Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback Hard Core 5e Test

I am doing a test run of the game with my 3 custom characters and Lae'zel using only D&D 5e rules to the best of my abilities. I am at the hag's house, and so far the game is going very well.

For example, if I drink a potion, I restrict myself from using an Action. Same for Disengage. I don't throw barrels. I eat food periodically, but only when full health, pretending to stave off exhaustion. I don't use Jump to bypass difficult terrain and then attack.

It not only can be done, but I'm telling you it works. Even though enemies cheat and use potions and disengage as Bonus Actions, I can still beat them. The game is, of course, more challenging, but it clearly can be done, and it definitely makes the game more fun for me. I find myself using potions more, I use more strategy, I use short rests more, etc.

So it can be done, Larian. It does work, and it is rewarding.

I want to say that this is probably going to have the exact opposite reaction from what you're probably intending.

Yeah good material for the "if you don't like it don't use it" crowd.

Oh cool they finally don't have to change anything because it works ! If you don't like it don't use it, everything is perfectly okay whatever the experience you're looking for !

Yeah i was trying to do the same on my last playthrough - as i did not like those changes to the rules - forcing myself to use rules like the ones you mentioned and i agree a game mode which would do these automatically instead of us would be amazing, the game becomes clearly more tactical, tense and rewarding (to me at least).

I saw some of the comments saying "then dont use it" and i really tried to play the whole EA like that but that did not really work for me on long term, one reason is that i dont like to keep notice of changed rules in my head when im playing a videogame i want and expect the GAME to set complex challenges for me. Also the game keeps showing me signs for opposite intentions (as you mentioned enemies are still cheating with those actions) and overall its just not the same rewarding feeling at the end of the battles, as i just know im not beating a game ultimately, but some rules in my head.

Also i saw comments saying "use mods then". Im not against mods but they can be tricky with multiple versions and game updates, also sometimes mods i need are clashing with each other etc. so i use them only after a couple of vanilla playthroughs only (like i did for DOS2).

So fingers crossed, im up for a more challenging game mode which includes changes like the mentioned ones.

This is pretty close to way I play as well.

Yes, it can be used by the "if you don't like it don't use it" but I would be fine with that if "don't use it" was included as a difficulty option.

Solasta does this now. Don't like concentration checks? Turn them off in difficulty settings . . .

But we also need replacements for broken mechanics -- jump as a substitute for disengage is a real problem -- if we don't use it we don't have a disengage at all. (which is strange since the goblin kids seem to have a real disengage)

Goblins actually do get disengage as a bonus action. We won't see later enemies abusing it.

What is not supposed to happen though are Bulettes being able to spam their leaping attack without provoking opportunity attacks from the party. And Minotaurs are more known for charging at a single target, not leaping shockwave AoE attacks.

Yeah and you have to care not standing on a rock, you have to care not being behind an ennemy, you can't use any special ammo, you can't ambush anyone, you can't ever try to use thunderwave,...

We as players shouldn't have to choose which mechanics to use.
Larian's homebrewed ARE usually cool but way too OP.

Right. The point is that it works and can be done and the game is MORE fun if 5e is implemented more accurately.

So I am suggesting Larian either implements the rules more accurately or provide a difficulty setting for strict 5e.

Why do we need it? Because enemies still get to abuse the rules if they don't implement accurate 5e rules, because there are times I can't use Bonus Actions since I drank a potion and pretended it was an Action, because it is a pain to try to remember every 5e rule myself and make sure I'm following it correctly, because some rules I have to really sit there and think about and calculate out myself, etc.

There are enough people who want 5e more accurately done out here and I'm proving it can work and is more fun and balanced and makes more use of game mechanics like potions and I'm trying to let Larian know so maybe they will do it. You can't tell me you aren't implementing the 5e rules because it's a CRPG and the accurate 5e rules just won't work. They do. Even if enemies cheat and I don't, which is like playing 5e on Hard Mode, it still works.

Of course, I haven't gotten to the REAL tough enemies yet. When I face the hag, and she's cheating on the rules, will I need to cheat also? What about the Bullette and the Minotaurs? 😳

For me it depends on how the mechanics are implemented. I agree that if the players needs to actively counteract a mechanics to avoid the cheese, this is a problem. Apart from height, stealth is another example. Currently ranged attacks have your character roll for stealth even if you don't hide this character. Enemies don't react even if you hit them several times and that over relatively short distances. It doesn't make sense and is quite immersion breaking.

Dipping on the other hand I don't have to counteract; I simply don't use that action. And I've seen only very few enemies use it, so I don't mind it being in the game.

I don't really know how to balance a game.

What I know is that a 1D8 dipped weapon deal more damages than a 1D12 weapon (especially if your target start burning - especially if you have 2 weapons in your hands).

The game allow players to use it at anytime giving them better weapons (bonus action + candle cheese). Ennemy's won't use it so they probably need buffs.
And on the other hand there's you and me that don't plan to use it because we don't like how it works/looks like.

I guess it's an impossible job to balance a game so the experience is enjoyable for everyone... Except if the mechanic itself is better balanced.

Ofc it's only about one part of the whole. The game is a whole and I guess everything (except real choices for fun i.e like barrelmancy or infinite pickpocketting) matter in the balance.

Well, the BG1 & 2 games were not balanced at all. But while some exploits were obvious and easy to use (e.g. fog of war), they were also very easy not to use. In BG3 with some mechanics even if you want to avoid them, it is very difficult to actually do so.

I just wish they find the perfect balance. I don't want a toggle for every little detail. I just want a "true D&D 5e" mode, but they can sprinkle in some homebrew where it doesn't completely change the game.

E.g. I like...

- Potions as a bonus action. They heal so little they would be useless otherwise.
- Wizards being able to learn all Cantrips. (They can learn all level 3 spells, so how come they can't learn all cantrips? Having access to every cantrip is not a balance issue. But learning other classes' spells and spamming long rests is a big no no.)
- having to consider the battlefield environment in 3D and using the terrain to my advantage.. but do NOT like how overpowering Backstab and especially High Ground are. (and where's Cover???)
- bigger emphasis on environmental hazards in a video game. But do NOT like the excessive spam of acid, poison and fire surfaces from consumables and common enemies like goblins (and gamey properties like acid giving a temporary AC debuff. If it corrodes, your armor should be ruined permanently. Things need to make sense in an RPG.)

I wish there was a Core D&D Rules difficulty level too. It's something I started wishing for around my 200th hour playing EA. It took me several playthroughs of Act 1 to notice that using elevation for advantage overshadows all other tactical considerations in most fights. Or that Lae'zel does a better job if she constantly hops behind the enemies' back, which isn't how we imagine a D&D fighter behaving. Or that it's actually superfluous to position your melee characters in a way that gives your rogue sneak attack opportunities, he does better just stabbing enemies in the back. And of course mundane food items often proving as good or better than magical healing potions.

Maybe this aspect of the game isn't discussed more in online reviews because you need to put a significant amount of time into the game before noticing those patterns. But once you do, it's really glaring and omnipresent. It makes me wish I could erase my accumulated knowledge of the game's mechanics and go back to a more "beginner's eyes" state when the game's combat encounters felt more tactically rich and more evocative of D&D.

So it's good to know that it's possible to play that way and the game still works.

That's actually something that we don't mention enough. Many BG3 homebrew rules are actually very good! Like the new weapon-specific attacks (Cleave, Pin Down, etc) or using up your lockpicks when you fail a check with them. As far as I can tell, everyone loves those additions to the game. So it's definitaly not a case of "homebrew rules = bad".

I just thought it might be good to actually test it as opposed to just asking them to do it. One of the arguments against 5e being more accurately obeyed is that if they do this the game won't be as balanced and enjoyable. So they need to nerf things like sneak attack and allow backstab and barrel throwing to make the game fun.

I personally like some of their house rules. I like poison clouds and greasing and setting fire to enemies and some of those types of things, but the whole backstab thing where Lae'zel plays Hulk Leap and Slash is ridiculous. Either make enemies easier to hit by lowering AC or give me better weapons so my chances of hitting regardless of facing and height are better. It is actually more frustrating for me to constantly make sure I position key characters right to avoid backstab and enemy height advantage than anything, and like someone said, I didn't even realize these little strategies in my first few playthroughs. So enemies were beating the tar out of me because they were using them and I wasn't.

I understand potions as a bonus action is a popular house rule in tabletop as well, so it has been tested and there are grounds to change it. And if I was the DM I would unlock all cantrips. I don't get it why they need to be so tightly restricted.

I like the weapon specific abilities like Cleave and Bash too, but I'm not sure I like the implementation of one use per fight the best. What if I'm surrounded and would like to cleave again? I think I would prefer something like -4 to attack in exchange for the AoE of Cleave or a damage boost and chance to stun or push with Bash, that you could do as often as you like. That would also solve the weird exploit of cycling different weapons to use all their abilities in the same fight. I haven't actually done that but I assume it's possible?

They could experiment with giving a slightly higher Proficiency bonus progression to increase hit rates 5-10% and make proficient skills work more often. Perhaps balance the extra HP loss by giving a 3rd short rest, or an automatic Short Rest after every encounter (unless you flee so it can't be exploited).

While lowering the enemy AC only helps attacks that target AC and effectively nerfs spells like Sacred Flame that target Saving Throws, a Proficiency bonus buff would be equally beneficial to everything. Hence less balance complications like we are already seeing with Sacred Flame, Poison Spray etc. after goblin AC got lowered.

That's debatable. I personally hate the fact that they've tied cleave and trip to particular weapons. Why should I have carry around and swap to a quarterstaff just to perform a trip attack? It is possible to trip someone without a quarterstaff.

Agreed. The moves are cool - make them something that martial classes can do as part of their skillset. There's nothing inherent in the weapon that suddenly allows anyone wielding it to do that move.

I dislike lockpicks as consumables. It's a little bit like tracking normal arrows (at least they decided not to make you do that in BG3). Either make them an actual scarce resource, in which case tracking might make sense, or just make one set of thieves' tools that never gets consumed and stop bothering me with this thing that just clogs up my inventory.

Imo the quarterstaff's special ability should be more of a stunning bash than a trip. Maybe polearms could have the trip ability.

Does the quarterstaff's Trip ability also do damage? If so, then it's a fine special ability. It's similar to the Battlemaster's Trip Attack.
If not, then yes everyone should be able to trip (shove prone). It'd be great if Larian implemented an option to Shove Away or Shove Prone.

Cleave is fine. No one can cleave by default; it requires a class ability or feat (e.g., GWM). And even then they're not exactly the same ability, so a weapon's "Cleave" ability will stack with GWM's cleave-like ability.

There is no reason that a particular attack even cleave, should be tied to a particular weapon. It's an unnecessary deviation from 5E that serves little purpose; there's no reason that a character shouldn't be able to make a cleave attack with any melee weapon.

We can certainly hope they DO implement various options for how the game plays and rulesets work. Core rule options, and option for a more advanced reaction system and such.... would be divine.

Eh, at the very least cleave should be restricted to slashing weapons. You can't really cleave with a spear or a quarterstaff, given the former is stabbed into a single enemy and the latter deals damage with the force of a blow directly on an enemy. You can't realistically extend those to multiple enemies unless you take multiple swings/stabs.

And it does serve a purpose: giving weapons cool, flavorful, and importantly limited usage/small effect abilities. Of all of Larian's homebrew, this is one of the best in terms of coolness-to-OPness ratio.

Coolness is fine; but make the characters cool, not the weapons. Most of Larian's homebrew is about taking cool things that maybe a character could do and instead baking it into an item.

Characters in general cannot cleave in 5e. The only one who can is a Hunter Ranger who took Horde Breaker, but they can still do that in BG3. Thus, Larian isn't taking anything away from the characters.

Are you arguing that Larian should instead add a "Cleave" feat and/or ability to the Fighter class? I'm not opposed to such a change in principle, but then we'd run into balance problems that I don't trust Larian to do properly. If the Cleave feat was usable 1x per short rest, it'd be a waste of a feat. If it was usable every turn, it'd be way too powerful.

There's no cleaving in 5e outside of the GWM feat. Well, there was an optional rule in the DMG iirc but I've never heard of anybody using it.

That's the point, they are attaching skills to weapons, and further devaluing melee classes. It's why you can roll dwarven mage, sack intelligence stack strength, and grab the headband of intellect, and now you have a mage, a non-melee class that can pick up a greatsword and cleave just from equipping the weapon.

It's in the same vein as allowing any class to cast spells from scrolls. It devalues the concept of individual classes that DnD is built around.

It's definitely not in the same vein as scrolls. Universal scroll usage has taken a class-exclusive feature and given it to all classes. Whereas weapon's Cleave, Smash, and Charge are not class exclusive abilities (except for the single instance of Horde Breaker). They're also extremely limited usage whereas scrolls usage is unlimited.

Plus, these weapon abilities are really only useful to martial characters. Are you really going to run up in melee with your wizard to use it's Topple ability? I don't think I've ever done that. If anything, these weapon abilities enhance melee classes because these are the only classes that will use them.

I know cleave isn't an existing thing in 5e - it's Larian homebrew. I don't have an issue with what they're letting character's do, it's how they do it.

The special weapon attacks totally feel like something a battlemaster fighter or maybe a kensei monk could already do. So make it a class feature of fighters (or a subclass, or all martial classes) that they can do fancy moves based on the weapon they're wielding. It could either be limited (once per encounter or long rest or something) or be unlimited with a tradeoff (this attack does less/no damage, but also knocks the target back 5 feet). There are ways to implement homebrew rules that make a character feel special because their skills allow them to do a cool thing that most people can't. But if everyone can do anything so long as they pick up the right item, what's the point of characters having classes and strengths and weaknesses?

So basically add these weapon abilities to the list of Battlemaster maneuvers? That list already has trip, and most maneuvers are already Smashing because they deal the extra superiority die damage, so we'd be adding Cleave and Charge.

At some point we have to draw a line between class skills and general/equipment skills, because if you go far enough ~everything could be a class skill. E.g., Shove. One could argue that only martial characters should be able to shove, as only martial characters have trained in melee combat to make such an attempt without it utterly failing or opening themselves up to counterattack. I think that these limited-use weapon abilities lie closer to Shove than to class-defining abilities like casting spells, sneak attack, or bonus action dashing.
But I see your point. It is a somewhat magical/supernatural ability given by the weapon, instead of an ability given by training/class. I just think it's not offensive enough to warrant removing.

Good discussion on weapons skills, I hope they read.

I agree that skills should be attached to characters, not weapons. Different weapons could unlock or improve certain moves, but since these were done to give martial classes something interesting to do perhaps Wizards shouldn't know how to Cleave or Pinning Shot by default. If you want to learn fighting techniques, multiclass into a martial class. I don't think Larian fully understands the class system here, or the purpose to multiclassing to gain combat feats or abilities like Scroll use.

Personally, I don't like the arbitrary restriction of once per encounter on skills that seem like basic combat moves like Topple. Unless they also include the option to Shove prone. Spears, Pikes and Glaives should be able to Topple just like Quarterstaff, so perhaps certain weapons should have more uses than one.

Generally, I like the 3.x way of doing things, where you can do Knockdown, Disarm or even Whirlwind attacks as much as you want. They are situational abilities that come with a downside. It's more of a consideration when to use them rather than always doing them once in every encounter. Much more interesting from a tactical point of view.

It is in the same vein as a change or addition of a rule, that devalues a class. A wizard should not be able to use a skill like 'cleave' just for equipping a sword. All that it does is create broken builds, like the dwarf mage running around in full plate who is a better melee fighter than an actual fighter, and can still use fighter skills like cleave and such just for equipping the weapon.

Relegating "trip" to a staff-specific skill is beyond moronic on Larian's plart.

Fair points. Ignoring trip (everyone should be able to do this), it doesn't really make sense that you can only cleave/charge/bash/pin down a limited number of times.

Perhaps a compromise is that the weapon skills (I still like certain skills being tied to certain weapons: you can't cleave with a rapier or inflict bleeding with a club) have unlimited uses, but they have a negative effect.
-Cleave, Pin Down, and Bash attacks are made at disadvantage. Bash is turned into a "Sunder Armor" reducing the enemy AC by 2 for a turn instead of dealing extra damage
-Charge results in all attacks against you have advantage for a turn
This makes them more situational and interferes less with class skills, as the class skills/feats allow you to do the above things without the negative effect.

What if, as @1varangian suggested, these weapon skill were limited to martial classes?

What if you are already attacking with Disadvantage because of Bane or Blindness or something? Special attacks should be turned off that point or they would be essentially free.

Anyway, Larian isn't going to implement something that will make players miss more often since they are already struggling with it. The effects could be strong enough to still be situationally and tactically worth it, so hopefully they would at least consider something. Pin Down is already so weak it's effect is almost undetectable. If you succeed in something that can only be used once, or comes with a penalty, it should actually do something when it lands.

It would be an improvement on the current system, but still not very good. Why should a fighter have to equip a sub-optimal weapon like a staff, just to make a trip attack?

No one is arguing this. Pretty much everyone agrees that Shove Prone should be an option freely available to everyone in addition to Shove Away, per 5e rules.
But dealing damage + tripping? That's different and it makes more sense to restrict that to weapons most suited for it: quarterstaffs, spears, etc..
They could make it like GWM and cause a -5 instead of disadvantage. Though I prefer your idea of turning them off at that point.

But true, it is unlikely that Larian will implement additional sources of disadvantage for basic-like attacks. I agree that Pin Down should be stronger for being a once-per-short-rest ability, as should Bash.

GWM is actually a great reference for them to work with and expand on since it's already in the game. Cleave &co could easily follow that design pattern.

It's a much more D&D thing to do to counter the attack penalties by casting Bless on your Fighter, and letting them loose at the enemy to Cleave and Bash as much as they like.

The only thing I don't like about this is that GWM is an entire feat. So these weapon-abilities shouldn't be nearly as powerful as it; otherwise I definitely agree that they should be class abilities.

But Cleave: -5 to hit in exchange for making 2, maybe 3 attacks, seems roughly balanced. It will work out to a very situational ability that, on average, only grants slightly more damage when used.
GWM deals a lot more damage to a single target and also allows bonus action attacks, so is still much more powerful.

OK. Beat the Hag's lair. I didn't even stealth it. I did use Potions of Speed, but no Long Rest beforehand. No Magic Missiles either to kill the dupes. Just raw attack strength with a Cleric, Battlemaster, Ranger and Eldritch Knight with two familiars. Used 5e rules, though I will confess it gets pretty hard to determine if I'm hitting from behind or not or from raised terrain. I probably was. Still, I only used potions as Actions and tried to keep to the Hard Core 5e rules, and I could still beat her at Level 3. It can be done.

I will also confess, my first time through, though, failed utterly. It took me 2 tries.

I just murdered her in her teahouse without using any consumables or buffs or Larian fun exploits and she never even got a turn. Ok maybe I used "backstab" because it's infused in my spine now to always abuse it, and the 3rd attack they gave Thief. But these "surprise attacks" are way too powerful in a turn based system with just Sneak attack and Action Surge. Bosses should have some defenses against these, especially a hag who is a powerful teleporting spellcaster.

The double surprise round needs to go for sure since initiating combat with an attack is already a surprise round. Just one surprise round or attack and winning initiative on the following round makes for really one sided fights where someone just gets destroyed even if you restrict yourself to 5e raw.

Isn't the armor / health adjusted for enemies / creatures in the game. I really doubt you can "5e" anything, the whole game is adjusted by larian, rogues don't even roll multiple dice for sneak attack.

Like I said a bit ago this is Larian edition not 5th edition, no point.

That's why I'm doing the best test I can do. From pretty much Day 1 I've been hearing about how they needed to tweak 5e so that it plays well in a video game.

But if you actually do 5e the game is challenging, but not impossible, items all have purpose and meaning, and if enemies were actually given correct stats we wouldn't need backstab, jumping all over the place, height advantage, and all the other Larian homebrew rules.

Just try it and you'll see, it works. The whole reason Larian is even doing this whole cross breed rule system is too try to make nonD&D fans who have never played it happy. But this has been marketed as a D&D game. You should know going into it that it is meant to be D&D and therefore you accept the D&D rules and gameplay.

Right now, I feel like it's as if someone told me I was going to play a Star Wars game. Then I sat down, turned it on, and Star Trek Federation popped up on my screen. "Welcome to the Federation." Don't say it's D&D 5e and then change a bunch of rules and add new ones.

Let me rephrase. I don't mind adding new rules if they make sense. It's the addition of rules that don't make sense that I struggle with. A round is 6 seconds, roughly. How fast can you drink a bottle of liquid? Would it take most of that 6 seconds, or only like maybe a second or 2. Would jumping 30 feet even be feasible, let alone make sense for people to do so they could jump OVER an enemy's head six feet in the air to land behind them and then, on top of it all, still take a solid swing...all in 6 seconds?

I honestly sometimes feel like I am playing Star Wars and my characters are all Jedi and Sith.

Yea sure, anything is possible.
I played rainy weather effects music from youtube to get better atmosphere from the game, lowered the gamma to simulate day/night cycles, and just went to pornhub during the cringy sex scenes.

On a more serious note, Poe2 Deadire did great including these <hardcore> (more like...regular rpg stuff...) challenges options when you start the game. Actually makes things tons more interesting (food spoils after a while, abilities can only be used once per REST, more storms, weapon degrades, stricter fog of war with low light areas etc....). I really hope BG3 does this, since Larian is hardheaded on keeping their cheese gimmicks for RPG 101 players.

There are many things lacking that would make it far easier to play "hardcore dnd", actions like Dodge, Help (other than just reviving) and Ready. In conjunction with a nice reaction system this would really improve combat gameplay by a lot as it would add more options. The reaction system could be toggle-able for those not wishing intrusion rather than have more options.