Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Should have given this to Obsidian

I suppose we're all just here sharing our opinions on our preferences, because I like DOS2 and BG3 gameplay and combat. While looking at BG2 and PoE, its nice, but in its own way. I feel like we're comparing pizza companies, same style of stuff, one just taste better to others for their specific flavor. So my opinion is Larian is doing a great job with BG3. Its not the flavor you like, but how does wishing they changed the game to be like another company's style help improve this game.

Does BG1 and 2 even follow dnd rules?

Closely.
Those who created the game engine were very knowledgeable on the DnD subject. Their deviations are easy to understand from a gameplay perspective.

With BG3 this is different. Here the engine already exists. Larian has its own vision of what makes a good RPG and the engine was tailored to meet those objectives.
As a result, in BG3 most deviations seem inherited rather than created on purpose.

I'm not so certain that Obsidian should have been given BG3 to make but I do have some fairly strong reservations about how the game is looking at present.

Right now I feel like the soul of Baldurs Gate is missing from BG3, if that makes any sense. There are elements of EA I really loved but haven't felt at any moment that this is a game in the BG series. I am sure that come the final release there will be obvious links to the previous games but other posters in this thread have summarised very well how there currently is very little in common with the original games.

I'm a pretty big fanboy of Obsidian, but I'm not sure if they would've been the right studio for this. There are a couple of reasons for this.


1. There hasn't ever been a time in Obsidian's lifetime where they can deliver fantastic gameplay AND storytelling, which a true BG2 sequel needs.
Firstly, the modern day Obsidian that currently exists (The Outerworlds, Deadfire), is quite a different beast from the older Obsidian (SW:KOTOR2, NWN2: MotB, Fallout: NV).

The older Obsidian were story-telling and world building geniuses. However, they always fumbled with gameplay design and game polishing. The current day Obsidian have improved on mechanics (although I find they trend too much towards "safe and balanced"), but seem to be weaker writing overall. Both the Outer Worlds and Deadfire struggled to deliver a truly gripping narrative. The world building is also still there, but somehow fails to draw you in like the previous titles. This is coming from someone who's a pretty die-hard fan of Deadfre (580 hours in game).



2. Obsidian are fantastic story-tellers, but possibly not the right ones for a BG3
Secondly, despite their story-telling brilliance, Obsidian seem to thrive in niche world/settings (in particular subverting the common ones), and seem to have trouble launching the "epic fantasy adventure" that a BG3 title would require.

• Epic Fantasy Games by Obsidian: NWN2 (Base), POE 1, POE 2 - all of which suffer from major narrative and pacing issues IMO.
• Niche, "Subversion" Games by Obsidian: KOTOR 2, NWN2 (MoTB), Fallout: NV - all brilliant, but built around taking a deep, philosophical view on an existing IP/Story/Trope

Note here, I'm not using Subversion as in "surprised, bet you never saw this coming!!", but more so as a deep philosophical dive into the assumptions of core tropes, and what may happen if you ask certain questions or re-contextualize certain events differently. That is "old" Obsidian's jam. All their best stories revolve around that.

However, I'm not sure if I'd want them to be the ones writing about how a derpy level 1 adventurer sets out on a grand adventure quest. It just doesn't seem like a story template they are comfortable flexing their narrative muscles in. They somewhat tried to merge the two in POE1, and IMO they struggled.



3. Obsidian's current RPG gameplay philosophy is counter-intuitive to the "feel" of the original BGs
The 2e ADnD system used in BG1/2 does A LOT to create the feel of its world, for better or worse. There is a level of inherent harsh unbalance in the rules that adds a lot immersion (at the expense of fairness) that newer, more balanced RPG system don't have. Magic users are just straight up better than others. Some classes/combos, are just straight up non-feasible (but presented as options). In many ways, these design choices creates a strong sense of world building, at the expense of balance. It's just like you can't have a "Jedi" class be balanced with a mundane troopers in SWs without breaking some level of immersion.

How does this relate to Obsidian? Look at what they did when given the opportunity to develop their own system in their BG spiritual successor:

• Far more balanced classes and itemization
• All class combos are viable (no trap options)
• Far less RNG driven system (i.e. static skill checks)
• Abolished the Vancian magic system, and other core D&D "feel" mechanics

Josh Sawyer (from Obsidian) has gone on the record many times on his issues with the overall DnD system, and his philosophy on balance. I'm not saying Josh is right or wrong to believe what he believes, but it's clear that his/Obsidian's fundamental approach to RPG mechanics will not give you the same BG feel as before.

This point extends similarly to D&D 5E (although I feel like it's a full topic all on its own). D&D 5e also follows a similar balance philosophy, meaning you essentially need to either go back to 2e ADnD or build a custom rule-set, to capture the feel of BG1/2 again in BG3. You simply won't get the classic BG feel from 5e or an Obsidian RPG system. E.g. you'll never have to engage in the complex BG2 mage duels with layers and layers of buffs/removals where the other party members just sit there and pretend they are contributing.



Now that I've finished writing this wall of text - does that mean I believe Larian will do a better job? Frankly, I don't know. Some of their decision making drives me up the wall (i.e. chain/unchain movement system... ARGH). Whereas, they also introduce a freshness to RPGs that most other BG imitators do not. Actual innovation (i.e. the physics, interactivity, player freedom), that others fantastic CRPG makers (Obsidian, Owlcat) do not.

For now, they done a decent job at adapting the tone in the EA, although it remains to be seen if it'll be enough. We're still missing too much of the world building, core conflict (including the villain), etc, to make a true judgement call IMO. I hate that the origin system seems to overtake our custom characters, but I love how much "agency" Larian instills in their companions.

By the mechanics I wonder from you guys that are more Obsidian familiar. How do all the games (BG 1 2 3) compare to the lines of closeness, to the heart and gameplay of table top D&D

This is still one of the better articles on BG2, Ray's post mortem...

https://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/131493/baldurs_gate_ii_the_anatomy_of_a_.php

It was written in 2001, before the shadow cast from BG2 wasn't quite so long as it is now.

Page 2 is particularly interesting, especially where he describes the Chapter 2 bloat as sort of unintended goof, since I thought that was the best chapter in the game haha.

Anyhow, the Bioware of today is obviously different than the Bioware of then. And Obsidian isn't exactly the same as the Black Isle of old. Despite some of the same colorful characters showing up at the top of the foodchain. Just like in the movies, where directors steal the limelight and get all the credit, I'm sure most of the real talent and grunt work was done further down the totem pole. And who knows where all those peeps ended up? But its an interesting read.

I think if the game was given to either Bioware or Obsidian by themselves, it would have felt like another iteration of the West Coast/Alberta rivalry that went down for the better part of a decade. You know with alternating sequels in various RPG franchises. Handing the baton of resurrection to the rogue studio from Ghent was probably the right call for a new lease on life. But I agree with others that the game is still missing something in the soul. I think there were so many "spiritual successors" that we kind of lost the spirit all together.

The one thing that all the various spiritual successors didn't have, which is really obvious once its pointed out, is the Forgotten Realms setting and entire back catalogue. Dragon Age and Pillars didn't have that to go off of. ToEE was a Greyhawk module. I don't even want to mention Eberron. Clearly we weren't going to get it from Everquest or Skyrim or WoW. We're not going to get it from Owlcat or Tactical Adventures. There's no substitute for the Realms, cause half the legwork has already been done, and the scaffolding for the "world building" is already in place. Larian just needs to lean into it and go for broke. I mean they got Volo on the train, now it needs to start steaming out the station. I haven't seen enough of Faerun yet in act 1, or been given many primers to understand what's been going down in the 100 years since the last game. It doesn't feel like its quite connected up with the previous entries yet. Like the various competing factions haven't really appeared yet, and the sweeping political backdrop. BG1/2 had a nice slow build, and when you finished the game you felt like you knew pretty much everything important there was to know about the Sword Coast and Amn.

I don't know, and probably won't until I see where it goes after chapter 1, but just feels like it needs more and then some hehe

In both Larian and Bioware's, heavy adaptations were done to make the systems work with the videogame medium. Some highlights that I remember off the top of my head:

BG 1/2:

• The 2E "group initiative" system is adapted to a RTwP system. Note, this actually works quite well unlike a 5E turn base conversion to RTwP would be like.
• Changes to character creation - i.e. removed female stat restrictions from the corebook. Charisma hireling effects removed. Etc.
• Changes to Class - added classes from 3E (i.e. Sorcerer, barbarian, etc). Added tons of kits (subclasses) to almost every class. Changed Illusionist (which was its own class) into a mage kit/subclass
• Implemented the Weapons Specialization/Mastery system from the "Combat and Tactics" book. It was stronger in BG1, but nerfed to match the book in BG2
• Epic level abilities (from Throne of Bhaal) are mostly a Bioware invention
• Heavily re-balanced monsters ("hp bloat")*

Larian's BG3

• Turn-based system implemented as-is in the game.
• Changes to action/bonus action balancing - some PnP actions are now bonus actions (i.e. "disengage")
• Backstab/High-ground advantage to attacks - "technically" in PnP (the book says DM should grant advantage whenever it makes sense), but still a big change from more PnP games
• No new classes, but there have been some alteration and "rebalancing" (Rogues missing expertise, GOO Warlocks missing an ability) - could be bugs/unfinished
• Rate and availability of treasure is higher in BG3. No attunement as of right now (which limits stacking magical items)
• Larianisms like surface area damage (although that has been toned down)
• Heavily re-balanced monsters ("hp bloat")*
  
  
  * Yes, BG2 has "hp bloating" too - even more drastically than Larian considering the system they played in. It made sense though, because in these conversion, monsters are always more vulnerable positionally (i.e. no flight) - so HP is often increased to account for that. Some examples:
  • 60 avg. hp Balors had up to 155 hp (the ritual demon in the Underdark)
  • 33 avg. hp Trolls were had 80 hp.
  • 102 avg. hp Great Wyrm Red Dragon had 184 in Firkragg.

Obsidian as a studio kind of got a rep as the sequel crew, I guess mainly because of Kotor2 and NWN2. Neverwinter was supposed to be the direct successor to the Baldur's Gate and Icewind Dale games, and it was obviously set in the Realms and you know, Feargus (they even had splash load screens in BG2 that suggested we'd be able to import our BG characters into Neverwinter) but the gameplay and whole thrust of the thing was so vastly different than the Infinity Engine games that you can't even compare them. NWN and NWN2 were both pretty cool, especially for DMs and persistent world builders, but it was missing the critical element of the 'god mode' full party control and it never really delivered on the idea of a modular Baldur's Gate where adventures could be released in an unending series.

I remember on the old NWN boards someone pointing out that a genuine successor to BG needed basically 3 things:

1. Dungeons and Dragons standardized rules
2. The Forgotten Realms setting
3. Tactical combat with full party control for up to 6 PCs

Everything that's come out since has been missing one or the other, and so they fall short. Either they had the ruleset and the setting, but not the tactical combat and full party control. Or, like in the case of the iso renaissance games, they had the full party tactical combat but not the rules or the setting.

I still blame Obsidian for caving on custom portraits precisely at the point in time when digital painting and fantasy concept art was really starting to take off and achieving a level on par with traditional mediums. It still depresses me. They said their modelers would be up to the task, and almost 2 decades later industry wide, we still aren't there in 3d. The best models I've ever seen still can't compete with the portraits in my 2d archives. Even the games with all the sliders and such that promise 'you can make anything you want', still haven't been able to capture the essential spirit of an ace portrait. So all the best illustrators made art for Magic the Gathering instead, which is now the gold standard, when it could just as easily have been Dungeons and Dragons if they didn't pull the rug out from under the thing. It's an old axe to grind, but still hehe

Thats my biggest take away when thinking if what this BG game should have. Deeper and more adopted DnD mechanics, and the setting of the forgotten realms. If Larian does open up the game to a party of 6, that would be pretty cool too but not something as a must in my personal list.

One thing I did notice tho, is that if you make a custom party with 4 player characters. The game will have you have Laezel track alo.g with you party of 4, making it 5. Laezel as number 5 acts like a literally companion in the party. You can access her traits, skills, and inventory too.so who knows. It seems like Larian already does have the grounds to expand party max to more than just 4.

@ topgoon and the obsidian text (somehow quote doe not work plus its a wall of text)

Thank you, this is a very good analysis.
- Look like Obsidian and DnD 5E do fit, since both care more about balance than the IE games.
Though maybe this has nothing to do with obsidian and DnD 5E in particular but its simply that now devs and players have a different understanding on how a game should be, compared to 20 years ago.
Things may look more biased in this forum because this is BG3 so people expect it to be similar to BG1+2, even though 20 years have passed and the game uses a different rule set.

- I really love the old Obsidian games, and I really love this "subversion" stuff.
I think KotoR2 is the best Star Wars game and Kreia is one of the best NPC ever.
MotB is fantastic too and NV is the best 3D Fallout game.
I am also a fan of PST, Disco Elysium and Undertale.
Stop saving the world and try something new, interesting and crazy.

I admit we also need "normal" fantasy stories and tropes, if only in order to have something that can be subverted ;-)

Your comment about the "nice slow build" really resonated with me. Granted BG2 had the prison escape which was a somewhat frenetic start but already you had a clear idea of who your adversary was. I'm all for a bit of mystery but BG3 feels like you have had the kitchen sink thrown at you from the outset and so far I have no idea what's going on other than that there is a tadpole inside my head.

Also I simply cannot get over forcing the party to camp only at night and in a fixed location. It's just so utterly daft that if you want to play a rogue, you can't sneak around at night.

Thank you for that wall of text. It really well expressed, what I couldn’t put into words myself. As much as I love Obsidian and Baldur’s Gate, I don’t think the two are quite on the same page. Obsidian’s strength was always departing from pulpy adventures of DND and safety of Bioware style RPGs.

Its so true. In the first two BG games the rogue protagonist felt pretty well served. From the very first level in Candlekeep the thief immediately felt like a worthwhile class to explore, with different lines of play. The Bard also, with the whole library backdrop and pick pockets being one of their skills in that set up. Running a rogue/scout oriented party was one of the more entertaining playthroughs, especially since there were so many rakish companions to slot in at either end of the alignment Axis. There were like twice as many rogues you could run with as the other classes. Also the human pcs that could also duel into or out of the thief class.

BG2 had a great roguish arch to get out of the City of Coin and launch into the main campaign, and their stronghold was rad. In BG2 the kits were fun as well, which was one of the reasons to revisit those enhanced editions of BG1 and TotSC to play as an assassin or bounty hunter etc. 2e was also kind of cool, since even at higher levels you could usually find a reason to throw another rogue on the team, just because of the way the skill points were distributed. Like your stealth and backstabbers vs lockbusters or trapfinders or sticky fingers types. They had some nice epic level abilities invented up for them in ToB too. There always felt like stuff for the thief to do in the dungeons, but especially in the towns, and at night.

Even though I usually end up with Astarion in the party for this one, I tend to have him take the spell-casting line, just because it seems more interesting. I don't feel like the Thief shines all that much in this one, and having two in the party seems like it would just feel redundant, instead of opening up a whole different avenue of the game.

Funny that this thread would end up so engaging lol

Obsidian? as in..

U mean the guys who make NWN the game which teleports ur main character without an error, from 456456 feet away while u were sneaking and puts u in dialogue and in the middle of combat? who are also unable to fix it it seems? oh sorry, its more like swapping your charcter with the one up front actually not even teleport..

Who already never succeeding deliverin a good story?

Whose character designs and dialogues always cheesy to the bone?

Who have really bad kind of voicing ?

Who makes the story telling such linear that you cannot even argue on?

Who utterly failed in implementing any of the spell mechanics properly? (I am not even gonna count them 1by1 but its like at least 2 pages)

Who couldnt manage to code 1 single good caster AI in a game, 10 frigging years later than BG II..there was "no single fight" worth playing in their cannon sequel game.

Who had the worst controls/camera options ever?


No ty, I ll pass
Obsidian is no Black isle, they have some good playable games but thats it. Going back to isometric view with PoE was the best thing they did, at least they did see and accept their limits on that one.

I would rather have some random indy compay who actually tries playing the game they make.

Obsidian: literally wrote the second best grand adventure story in the rpg business

You are trying too hard.
Mask of the Betrayer was great storywise. Tyranny was great gameplaywise and storywise, and New Vegas is excellent all around.
PoE sucks though, no argument there. I'M very happy that Obsidian is NOT doing BG3

the thing is I really hope they speed up the turn combat ill say it again if your playing solo Goooood luck going through 20 turns as the enemies each do their combat by the time they're done it I can take a shower wash my dishes do a full work out and hopefully the 10th enemy will be going If you don't believe start a solo game and start a fight in the goblin camp Whhhhewwyyy. What I liked about obsidian is what they did they managed to make it TURN based for the turn-based ppl and also real-time combat like the original Baldurs gate. From what I've seen after I think they said 2 years they have been working on this is the animation is kind of clunky still with the talking and after playing the early release im a bit sceptical maybe I should have waited to see some reviews when the game was fully out. I'm also worried about some of the races orcs are still not out yet well half orcs most of the elves look the same with some different skin coming from a person who's a character artist myself you can easily take the base mesh from the human or even the druid guy bring him into Zbrush re-sculpt the face the hands and just transfer the skin weights on to the new model I have a feeling I won't be seeing this game release for about 3 more years, I only say that because their still addressing alot of issues with the bugs which is understandable. Also, another worry is will I run into the divinity original sin 2 things where they draw this sweet art icon you're like mannn this is gonna be siickk a custom graphic for this unique weapon or armor but as you go through the game its reused about 20 times, paperdoll is HUUUGEEE when it comes to wielding something like the holy avenger or like Cromfyer. But all that being said ill have to wait and see when it fully comes out to actually see if they address these things.

I have been all over looking at videos on YT in regards to this game, and all I see is positive comments (which is strange for YT). I go to gaming sites, positive comments. I go to Steam, positive. GOG....positive. It seems the most negative comments are on this forum. People said the same thing about the remake of Tomb Raider when Square Enix took over, and guess what, it was a great game. Personally I quite enjoy this game, there is some things that annoy me, but I will hold my judgement until the actual game comes out. I can tell you this, Larian is doing a better job than modern day Bioware would do.

While I enjoyed POE much more than D:OS, I feel they missed the key features of previous RPG games like these. I feel not having character exports limits these games so drastically. Not even from game to game, just from each game. It was just a great feature in DA:O, Mass Effect, BG 1&2, NWN, Icewind Dale.........etc. etc. etc. Being able to build parties or further level your character (when they lift the cap) makes for game with so more value and self story telling (HELLO!!! THIS IS D&D). I just hate that I am constantly harping on this feature and not a single Dev has weighed in. It's a simple code, not even a challenge to put in. I hate hate hate hate the idea of only being able to drop in and out of my wife or friends game with one of the lame NPC's in this game......Rapey Vampire? Ugh! Grumpy Gith? UGH! Grumpy Elf? UUUUUUUGH!!!!! Magic Item Eating Wiard? God please no! The bland Fencerlock? No thank you! Literally every single companion is awwwwwful in this game. I just want my own party, preferably transferrable to other game states to mix and match! This is why Character import/export for BG3 saves is important to me.