Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General How accurate is ruleset implementation?

Namely, in D&D there are a number of things players and monsters can outside of their turn, like reactions, immediate actions, bonus actions and legendary actions. Eventually will we be able to use the full spectrum of actions or will the rules be only half arsed implemented like in NWN?

Larian said that they are trying to put in as much of the rues as they can. Some things are changed to fit the medium, like spell ranges are often reduced. Actions, bonus actions and reactions are all in the game.

Larian's first duty is to make an enjoyable AAA video game, not a D&D 5E simulator.

If the 5E rules don't translate to a video game or are un-fun to play then Larian will change them just like any DM making house rules.
The main difference being, unlike most DMs, Larian's house rules are approved by Wizards of the Coast.

A useful quotation from the DMG:



Larian is the DM and they are in charge of the game.
If the 5E rules make for a fun video game they will use them, otherwise they will change them as they see fit.

This. Larian is going to do some really impressive things, but I think that a few people may be disappointed if they think that this is going to be a strict, by-the-book campaign like they'd have with their friends.

Just like mobile cashgrabs "house rules", just like sword coast legends "house rules" and so on.

We don't have a decent D&D adaptation since nwn2(2006) and even nwn2 requires heavy modding to be faithful to P&P(spell fixes and warlock reworked are must have mods). There are so many cases of "change as they see fit" producing worse effects.

I do not recall seeing them, to be honest.



My point is that some mechanics are essential to the challenge, and they add a dynamic twist to otherwise semi-stale turn-based combat.

I think it is not necessarily fun to make everything by the book. Turned based combat is also used to mimic real battle. I am not that interested to see dice-rolls or the exact "%" of miss when I try to attack, but I guess I have to try to decide.

Same with jump, they made it bigger, so it is more fun in the game. I think they should be free to modify everything, that makes sense.

The pen and paper version uses imagination for fuel, and the operating system is the human brain of the Dungeon Master. Any adaptation away from that system is going to be more limited by definition. A computer game requires that all the content and the systems be put into the game, into a sealed box which cannot be modified on the fly. Making a fun system has to be the priority, because there is no DM to smooth out the wrinkles and add in totally original content.

But having no +caster level on clases like pale master on nwn1 and only one summon limit is not fun. Arcane archers incapable of imbuing any element but fire, which is the most resistent element too, not fun. Warlocks unable to grapple enemies with chilling tentacles cuz instead of caster level + 8 BAB, they have a fix +5 to hit on nwn2 is not fun too. Removing spell slots in favor of the boring wow style cooldown spellcasting on sword cast legends is not fun too.

And this not talking about mobile cashgrabs...

The reason why we are wanting an more faithful adaptation is cuz the "lets bend the rules in favor of <<insert any excuse>> " produced worse games. Even Pathfinder Kingmaker, has his fair share of problems due bending rules. For eg, sneak attack. An arcane trickster with hellfire ray can apply 6 sneak attacks per round which is ludicrous in that game. I love pathfinder kingmaker, but if was more faithful, would be even better.

What should't be faithfully adapted is things that can't work due media limitations.

For eg? Wish spell. Not even the most advanced AI can act like an good DM with Wish. So, an "wish list" which the player chooses like a dialog from BG2 is the best solution. And 2e/3.5e had far more hard to translate spells. Mainly on epic levels. Raise island for eg. Not mentioning divination spells.

I see that someone gets it, finally, instead of brigading. Your point about Pale Master / RDD in NWN was especially painful, and completely unnecessary to boot, as they could have added caster levels quite easily. But instead NO.

And you are quite right - BG2 had a much more faithful adaptation of spells like Wish or Spell sequencer. Which were left out of NWN.

/sigh. You can please some of the people some of the time... as was stated this is not a 5e emulator. There are too many nuances to fit into a video game. Enjoy it for what it is or hate it, but hold judgement until you play it. I hate playing with rules lawyers. Player input is fine but eventually you have to let the DM (Larian) run their game.

Ironic that you argue for faithful 5E implementation while taking a swipe a turn based combat. You can't have faithful 5e combat without it being turn based.
As you haven't played BG3 yet you don't know what has changed nor whether or not those changes improve the game, so I'm not really sure what your point is.

To be fair, you can mod nwn1 and nwn2 for a more P&P like experience.

Spell fixes for nwn2 or warlock reworked makes spellcasters playable. And on NWN1, PRC mod is very P&P like.



I never saw an alteration on rules which improved the gameplay...

TB/RT debate has its own topic. Please take any further discussion regarding the subject there; thanks.

Well, your choices are to either get over it, or walk away. Because the original rules are designed for a human player to be interpreting them and outputting the results. That doesn't exist.

Yes, but some things are broken without redemption: Undeads have no CON score in PNP, while the game half-arse it with a CON score of 10 which actually makes them weaker, incorporeal creatures have STR drain attacks while the game gives them a d4, same issues with constructs, no "at will" abilities usable by monsters, no recharge for Dragon Breaths, arbitrary familiar list with no chance of expansion... the list goes on and on. Was it really necessary to make these changes to preserve gameplay?



Your candour is heartening, as you readily admit to be Clueless. My point is, I am not disputing that some rules won't work in a video game, while others will, I'm just asking how accurate the implementation is. Some feats, such as Mage Slayer, make use of reactions and some spells disable them altogether. I don't expect the "ready" mechanic to be implemented, as that would be too difficult, but stuff like Legendary actions make solo bosses viable, rather than forcing them to be minion-fests.

And you still din't showed to me an single case of an game bending the rules and making the game more fun...

Quite the contrary, there are TONS of examples of games bending the rules and making the game worse. Low magic age for eg, decided to go for cooldowns over spell slots and now, is implementing spell slots since nobody liked it.



Yep. You are right.

Enemies on NWN1 also has RETARDED AI. Undead clerics casting heal on themselves for eg is the most ludicrous thing.

NWN1 also hardcodded a lot of spellbooks and feats which made pretty hard for mods like PRC to make the game more P&P like.

The mod who adds Dread Necromancer class for nwn2, had to half implement most Lich "features" at lv 20.

I didn't realize you were demanding answers to gotcha questions. That's an extremely generic statement. To even begin to answer that, I would need to have played a game that you are familiar with, based on a rule-set, and know intimately what the original rules were, and what the changes are.

I don't have my hands on BG 3, so I can't answer based on that game yet. Even once I do, it would be based on a not-yet-final rule-set.

Even if I could show you many rule changes that I, personally, think are improvements, fun is subjective, and you enjoy such things as missing 27 times in a row. Your blanket statement indicates that you're not likely to be persuaded anyway, no matter what I say.

Low DEX low level sorcerer on ToEE missed a lot when he ran out of spell slots. My other party members din't missed a lot.

But before you said that rule changes was good and necessary, now that are subjective. After the official EA launch, I will wait few days to see how the rules are implemented. Then I decide between purchasing early or waiting for modders to make the game more P&P like. Low Magic Age stayed a long time in my wishlist before they announced that they will give the option ot use vancian magical system instead of cooldowns. If Larian decided to ruin spells like animate dead and animate objects, I will just wait until modders fixes those spells to buy the game.

I readily admit that your posts are pointless and am thankful for Larian's ignore function.