Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Programming is hard, guys. Saying 'the devs are lazy' helps no one.

Yeah, this patch actually increased the surface management in a big way. I just tested to see if they fixed the "silence doesn't Gut from calling for help" bug and the electric ice surface is used against the party by Gut's followers. (Gut still yells despite being in a zone of silence) The goblins break the strategically positioned water barrels, one warlock electrifies and the other freezes. Now the party is prone on electric ice.

Haven't tired it but obvious counter this is barrellmancy -- either blow Gut up or blow up to avoid the fight or blow up the smokepowder reserves in the storage room. Then Gut's followers have to stand in a fire surface and the two surfaces come together to make steam.

I'll see if I can electrify a fog cloud spell this weekend. BG3 still a hybrid but this patch made it resemble its DOS parent more than ever.

Seriously, now someone is just sounding like an apologist for a failing game trying to remain relevant in the face of constant criticism from all but its most stringent supporters.

These forums are primarily for the discussion of Larian Studio's Baldur's Gate 3 game.

Please don't start bringing in long posts about other games and the minutia of their updates. If you feel that such posts are relevant to BG3, at least put them in spoilers.

As above, but you have already been warned about your abrasive tone. This time you will have a 7-day suspension.

Taken in conjunction with your post on another thread, the ban is now permanent.

Some posts have gone away. To reiterate Sadurian's post from just a few hours ago:


Some people may consider themselves on their final warning.

...

Yeah I'm just gonna request a lock at this point.

This thread really DID sound better in my head when I was bored at work. It has clearly turned into a terrible idea by this point.

On second thought, something was just announced for Solasta that is making me rethink a few things.

A Dungeon Maker.


An update like this kind of shows that Solasta's priorities lie firmly in the combat/gameplay experience, and it doesn't make any attempts to pretend that it's going to be anything but that with how the writing is presented. Maybe the same should hold true for how we're supposed to view BG3 - a highly cinematic experience first and foremost, with a combat system that tries to be as much of a sandbox as possible, no matter how much certain factions here want it to conform more to 5E in varying levels of strictness. Both vastly different experiences - and the question there would be, is that really so much of a bad thing in the end?

D:OS2 had a similar toolset that let you create your own adventures, but it never took off at all because it was supposedly extremely cumbersome to try to create things with it, so we probably wouldn't expect such a thing in BG3. And quite frankly, BG3 probably doesn't need to waste precious resources trying such a thing again.

(Some might take the way the post is worded as me being disappointed with Solasta's latest update. It's the exact opposite, I think it's pretty freaking great because it basically means Solasta is now firmly set on its own path away from BG3's shadow, with something that might spawn a modding community that persists through entire decades like Neverwinter Nights. BG3 and Solasta are going to end up being amazing in the end for completely different reasons. A couple of us, perhaps including myself, would probably benefit from the practical approach of just letting both games do their own thing.)

the DOS2 dungeon builder was horrendous. There were basically a small set of pre-made rooms and caverns that you could tile together. There was no actual user creativity involved, more like work to overcome the hindrances of the toolset.

I really don't understand this argument.
There should be no "choice" between the game being this cinematic experience and also having great combat, that is, being a faithful adaptation of the 5e mechanics.
BG and IWD are both great games that have the exact same mechanics and no one ever thought they were the same.

My argument is a bit roundabout. For one, I don't really expect Larian to really listen to our feedback (or they simply can't due to the choice of engine and that it's far too late for them to turn back on that), ergo, I'm not going to bother talking about the game in a way that misrepresents what it actually is. So instead of wasting my efforts spending entire afternoons typing out huge essays in these parts, I've learned to simply accept BG3 for what it simply is. It's a highly cinematic experience with a very sandbox-type combat system.

Indeed, I found myself enjoying BG3 again. What changed? I simply stopped formulating my strategies around it being a DnD game, and adapted towards approaching it with the mindset of a D:OS game, which I enjoyed for largely different reasons.

Coming from you, this ought to be a huge wake up call to a company who openly admitted they were afraid people would confuse BG3 with their DOS games.

Larian needs to take a step back and reassess.

I've had the same experience except instead of stop thinking it's a D&D game, I had to stop thinking of it as a BG game and try to enjoy it for what it is. That unfortunately means ignoring all the companions right now as i don't like any of them, but the game has promise, it's just not a BG game right now imo.

Yeah, I agree. P4 / Panel from Hell 2 made me fully realize that the BG3 name/setting/D&D part is just marketing/cash-grab, but BG3 definitely still has a fighting chance to end up being a pretty good RPG. Still, it would be nice if Larian actually managed to get out of their DOS comfort zone a bit more (both in terms of gameplay/mechanics and writing).

Could have left us with OP cantrips if the rest of the game won't be D&D then. To extrapolate, it greatly impacts what the fan feedback should be and what Larian should implement from that feedback what the end product is supposed to look like. And to the extent there's lack of clarity from Larian, it makes it hard to give feedback. And then people get frustrated. Like the wrong thing could have been implemented because most of the fans were confused about what the game was even supposed to be then the entire thing becomes worse for it.

Like right now I'm freaking out how druids have been nerfed to the ground and it's not clear if this is intentional or if Larian is working on it with regard to, for instance, controlling concentration spells that existed before you wild shaped. With slightly better communication, I wouldn't be worried because I'd know one way or the other, whether I liked the outcome or not. As it is, I'm looking at the possibility of a good outcome or a bad outcome, so I experience some level of anxiety.

And you may say, well, they never promised they would implement it this way. But in a sense, by saying they're trying to do 5e, with some changes, you don't expect major core class functions to be dead. And controlling concentration spells while wild shaped, for instance, is a very core druid feature. This is actually the first time I ever felt really nervous about this game's development so far. Like lighting people on fire with a cantrip isn't that big of a deal comparatively to me, as that's just sort of a damage function feature. This is about how you play and strategize as the class. It takes a class that's interesting and requires a lot of thought and actually gives it fewer options in beast mode than a fighter. I don't think it's a hyperbole to say if the implementation of call lightning is screwed up, you're not playing a druid.