Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Devs, you should check out Solasta[5e indie game]

Watched some videos of Sorastra and it certainely has my interest, as combat looks really good..i Like the travel system with random encounters...Definately on my wishlist and yes, some things I saw in the EA video's could be added to BG3 to make it a better game in my opinion.
If that will happen, only Larian knows.

when it comes down to it, Solasta apparently has a 6 month early access planned and probably 1/10th the size team working on it. BG3 has a 1 year early access planned and as noted, a significantly larger team

This means that whilst, right now Solasta feels significantly better to play in terms of exploration, travel, combat and world interaction, Larian has the power to massively improve BG3 during its early access, whereas Tactical Adventures will be much harder pressed to make meaningful changes to their engine or game.Solasta will likely not meaningfully change in terms of visuals or mechanics between now and released I'd guess (6 months in dev time really isn't all that long, the project I've been working on has been going for about 18 months at this point and whilst its business software because I'm not lucky enough to work in the games industry, I know the turnaround for even small changes when you include QA time etc is quite large).

IMO, Tactical Adventures seem to have focused on what was important to their vision first, i.e. they've ensured they've got a pretty excellent functional D&D 5e SRD game (the SRD part is important, because they dont have rights to use the majority of D&D content), visuals aren't as good and I don't expect that to change between now and release, balance of a lot of their custom stuff needs some work, but I expect that will change as it gets closer to release. The key thing is, their early access time can focus on adding story content and fixing bugs. Both games have their share of bugs right now.

I'm currently more looking forward to playing Solasta in its final form, but I'm more looking forward to experiencing BG3 in its.

IMO 17 people with Unity isn't a bad number for a game like this.

One thing I haven't felt yet with this offering vs other unity offerings in this genre is the load time blues, so good planning on that, it can become a breaking point for me.

As in final form, I know right now if Larian doesn't have a more "true 5e experience" there will be mods available soon after, so if that is a big big thing for me, I know I'm covered either way.

Larian needs to work on their UI overall, it's always been their weak point. These are things that will be harder to mod if at all. It seems from initial demo sessions to now, it is like they were 1/2 way done with the makeover.

I kinda want to try it, but the visual design ain't doing anything for me.
I prefer more fantasy designs, I get really bored very quickly when gear looks so '' basic '' as in Solasta.
Baldur's Gate is kinda like that right now but I think it's going to get better later on and it's not as bad.
I like it when there's some sense of self-expression in the gear rather than it looking like it was made on a conveyor belt lol, characters basically just looking like random generic soldiers/ guards is a huge turn off for me in games.

I do understand the comparisons with Baldur's Gate 3 too but I think people should be a bit careful about that.
The gameplay in Solasta does look good but there's so much missing right now in Baldur's Gate 3 like half the classes lol.
I don't think that Baldur's Gate 3 being a bit easier to approach either is necessarily a bad thing.
I mean a surprising amount of people are already finding it to be too complex as it is, I disagree with that but the game has attracted a lot of people who have no former knowledge of DnD.

I downloaded it today, and have played a bit (now up to level 3). My thoughts.

1. Combat is indeed much more fun/rewarding in Solasta than in BG3.

2. The camera is super-easy to work with in comparison to BG3.

3. The interface is much simpler, though it feels a bit unfinished at the same time, insofar as the design doesn't seem entirely appropriate for a fantasy RPG.

4. The way that party dialogue works means the game has basically no roleplaying to speak of. You create all four of your characters, giving them unique classes, alignments, backgrounds, and a few personality traits. But when you talk to NPCs, you are basically given four options - one for each character. That means that there's really one, and only one thing each character can interject at a given time. The characters are all 100% voice acted, which is nice in a way, but there's simply not quite enough flavor put into each one to give a real idea that each of your characters has a unique personality. I mean, my mage chimes in with history/arcana lore from time to time, and people recognize their co-religionists, but my Paladin has said pretty un-Paladin things as well.

5. Once you take out all the mechanics stuff, it's just not as good of a game, period. The game appears to be almost entirely linear, and outside of combat mechanics, each encounter seems to have been designed to have one - and only one - successful outcome. This is much more simplistic than what Larian is attempting to design. NPCs exist just to hand out quests, sell items, and spit out some lore from time to time. The game setting and story feel like bog-standard fantasy - there's not anything really to hook you. It honestly gives a NWN sort of vibe in terms of telling a "basic" story of a party of low-level generic adventurers.

I will say I really liked how the turtorial was set up though - as a series of bar tales which the party members were telling to one another.

I'm checking out both. Both have their pros/cons. The camera in BG3 is just wonky (finally figured most of it out). Neither one have the "tilt" that I'd like, but oh well. It's been ages since I played BG series, Icewind Dale, Neverwinter, etc.

The characters are hideous in Solasta (my High Elf looks like a hunchback of notre dame).

I like the turn-based combat, but that's me. Playing Dragon Age series, I found myself constantly pausing anyway to switch characters, change tactics, etc.
Neverwinter (MMPORPG) is OK with live action but you only have one character.

Not quite liking the 4 character limitation of both, but DA series does the same. With D&D I'm finding that without multi-classing you need more than 4. thief/rogue is required, IMO, along with "fighter", healer (cleric) and magic user. But that's the very basic. I'll live/survive though.

Haven't gotten nearly as far in Solasta vs. BG3 though, but only recently downloaded Solasta like 3 days ago.

Mmm? One thing about 5e and all the games based on it is that any character could "rogue". Not better than a rogue, of course, but a rogue character is not mandatory like in previous versions. You can train other classes to sneak, disable traps and locks, steal, etc.
Just pick your high-dex character (like the ranger) and give him/her the lowlife background and that´s it.

That said, a bigger group would be appreciated. I understand in bg3 you have the 4 coop-party limitation, but I do not get why they do the same in an SP game like Solasta too.

pretty similar to my breakdown a few pages ago, right now the gameplay of combat feels better (I dont think combat having multiple approachs is more true in BG3 than Solasta though, some environments are pretty diverse in solasta with multiple approaches, especially as you start getting more abilities). But in terms of the bulk of content, BG3 feels better. It's why I hope they look at Solasta combat and realise what they're doing wrong, as cleaning up BG3 combat would make it strictly superior in every way. But right now I get irked by too many things in BG3 combat to truly enjoy the gameplay.

I was playing Neverwinter Nights 2 Mask of the Betrayer and BG3 reminds me of that game, where you have powers from an outside influence so to speak.

I've seen some complaints about the Story for Solasta that it is boring on steam, and don't know about that.

I am planning on getting Solasta eventually since I already have this

Solasta is definitely (for the EA) a more "down to earth" story, it doesnt start with epicness and craziness that doesn't make sense for level 1 newbie adventurers lol.
That said, its story is also very very linear, which isn't great. Hopefully they take their feedback on board and consider adding more dialogue options and story forks. Apparently most of the planned side content isn't there yet which is also likely part of why it feels as linear. From what i can see, it seems like its story will get crazy eventually though too, maybe not /as/ crazy as BG3 though Story/narrative is definitely Solastas weakpoint (along with character models which arent really up to par for cinematics and cinematic dialogues these days but are plenty good enough for isometric.

(Haven't played Solasta yet, but I've followed it for a while and now I've looked at character creation and some gameplay bits.)

Solasta appears to me to mostly aim to be a great dungeon crawler with some bits to make it feel like a party experience. I was going to compare it to IWD (which, I admit, I haven't played either yet, though I have an idea of its "style"), but earlier you said you don't think this comparison is apt. Would you mind elaborating on that?

Solasta visuals are all over the place. From my brief observations, environments/creatures look quite nice if somewhat dated (typical for indies, I'd say), character models are... terrible and animations surprisingly ok. There was this weird disconnect between model quality and animation quality. That was my impression, anyway. (The UI looks like a placeholder, but I think it could be entirely solved by simply changing the colours and adding a "fantasy" texture - wood, stone or paper. Say, dark blue stone for UI background and gold for borders/text.)

As for what BG3 could "steal" from Solasta... apart from 5e/combat stuff - custom character "flavour". Way of speaking. Personality flags. Better backgrounds. Of course, it's going to be harder to implement in a cinematic AAA game...

I prefer clean easy to follow stories and by that I mean not get bogged down with many quests (sides) doing completely different things all at once. IMO that is bad game design for me.

So who here has played DND modules that have all kinds of different stories going on at once vs the just the story at hand?

I think there is a difference between a singular story and linear, while having both of those it is the most basic method, at the least you totally get the story. However it is nice to have a singular story with branches so you can get different endings for more play throughs and yes something more than right at the end you have 3 choices. Something meatier than that. Is still a singular story but like Choose Your Adventure novels, if you are clever you can choose better.

So if anything Solasta is keeping things very clear and easy to remember, I'm ok with that. Just make me more modules and perhaps over time you can make those come together in some way for a larger over-arching story.

To Blindham I like to foster devs, so if what they are doing now is what they can accomplish and do well, then we can just hope that each module they release they keep adding and honing in. Pretty much how Larians been doing since DOS. I'm good with steady improvement.

The Solasta devs were talking about 'verticality' as a major part of their game way before BG3 devs started talking about it in their game. Credit where credit is due.

Played Solasta EA and its the closest experience you can find for DnD 5e on a computer. They have completely nailed the mechanics.

The only two things I really want Larian to emulate from Solasta are:

1. The combat log! It's SO GOOD in Solasta, and so bad in BG3.
2. Click somewhere, the whole party makes any jumps necessary to get there automatically.

As a bonus thing, have you seen/heard the Magic Missile spell in Solasta? Holy crap it looks and sounds amazing.

I like the options to have dice rolls visually in Solasta, it's neat and does very well to flavor the experience as a DND game.

What's really disappointing is how they couldn't implement all the PHB's armors and weapons. No flails, no whips, no reach weapons, and I've not seen breastplates for example, but that might be because they weren't available at the shop yet, I don't know.

They've got a really solid base they could heavily expand on, so I hope they find success!

After playing Solasta for a couple of hours I feel BG3 is heavily missing out by not including some of its features. Some of these aren't even a matter of preference, they're outright quality-of-life implementations that definitely improve the experience for the player.

1) Reactions in combat - Larian's reason for not implementing these was that it'd slow down the flow of combat. After playing Solasta I can safely say that this is not the case. When an opportunity arises the game gives you a message telling you that you have the option to perform a reaction, for example an attack of opportunity on an enemy that's moving away from you, while giving you the option of performing the said action or ignoring it and saving your action for later. This feels very natural and does not slow down the combat at all. In fact I'd even say it feels like it makes it even more engaging since it gives the player agency during the enemy's turn rather than making you sit and watch them run around.

2) Followers automatically jumping over chasms/obstacles - Anyone that has played BG3 will know how much of a source of frustration it is to have to select all four party members one by one and have them jump across a crevice. In Solasta your companions will automatically jump across if you've crossed a chasm. It's such a huge quality of life improvement that I'm afraid I won't be able to live with BG3's implementation which, to be sincere, is very clunky in its current early access stage.

3) Dodge action & Readying actions - Forgoing your turn in favour of preparing an action (usually attacking an enemy that enters your range) adds another layer of strategic depth. It solves the problem of feeling like you're 'wasting' your turn in the cases where you are unable to perform any other meaningful actions. Another unseen benefits of having this is that your characters gets to 'do something' even when it isn't your turn. In multiplayer games combat can often feel boring you get very little screentime, but this provides you the option to essentially think outside of your turn by offering you actions that can be performed later.

A final note which, admittedly, mostly is a manner of preference is that I really like how Solasta presents the dice rolls during combat. They happen simultaneously with the action so you can see the roll (and your modifiers) without combat being slowed down in any way. While I doubt everyone would be interested in seeing this added I would greatly appreciate if this was a toggleable option in the final release of the game.

Solasta doesn't have the license to use PHB material, only SRD material, and even there they didn't have the budget to do everything iirc.

I think no one made a comment about the travelling and camping mechanics in Solasta.

I do not know how´s going to be in BG but the camping, crafting and travelling options in Solasta seem fun. There are still some things that are not implemented (Some placeholders state that it´s still in the making, like the scavenger services) but right now that adds some spice to the game.




That makes two of us +1000

I will also add that in Solasta you can take cover behind obstacles and the IA does not attack downed party members.

the UI is far more player-friendly: You do not have 2 buttons, one for sneak attack/battlemaster/etc melee and another for ranged, the bonus-action spells are separated from the others so you can pick them at first glance, the powers are in another tab, etc.

Oh, thanks! I didn't know that. Will give it a try.