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

Hey it’s me again

In research the sample shouldn’t be a census. Which means you cut a portion of the playerbase and that will give the results under an error margin.
Given the sample in steam we have 0,6p.p as an error margin which somehow solidifies BG3 in that position.

But I think that this argument is shallow. Let’s stop it and focus on what Larians marketed the game to be and what it is

The game has a much better result than I thought it would be.
I was expecting massive spam of poor ratings from psycho fans.
The game tries to reconcile fans of 3 different games, which is doing quite well, but it does not satisfy everyone.
Solasta is a game designed for a much smaller and fairly homogeneous group of players, so it will have better grades even if bg is a better game.

You are comparing 21,000+ reviews to <1000 reviews.

There is a whole legacy that the game has to live upto, not only does it have BG's legacy but it also has Larians legacy, as shown on the forums not everyone agrees they are fully compatible.

Smaller releases like Solasta are going to have more informed users generally with players who are more likely to consider it negative to simply skip getting it, so if the devs do a decent job (as it seems they have on Solasta) then it should have quite a strong positive rating. If Solasta saw the player numbers that BG3 had, I would expect it to also see a hit to it's rating.

Heck a large portion of the positive reviews for Solasta are just to dunk on BG3 - I feel like that indicates at least some of these reviews are not quite as about Solasta as you would hope.

I'm not saying Solasta is bad or anything like that, I'm just saying that I think this comparison isn't quite as revealing about the situation as it may seem.

I think Larian also had console gamers in mind when designing this game, maybe more so than DOS2. Hence all the weird stuff done with DnD5e, cinematic dialogues etc...

BG3 design process in a nutshell: <So, how to we make a game that will loosely satisfy PnP, RPG PC players while staying accessible and fun to console gamers (our main demographic now...).>

I mean, right now the most asked question seems to be: "when will we have controller support?". lol.

When I hunted, I learned things like "leading" my target. There's a reason deer blinds aren't sitting on the ground, but are up in trees, even for archery. Yes, you can get some more distance from a shot, but that's not why you go to high ground, you go to get better advantage, defined here as being able shoot over obstacles w/out having to actually shoot over them. We're not in an arena, we're in natural terrain, for the most part. There are obstacles, even when indoors. Being in a higher position means you can shoot over their cover, or nullifying it completely depending on how high you are. This isn't only realistic, but is reflected in the rules as "Advantage". On a level plane, with the target behind a waist high cover, you have a smaller target than you would have if you were higher up. In the rules, it gives a +2 AC? This has the effect of making the target harder to hit, on a level plane. If you're higher up, you have a larger target, because the waist high cover might now only be knee high, depending on the range and angles. In game, this is reflected as advantage, and it should be clear to see why it is advantageous. This is the one thing I don't miss about table top, aside from when it's at my house, and I have to clean up the next day, rules lawyers, and it's especially bad when they're lawyering away at a rule, with such a poor understanding of what's actually going on.

You say that cover "in the rules, grants a +2AC." Correct, it does. But then you use this to argue that high ground should give advantage. There is a significant difference between "removing the enemy's +2AC buff from cover" and advantage from height. Advantage:
a) is basically a +5 bonus (2.5x more powerful than +2)
b) weakens the power of other things (spells, feats, class abilities) that grant advantage, since advantage doesn't stack.

Getting a +2 bonus from height would be more reasonable (and in line with your usage of the rules). Heck, I'd even accept getting a +4 bonus. But the fact that it grants Advantage weakens or invalidates so many other aspects of the game.

Should we be using laws of physics in a game with feys being summoned from others planes of existence? Or should we discuss the rules for that realm being changed by the devs? No one so far has shown the counterpart of that adaption in the rest of the game mechanics. My main guess is there’s no counter part. And that’s what makes me sad about it.

this

Advantage also double the chance u do critical hit.

I remark on your post because I disagree with unnecessary name calling. You start calling me names. Well, at least now I know I wasn't mistaken.

It's really not up there with rocket science levels of physics though, and the same physics actually do apply in game. If a character is behind a barrel, and you're on an even plane, +2 AC for the target. You could still hit them, but it's going to be harder. If you're elevated above the height of the barrel, no more cover advantage, because you can see them just like you could if they weren't and you were on a level plane. You see, when I'm talking advantage here, I'm talking pure visibility mechanics. The game rules apply, but I'm not even concerned with them, I mean, the idea of the thread is to actually use the game's rules, right? I just looked at the more practical application. In the spirit of the thread, this should be celebrated, not used as an example of something bad, right?

Solastra has the rules down pat. Character creation with dice rolls. Shield spell works as its supposed. All attack rolls so dice and damage. You also have shoving based on strength checks. In fact its awesome. Atleast us dnd fans have solastra only wish they had more funding for more classes

You are correct higher ground and distance is bad for both accuracy and power for an individual archer to hit a target. The closer you are to the target the more damage and accuracy regardless of bow weapon. Height or elevation from the target makes little difference where the archer aims at said target.

The shortest distance between two objects is?
The longer the arrow travels the less energy it has.

Higher ground gives a gerographical military advantage not "my weapon gains accuracy and damage" at higher ground advantage.

but if you fire at a target below you then gravity will speed up the arrow :P

[/quote]
It's really not up there with rocket science levels of physics though, and the same physics actually do apply in game. If a character is behind a barrel, and you're on an even plane, +2 AC for the target. You could still hit them, but it's going to be harder. If you're elevated above the height of the barrel, no more cover advantage, because you can see them just like you could if they weren't and you were on a level plane. You see, when I'm talking advantage here, I'm talking pure visibility mechanics. The game rules apply, but I'm not even concerned with them, I mean, the idea of the thread is to actually use the game's rules, right? I just looked at the more practical application. In the spirit of the thread, this should be celebrated, not used as an example of something bad, right?[/quote]

If you have line of sight .. they do too - no advantage

Shooting up 4 steps is no different than shooting down 4 steps.

So far, if they refuse to make it a DnD game then they should not be using the name, world, or lore. The game plays as divinity, and is divinity. Has nothing to do with DnD and definitly nothing to do with the forgotten realms.

+1. I am on team "make this as close to 5e as possible". I understand things like reactions could be difficult to implement without breaking combat flow (especially in multiplayer). However, things like Disengage, Jump, Push, Dodge, barrels, cantrips, ground effects, backstab, high ground, sneak attack, long rest, short rest, item switching... etc. etc. etc. should be reflective of the 5e system.

It's really not up there with rocket science levels of physics though, and the same physics actually do apply in game. If a character is behind a barrel, and you're on an even plane, +2 AC for the target. You could still hit them, but it's going to be harder. If you're elevated above the height of the barrel, no more cover advantage, because you can see them just like you could if they weren't and you were on a level plane. You see, when I'm talking advantage here, I'm talking pure visibility mechanics. The game rules apply, but I'm not even concerned with them, I mean, the idea of the thread is to actually use the game's rules, right? I just looked at the more practical application. In the spirit of the thread, this should be celebrated, not used as an example of something bad, right?[/quote]

If you have line of sight .. they do too - no advantage

Shooting up 4 steps is no different than shooting down 4 steps.


[/quote]
I don't write the rules, I just have to play by them. If it's in the 5e rulebooks, and it's implemented in game, then what you or I think doesn't matter. As we can see from the OP's subsequent post, it's less to do with the rules, and more to do with something else entirely, that has nothing to do with the rules.


Everything they implement has to be approved by WotC. You know, those pesky people that own the IP? If they thought it was too far outside the realm of their rules, it's not in game, you can bet on that. Whether WotC is handling the IP correctly is another debate, they lost me at 4e, never looked back, table top wise anyway, but as it stands right now, they own it, and they approve it. You should check out the Dragonlance author's lawsuit if you want to see just how much in the mix they get with creative stuff in their IPs. I must admit, I was a bit more than just surprised.

So, dealing 19 damage with a Fire Bolt Cantrip is a house rule?
Which DM would ever in their right mind allow that to be a thing? Not one I'd want to play with.

HP Bloat is a house rule?
Getting Advantage for standing on a 5 foot rock is a house rule?
Spells that have a 30 foot range not having a 30 foot height too?
Dozens of barrels of oil and wine in every location you visit is a house rule?
Not being able to get up when you fall prone is a house rule?
Not getting advantage when pincering an enemy is a house rule?

Larian's "House rules" are god-awful. Like, Bhaal-god-awful.
It's not about them being cheaty or cheesy. It's about them being mechanically bad and feeling bad.

This game will genuinely become an unfun snooze-fest the more "house rules" they add.

You forgot a few.

Minotaurs and hook horrors basically being Mario and jumping on you all the time because why not? it does damage AND knocks you prone in a large AOE.

LvL 4 Duergar that get 2 attacks a round.

Warp portals all over the place

Can literally rest as often as you like

Push being a bonus action instead of a full action

Jump also being a disengage instead of separate full actions

No dodge action