Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 295
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 295
Originally Posted by Try2Handing
Originally Posted by Nobody_Special
It is a computer game that is adhereing to the D&D rules as closely as possible.

It's also supposedly the sequel to an established franchise, in which a party of 6 is a core element. Both "4" and "6" are in your "rules", and there's no rule that says "4" is closer to the rules than "6", so your "adhering to rules" argument is completely meaningless. Not to mention Larian has the ability to change the rules if necessary.


Do you just read a whole post before you reply or just pick something out to argue about.? I also said this

Originally Posted by Nobody_Special
As I said, I understand why they would only give us 4 players, but I am hoping for 6.



Joined: Oct 2017
Posts: 556
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2017
Posts: 556
@Nobody_Special
You spent one whole paragraph to argue that the game "tries to adhere to rules as closely as possible", which was supposedly the reason why you said "I understand why they would make a party size of 4". You also cited two examples that have nothing to do with the game, a "starter set" and an "essential kit". You would "understand" because "it's part of the rules". That was your argument. And that's why I pointed out that, that reasoning is dumb. "What you hope for" is irrelevant.

Are we clear about this now? Good.

Last edited by Try2Handing; 13/07/19 09:28 PM.

"We make our choices and take what comes and the rest is void."
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 295
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 295
Originally Posted by Try2Handing
Originally Posted by Nobody_Special
It is a computer game that is adhereing to the D&D rules as closely as possible.

It's also supposedly the sequel to an established franchise, in which a party of 6 is a core element. Both "4" and "6" are in your "rules", and there's no rule that says "4" is closer to the rules than "6", so your "adhering to rules" argument is completely meaningless. Not to mention Larian has the ability to change the rules if necessary.


First they are not my rules they are WotC rules written on their products or product pages. Thus the links above.
I was not arguing that there should be only 4, just stating where 4 players might come into play.

I explained that the Tables in the DMG are gear towards a party of 4.

I explained that most games being played on the internet are with 4 people.

I also said I can see where Larian might just give us just 4 players.

I ALSO said I hope they give us 6 players.

So don't come at me with the idea that I am against having a party of 6.

Are we Clear Now? Good

Joined: Oct 2017
Posts: 556
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2017
Posts: 556
It’s obvious to me who is the one who’s not “clear” here.

No, you’re not against a party size of 6; that’s obvious enough. You can hope for whatever you want, I simply don’t care. That’s not the point.

Imagine they implement a party size of 4, then explain to players the reason for that is because of any one of the things you “explained”. That would be beyond dumb to me, but I suppose there are also players like you who would readily accept that kind of explanation.

What I’m saying is, if they would make this kind of change to a core element such as this, fans of the original games, including me, would expect a much better reason than anything you have come up with so far.

“Because the DMG is geared...” - when Larian has free reign to create a game scope and to balance the game in a way such that a party of 6 should not be a problem? When the two 20-year-old original games already established a party size of 6?

“Most games played on the internet” - what games? The Starter Set and the Essential Kit? You must be joking. And what do they have to do with BG3?

No, you’re not arguing that the party size should be 4. You’re just citing the most ridiculous reasons why you would accept it if Larian gives you that. But I suppose you have the right to have low expectations.


"We make our choices and take what comes and the rest is void."
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 5,327
Duchess of Gorgombert
Offline
Duchess of Gorgombert
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 5,327
Er, guys, how about you stick to arguing about the party size (or even agreeing, as the case may be) instead of arguing about who said what about the party size...?


J'aime le fromage.
Joined: Oct 2017
Posts: 556
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2017
Posts: 556
Some people are just no good at comprehending what someone else is really saying and what that person's points really are. Before you know it, it becomes a game of repeating yourself and explaining what you really said in previous posts.

But this one's on me. I started it. I'll try harder to refrain from questioning comments that I find too dumb to bother with. My bad.

Last edited by Try2Handing; 14/07/19 07:41 AM.

"We make our choices and take what comes and the rest is void."
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 108
member
Offline
member
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 108
Originally Posted by Omegaphallic
I don't think a single character holds the position of "PC", like I said I think the party itself is going to be the "PC" aka the protangonist, I don't think the plot will centre on a single character like it did in BG 1 & 2, Pillars of Eternity 1 & 2, Planescape Torment, Tides of Numenera, Pathfinder: Kingmaker and so on.

Any particular reason you think this?

Just curious. I have not read any recent updates.

Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 35
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 35
I'm actually hoping that BG3 does indeed feel like a tabletop game in a lot of respects==which if the AI is good enough will include not just simulation of a GM but also that the other party members... and in SP mode this means joinable NPCs... think and behave for themselves independently but also synergistically with the decisions that I as a player controlling just my PC makes.

Up to six party members as such.

Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,364
S
veteran
Offline
veteran
S
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,364
thatd be nice , but i doubt it, that would be some serious AI stuff, even having a dynamic "AI DM" would be quite the new thing

Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 35
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 35
Having the game engine simulate the role of the DM is a main goal that both Vinke and Mearles keep repeating though, along with saying their aim is for BG3 to "revolutionize" the CRPG genre.

Last edited by Lemernis; 17/07/19 10:06 AM.
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,364
S
veteran
Offline
veteran
S
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,364
yeah ok, but thats marketing talk.
the Game engine already simulates the DM by rolling the dice for you, having pre placed monsters and NPCs, that sort of stuff.
What you discribe would be something ackin to the defunct Everquest Next.

I can see larian attempting to do something like that, but i dont think theyll do it with BG3, from how i see it, BG3 will be very much a CRPG with fixed quests, enemies, potentially no respawning ones like the OS games and a set story.

Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 176
A
member
Offline
member
A
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 176
I can't wait to read arguments from someone here about 4 party characters will be more tactical /s.

this is my take. It's high possibility it's 4 party character perhaps with 1 added DM. as I said it's a DOS clone. I really hope Larian prove me wrong.

But we will all see smile

Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 35
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 35
Originally Posted by Sordak
yeah ok, but thats marketing talk.
the Game engine already simulates the DM by rolling the dice for you, having pre placed monsters and NPCs, that sort of stuff.
What you discribe would be something ackin to the defunct Everquest Next.

I can see larian attempting to do something like that, but i dont think theyll do it with BG3, from how i see it, BG3 will be very much a CRPG with fixed quests, enemies, potentially no respawning ones like the OS games and a set story.


Oh yeah, what they will actually be able to achieve in that aspect is a whole other matter!

Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 108
member
Offline
member
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 108
Originally Posted by Lemernis
Having the game engine simulate the role of the DM is a main goal that both Vinke and Mearles keep repeating though, along with saying their aim is for BG3 to "revolutionize" the CRPG genre.

Maybe they keep repeating it because there really will be a DM as a player choice.... because it's a multiplayer only game.....?

Who the hell knows....

Joined: Sep 2017
Posts: 1,187
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Sep 2017
Posts: 1,187
In DoS2 you had the possibility to use the "DM mode" in your custom campaign (not in the OC) I hope they keep it that way in BG3.

Joined: Jul 2019
Posts: 649
addict
OP Offline
addict
Joined: Jul 2019
Posts: 649
Originally Posted by Archaven
I can't wait to read arguments from someone here about 4 party characters will be more tactical /s.

this is my take. It's high possibility it's 4 party character perhaps with 1 added DM. as I said it's a DOS clone. I really hope Larian prove me wrong.

But we will all see smile


They have already proven you wrong, the graphics art style is radically different from DOS 2, it's rules style is modified D&D 5e very different from DOS2, the setting is, different from DOS2, and more.

Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,364
S
veteran
Offline
veteran
S
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,364
Yeah sure multiplayer only.
Persecution complex at work.

At this point i hope the game will be a 4 player turn based chess game specifically set in chult, and Bhaal is never mentioned, and you read in an off colour remark that "the drow gets poisoned" ending is canon , just to see you rage

Joined: May 2010
Posts: 5,327
Duchess of Gorgombert
Offline
Duchess of Gorgombert
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 5,327
Stop sniping, guys. You can make your point without snarking at each other.


J'aime le fromage.
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 584
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 584
I'm raising the topic from the dead to ask if we have had more info on this ?
And just to be mean with everyone I'll vote for 5 PC in the group. Because with 5 demonologists we could make enhanced invocations.

(Actually I'd prefer 3 PC in the party because I don't like micro-managing much but I know I'm a minority out there).

Joined: Sep 2019
Posts: 8
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: Sep 2019
Posts: 8
I prefer up to six just like in BG2. It gives more depth, especially if the npc's are interesting and banter with each other.

Page 2 of 3 1 2 3

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