

I think that is what the community for this game is, a mix of both. I'd lean more heavily towards Larian's fanbase, since it is a more recent fan-base.

Originally Posted by Killer Rabbit
Larian has repeatedly said they didn't expect the sales numbers they received and It's pretty clear that the unexpected boost in EA sales came from the BG / D&D name.

You cant equate this to meaning its a turnout of BG fans. It's a different title than what their fanbase came for, having that fanbase buy into an off-title product so readily / would be willing to buy it, in EA is surprising in and of itself.

Originally Posted by Starshine
Per-Rest abilities add a strategy to the game, that removal would reduce the game. It's fun having to think about when to use what abilities, that's why it's been a core mechanic of pretty much all RPGs to have items or abilities you can run out of.
Games that have, use ability when it's recharged so you just span them are fun sure, but because of being different games with different reasons.
It's not old or new either, both systems have always been around but with different purposes and for different experiences and a BG-RPG style game without per-rest wouldn't be as fun. You'd need a completely new system to add the strategy and risk to make up for it or else it'd just be a game built on a per rest model that doesn't have one.

Cooldowns also add strategy, having to think about when to use them, and cooldowns are also the core mechanic most other rpgs use, some use mana, some combine both.

Cooldowns are a time tested and reliable balancing mechanic. Spellslot rest resets, are only ever used in D&D ruleset cRPGs. If its such a good mechanic why do no other rulesets adopt it? I might be wrong, maybe some have that I just haven't heard of.

Also, there is no real balancing to the spellslot mechanic at all if resting is meaningless. The only thing it creates is a chore. Go to camp, end day, pet the dog, see if anyone needs to talk, rest, pick a waypoint close to where you were, cast all your passive long term spells, walk all the way back to where you were(all meaningless because mobs dont respawn, and new ones dont repopulate, no random encounters.) then finally start back up. No consequences to going to rest, I can spam my good spells every turn to soften them up, until I run out of usages, and then just AA slog until the battle is done.

There is no RP value to this mechanic, it does a poor job of actually balancing combat, other than you knowing exactly the amount of resources you have going in to use against the opponent. The only thing it does is create a list of chores you have to do, every time that you have to spend yourself in an encounter. Yes we can make resting have more consequences in several different ways. However, most of those ways would make the gameplay experience more tedious, unless you change to a cooldown mechanic for balance instead, then they can become RP aspects, and you can also have more engaging combat.

Limited uses per item, and per day limits on some abilities are not exclusive to spellslot rest reset mechanics.

----------------------

Just to explain how I came to be here.

I haven't had a PC for about 5 yrs, because I was living on the road for my job, so Ive been stuck playing mobile games(Glorified slot machines, if you ask me. There are a few decent ones, but mostly just companies trying to get you to spend as much as possible.) Changed job paths so I could sit in 1 place, and finally got a PC again. I decided to look up games id played before to see if there were any possible sequels. I searched for BG3 as a joke really, and found out it had come out and was in EA, so I am here as a BG fan, but overall I'm here as a cRPG fan in total. I'd like to see D&D get its due, but also I'd like it to adapt to create a more enjoyable gaming experience, and hopefully expanding the fanbase enough that we can get some more content.

I hadn't even heard of Larian myself, but looked into the company because "Why did this company get the rights to make a D&D game, and a BG title to boot." I found that they had come smashing into the cRPG industry with great success, so I bought the game. Played thru it, and am now waiting for more. I am currently playing DoS2, and realizing why they got the go ahead. I haven't played DoS yet, and I normally try to start at the beginning, but I was more interested in how there recent game played, because of BG3. I definitely don't want to see BG3 be a reskinned clone of DoS2, but I trust the game in Larian's hands. I'm just hoping that they are going to leave enough modding capability to make a mod that will allow a CD mechanic to be used instead.

Cooldowns do change the balance of the game, but for the better, and with more balancing options.

Last edited by Seiryu Suta; 31/01/21 04:35 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
D
member
Offline
member
D
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Seiryu Suta
Cooldowns do change the balance of the game, but for the better, and with more balancing options.
If you want to keep the spells (as in their actual effects) mostly intact (vs. the 5e rules), then this is the very opposite of truth. 5e classes/actions/spells are decently (though not perfectly) balanced around the rest mechanics, in both P&P and cRPGs - as long as you implement 5e rules relatively faithfully (Solasta...).

If you want to throw the rules completely out of the window (again, actual licensing issues might arise, not sure about WotC's position on this) and reimplement/rebalance all actions/spells, then depending on the quality of your implementation, the balance may end up being worse or better.

And sure, the more moddable the game is, the better.

Joined: Jan 2021
Location: Netherlands
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Jan 2021
Location: Netherlands
Originally Posted by Seiryu Suta
Originally Posted by TheFoxWhisperer
But that is making equal assumptions about people being here for the Larian brand. Sure, the forum activity could easily be a vocal minority but if you say you make assumptions one way, you also cannot make assumptions the other way. I personally know more people who share my thoughts and wanted either a BG game or a 5e DND game rather than a Larian game.

Actually the 'Vocal Minority' is what's going on in the forums. To try and say that's what skews the conversation to 1 side of the purist mentality, is a can of worms that I don't want to bother with opening. I could state that purists are a huge group of people on most gaming forums, but that's anecdotal, and spending my time trying to find data and statistics to prove that, is not something I care to do, or get into.

That is still assumption. Without data, you do not really know if it is the vocal minority. You would need to look further than just the forum here, it is a view I have seen on reddit plenty as well. That in itself does not say much, aside give me a vague perspective with my immediate experiences, but without data, you cannot just assume (like you told people not to assume). It does go both ways.

Joined: Dec 2020
Location: CA
S
addict
Offline
addict
S
Joined: Dec 2020
Location: CA
Originally Posted by Seiryu Suta
Cooldowns also add strategy, having to think about when to use them, and cooldowns are also the core mechanic most other rpgs use, some use mana, some combine both.

I don't know if you are familiar with 5e but I think cooldowns would be a mistake. I think one of the biggest mistakes Larian made in EA is not including level 5. It's a major bump in power for the characters and people who are unfamiliar do not understand what lies ahead. Martial classes get their second attack. Casters get 3rd level spells. It's the reason why levels 5-10 are considered the sweet spot of D&D PnP. You have just enough powers to make things interesting and you aren't bogged down with too many powers that drag out combat.

I'm going to use everyone's favorite spell: Fireball. It's a 3rd level spell that does 8D8 AoE fire damage spell. It's auto hit and if you make a DEX save you take half damage. Notice a fighter would have to use action surge and hit with all four of his attacks to match the damage of one fireball. And that's just one monster. Fireball is AoE. Clearly, the spell is significantly powerful. Wizards can cast it twice per long rest.

Now, if the resting mechanic is used correctly, wizards shouldn't be able to spam fireball. They would have to conserve it for either large groups of minions or a boss. Larian NEEDS to fix the resting mechanic or yes, like you said, people will just long rest before every encounter. Have four wizards and drop eight fireballs. There's nothing that would be able to absorb that at level 5.

Let's go over cooldowns then. How would you implement fireball cooldowns? Every encounter? That's OP as you can see. A longer timer? Well that means players will just stand around twiddling their thumbs until it recharges which is equally pointless as the current resting system. Nerf it so it becomes a glorified fire bolt? I guess but then it takes away from a hallmark wizard spell. As you can see, just throwing out cooldowns in 5e presents lots of new issues. And this is just one spell.

And I disagree that cooldowns are more tactical. It's less. In 5e, the wizard has the choice to cast fireball twice in one encounter if the party feels they need it. Sure, the wizard can't cast it anymore until a long rest but the choice is there. And in a desperate situation, it may be deemed necessary. Cooldowns? Nope. Not an option.

D&D isn't about spamming powers. It's about resource management. As players you had to make calculated risks on when to use your most powerful weapons at the right time. Old school, if you failed to do that, you'd die. But D&D has been watered down so much it's actually hard to have a character killed. I never felt concerned for my characters playing BG3. Why? Because the game mechanics are a joke. There's no threat. No sense of adventure. It's just a bunch of OP characters plowing through the game. It lacks depth of tactics. Perhaps that's why games like Darkest Dungeon and Dark Souls are popular now. They actually offer challenge to the player. But that's another topic.

Last edited by spectralhunter; 31/01/21 09:36 PM.
Joined: Jan 2021
Location: Netherlands
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Jan 2021
Location: Netherlands
Originally Posted by spectralhunter
And I disagree that cooldowns are more tactical. It's less. In 5e, the wizard has the choice to cast fireball twice in one encounter if the party feels they need it. Sure, the wizard can't cast it anymore until a long rest but the choice is there. And in a desperate situation, it may be deemed necessary. Cooldowns? Nope. Not an option.

And this example is just the fireball too. It gets more complex too: Do you use your 3rd level spelllslot for that counterspell? Or will you upcast a Sleep spell to put the big beastie to sleep? Maybe you will haste the fighter instead because the enemies are fire resistant?

With how 5e spells work, as well as spellslots and upcasting of spells for bigger effect, it becomes a LOT more tactical than cooldowns can ever be, really.

Joined: Dec 2020
R
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
R
Joined: Dec 2020
Originally Posted by Icelyn
Originally Posted by Bufotenina
Still the developpers could find ways to have different outcomes based on how long a player takes to end a quest (specialy the main ones that usually rely on the fact that the main character has a main role in a world changing event), or find a way to push the quests of the various chapters to completion before the depleting of all quests (from a narrative point of view it means to create "interludes" that justify the fact that the player can spend time in completing side quests) or made the side quest influence the main one.
Please no timed quests. Those are the worst.

They already exist. The biggest one is Waukeen's Rest - if you get too close to it and then leave, when you come back, the councilor is gone, Bynryn is dead, and all but the one praying soldier have left. Also, when you start those quests, the fire gets worse in several areas over time and will kill Bynren and put smoke on the councilor's escape route if you wait too long.

That's the worst example, but there are others. Some scenes will wait forever for you; some will not. For example, if you want the cinematic of Arka grieving over Kanon, you don't have much time at all to see it.

Joined: Jan 2021
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Jan 2021
Originally Posted by spectralhunter
I don't know if you are familiar with 5e but I think cooldowns would be a mistake. I think one of the biggest mistakes Larian made in EA is not including level 5. It's a major bump in power for the characters and people who are unfamiliar do not understand what lies ahead. Martial classes get their second attack. Casters get 3rd level spells. It's the reason why levels 5-10 are considered the sweet spot of D&D PnP. You have just enough powers to make things interesting and you aren't bogged down with too many powers that drag out combat.

They really should let the players experience level 5 in early access. It would clear up a lot of confusion.

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by DragonSnooz
They really should let the players experience level 5 in early access. It would clear up a lot of confusion.
I also hope they add level 5 to EA soon. I would like some more spells. mage

Joined: Oct 2020
D
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
D
Joined: Oct 2020
The question of cooldowns vs no cooldowns is probably moot. Larian signed a contract with Wizards of the Coast to produce a 5e D&D video game. I am sure that there are provisions to change some rules where needed for playability, but something like cooldowns would be a dramatic change to the structure of 5e, and there is really no way you could spin them as a playability change. I suspect adding them in a big way would go against their contract and get them in trouble with Wizards.

I am sure that Larian will eventually make another game in the divinity universe, and you will likely find cooldowns there.

Joined: Oct 2015
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2015
Originally Posted by Seiryu Suta
Originally Posted by TheFoxWhisperer
But that is making equal assumptions about people being here for the Larian brand. Sure, the forum activity could easily be a vocal minority but if you say you make assumptions one way, you also cannot make assumptions the other way. I personally know more people who share my thoughts and wanted either a BG game or a 5e DND game rather than a Larian game.

Actually the 'Vocal Minority' is what's going on in the forums. To try and say that's what skews the conversation to 1 side of the purist mentality, is a can of worms that I don't want to bother with opening. I could state that purists are a huge group of people on most gaming forums, but that's anecdotal, and spending my time trying to find data and statistics to prove that, is not something I care to do, or get into.

However, there is a big * here, Larian recently made a game, and grew its own, some could say grass-roots, fanbase. BG 1&2 are 20yrs old.
There was also a vocal minority at Blizzcon. The people who visit Blizzcon do not represent normal people. Normal people might love Diablo Immortal as a mobile game!

That doesn't mean you can walk up to them and tell them they're wrong for not liking what you like.

It doesn't matter why we're here in the forums as such. What I meant is that Larian bought access to the Baldur's Gate brand for a reason -- in order to access the good will of that brand among the "vocal minority".

I enjoy other games. But I'm excited about Baldur's Gate because of what that brand represents, and I'm enjoying what Larian have done with the story and character customisation so far.

Anyway, there will be opportunities to diversify the brand in future. Firaxis did this when they released XCOM: Chimera Squad, a game that broke away from many of the elements that made XCOM what it is. However, they were only able to do that after looking after the vocal minority. There is a reason they didn't call it "XCOM 3".

Originally Posted by TheFoxWhisperer
That is still assumption. Without data, you do not really know if it is the vocal minority. You would need to look further than just the forum here, it is a view I have seen on reddit plenty as well. That in itself does not say much, aside give me a vague perspective with my immediate experiences, but without data, you cannot just assume (like you told people not to assume). It does go both ways.
Seiryu Suta just instinctively knows what's popular, I guess. I'm kind of amused by the idea that Larian would do market research by just finding one person in the forum and asking him what he thinks is really popular.

Originally Posted by RBarbare
They already exist. The biggest one is Waukeen's Rest - if you get too close to it and then leave, when you come back, the councilor is gone, Bynryn is dead, and all but the one praying soldier have left. Also, when you start those quests, the fire gets worse in several areas over time and will kill Bynren and put smoke on the councilor's escape route if you wait too long.
Whether or not they already exist, I still don't like it.

Originally Posted by TheFoxWhisperer
Originally Posted by spectralhunter
And I disagree that cooldowns are more tactical. It's less. In 5e, the wizard has the choice to cast fireball twice in one encounter if the party feels they need it. Sure, the wizard can't cast it anymore until a long rest but the choice is there. And in a desperate situation, it may be deemed necessary. Cooldowns? Nope. Not an option.

And this example is just the fireball too. It gets more complex too: Do you use your 3rd level spelllslot for that counterspell? Or will you upcast a Sleep spell to put the big beastie to sleep? Maybe you will haste the fighter instead because the enemies are fire resistant?

With how 5e spells work, as well as spellslots and upcasting of spells for bigger effect, it becomes a LOT more tactical than cooldowns can ever be, really.
I dont want to oversell it. Cooldowns can be great, but spell slots can be too. The tactics are different.

In the end I think the comparisons are fruitless because removing skill slots would mean abandoning most of 5E. I'd rather talk about what people don't like about the skill slot system and how to make that system better. Let's stop trying to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Sidenote: I think it'd be really cool if D&D had decks of cards you could use to represent skill slots that look like something from Magic: The Gathering. I feel like casting Fireball would feel a little more rewarding if you're picking a card (with some beautiful art) out of your hand and slapping it down as you declare your action. Haha.

Last edited by Ayvah; 31/01/21 10:09 PM.
Joined: Apr 2020
Location: Boston , MA
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Apr 2020
Location: Boston , MA
Rest mechanics are what differentiate D&D from all these generic RPGs.

The question is how to create better rest strategies instead of switching to cool-downs. Like Solasta, that implemented bondfires where you can long rest in dungeons.

Joined: Dec 2020
S
apprentice
OP Offline
apprentice
S
Joined: Dec 2020
Originally Posted by TheFoxWhisperer
Originally Posted by Seiryu Suta
Originally Posted by TheFoxWhisperer
But that is making equal assumptions about people being here for the Larian brand. Sure, the forum activity could easily be a vocal minority but if you say you make assumptions one way, you also cannot make assumptions the other way. I personally know more people who share my thoughts and wanted either a BG game or a 5e DND game rather than a Larian game.

Actually the 'Vocal Minority' is what's going on in the forums. To try and say that's what skews the conversation to 1 side of the purist mentality, is a can of worms that I don't want to bother with opening. I could state that purists are a huge group of people on most gaming forums, but that's anecdotal, and spending my time trying to find data and statistics to prove that, is not something I care to do, or get into.

That is still assumption. Without data, you do not really know if it is the vocal minority. You would need to look further than just the forum here, it is a view I have seen on reddit plenty as well. That in itself does not say much, aside give me a vague perspective with my immediate experiences, but without data, you cannot just assume (like you told people not to assume). It does go both ways.
You are taking my comment out of context. We are in fact the vocal minority. The majority doesn't bother coming onto forums. I said we cant state whether that minority is actually skewed in any certain direction from the majority that isn't here voicing their interests. I also pointed out that my experience that there are more purists on forums, is anecdotal, and I personally have no interest in using my time to track the stats to figure it out. Therefore I was saying its not an assumption anyone can make.

Last edited by Seiryu Suta; 01/02/21 02:01 AM.
Joined: Dec 2020
S
apprentice
OP Offline
apprentice
S
Joined: Dec 2020
Originally Posted by spectralhunter
Originally Posted by Seiryu Suta
Cooldowns also add strategy, having to think about when to use them, and cooldowns are also the core mechanic most other rpgs use, some use mana, some combine both.

I don't know if you are familiar with 5e but I think cooldowns would be a mistake. I think one of the biggest mistakes Larian made in EA is not including level 5. It's a major bump in power for the characters and people who are unfamiliar do not understand what lies ahead. Martial classes get their second attack. Casters get 3rd level spells. It's the reason why levels 5-10 are considered the sweet spot of D&D PnP. You have just enough powers to make things interesting and you aren't bogged down with too many powers that drag out combat.

I'm going to use everyone's favorite spell: Fireball. It's a 3rd level spell that does 8D8 AoE fire damage spell. It's auto hit and if you make a DEX save you take half damage. Notice a fighter would have to use action surge and hit with all four of his attacks to match the damage of one fireball. And that's just one monster. Fireball is AoE. Clearly, the spell is significantly powerful. Wizards can cast it twice per long rest.

Now, if the resting mechanic is used correctly, wizards shouldn't be able to spam fireball. They would have to conserve it for either large groups of minions or a boss. Larian NEEDS to fix the resting mechanic or yes, like you said, people will just long rest before every encounter. Have four wizards and drop eight fireballs. There's nothing that would be able to absorb that at level 5.

Let's go over cooldowns then. How would you implement fireball cooldowns? Every encounter? That's OP as you can see. A longer timer? Well that means players will just stand around twiddling their thumbs until it recharges which is equally pointless as the current resting system. Nerf it so it becomes a glorified fire bolt? I guess but then it takes away from a hallmark wizard spell. As you can see, just throwing out cooldowns in 5e presents lots of new issues. And this is just one spell.

And I disagree that cooldowns are more tactical. It's less. In 5e, the wizard has the choice to cast fireball twice in one encounter if the party feels they need it. Sure, the wizard can't cast it anymore until a long rest but the choice is there. And in a desperate situation, it may be deemed necessary. Cooldowns? Nope. Not an option.

D&D isn't about spamming powers. It's about resource management. As players you had to make calculated risks on when to use your most powerful weapons at the right time. Old school, if you failed to do that, you'd die. But D&D has been watered down so much it's actually hard to have a character killed. I never felt concerned for my characters playing BG3. Why? Because the game mechanics are a joke. There's no threat. No sense of adventure. It's just a bunch of OP characters plowing through the game. It lacks depth of tactics. Perhaps that's why games like Darkest Dungeon and Dark Souls are popular now. They actually offer challenge to the player. But that's another topic.
You are kind of making my point for me. You are saying that you only want to cast fireball. As I previously stated cooldowns make you rely on a more broader set of tactics, than just casting the "best spell" of that level every time, only deviating when you have a fight that has resistance to that spell. It also doesn't become OP, if you know that every encounter everyone will have access to all their abilities everytime, you can ramp up encounters to be more challenging, and take out small encounters that would be utterly meaningless. Also the other side gets the same access that you do. Nobody twiddles their thumbs in other games with cooldowns, waiting for the right one to come off CD, this is not a good faith argument at all.

One of the things as a DM/GM you always have to consider when making encounters is how difficult to make them. if you just make them all the same challenge rating, when they have to do multiple fights back to back in a dungeon, your party will either run thru it, or die horribly. Setting up pace and balance of encounters is a huge timesink, and in PnP you can at least make adjustments on the fly.

Also if you really need to cast that fireball a 2nd time, it will come off of cooldown in time for you to use it again, or you might have to adapt to the battle, because the enemies aren't grouped anymore.

Originally Posted by TheFoxWhisperer
Originally Posted by spectralhunter
And I disagree that cooldowns are more tactical. It's less. In 5e, the wizard has the choice to cast fireball twice in one encounter if the party feels they need it. Sure, the wizard can't cast it anymore until a long rest but the choice is there. And in a desperate situation, it may be deemed necessary. Cooldowns? Nope. Not an option.

And this example is just the fireball too. It gets more complex too: Do you use your 3rd level spelllslot for that counterspell? Or will you upcast a Sleep spell to put the big beastie to sleep? Maybe you will haste the fighter instead because the enemies are fire resistant?

With how 5e spells work, as well as spellslots and upcasting of spells for bigger effect, it becomes a LOT more tactical than cooldowns can ever be, really.

You can do a few things for this, one way would to simply "charge" a spell making it a more potent spell, adding a +1 to cooldown time, or +2, etc. You could even make it so some are +1 for the first 1-3, then the next 1-3 is only +1 more. You can add in passive scaling for some as well. Some abilities scale off of modifiers too/instead.

Page 8 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

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