Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
#770819 24/04/21 02:23 AM
Joined: Apr 2021
A
alper Offline OP
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
A
Joined: Apr 2021
Dice System

All i do is going back load like everyone else doing. Not fun, just boring and annoying. Just remove it from game and give back lovely ability point giving.

Misses

Ok, got it. Game make us to pick better place for accurate shots but i can't get it, why face to face with enemy is not enough? Why do we have to always choose a high place or get behind the enemy. This does not add a strategic depth to the game, it misses all the fun after a while. On the other hand, after every missing shots, players gonna take back to load. C'mon guys, do you wish us to kill our hours in waiting screen? I hope you fix this completely when the full version of the game release.

Poor Fight

Combat is not enjoyable as in divinity. Burn the ground, shock the blood, freeze the enemy.... Bring back them. I know that this game also has these features but it is not satisfying. Don't want to play whole game by running stealth and shooting millions times to deal 4 damage the enemy.

Joined: Jan 2021
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Jan 2021
Combat is the low point of the game right now. Larian's hombrew makes combat dull.

They've currently changed the dice twice in the player's favor. It's really highlighting that dice (random chance) isn't the issue. The problem isn't that dice can result in misses, but that the player has limited choices to make because of lop-sided mechanics.

Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Dialogue is much better than combat, but still could use a few improvements.

- More use of passive checks, where you're assumed to have rolled a 10 on the die. This would guarantee success on easy-mid level checks depending on your bonus.
- More "fun failure" options, where failing dialogue checks leads to new interesting situations and not just a loss of content. E.g., Saving the Tiefling Child from Kagha. A failure to persuade Kagha should result in additional options for you: Step in front of child, letting the snake attack you. Pre-emptively attack Kagha. Pre-emptively attack the snake. Choose to stand by and let it happen. Each of these would lead to different consequences, but this gives agency to the player instead of the dice, while still allowing the dice to affect which options are available to you.
- Visually adding modifiers to the roll instead of subtracting them from the DC would make the player feel like their character is more powerful. Right now you can't distinguish between an easy check and a large modifier so all characters feel ~equally effective at charisma checks.
- Letting you switch between characters mid-dialogue to choose the one with the best skills. Additionally, allow multiple characters to attempt a check, either individually or as a group for Advantage on the roll.

Joined: Mar 2021
J
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
J
Joined: Mar 2021
Originally Posted by alper
Dice System

All i do is going back load like everyone else doing. Not fun, just boring and annoying. Just remove it from game and give back lovely ability point giving.

Misses

Ok, got it. Game make us to pick better place for accurate shots but i can't get it, why face to face with enemy is not enough? Why do we have to always choose a high place or get behind the enemy. This does not add a strategic depth to the game, it misses all the fun after a while. On the other hand, after every missing shots, players gonna take back to load. C'mon guys, do you wish us to kill our hours in waiting screen? I hope you fix this completely when the full version of the game release.

Poor Fight

Combat is not enjoyable as in divinity. Burn the ground, shock the blood, freeze the enemy.... Bring back them. I know that this game also has these features but it is not satisfying. Don't want to play whole game by running stealth and shooting millions times to deal 4 damage the enemy.

The reason I never bought any games from the DOS series was because when I was researching the games, it became clear that it was built around the very features you highlight above. What I will play is a game that is loosely built around D&D and located within Forgotten Realms. When I lose a dice roll, I do not reload but accept the consequences of my failure. If that means an innocent kid dies or another goblin battle, so be it. I don’t want every swing I take to hit the enemy because enemies move, my character is still inexperienced, and a hit still needs to get through armor. In other words, there are many of us that bought this game that want to play a game where failure is an option and consequences have meaning. I am sorry this is not DOS 3, but I am sure you will get it in a few years. Nonetheless, If you really want to always succeed on a roll to hit or dialogue check, I have no doubt there will be some kind of story mode where everything is a success.

Joined: Dec 2016
Y
stranger
Offline
stranger
Y
Joined: Dec 2016
Agree
In my opinion the combat is so bad that I lose all interest in anything else
At best its boring at worst it's absolutely tedious and most of the time it just tedious. Just think of the goblin fight that took like 30min and all you did is wait for 5min to press "attack" once. No depth no variation just annoying as hell
And the story is also not great really
So it's a pretty big downgrade from the dos games

Last edited by Youphreak; 24/04/21 12:00 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
I mean the misses here are an issue with D&D. That is why they changed up goblins and made them essentially re-skinned bandits (low hp with high AC vs high hp with low AC).

We are playing the game from a DM's perspective - we have X characters we control and if they all miss it is annoying. But unlike a DM you actually want to win.

But hey, I for one enjoy the high ground stuff - verticality is very much absent in my 5e DnD games that I run/play because it slows down combat.

Joined: Mar 2021
J
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
J
Joined: Mar 2021
Originally Posted by Youphreak
Agree
In my opinion the combat is so bad that I lose all interest in anything else
At best its boring at worst it's absolutely tedious and most of the time it just tedious. Just think of the goblin fight that took like 30min and all you did is wait for 5min to press "attack" once. No depth no variation just annoying as hell
And the story is also not great really
So it's a pretty big downgrade from the dos games

D&D is not for everyone. Fortunately you can always go back to DOS and if you wait a few years, I am sure you will have a shiny new iteration of DOS to play. BG3 is a game that is at least notionally built off of 5E mechanics and its story takes place in the Forgotten Realms. I happen to like it a great deal and the things I would like improved are the reduction of the over exaggerated arcade mechanics that we inherited from DOS, but I enjoy it in spite of these petty annoyances. You are of course entitled to your opinion, but you should understand that many of us are happy that they didn’t make BG3 a DOS clone.

Joined: Aug 2014
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Aug 2014
And I hate the DOS ruleset to the point where I can't play those games. =)

That said, BG3's combat is awful even from a D&D point of view. It's like playing with a DM who doesn't understand how stuff works.

Luckily for DOS fans, there will probably be a DOS3 after BG3. BG3 needs to be more D&D though, it's not satisfying as it is.

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Having BOTH turn base and real time with pause would of solved these <minor> encounters boredom. Use real time for a more chaotic action pack quick battles, and tactical turn base for more serious mobs.
But oh well. Only Pathfinder Wrath of the Righteous has the common sense of doing this now, and its turning out to be amazing fun that way.

Last edited by mr_planescapist; 24/04/21 02:30 PM.
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
I agree that combats aren't really satisfying especially after a few hours. I really fear for the 80+ hours playthrough but anyway...

Missing is really a problem. Not to me but this is a feedback we heard a lot. Larian gave us 2 easy solutions not to miss but as OP said, we always have to go higher or behind our ennemies.

D&D have a lot of possibilities to increase our %to hit but there's only 2 valuable in BG3 and this really decrease the depth of combats.

On the other hand creatures AC/choices are made with the assumption we'll have advantage EACH TURN. As a results : missing is a problem and the game is unplayable if you don't have an advantage/aren't higher/aren't behind.

(Question to D&D players : is advantage something you always HAVE to care about in the TT ?)

That's why in BG3 flat bonuses for a good position looks like a great solution.
It would more or less help us to reduce misses without overshadowing the various D&D possibilities.

Combining advantages from D&D + various flat bonuses from BG3 (+ loaded dices) could totally solve the missing issue if Larian want to stick with these creatures AC/HP.

On the other hand the D&D possibilities to have an advantage often require you to spend an action to have the bonus on the next turn .. which means combats would be slower.

If 1 or 2 characters have to spend their actions to cast faery fire or something I guess a lot of players would have the feeling not to have enough meaningfull things to do during their turns ... And this is something I understand.

That's also why a party size of 4 is too restrictive.
Assuming having an advantage will remain necessary, an increased party size would give us more things to do/turn even if we spend a few actions just "to help" other characters to increase their %to hit.

Summary :
Custom flat bonuses rather than Highround/backstab advantage + an increased party size would :


- allow some players not to care about advantage at all if the flat bonus is high enough ("easy" mode)

- allow us to combine flat bonuses with advantage to increase our %to hit even more, increasing the depths of combats at the same time. ("normal to hard" mode)

- bring back overshadowed spells and features as valuable things to do, increasing at the same time our possibilities/creative solutions to have an advantage.

- not slowing down combats. The more you increase the party size, the faster are combats.

Last edited by Maximuuus; 24/04/21 02:51 PM.
Joined: Mar 2020
Location: Belfast
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Mar 2020
Location: Belfast
Originally Posted by alper
Ok, got it. Game make us to pick better place for accurate shots but i can't get it, why face to face with enemy is not enough? Why do we have to always choose a high place or get behind the enemy. This does not add a strategic depth to the game, it misses all the fun after a while. On the other hand, after every missing shots, players gonna take back to load. C'mon guys, do you wish us to kill our hours in waiting screen? I hope you fix this completely when the full version of the game release.

Poor Fight

Combat is not enjoyable as in divinity. Burn the ground, shock the blood, freeze the enemy.... Bring back them. I know that this game also has these features but it is not satisfying. Don't want to play whole game by running stealth and shooting millions times to deal 4 damage the enemy.
I think your impressions are correct, but I disagree with solutions.

Let’s start with surfaces. It is quite possible this game would be better off, if it was D:OS3. It however, tries to use DND system. Personally, I am not a fan of D:OS2 - I found combat too shallow and repetitive. That said, a thing that D:OSs do brilliantly is to take what is usually an abstract system (buffs and debuffs, status effects) and visualise it and place it on the actual game map. D:OSs surfaces might be on a shallow side as a system, but it’s more intuitive and easier to engage with in a cRPG setting.

The problem with Larian added rules (surfaces, backstab, height advantage, jump, push) in BG3 is that the game already has systems that fulfill that role. And for some reason Larian doesn’t restrict those new additions in any way (guaranteed damage from surfaces? Bonus action for push and jump, very high chance to hit using backstab&height). Having those addition be so widely available and powerful means it’s more practical to use those then try to engage with DND system buried underneath.

The result is a game system that revolves around those few new additions, rather then using a more complex system of DND, or repetitive, but still more nuanced, then jump/push&attack from high/backstab, system of D:OS2.

As to rolls - I don’t mind them. A good combat needs an unpredictable element - be it what enemy does next, fog of war, or at the very least - not all actions you attempt will work out. A big downgrade from D:OS1-D:OS2 was removing this unknowable element. Once you found an efficient chain of skills, they would work every single time, because D:OS2 had only two types of enemies - those with high physical Armor and those with magical armor. Armor system simply wasn’t a good enough replacement for save rolls.

From a tactics point of view, I do agree that it is more interesting to have to react to a unpredictable element, rather then having your actions work or not work on random. In the RPG, however, that also acts as a definition of the character you created - him trying to do something, doesn’t mean he will succeed, if his stats aren’t right. I don’t really like how DND handles checks cRPG, but removing them undermines the entire system.

Last edited by Wormerine; 24/04/21 02:45 PM.
Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
<snip> If 1 or 2 characters have to spend their actions to cast faery fire or something I guess a lot of players would have the feeling not to have enough meaningfull things to do during their turns ... And this is something I understand.<snip>
I don't really understand this line of thinking. Sure, Faerie Fire doesn't do damage, but it can give your allies advantage on up to 4 enemies for the entire rest of the fight. It's a tactically interesting decision and definitely more impactful than dealing damage once.

If I wanted to play a hack and slash, I'd play Diablo or any looter-shooter. What I enjoy about D&D is the tactics and using your different party members for different roles: the tank draws aggro and can prevent enemies from moving past them, wizard/druid supports with Area Control spells, Cleric buffs the party, fighter/rogue/barbarian deals damage, bard debuffs the enemies. Obviously a lot of turns will be spent dealing direct damage (cough cough fireball), but turns spent debuffing enemies can also be incredible rewarding.

Of course, in the current version of BG3 there's a lot of mitigating factors. Faerie Fire is almost completely useless due to the ease of getting advantage, Concentration spells are in the same boat because of the prevalence of auto-damage-dealing surfaces (via arrows&flasks), and combats are so slow (want to fight 20+ goblins, spending 70% of your time waiting?). The last two problems will theoretically be fixed by release which should encourage more use of buffing/debuffing/concentration spells...I hope.

Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
<snip> If 1 or 2 characters have to spend their actions to cast faery fire or something I guess a lot of players would have the feeling not to have enough meaningfull things to do during their turns ... And this is something I understand.<snip>
I don't really understand this line of thinking. Sure, Faerie Fire doesn't do damage, but it can give your allies advantage on up to 4 enemies for the entire rest of the fight. It's a tactically interesting decision and definitely more impactful than dealing damage once.

If I wanted to play a hack and slash, I'd play Diablo or any looter-shooter. What I enjoy about D&D is the tactics and using your different party members for different roles: the tank draws aggro and can prevent enemies from moving past them, wizard/druid supports with Area Control spells, Cleric buffs the party, fighter/rogue/barbarian deals damage, bard debuffs the enemies. Obviously a lot of turns will be spent dealing direct damage (cough cough fireball), but turns spent debuffing enemies can also be incredible rewarding.

Of course, in the current version of BG3 there's a lot of mitigating factors. Faerie Fire is almost completely useless due to the ease of getting advantage, Concentration spells are in the same boat because of the prevalence of auto-damage-dealing surfaces (via arrows&flasks), and combats are so slow (want to fight 20+ goblins, spending 70% of your time waiting?). The last two problems will theoretically be fixed by release which should encourage more use of buffing/debuffing/concentration spells...I hope.

This has no direct effect on the progress of the battle.

I 100% agree that it's an interresting tactical decision but it only belongs to D&D and its D20. The system is very interresting and deep and I like it for many reasons but it's less dynamic than what many can expect of a TB video game that is already "slow" by nature.

I don't really know/remember any tactical TB video games in which I have to spend entire turns to ""buff"" character(s) often during combats (>< before combats).

According to me Swen is wrong when he says that you can't sell "bless" to players but I think I understand what he means.

I guess Larian is trying to create something a bit more dynamic than Solasta (they failed for other reasons) and I really think it's a good choice to reach a wider audience.
And if things have to be a bit more dynamic/less slow, players have to deal damages more often.

I hope you'll forgive me not to answer about hack&slash smile
Anyway if I try to think about my ideal combats setting - I won't repeat, you know what I'm talking about - assuming they won't design the whole game once again I really think it could be a problem with a party of 4.

I still have to try the D&D rebalance mod.

Last edited by Maximuuus; 24/04/21 06:30 PM.
Joined: Mar 2021
member
Offline
member
Joined: Mar 2021
Originally Posted by JJRX5
D&D is not for everyone. Fortunately you can always go back to DOS and if you wait a few years, I am sure you will have a shiny new iteration of DOS to play. BG3 is a game that is at least notionally built off of 5E mechanics and its story takes place in the Forgotten Realms. I happen to like it a great deal and the things I would like improved are the reduction of the over exaggerated arcade mechanics that we inherited from DOS, but I enjoy it in spite of these petty annoyances. You are of course entitled to your opinion, but you should understand that many of us are happy that they didn’t make BG3 a DOS clone.


BG3 isn't DnD, it's DnD characters dropped into DOS.

Last edited by Grudgebearer; 24/04/21 06:22 PM.
Joined: Dec 2020
A
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
A
Joined: Dec 2020
In tabletop D&D advantage isn't something you can easily get by yourself. Instead, you have lots of spells/abilities/maneuvers that grant advantage to your allies. It was designed that way to increase social pleasure around the gaming table. If the party fighter downs the monster because my spell gave him advantage on his roll, we both get enjoyment from that moment. Also the D&D rules system was designed around the idea that advantage should be rare and you need to use up some resources to get it, so it feels meaningful every time.

In BG3, there's new ways to get advantage that are easy to obtain and don't require any outside help (backstab, height). That approach makes sense in a video game, but at the same time, lots of straight-from-D&D spells and abilities end up feeling useless and obsolete. Who can remember the last time they've used Shadowheart's Invoke Duplicity ability? Or carefully positioned Lae'zel to help Astarion trigger a sneak attack? Or spent a spell slot to cast Faerie Fire? These tactical options no longer seem worth the resources they cost, and you just end up focusing on maximizing your damage potential, while advantage gets mostly taken for granted. The result is the whole game ends up feeling much less tactical than standard D&D.

What's the solution to this problem? I don't know exactly, it's a complicated issue. That's up to Larian to figure out.

Last edited by agouzov; 24/04/21 06:33 PM.
Joined: Mar 2021
member
Offline
member
Joined: Mar 2021
Originally Posted by agouzov
In tabletop D&D advantage isn't something you can easily get by yourself. Instead, you have lots of spells/abilities/maneuvers that grant advantage to your allies. It was designed that way to increase social pleasure around the gaming table. If the party fighter downs the monster because my spell gave him advantage on his roll, we both get enjoyment from that moment. Also the D&D rules system was designed around the idea that advantage should be rare and you need to use up some resources to get it, so it feels meaningful every time.

It does not makes sense in a DnD video game that set out to adapt table-top rules to a PC game. There's literally nothing about the base mechanics of 5th edition, that are geared towards "social pleasure" rather than efficient and balanced combat resolution.

Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
Originally Posted by agouzov
In tabletop D&D advantage isn't something you can easily get by yourself. Instead, you have lots of spells/abilities/maneuvers that grant advantage to your allies. It was designed that way to increase social pleasure around the gaming table. If the party fighter downs the monster because my spell gave him advantage on his roll, we both get enjoyment from that moment. Also the D&D rules system was designed around the idea that advantage should be rare and you need to use up some resources to get it, so it feels meaningful every time.

In BG3, there's new ways to get advantage that are easy to obtain and don't require any outside help (backstab, height). That approach makes sense in a video game, but at the same time, lots of straight-from-D&D spells and abilities end up feeling useless and obsolete. Who can remember the last time they've used Shadowheart's Invoke Duplicity ability? Or carefully positioned Lae'zel to help Astarion trigger a sneak attack? Or spent a spell slot to cast Faerie Fire? These tactical options no longer seem worth the resources they cost, and you just end up focusing on maximizing your damage potential, while advantage gets mostly taken for granted. The result is the whole game ends up feeling much less tactical than standard D&D.

What's the solution to this problem? I don't know exactly, it's a complicated issue. It's up to Larian to figure it out.

May I assume that in TT advantage is something you'll usually try to have for "hard" encounters ?

I.E when you encounter a random/trash goblins group, will you always try to have an advantage not to be screwed by the D20 or isn't that necessary for you to succeed ?

In other word I should say : is "missing" a problem in the TT ?

I'm asking just to know if the missing issues of BG3 comes directly from the TT or from Larian's encounters design (i.e - too high CR creatures for lvl 1 characters)

Last edited by Maximuuus; 24/04/21 06:43 PM.
Joined: Dec 2020
A
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
A
Joined: Dec 2020
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
In other word I should say : is "missing" a problem in the TT ?

There's a reason the phrase "Dice Jail" was invented. wink

Last edited by agouzov; 24/04/21 06:54 PM.
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
Originally Posted by agouzov
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
In other word I should say : is "missing" a problem in the TT ?

There's a reason the phrase "Dice Jail" was invented. wink

Thx, fun thread smile
Looks like the D20 is merciless even in the TT.

Then I guess asking for additionnal possibilities to increase our %to hit and/or complaining about missing is reasonable.

What would you think about flat bonuses for highground and/or backstab rather than advantage then ?
(Sorry if you already gave your opinion about it and if I missed it but your previous messages are really interresting)

Last edited by Maximuuus; 24/04/21 07:05 PM.
Joined: Mar 2020
Location: Belfast
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Mar 2020
Location: Belfast
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
This has no direct effect on the progress of the battle.

I 100% agree that it's an interresting tactical decision but it only belongs to D&D and its D20. The system is very interresting and deep and I like it for many reasons but it's less dynamic than what many can expect of a TB video game that is already "slow" by nature.

I don't really know/remember any tactical TB video games in which I have to spend entire turns to ""buff"" character(s) often during combats (>< before combats).
This is completely wrong, but you might be right.

I did encounter attitude before, that if you aren't actively dishing out the damage you are wasting a turn. I do think modern tactical games underrate imporatance of thinking multiple turns at a time, rather then just immediate gain. That need to think ahead is what I thought helped LongWar to elevate XCOM into enjoyable territory - disabling, protecting, moving into position were a valiable and necessary choices, where is Vanilla XCOM most of the time the only question to ask is: what I kill next? Satisfying in short term, perhaps, but gets boring quickly.

Page 1 of 2 1 2

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