Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback When making a DnD game use the rules

I think the paladin is still not in EA because they were working with the WOTC on rework.




True Strike has always been a trash spell.

The point is, every spell or mechanics which gives you advantage beside Jump/Highground is trash now, because Jump/Highground is far superior and it's accessible to all classes. What's reason to e.g. lower saves with Bane and cast Blindness? I see none. Everybody can jump around or highground. Lots of the spell just losts it's meaning.

Not every fight has easily accessible high ground and your enemies can also jump to reach you. I actually used Bane quite a lot because AoE disadvantage can be a life saver in big group fights with enemies surrounding you.

Well.
When i look at the 4th and 5th edition rules they seem to be more "mmo-like". I have started with AD&D 30 years ago and even though i like that, the new rules are a bit more enjoyable in certain areas. I haven't read a lot of 5e but playing BG3 shows that some changes can be good for fluid gameplay, while others are not.
I find the jumping pretty hilarious. First too far for normal, fully equipped chars. And the transition form jump to fall needs work. (meaning prone stat and damage)

The height advantage good for ranged. The bonus may be a bit high though. Look at the curve an arrow takes. Then you will recognize why higher ground makes hitting a bit easier.

What annoys me more is that i cannot aim some spells when the enemy is higher and get the "too far" info.

That’s Larian saying to WotC: your system sucks for video game.
BG3 87% positive reviews in EA. Solasta 93%. (Steam)
Both unpolished and somehow expensive games as they are in the early access, so we’re not comparing a finished game against an unfinished game.

Yes, I know that we’re not talking about the same audience. The fact is: Solasta customers are more happier with what they’ve got. That’s undeniable.

"because Solasta" is a pretty weak argument; because someone else did it therefore so and so should. Solasta longevity remains to be seen. As long as changes are for the better, breaking convention is not a bad thing.

Rules are meant to be broken

I would agree with you IF the customer satisfaction was the same. It’s not.

Solasta's team doesn't get the license, they said it. That's why they have to create their own background, etc...

Steam reviews aren't a very good measurement. BG3 had a lot more expectations from fans and a higher price, which played a big role in reviews

What is a good measurement other than customer satisfaction my good sir?
People thinks rationally, cost vs benefits.

I like how reviews and sales works for Larian fanboys until it stops supporting their narrative.

Have some dignity lmao.

I am not sure it means anything - I am confident that Solasta’s audience is much smaller, and probably more expecting what they get. During crowdfunding it had a very small amount of supporter, and those supporters got to try the demo.

BG3 is a big IP with an interest of both BG and Larian games. Some disappointment is unavoidable - by both fans of BG and Divinities. And a decent amount of complaints I see is about price tag, not actual content.

I think it is fair to say that there will be a group of players to whom Solasta will appeal more - but it doesn’t mean that a high budget production, like BG3 is doing something wrong by altering systems to their needs.

Making unnecessary changes to the ruleset, i.e. having hide &disengage as bonus actions for everyone or throwing out advantages left and right, isn't going to make for better gameplay. It only takes away from classes that get similiar things as class features and weakens them.

Well, that’s why it’s a percentage base and not an absolute base. Conclusion: Solasta customers are happier.
Adding price tag on the loop: Solasta customers found that the price they’ve paid it’s more worthy of what they’ve got.

I know, I know... percentages are ruthless.

Conclusion: Larian will have to spend more resources to raise their customers satisfaction than Solasta (IF they care about it)

Just to be clear. i think most people that advocate for being closer to 5e don't say, that any changes from 5e are bad.
i have no problem if they change some things of 5e.
but there basic core principles to the 5e rule system, that balance the game (against other character as well as against monsters)
and larian broke many of those core balancing principles, in many ways.
not to mention, that some changes mean, that class abilities get obsolete, which means that they basically reinvent the wheel. why? i have no idea...
i can understand, that they don't want to add popups for reactions. and i could understand, to change the rules for that.
but giving a special rogue ability to every character is just plainly stupid from a balancing perspective.
or handing out advantage makes the barbarian feature "reckless attack" obsolete.
so they have to invent new abilities, which is just simply unnessecary. it just causes a rippling effect, to reinvent a lot of features.

it's simply wasted time and the only reason i can see, why they did that is, to give the game their own special touch...
it's a pretty narcistic approach if you ask me...

Divinityzation touch, I would say.
3 months ago I’d rage against people saying that the game should call DOS3. Seriously.

Now they’re my best friends.

I will regret this, but toxicity here I come!



I don't understand why you feel a need to call someone names just because you're of a different opinion. I don't love how you do it, and I think you should look yourself in the mirror before you start talking about whether other people's actions are dignified or not (as should everyone).



What I've seen people mention is whether this small difference between the ratings is a good way of measuring Early Access success or not. Personally, I rarely review on steam at all, but I definitely don't during an alpha, for (to me) quite obvious reasons. Back to the point, I think it's very relevant to consider the expectations of the people picking up the two games. I know I don't access to that kind of data, nor an interest in trying to obtain it.

As far as reviews go the current counr is 1k reviews for Solasta and approximately 25k reviews for BG3. If anyone want to make a point about that specific fact it should probably me made in relation to how many copies the game sold, and preferably with a motivation as to why it matters. Else this will be yet another toxic topic with no real point to it.

ps. seems like Sludge Khalid has a bone to pick with Larian due to his own disappointment. Maybe you should be the one providing a good argument for why the difference in steam reviews matter, so that there can possibly be a decent discussion coming out of it. ds.

That’s the beauty of the math, my good sir

It’s called customer satisfaction because the only condition required to like/dislike something is to be an actual customer

Meaning that the sequence is: buying the game > evaluating the game > rating the game

Complaints about the price tags aren’t coming from those who couldn’t afford the game and then raged. They are coming from people who paid for that and couldn’t see the cost benefit (which is not my opinion as I’m not worried about the price of EA at all)

Raw sales define how good they’ve marketed the game. Steam rating means : AFTER the game was bought, are you satisfied with it? Yes or No.

Marketing is a double edge my good sir. You can sell a lot of game based in attributes but when the product reaches the customers hands you can’t do marketing anymore. It simply get out of control

Oh yeah, I’m mature to understand their decisions if they decide to go straight ahead in that path. It’s very disappointing but I’ll manage to survive

I regularly get called every name under the sun for my opinion on this board by the larian support squad including the moral busybodies such as yourself. I also feel the need to call you fanboys because when the evidence presents in your favor you ooh and ahh about it and use it to prove every conjecture and equivocation under the sun but the minute it presents differntly suddenly it's not as important and the be all end all for every argument. This is hypocritical and dishonest behavior and if you don't like that then just don't be a part of it.

You have to remember steam reviews are a minority of the playerbase. You're using steam reviews like they depict the opinions of all customers, while only few actually write them. You can say, based on that data, that out of all that have left reviews, Solasta has overall higher satisfaction. Not the same thing as all customers.

Also, that's only counting the ratio of recommend / not recommend. You could be extremely satisfied or only somewhat satisfied and both translate to being the same value, a recommendation. While the correlation is there, it is not an accurate measurement of customer satisfaction. If the difference was 30% vs 70% then yeah probably the 70% game is doing something better, but 87% vs 93% during early stages of EA really doesn't tell me anything.

And if we're arguing based on this if following 5e rules closer is better, it tells us even less. Did they write the review based on that, or maybe story, soundtrack, visuals, etc played a bigger role? Or maybe they had lots of bugs/crashes?

I'm not here arguing that BG3 is better than Solasta, I wouldn't even know. I'm just saying that difference in steam reviews is not undeniable proof that Solasta customers are all in all more satisfied like you said