Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Joined: Apr 2021
Tey Offline OP
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
Joined: Apr 2021
This is a list of my observations that highlight some characters, events or situations, which are in dire need of logical adjustments. it's going to be painfully long, though it's still just a scratch on the surface. Main reason for its length, is because I’ll have to postpone playing this game, it’s killing my PC, literally. It wasn't that bad when I started playing it. I think the last update wasn't healthy...
Anyway, buckle up. Wearing a helmet and a cup is optional but recommended.

CHARACTERS
1. Gale - a very confused individual that happened to be in love with a Goddess and then proves to be undeniably gay. Unless that goddess of his is a drag queen, it doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Please help him to make his mind up.

When you first meet him (as a warlock for example), he asks you if you are a wizard, after you told him that you are a warlock, he asks you if you are a cleric… I thought he was supposed to be the most intelligent of them all, at least the attempt at that is clear enough. Please fix it.

His cravings for powerful artifacts makes him a liability. Yes, you can refuse him but hat’s not the point. It’s just another stretch in failed attempt to enrich the character. It doesn’t make him anymore interesting, just wasteful. This artifact thing is one pull too far and it doesn’t seem to be a necessity.
“I trust you, so you must trust me back. Say nothing, ask nothing, just give me your best weapons and keep hunting for more, or I shall explode and take everyone with me…” Give me a break.

2. Wyll - yet an other confused character. Is he a nobility, a spoiled brat from the high city of Boldur's Gate, or is he some nameless brat from a village, which got burned down by goblins, and whose father couldn't spell?
I don't know how you manage to make this kind of a mess, basically in a single sentence, but it seems that your right hand doesn't know what your left hand is doing...

It would be nice if Wyll kept his eye in his inventory instead of dropping that thing on you after you disband him (same goes for Shadowheart and that gith trinket). That eye has nether sentimental nor any other value to us. You could let us be able to make a ring out of it, or something. A distasteful piece of jewelry, but at least having it will make sense. And it should go together nicely with that necklace you find at hags house.

He makes a lot of disapprovals at the beginning of Hag’s Quest and none of the approvals at the end of it. No explanations either, no comments, nothing. I’d like to know what the hell is going on in his head. He seems reasonable enough, but then he isn’t.

There are a lot of approval/disapproval going on in meager, insignificant situations, when worthy of attention situations are completely ignored. This approval system needs serious balansing.

3. Lae'zel - now this little frog princess is a bit too hard to get, if you wish to keep at least some of your consciousness intact that is. There are definitely some situations that simply cry for her approval to be raised.

For example, when she speaks about her admiration towards you. Or when she tells you how she respects your dumb optimism.
Or if you play as a gith, you may inspire her to high praise inside the ruins, when she compares your words with the words of her beloved queen and calls you “true child of Gith”. This is the best thing you’ll ever hear from her, solid grounds for kudos, right? Nope...

On the other hand, her disapprovals come by packs, some of which seem unreasonable or just not important enough to tip that scale.
One from the top of my head - when you manage to convince the owlbear not to attempt a massacre, she disapproves... Why? I get it, she likes killing things, but this really feels like unnecessary stretch.

(Inside Goblin’s Camp when you attempt the druid’s rescue) Lae'zel speaks of finding Zoru after Zoru has been found, talked to and forgotten. It would be nice if you removed that dialogue from her right after Zoru marks the map.

4. Shadowheart. Unlike Lae'zels, Shadowheart's superiority complex is utterly baseless. It's not a problem, just a fact. The problem is that she allowed to run that arrogant mouth without any repercussions. Not to mention, it's completely unfair to miss iguana, whom you get a chance to put in her place in conversation with Zoru (even if temporarily), and who's already fairly discriminated for economical state of her nose…
She’s also the only one who is sure about providing the cure. Overall, Lai’zels arrogance is justified, Shadowhearts isn’t, and there are no options to grab that tongue of hers and slap her with it.

There’s no middle ground, you either swallow her crap or kill/kick her. I don’t like either options. I want the option where you can try to humble her and if you fail, she lives on her own without you kicking her (she threatens you with it, let's call that bluff, if it is a bluff). But if she comes back, she better do it apologetically.

It's bad enough that they always get the last word, as if they made a compelling or conclusive argument. I'm yet to see any of them make such an argument... And then, there are situations when that arrogance is forced upon you and you have no choice but either to swallow it or just kill everybody. Why are we squeezed between two extremes?

Here is an interesting example, rich on lack of common sense.
If you play as a gith, your first conversation with Shadowheart (by the door to the ruins) may take on an interesting turn very quickly. If you're not in a habit of killing everything that moves or barks at you, you can simply knock her out and be on your merry way. That's what I did. However, I also looted her for her armor and the artifact, dropped some light leather on her (because there might be mosquitoes and I am no monster) and moved on.

When I finally reached the Grove, naturally she was there, playing with the artifact she's not supposed to have and wearing no armor. If the game allows such turn of events, it must adopt it properly. But that's not the worst part.

You can't pass her without triggering the dialogue and the dialogue has only 2 options:
1. Back down before her threat… OR
2. Start the fight. And here comes the retarded part. If you decide to stick a sock in her mouth (again), Wyll takes HER side and the entire grove with him. You just saved the damned place, while she was just sitting there, playing with the toy she doesn't have, yet YOU become the enemy number one... What the hell(s) is going on?
How about adding a 3rd option to ignore her completely? Option to leave without a reply instead of being forced to massacre the entire grove for one arrogant moron. Nothing makes any sense here.

If you recruit Wyll prior the conversation, you can knock her out again and move on with your life. Funny enough, she appears at your camp later, threatening you (again). Even an idiot would have learned by now, but not her… Convincing her to act reasonably without bowing down is a challenge, so a fight might take place and here is the extension of the retarded part from the grove. Any companion that isn’t in your party takes HER side… She came to kill you and your companion, who might have never seen her before takes her side. This is beyond ridiculous... Please fix this nonsense.

In her opening speech at the Seluna’s Temple, the intimidation requirement is 16 for a gith warrior, who’s supposed to be intimidating just by being present… Persuasion on this character is bellow 0, so the chances of success are even slimmer. You want to show her as a brave bird, I understand, however, after being knocked out twice by this particular gith, even an idiot should know better by now.

She constantly expresses her dislike of everything Selunas. I get it, she worships the opposite side, but for cry out loud, give me an option to tell her to shut the hell up! I don't give a damn about Seluna or any other religion in game or outside of it, but even I can't stand that constant bitching. And if Gale is with you, he's being silent... Why? Let him to tell her to shut up, I don't care, just make it happened before I broke my game in the attempt to choke her with her own braid and hang her as a piñata for goblins.

I am not asking to adjust the character, you want her like this, that’s fine. And I'm sure it took great deal to create someone THAT unpleasant, It’s rare for the game to have such an arrogant fool for one of the main characters. They are much more common in RL then fictions. I just want a range of ways to deal with this, especially when you play as a Gith or a Drow, for these guys don't take crap lightly. You show this in one situation and completely abandon it in others. Consistency & balance please.

One more thing on this subject, only with Lae'zel this time. When you play as an elf, you don't take her crap on subordinate after conversation with Zoru. When you play as a drow, however, with the same racial superiority complex as Gith, you swallow it... I thought there would be something like "Hush, monkey, or I'll put you back into that cage where I found you" or something of the sort, but no! Your proud drow has only 2 options, turn it into a joke or submit... Ew...


BATTLE
If you initiate the fight, you should be able to strike first, even if you are the slowest and the dumbest of them all. This is how you initiate fight, by throwing the first punch. If you press the button "Attack", you should be attacking, not the one who's being attacked.

Ogres. Missing an ogre 3 times in a row at the range of 1.5m with a sword is... well... ridiculous. Same happened with bows & spells at appropriate range... These freaking ogres are miraculously agile... I mean, how can you miss anything of that size? Even if you're completely blind, you hear it's stomping, you throw something in that direction, you're bound to hit it! But not here. And it's constant. I miss ogres a lot with spells, arrows, swords, hummers, freaking bombs... Something should be done about this in the name of common sense if nothing else.

Acid. Utterly unnecessary, messy, neither effective nor interesting, which feels out of place. They just leave these permanent, disgusting green stains on the ground, which you have to go around every time you’re in the area. Color me conservative, but I don’t think goblins should be intelligent enough to make chemical weaponry either. There are enough of things you can throw and miss the ogres with already, acid is just extra, and a poor taste too.

Now, this is a more of a question – HOW? Some enemies have a tendency to hit you 3-4 times in a row. Gnolls and the gith for exsample. I made a ranger specially for the purpose of seeing how the damn gnolls manage to shoot 2-3 times in a raw... The mystery remains. The gith are no better. I've seen their archer teleporting, shooting his crossbow twice then using another spell... It's 4 actions/bonus actions in one go. The mighty Baretha (may she rest in pieces) manages to hit twice, then she uses charge and hits again, which usually takes Lae’zel down (who faces the enemy with her back after that cut scene). If the giths start that fight, chances are they finish it quickly.

Learning Spells. I'm curious, when you are a wizard with a scroll in your hands, whom do you pay in order to learn that spell? Is there a pocket tutor I'm neglecting?

Weapons. All weapons have the same reach. Melee - 1.5 m (with one exception), spells (farthest) and bows 18 m. Now think about it, the dagger and the spear have the same reach... Am I the only one who's hurting here? The real spear has one advantage over other melee weapons, anyone care to guess what it is? And why do you need spears there anyway, it's the most uninteresting and poorly made weapon in the game and just as necessary as the acid...

The dagger may have the same reach as short sword, but that's it. The long bow has a longer reach then short bow and much longer then the reach of a crossbow. The crossbow carries a punch at a short distance, so it can have higher dmg (arguably still), but it can't shoot as far as the bow can and even less so accurately. I understand you simplify things for yourselves, but you already have spells with different range of impact, why not do everything right then?


QUESTS
The Hag Quest.
Perception Check at the beginning is utterly useless, it doesn’t change a thing, nor do the choices in the dialogue… You could live 2 options, help the hag or help the brothers, because there’s nothing else to it, at all. A lot of body movements and an illusion of choices when there are none.

Whether the hag kills brothers right in front of you, or you find them dead in the swamp later, there’s no dialogue on the subject after, your character acts as if they have no clue what happened to them.

The Devil Quest.
The paladin claims that it was the tifling who brought the gnolls around. That’s the only thing that got me involved.
By speaking with the dead, you confirm that it were paladins who defeated the gnolls.

When speak to the tifling, there is not a single question about the god-damned gnolls, only utterly irreverent ones. “Ooo, I’ve been to the Hells recently, fabulous place, and those shoes you have are fantaristic!” Where is my freaking gun...

And if for hell knows what reason you take the side of a tifling, everybody joyfully approves and no one knows exactly why... What a mess of a quest.


BROKEN
Spiders at the Goblins Camp drool at the "closed" door even when it's wide opened. So much for having 8 eyes, ey? I thought the idea was for you to release the beasties, so they would help you fight the goblins, guess I overestimated something here...

Well, that's enough for now. I hope that at least some of it isn't written in vain.


My heart will take me there, where my feet cannot...
Joined: May 2021
D
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
D
Joined: May 2021
I concur with all of the above.

Joined: Mar 2018
S
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
S
Joined: Mar 2018
A lot of the mechanical problems you are listing are problems with 5e (missing all the time, Learning spells costing you 2 x scrolls value and the copy value, weapons all being the same, etc.) some of them i think are bugs the multi attacking archers.

Joined: Jun 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Jun 2020
Hey there Tey, thanks for adding your input!

I'll go over a few of these things with some explanations or responses, which you can take or leave as you feel fit – either way, though, if you want to make sure that Larian definitely reads through your list, you can also submit it to their formal feedback form, which you can get to from the launcher ^.^

Originally Posted by Tey
CHARACTERS
1. Gale - a very confused individual that happened to be in love with a Goddess and then proves to be undeniably gay. Unless that goddess of his is a drag queen, it doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Please help him to make his mind up.

Well, he certainly wasn't a gay man in my game. Romancable characters in BG3 are what is known as Player-sexual; in any individual play thought, IF the player chooses to romance them, then they are, by convenience, of a sexuality that makes that permissible and able to progress. So, if you played a male character, and jumped through the many hoops required to romance Gale, then by coincidence, Gale is convincibly bisexual – we don't know whether he always was, or whether he's just open to trying this with you, but he is at least on board for giving it a go. This has no real impact or bearing on the established facts – that he was in love with a goddess, or at least in love with the concept of what he took her to be, depending on your view. There's no confusion here; Gale is either heterosexual or bisexual depending on your MC and whether they express interest in him, and the game conforms to that. It doesn't have any great impact on his overall character, and doesn't take away from him to have that particular detail be player-variable.

That said, Larian is a bit heavy-handed with their 'romance' in Act I at the moment, and it generally doesn't go over well, feeling arbitrary and forced in several places, and also feeling like it's pressed on you whether you're looking for it or not – that's a problem with Larian's design, though, and not with the individual characters.

Quote
When you first meet him (as a warlock for example), he asks you if you are a wizard, after you told him that you are a warlock, he asks you if you are a cleric… I thought he was supposed to be the most intelligent of them all, at least the attempt at that is clear enough. Please fix it.

This one sounds like a bug that's worth reporting – not one I've encountered, personally, and I've played as a warlock on numerous occasions. As a warlock, he's never offered me the cleric line, and he's only asked it of me when I'm a wisdom caster (cleric druid or ranger), and not if I've already expressed my class to him. I'd recommend, if you've got a save file from the point and can replicate the bug, it would be really good if you'd send it (save file included) to Larian's direct bug reporting form. (https://larian.com/support/baldur-s-gate-3?ver=4.1.101.4425#modal)

Quote
His cravings for powerful artifacts makes him a liability. Yes, you can refuse him but hat’s not the point. It’s just another stretch in failed attempt to enrich the character. It doesn’t make him anymore interesting, just wasteful. This artifact thing is one pull too far and it doesn’t seem to be a necessity.
“I trust you, so you must trust me back. Say nothing, ask nothing, just give me your best weapons and keep hunting for more, or I shall explode and take everyone with me…” Give me a break.

I've never really found this to be an issue, personally – there's more than enough artifacts that are of interest to him, and they're deliberately varied enough in type that you're bound to have one or two that you're simply not using. That's been my experience every play through so far... however, it Is a bit fiddly at the moment and not handled very well, I'll agree with that. It creates a contention for the character – and one that genuinely seems to carry a lot of weight with many players, who report growing to dislike him strongly over this exact thing. If that's the case, then it absolutely is having a defining impact on the character and his relationships with others. I've never actually refused him, though, so I don't have much familiarity with how he acts if you do.

The premise itself is typical Larian over-blown ridiculousness, as MOST of the mary-sue origin NPCs are, and there's not really much hope that any of that will be salvaged, but thanks still for adding your voice.

Quote
2. Wyll - yet an other confused character. Is he a nobility, a spoiled brat from the high city of Boldur's Gate, or is he some nameless brat from a village, which got burned down by goblins, and whose father couldn't spell?
I don't know how you manage to make this kind of a mess, basically in a single sentence, but it seems that your right hand doesn't know what your left hand is doing...

The latter, and he never actually claims or implies otherwise. I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that he claims to be nobility from – Wyll certainly never does this. He ACTS like a dashing heroic figure, and 'the Blade of Frontiers' has an epic of adventure surrounding him – that's part of his presentation and story, and it's made fairly clear from the outset that the 'blade' is a persona that Wyll wears as an adventuring hero. Over the course of the Act, you learn more about the person behind the stories, and that it is not, and never was, all glamour and glory – that he's not actually as 'good' a person as he paints himself, but that he very much wants to be.

As with Larian Mary-Sue origin characters, he literally was an epic grade hero figure who has indeed a great many dashing and daring deeds or heroism and good, using the fiend-pacted powers that his desperate deal for vengeance granted him, he's just now conveniently reduced to a kitten for 'some reason' (we presume the tadpole, I guess), and also apparently is perfectly happy following the leader to and obeying as the sidekick to a level one nothing person with no famous reputation of image to keep up... that's the bit that makes zero sense, if anything...

Quote
It would be nice if Wyll kept his eye in his inventory instead of dropping that thing on you after you disband him (same goes for Shadowheart and that gith trinket).

This one is a definite Larian design problem that one would really want to hope they fix – Key items are returned to the PC when a character leaves the party, even when they're things that wouldn't otherwise be given up at all. Shadow should absolutely keep her box, and there really ought to be *something* to do with the eye in relation to finding it, returning it to Wyll, or at least asking him about it, etc., so that we actually know where we stand with it ,and whether he wants to keep it or not. Right now, there's nothing by a throwaway comment when you pick it up, and that's all.

Quote
He makes a lot of disapprovals at the beginning of Hag’s Quest and none of the approvals at the end of it. No explanations either, no comments, nothing. I’d like to know what the hell is going on in his head. He seems reasonable enough, but then he isn’t.

There are a lot of approval/disapproval going on in meager, insignificant situations, when worthy of attention situations are completely ignored. This approval system needs serious balansing.

The approval system is definitely lacking in timely definition and clarity – I don't disagree that the moments when they choose to add approval ticks are sometimes very strange, juxtaposed alongside the places whether they're really lacking when they should exist.

Generally, though, the characters are fairly consistent – they failing is that they judge you based on outcomes, not on efforts, and further that they presume your motives for you ahead of time, and judge you for those, without correcting themselves even if your plan later proves otherwise.

Wyll, for example, approves of goodly and heroic acts, and of justice, but he's the violent-leaning side of it – he likes it when you enact violence against 'evil' things; saving innocents is a definite plus in his book, but the vengeance trip is stronger. He disapproves of you having social dealings with evil creatures, or doing anything with them other than killing them. This means he will disapprove of you dealing with the Hag at all, in any way other than full aggression, even if your plan was simply to pacify her temporarily so you can sneak in and deal with her by surprise. You won't get that reputation back, even if that's what you do, once he's taken it away. This is a problem with the entire system.

Quote
3. Lae'zel - now this little frog princess is a bit too hard to get, if you wish to keep at least some of your consciousness intact that is. There are definitely some situations that simply cry for her approval to be raised.

[Several Examples]

Indeed; these are more examples of where the system feels like it's poorly fit, with many clear approval moments going begging, and many other strange or seemingly small and insignificant moments getting attention.

Quote
(Inside Goblin’s Camp when you attempt the druid’s rescue) Lae'zel speaks of finding Zoru after Zoru has been found, talked to and forgotten. It would be nice if you removed that dialogue from her right after Zoru marks the map.

there are a lot of dialogue tails like this that don't update properly; I'd strongly encourage you, and any one else, to continue submitting bug reports to their formal bug reporter as much as you can spare the effort. The companion dialogues are littered with these, everywhere, and it really detracts from the game.

Quote
4. Shadowheart. Unlike Lae'zels, Shadowheart's superiority complex is utterly baseless. It's not a problem, just a fact. The problem is that she allowed to run that arrogant mouth without any repercussions. Not to mention, it's completely unfair to miss iguana, whom you get a chance to put in her place in conversation with Zoru (even if temporarily), and who's already fairly discriminated for economical state of her nose…
She’s also the only one who is sure about providing the cure. Overall, Lai’zels arrogance is justified, Shadowhearts isn’t, and there are no options to grab that tongue of hers and slap her with it.

There’s no middle ground, you either swallow her crap or kill/kick her. I don’t like either options. I want the option where you can try to humble her and if you fail, she lives on her own without you kicking her (she threatens you with it, let's call that bluff, if it is a bluff). But if she comes back, she better do it apologetically.

It's bad enough that they always get the last word, as if they made a compelling or conclusive argument. I'm yet to see any of them make such an argument... And then, there are situations when that arrogance is forced upon you and you have no choice but either to swallow it or just kill everybody. Why are we squeezed between two extremes?

This comes back to Larian's love of their Mary-Sue origin companions. The companions almost always get to have the last word, an the MC almost always exists in conversation just to be the fall person, the dumb person, the idiot or the interlocutor for them to springboard their awesomeness off, feeding them the lines they need to do it, even if those lines make zero sense for our character to be saying. They are the shining stars, and Larian loves them, so we virtually never get the chance to call them down or counter their attitudes. It's frankly pretty disgusting and unenjoyable. Shadow is definitely one of the worst offenders of this, but they've all got it pretty bad.

Quote
Here is an interesting example, rich on lack of common sense.

[more Shadowheart shenanigans]

One more thing on this subject, only with Lae'zel this time. When you play as an elf, you don't take her crap on subordinate after conversation with Zoru. When you play as a drow, however, with the same racial superiority complex as Gith, you swallow it... I thought there would be something like "Hush, monkey, or I'll put you back into that cage where I found you" or something of the sort, but no! Your proud drow has only 2 options, turn it into a joke or submit... Ew...

You're not the only one who has had these complaints, and they're a pretty glaring issue with writing and design; I still want to hope that adding more voices may help.

The dialogue choices and race-locked options are pretty damn disgusting in the game at the moment, borderline offensive, really... You're ONLY allowed to suggest that everyone calm down and that it doesn't need to come to blows if you're a halfling – no-one else is allowed to use those lines! No one of any other race could POSSIBLE ever want to de-escalate a situation (SPECIFICALY because of their RACE), it's so impossible that they locked the line away behind halflings... who are apparently also to be characterised as the only ones who might be yokels or ignorant bumpkins; halfing only, no-one else. You can only use bloody and violent threats as a drow, and if you are a drow, you lose the ability to make more nuanced or subtle threats because all of those lines are replaced by the tactlessly gratuitous 'drow' ones. It's gross and it's terrible, it's above-game racist and disgusting... and the more people report it as an issue the better.

(For the record – I'm not against race-locked dialogue. What it SHOULD be, however, are dialogue options related to history, culture and other such information; things that are actually fairly likely to be specific to their racial origins - a halfling sharing the traditional halfling take on a particular deity or situation, an elf talking about what evermeet means to them, or a dwarf talking about the subtle differences between shield dwarf and gold dwarf cultures, or how they're usually taught about duergar and dealing with them...)

Quote
BATTLE
If you initiate the fight, you should be able to strike first, even if you are the slowest and the dumbest of them all. This is how you initiate fight, by throwing the first punch. If you press the button "Attack", you should be attacking, not the one who's being attacked.

So, in BG3 Surprise is not working properly, and we're still waiting on them to get it right. In 5e rules, if you surprise an enemy, and the enemy Is indeed surprised, then you will get to act before they do, regardless of your initiative. There is no such thing as a 'surprise round' in 5e, and initiative is rolled normally, however, surprised foes get the surprised condition for their first turn, and while they have it, they cannot take any action at all, including reactions. If you roll a terrible initiative, they'll get their turn before you, but it will functionally be a turn skip for them, so you'll still get to actually act ahead of them. If you roll well, you'll get to act on them while they are surprised, and then you'll get to act ahead of them on the next round again, after they've skipped their first turn.

If you have instances where you initiate combat from stealth, or against sleeping targets, etc., and you find them acting, and actually acting, before you get to do anything, then that's something you should definitely send in as a bug report, save file included. We're still hoping that they do actually intend to do surprise correctly, fingers crossed.

Quote
Ogres. Missing an ogre 3 times in a row at the range of 1.5m with a sword is... well... ridiculous. Same happened with bows & spells at appropriate range... These freaking ogres are miraculously agile... I mean, how can you miss anything of that size? Even if you're completely blind, you hear it's stomping, you throw something in that direction, you're bound to hit it! But not here. And it's constant. I miss ogres a lot with spells, arrows, swords, hummers, freaking bombs... Something should be done about this in the name of common sense if nothing else.

This is a failure of BG3's lazy visual effects... everything is characterised as a miss outright, or as the enemy dodging, when it shouldn't be. Ogres, for example, are not nimble creatures, and they aren't hard to hit – their AC comes from natural armour, which mostly meas that when you fail to beat the AC, it's not really because you missed them, per se, but rather that your strike failed to pierce their hide and blubber, that it glanced off, or rebounded, or otherwise filed to do significant damage to them, through their tough exteriors. The game does not convey that, and leaves you with the ridiculousness of ogres doing phase-dodges, which, I agree, looks silly.

The simplest, laziest, solution that Larian could take would be to put in the 'hit failure' effect that makes the most sense for each enemy type – so that any miss on an Ogre looks like a glance off or a deflection, while any miss on a jumping spider looks like a dodge, etc... not ideal, but better than the present, and the best we've any hope of getting out of Larian, I fear.

Quote
Acid.

Lots of people don't care for the over-use of floor spots and other gaudy larianisms – no disagreement here. I don't agree that goblins don't have the smarts for it – they're a sentient race like any other, and each tribe is going to have a few crafty minds in it... but likely not every goblin, and even then, resources are the thing. There's definitely too many special arrows and bombs being thrown around, by a long margin.

Quote
Now, this is a more of a question – HOW? Some enemies have a tendency to hit you 3-4 times in a row. Gnolls and the gith for example.

So, while the enemies are of a higher individual level than our PCs in the examples given, this is a case of Larian flagrantly ignoring or disregarding the rules in order to make overpowered enemies, rather than actually using the balance already provided by the system they're supposedly using. A CR1 gnoll flesh gnawer as a three hit multi-attack – but it's melee only, and it's a d6+2, not a ranged d8+4 as in BG3. They don't really seem aware of how ignorant their tinkering is, because they expect you to use their class-abolishing larianisms to counter-act it. Their spellcasters are worse – with examples of level 5 casters having excessively more first and second level spell slots available to them than even a level 20 character could EVER have, as well as a slew of special bonus action abilities that are just duplicates of spells but fashioned as free BA abilities instead, to let them stack them up. Having the enemies playing by a different set of rules to the players does not create a sense of a fair system, at all.

Quote
Learning Spells. I'm curious, when you are a wizard with a scroll in your hands, whom do you pay in order to learn that spell? Is there a pocket tutor I'm neglecting?

So, this is a “for Video Games” quality of life thing, which is pretty wise for them to do, and most RPGs that have a scribing mechanic like this do so. The formal idea is that transcribing a spell into your spellbook, so that you can use and prepare it regularly, takes both time and effort, as well as reagents and materials (and also destroys the scroll) – specifically in 5e it takes enchanted inks and scribing paper, for example. A video game would be doing itself a disservice to meticulously book-keep you on this, requiring you to buy scribing materials in towns with vendors that have them, in advance, and instead they just 'presume' that you have bought the required materials when last they were available, and 'retroactively' subtract the gold they would have cost you. The game could definitely do a better job of explaining that scribing costs materials and money though.

Quote
Weapons. All weapons have the same reach. Melee - 1.5 m (with one exception), spells (farthest) and bows 18 m. Now think about it, the dagger and the spear have the same reach... Am I the only one who's hurting here? The real spear has one advantage over other melee weapons, anyone care to guess what it is? And why do you need spears there anyway, it's the most uninteresting and poorly made weapon in the game and just as necessary as the acid...

The dagger may have the same reach as short sword, but that's it. The long bow has a longer reach then short bow and much longer then the reach of a crossbow. The crossbow carries a punch at a short distance, so it can have higher dmg (arguably still), but it can't shoot as far as the bow can and even less so accurately. I understand you simplify things for yourselves, but you already have spells with different range of impact, why not do everything right then?

Some weapons (glaives, halberds, whips) have a special property, 'reach', which extends their melee range – all other melee weapons have a standardised effective range that they can be used in. This doesn't mean you use them all the same way. The thing to bear in mind if you're thinking in practical terms about this, is that you are not standing necessarily toe to to with your opponent – you control a five foot space around you, and so do they. Within that space, you move and threaten; a spear-wielder wold move differently to a dagger-wielder, in this situation, but they can both functionally threaten the space around them in doing so. If you actually physically play this out, it comes out making a surprising amount of sense, even if it seems like it wouldn't' in your mind. It's not perfect, of course, but it's a fair simplification. The game doesn't convey this well, since the freedom of movement often leaves you pressed right up against enemies and even clipping into them at times, but I'd argue that it's something that would be better fixed with improved presentation and communication of mechanics, than a hard change.

Ranged weapons have all received a drastic downgrade and hard disservice in Larian's game, where the nuanced differences between them have been largely abolished, leaving some ranged weapons seeming to be pointless compared to others. Spell ranges suffered as well, with most spells that have a range longer than 30 feet being horrendously cut down to almost nothing... along with bonus action dashing and jumping, an movement which has not been similarly reduced, it's a big nerf and imbalance to this aspect of the game.

If you're curious, the formal distinctions between ranged weapons should look like this (range brackets indicate the effective range, and the maximum range; shots in the second range can be made, but are made with disadvantage):

Requiring Simple Weapon Proficiency:
Dart (1d4), Range: (20/60) (Can also be used as a finesse melee weapon, and is very easy to hide)
Sling (1d4), Range: (30/120) (virtually weightless, and looks fairly innocent on its own)
Shortbow (1d6), Range: (80/320) (Harder to hide, requires 2 hands to use)
Light Crossbow (1d8), Range: (80/320) (obvious weapon, 2 hands to use, requires loading)

Requiring Martial Weapon Proficiency:
Blowgun (1 Damage), Range: (25/100) (Stealthy, quiet, easy to hide, requires loading)
Net (No damage; restrains target), Range: (5/15) (takes special training to not be disadvantaged)
Longbow (1d8), Range: (150/600) (Heavy for small races, 2 hands to use)
Hand Crossbow (1d6), Range: (30/120) (light; can be off-handed/dual-wielded, easy to hide, stealthy, requires loading)
Heavy Crossbow (1d10), Range: (100/400) (Not stealthy at all, heavy for small races, two hands to use, requires loading)

They all have their strengths and weaknesses, and valuable uses – but most of those differences have disappeared in BG3 so far, with the drastic range cuts, currently bugged inability to dual-wield hand crossbows, and lack of situations where stealth or concealment may be relevant.

Quote
QUESTS
The Hag Quest.

There's a lot of false choice that ultimately railroads to one of two conclusions, so far in ACT I. It's actually quite disheartening. There is one way that I know of to keep the brothers alive, but the game doesn't seem to have actually accounted for it properly, and it's probably a bug.

Seeing through the illusion on the glade does give you some other options with interacting with the redcaps, but nothing that lets you say anything different in any of the important conversations.

Quote
The Devil Quest.

The paladins are lying about themselves and also serve Zariel, acting as her head-hunters here (you learn this form SwD with their fallen member). They didn't summon the gnolls, and did indeed dispatch them, but tiefling girl didn't summon them either. I didn't catch anything implying that she did... what dialogue was that?

The situation is pitched s a moral choice, since both of them have been forced into Zariel's service, and both want out of it. Both would seemingly rather live their own lives, but only accepted Zariel's dominion because the choice was that or death... the difference being that the Paladins Asked for it, turning their backs on their old oaths, and the tiefling did not.

The problem I have with this quest is that you're presented a false fork – it implies that you have no choice but to murder one of these groups, and condemn their souls for all eternity, and no other option at all, even though neither of them is really in a position worthy of punishment... and indeed, the idea of what it wold take to get the out from under Zariel's control is presented during the conversations. I'm not interested in killing either of them – neither side wants to serve Zariel, or has any emnity with the other outside of her direct orders... but we cannot progress the quest other than through murder. It's a false choice, and it's badly done.

Quote
BROKEN
Spiders at the Goblins Camp drool at the "closed" door even when it's wide opened. So much for having 8 eyes, ey?

Lots of this stuff all over the first Act of the game... report it to their official bug form where you find it, as that's probably the best thing that any of us can do.

Thanks again for taking the time and effort to write this up and add your feedback. Hope some of the responses are a little comforting to you at least ^.^

Last edited by Niara; 10/06/21 04:07 AM.
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
Good feedback OP, thanks for taking your time to write this. It was interresting to read.

Originally Posted by Snardbuckett
A lot of the mechanical problems you are listing are problems with 5e (missing all the time, Learning spells costing you 2 x scrolls value and the copy value, weapons all being the same, etc.) some of them i think are bugs the multi attacking archers.

According to any DnD encounter calculator : 3 ogre against 4 level 4 characters is supposed to be a deadly encounter. And you usually meet them at level 3.

It becomes an average encounter at level 5 when your proficiency bonus is increased by 1.
The wizard ogre also have an AC increased by 1 compared to DnD (+mirror image) and their dexterity is higher, meaning they can avoid some damages/spells more easily than they should.

Missing all the time can be a problem in DnD but encounters are not often balanced / well chosen in BG3...
WoTC may be guilty for some thing but don't forget that Larian has deviated A LOT from DnD, creating even more issues or reinforcing them.

And as Niara said, "missing" does not always mean that you "miss" them... It means that you failed to hurt them.

Last edited by Maximuuus; 10/06/21 07:39 AM.
Joined: Jun 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Jun 2020
Not to mention, add the spellcasting trait to one of those ogres, with second level wizard casting including mirror image, and their challenge rating footprint spikes up even higher - it's beyond deadly for level 3s.

Joined: Apr 2021
Tey Offline OP
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
Joined: Apr 2021
Hello Niara. Not only did you manage to read the entire thing, you also took your time to grace it with a detailed reply. It's more then I expected. Thank you.

Now, it would seem that you and I had some very different experiences in the game, naturally some explanations are in order. I also got a slight impression that you doubt my sincerity. I assure you, I did not make anything up and I doubt that my experience is unique. I certainly hope that's not the case.

About Gale.


Originally Posted by Niara
Well, he certainly wasn't a gay man in my game. Romancable characters in BG3 are what is known as Player-sexual; in any individual play thought, IF the player chooses to romance them, then they are, by convenience, of a sexuality that makes that permissible and able to progress.

So, if you played a male character, and jumped through the many hoops required to romance Gale, then by coincidence, Gale is convincibly bisexual – we don't know whether he always was, or whether he's just open to trying this with you, but he is at least on board for giving it a go. This has no real impact or bearing on the established facts – that he was in love with a goddess, or at least in love with the concept of what he took her to be, depending on your view. There's no confusion here; Gale is either heterosexual or bisexual depending on your MC and whether they express interest in him, and the game conforms to that. It doesn't have any great impact on his overall character, and doesn't take away from him to have that particular detail be player-variable.
I am sure that the characters are meant to be... flexible in their tastes, that paragraph is filled with sarcasm, which is often lost in writing, to my regret.
I have never tried courting Gale with my male character. Not my cup of tea (as Gale says somewhere), not even in game for curiosity sake. I could barely brush him off with my male character, he didn't take first "NO" for an answer like Wyll for example. He persisted to the borderline of begging. (that was funny, actually)

And all my female characters with the same Approval Level (High - Very High), got a toast to a friendship, or something and that's it. All 5 of them! Order of the approach did not matter, race did not matter, his resurrections did not matter, nothing mattered, all measurably failed. =)

As you can see, I gave this a bit of a thought and jumped through a lot of hoops with my female characters to earn his affection. I don't know how you managed to charm him in your game but in mine, his straight side is obviously broken.

About his hunger for rare trinkets.

Originally Posted by Niara
I've never really found this to be an issue, personally – there's more than enough artifacts that are of interest to him, and they're deliberately varied enough in type that you're bound to have one or two that you're simply not using.
I never said it to be an issue, I've said it's unnecessary. It does not add depth to his character, rather takes away from it. It's just too much. Of course, this is my personal opinion, to agree or disagree is entirely up to the reader, I just felt like sharing it.

And the only reason I denied him the weapon, is because the first artifact I acquired in that particular playthrough was Tyr's Sword. This is not the weapon I am willing to part with, especially with 2 warriors in the party. I could tell you what will happen if you deny him feeding, but you should find out on your own, if you're curious enough.

About Wyll.

Originally Posted by Niara
The latter, and he never actually claims or implies otherwise. I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that he claims to be nobility from – Wyll certainly never does this.
It seems there is a part of the game which you haven't explored yet. I do not "invent" anything here. Follow up on "Spoiled Brat" part of the conversation with him. I don't know if his Approval level matters here, just in case make sure it's high enough to compel him to open up. He will claim to be from High City, the nobility part is what you "smell" on him during that conversation and presented as your conclusion, which he does not deny. He was a rich kid who's got caught pickpocketing. And this creates the conflict I have mentioned.

So it seems you have a bit of exploring to do. Please let me know what you've discovered with a reply here, or with PM if you prefer. I'm just curious. Should you decide to take that path of course.


Originally Posted by Niara
This one is a definite Larian design problem that one would really want to hope they fix – Key items are returned to the PC when a character leaves the party, even when they're things that wouldn't otherwise be given up at all. Shadow should absolutely keep her box, and there really ought to be *something* to do with the eye in relation to finding it, returning it to Wyll, or at least asking him about it, etc., so that we actually know where we stand with it ,and whether he wants to keep it or not. Right now, there's nothing by a throwaway comment when you pick it up, and that's all.
The funny part is, that on occasion they forget to return Thieves Tools or something else of use, but when it comes to their body parts or other questionable things... never.

Originally Posted by Niara
Wyll, for example, approves of goodly and heroic acts, and of justice, but he's the violent-leaning side of it – he likes it when you enact violence against 'evil' things; saving innocents is a definite plus in his book, but the vengeance trip is stronger. He disapproves of you having social dealings with evil creatures, or doing anything with them other than killing them. This means he will disapprove of you dealing with the Hag at all, in any way other than full aggression, even if your plan was simply to pacify her temporarily so you can sneak in and deal with her by surprise. You won't get that reputation back, even if that's what you do, once he's taken it away. This is a problem with the entire system.
Ah, but you see, he takes the Hags side before she is discovered as such. He disapproves of you questioning the old lady about the sister. In my opinion, he should wait.

Well it seems we agree that the approval system is not... perfect. Though imagine this. What if the characters were able to give PC a benefit of a doubt based on their approval/trust level and make their judgements after the event.. That would be something, no? I doubt this will ever come to pass but they say "dreaming is healthy", so that's what I just did.


Quote
There are a lot of dialogue tails like this that don't update properly; I'd strongly encourage you, and any one else, to continue submitting bug reports to their formal bug reporter as much as you can spare the effort. The companion dialogues are littered with these, everywhere, and it really detracts from the game.
I just thought these words deserve extra attention. =)


Originally Posted by Niara
This comes back to Larian's love of their Mary-Sue origin companions. The companions almost always get to have the last word, an the MC almost always exists in conversation just to be the fall person, the dumb person, the idiot or the interlocutor for them to springboard their awesomeness off, feeding them the lines they need to do it, even if those lines make zero sense for our character to be saying. They are the shining stars, and Larian loves them, so we virtually never get the chance to call them down or counter their attitudes. It's frankly pretty disgusting and unenjoyable. Shadow is definitely one of the worst offenders of this, but they've all got it pretty bad.

You're not the only one who has had these complaints, and they're a pretty glaring issue with writing and design; I still want to hope that adding more voices may help.
I am glad I'm not the only one having issues with this. You know, I would let it slide if there was at least a spark of intelligence behind those lines, but there isn't. At best they are unnecessary and boring, at worst they are painfully moronic.

If you ever played TW3, remember Gerald's conversations with Dijkstra. Those are pinnacle of sarcasm and Dijkstra's is especially sharp. However, when he slaps you with it, you don't hold it against him, for it is beautiful and always to the point. It provokes a smile at very least and that intelligence inspires respect.
Here, I feel stupid just for engaging in the conversation with this idiot in the first place... But if you do not interact with your companions, especially when there's that yellow mark above their heads, there isn't much of the game left, is there...


Originally Posted by Niara
The dialogue choices and race-locked options are pretty damn disgusting in the game at the moment, borderline offensive, really... You're ONLY allowed to suggest that everyone calm down and that it doesn't need to come to blows if you're a halfling – no-one else is allowed to use those lines! No one of any other race could POSSIBLE ever want to de-escalate a situation (SPECIFICALY because of their RACE), it's so impossible that they locked the line away behind halflings... who are apparently also to be characterised as the only ones who might be yokels or ignorant bumpkins; halfing only, no-one else. You can only use bloody and violent threats as a drow, and if you are a drow, you lose the ability to make more nuanced or subtle threats because all of those lines are replaced by the tactlessly gratuitous 'drow' ones. It's gross and it's terrible, it's above-game racist and disgusting... and the more people report it as an issue the better.
Are you talking about the argument between the human and the tifling (sorry, can't remember their names) after the siege of the Grove? Well, the specific line may be locked away (haven't played a halfling) but the ways to deescalate the conflict are still there, for elves, drow and even the gyth, though the later two can do it only with a threat I think. I normally just punch the human and move on. I'm satisficed with the result, except of that meaningless remarks Lae'zel makes after. If she questions my punch, she should be able to test it first hand. My half-elf is a piece-loving, tree-hugging druid however, walks in opposite of my usual way so I would learn more about the game, widens my horizon sort of speak... So, I am aware of other options too.

I absolutely agree. Aggressive, doesn't have to be stupid or narrowminded. Small, doesn't have to me silly or weak. Sometimes you can get two specific lines for your race and you realize that you wouldn't pick either. Both are a waste of a virtual space.
It definitely should be more on a level of cultural influence rather someone's personal idea of what your character's personality should be, and a primitive idea at that.


Originally Posted by Niara
So, in BG3 Surprise is not working properly, and we're still waiting on them to get it right. In 5e rules, if you surprise an enemy, and the enemy Is indeed surprised, then you will get to act before they do, regardless of your initiative. There is no such thing as a 'surprise round' in 5e, and initiative is rolled normally, however, surprised foes get the surprised condition for their first turn, and while they have it, they cannot take any action at all, including reactions. If you roll a terrible initiative, they'll get their turn before you, but it will functionally be a turn skip for them, so you'll still get to actually act ahead of them. If you roll well, you'll get to act on them while they are surprised, and then you'll get to act ahead of them on the next round again, after they've skipped their first turn.

If you have instances where you initiate combat from stealth, or against sleeping targets, etc., and you find them acting, and actually acting, before you get to do anything, then that's something you should definitely send in as a bug report, save file included. We're still hoping that they do actually intend to do surprise correctly, fingers crossed.
No, I wasn't talking about surprise attacks, though those can malfunction too and sometimes in your favor. That was my experience, but I only witnessed it once. Usually, they work for me as they should.
I was talking about options in dialogues, when you have a choice of attacking an individual or a group that you are conversing with, either with perception passed (surprise was nullified) or where there's no surprises involved of any kind. Those seem to be utterly random and can go either way. It seems that this Attack button is simply there to start the fight, which side gets to hit first simply doesn't seem to matter.


Originally Posted by Niara
Ogres.
This is a failure of BG3's lazy visual effects... everything is characterised as a miss outright, or as the enemy dodging, when it shouldn't be. Ogres, for example, are not nimble creatures, and they aren't hard to hit – their AC comes from natural armour, which mostly meas that when you fail to beat the AC, it's not really because you missed them, per se, but rather that your strike failed to pierce their hide and blubber, that it glanced off, or rebounded, or otherwise filed to do significant damage to them, through their tough exteriors. The game does not convey that, and leaves you with the ridiculousness of ogres doing phase-dodges, which, I agree, looks silly.

The simplest, laziest, solution that Larian could take would be to put in the 'hit failure' effect that makes the most sense for each enemy type – so that any miss on an Ogre looks like a glance off or a deflection, while any miss on a jumping spider looks like a dodge, etc... not ideal, but better than the present, and the best we've any hope of getting out of Larian, I fear.
You see, DMG of 0~1 pt should cover the lack of penetration... Not sure if it sounds right, my English vocabulary is in dire need of improvement. However, I am confident you understand precisely what I mean. No other special effects are needed. And it shouldn't be that hard to execute.

Originally Posted by Niara
Acid.
Lots of people don't care for the over-use of floor spots and other gaudy larianisms – no disagreement here. I don't agree that goblins don't have the smarts for it – they're a sentient race like any other, and each tribe is going to have a few crafty minds in it... but likely not every goblin, and even then, resources are the thing. There's definitely too many special arrows and bombs being thrown around, by a long margin.
Sentient is not a synonym of intelligence. Trolls in TW3 are also sentient, yet a little smarter then the rocks they are made of. I respect your opinion, but I'll keep my own. To my eyes, goblins are a bit too primitive to be heavily involved in chemistry.

Originally Posted by Niara
Quote
Now, this is a more of a question – HOW? Some enemies have a tendency to hit you 3-4 times in a row. Gnolls and the gith for example.

So, while the enemies are of a higher individual level than our PCs in the examples given, this is a case of Larian flagrantly ignoring or disregarding the rules in order to make overpowered enemies, rather than actually using the balance already provided by the system they're supposedly using. A CR1 gnoll flesh gnawer as a three hit multi-attack – but it's melee only, and it's a d6+2, not a ranged d8+4 as in BG3. They don't really seem aware of how ignorant their tinkering is, because they expect you to use their class-abolishing larianisms to counter-act it. Their spellcasters are worse – with examples of level 5 casters having excessively more first and second level spell slots available to them than even a level 20 character could EVER have, as well as a slew of special bonus action abilities that are just duplicates of spells but fashioned as free BA abilities instead, to let them stack them up. Having the enemies playing by a different set of rules to the players does not create a sense of a fair system, at all.
I see... Thank you for making it clearer to me. Though, now I am not sure how to react. To be pissed about being cheated or to be proud for coming on top despite of being cheated. Now that's a real dilemma =) Kidding.
I was just curious if that was a bug or the skills at a higher level. I've noticed that the gyth are lvl 5, at least some of them. The level of gnolls escaped my attention but they were never a challenge, only that double-shot spiked my curiosity.
I do agree that changing rules inside the game to compensate for something is a poor way to troubleshoot.


Originally Posted by Niara
Quote
Learning Spells. I'm curious, when you are a wizard with a scroll in your hands, whom do you pay in order to learn that spell? Is there a pocket tutor I'm neglecting?

So, this is a “for Video Games” quality of life thing, which is pretty wise for them to do, and most RPGs that have a scribing mechanic like this do so. The formal idea is that transcribing a spell into your spellbook, so that you can use and prepare it regularly, takes both time and effort, as well as reagents and materials (and also destroys the scroll) – specifically in 5e it takes enchanted inks and scribing paper, for example. A video game would be doing itself a disservice to meticulously book-keep you on this, requiring you to buy scribing materials in towns with vendors that have them, in advance, and instead they just 'presume' that you have bought the required materials when last they were available, and 'retroactively' subtract the gold they would have cost you. The game could definitely do a better job of explaining that scribing costs materials and money though.
Alight, I'm sorry, but none of it makes any sense. It sounds like they have created a silly concept, then decided that it's too complex and started building upon it to create a silly way to cut the corners of that silly concept instead of fixing the foundation and avoid this ridiculous lambada altogether.
It's a spell. You learn it, it becomes your skill. The presence of a spellbook is only justified if you have poor memory, or if it contains spells which you had no time to learn yet.
Anyway, let this be the dumbest thing in this game has to offer, I can live with it.


Originally Posted by Niara
Some weapons (glaives, halberds, whips) have a special property, 'reach', which extends their melee range – all other melee weapons have a standardised effective range that they can be used in. This doesn't mean you use them all the same way. The thing to bear in mind if you're thinking in practical terms about this, is that you are not standing necessarily toe to to with your opponent – you control a five foot space around you, and so do they. Within that space, you move and threaten; a spear-wielder wold move differently to a dagger-wielder, in this situation, but they can both functionally threaten the space around them in doing so. If you actually physically play this out, it comes out making a surprising amount of sense, even if it seems like it wouldn't' in your mind. It's not perfect, of course, but it's a fair simplification. The game doesn't convey this well, since the freedom of movement often leaves you pressed right up against enemies and even clipping into them at times, but I'd argue that it's something that would be better fixed with improved presentation and communication of mechanics, than a hard change.
It would be a fair simplification if the spear and a great sword would be on the same list with halberds. I'm not sure what did you mean by "actually physically play this out", but here is how I see it. If you are wielding a dagger and I am with a sword, or god forbid - a spear, the only way for you to get to me for your striking distance is to through the damn thing at me. Unless of course you're coming from the back and I don't see you.

Originally Posted by Niara
Ranged weapons have all received a drastic downgrade and hard disservice in Larian's game, where the nuanced differences between them have been largely abolished, leaving some ranged weapons seeming to be pointless compared to others. Spell ranges suffered as well, with most spells that have a range longer than 30 feet being horrendously cut down to almost nothing... along with bonus action dashing and jumping, an movement which has not been similarly reduced, it's a big nerf and imbalance to this aspect of the game.

If you're curious, the formal distinctions between ranged weapons should look like this (range brackets indicate the effective range, and the maximum range; shots in the second range can be made, but are made with disadvantage):

Requiring Simple Weapon Proficiency:
Dart (1d4), Range: (20/60) (Can also be used as a finesse melee weapon, and is very easy to hide)
Sling (1d4), Range: (30/120) (virtually weightless, and looks fairly innocent on its own)
Shortbow (1d6), Range: (80/320) (Harder to hide, requires 2 hands to use)
Light Crossbow (1d8), Range: (80/320) (obvious weapon, 2 hands to use, requires loading)

Requiring Martial Weapon Proficiency:
Blowgun (1 Damage), Range: (25/100) (Stealthy, quiet, easy to hide, requires loading)
Net (No damage; restrains target), Range: (5/15) (takes special training to not be disadvantaged)
Longbow (1d8), Range: (150/600) (Heavy for small races, 2 hands to use)
Hand Crossbow (1d6), Range: (30/120) (light; can be off-handed/dual-wielded, easy to hide, stealthy, requires loading)
Heavy Crossbow (1d10), Range: (100/400) (Not stealthy at all, heavy for small races, two hands to use, requires loading)

They all have their strengths and weaknesses, and valuable uses – but most of those differences have disappeared in BG3 so far, with the drastic range cuts, currently bugged inability to dual-wield hand crossbows, and lack of situations where stealth or concealment may be relevant.
Now, THAT makes sense to me. I don't know why they made such drastic changes, perhaps they had a good reason, perhaps not, but for now all I can say - Pity.

Originally Posted by Niara
The Devil Quest.
The paladins are lying about themselves and also serve Zariel, acting as her head-hunters here (you learn this form SwD with their fallen member). They didn't summon the gnolls, and did indeed dispatch them, but tiefling girl didn't summon them either. I didn't catch anything implying that she did... what dialogue was that?
Yes, I know all that, and after speaking to the corpse you can actually tell them to drop the act and they will tell you everything, though they don't mention the gnolls anymore. The gnolls are mentioned in first conversation when they are lying, just pay attention and you'll hear it. So it could be a lie or the truth, we never find out and that's irritating.

Originally Posted by Niara
The situation is pitched s a moral choice, since both of them have been forced into Zariel's service, and both want out of it. Both would seemingly rather live their own lives, but only accepted Zariel's dominion because the choice was that or death... the difference being that the Paladins Asked for it, turning their backs on their old oaths, and the tiefling did not.
Yes, I understand the idea behind this quest very well, and the paladins did not ask for anything, at the moment of despair they accepted the offer, just like Wyll. I am not making excuses for them, just stating a fact.
As for the tifling, she remains a mystery, that idiotic conversation you can have with her can hardly be called enlightening.


Originally Posted by Niara
The problem I have with this quest is that you're presented a false fork – it implies that you have no choice but to murder one of these groups, and condemn their souls for all eternity, and no other option at all, even though neither of them is really in a position worthy of punishment... and indeed, the idea of what it wold take to get the out from under Zariel's control is presented during the conversations. I'm not interested in killing either of them – neither side wants to serve Zariel, or has any emnity with the other outside of her direct orders... but we cannot progress the quest other than through murder. It's a false choice, and it's badly done.
Badly done - definitely. False choice - absolutely, but only because you're lead to belive that there is a moral choice.
Your desire to help everybody only displays the goodness of your heart, and this kind of hearts often tend to reject cruel reality. You mentioned a moral dilemma, when in fact it is not, and that's what upsets you. You are denied a moral choice, because there isn't one. Well, you can simply walk away without helping either side. That's as moral as you can get out of this situation. But if you decide to interfere, your morality takes a day off.

I will tell you what choice I make and why, though it is partly based on broken part of the quest, but I deal with what I have. If you are not interested, just skip the next paragraph.

I pick the paladins and the choice comes very easily to me. I don't even consider the alternative, that's how simple this choice is to me. If you speak to the paladin leader right after learning the truth from the corpse, you'll get a bit more insight on them. And if you see Wyll as a hero with a dark side, these come out to be same as him only without that dark side, rather a little naive. One good thing that places them on my good side is the fact that they destroyed a small army of gnolls. The other thing, is that they will continue doing so every chance they get.
What do you think the tifling will do with her freedom? Zariel will never let her go, so she'll keep running, hiding and removing obstacles on her way, big or small, in only way she knows how. She spent a lifetime fighting for Zariel, she became her champion. You can clearly see the level of her social skills. She's like a rabid dog in this world, ultimately innocent, but utterly useless and undeniably dangerous.
So, here it is, no moral choices, just a logical one.


Originally Posted by Niara
Thanks again for taking the time and effort to write this up and add your feedback. Hope some of the responses are a little comforting to you at least ^.^
Your response was pleasantly informative, painfully detailed, overall - very satisfying. The exchange of opinions also a big plus.
Thank you again =)


My heart will take me there, where my feet cannot...
Joined: Jun 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Jun 2020
Thanks for the kind words, I don't doubt your sincerity, not at all ^.^ Just different experiences, and a lot of reading of people extrapolating ideas out of things that weren't actually said, or missing other lines can lead to very different impressions. What we specifically take note of or hang on varies by player, especially in dialogues, after all. I intended no sarcasm or mocking, I assure.

I am curious about your experience with Gale... The way the game works it, you need to have viewed a specific set of scenes, and you need to have seen all of them, before party night, for him to proposition you. If you haven't triggered these scenes, he'll just treat you as a friend, no matter how high his approval or anything else you've said and done.

Getting all of the scenes to trigger is a circus act at the moment, and you've basically got to rest after every little event, and every approval change, just in case you miss one – if your approval goes up too much between long rests, you'll skip over one and be locked out, because they can't be made up later. It took me three plays with different characters to lock down triggering all of Gale's scenes reliably every time I want to.

It sounds like, with your character that was propositioned, you triggered all of the scenes – including the weave scene, where you do magic with him (and must then pass all three checks to finish the scene properly), and the one that follows that one. I don't know how those scenes play out if you are also a wizard – I've not done it that way, so that may alter or soften the path possibly.

If you give Gale a positive image that involves you and him at the end of that scene – regardless of which one, then the game interprets that as flirting, and Gale is put solidly on the romance line.

From what I hear, if he is in that position at the party, but you rebuff him, he may come to you later on to see if you might reconsider, since the previous magical nights meant a lot to him, but I've not actually done that part myself. I find Gale more palatable than pretty much ANY of the other characters, and usually choose him when he's available, depending on which character I'm playing.

It sounds as though, with your other character,s you missed out on one of the key scenes, and so the romance refused to trigger. There have been a lot of complaints about Gale's path being very fiddly...

If you had a case where Gale actually attempted to progress a romance with your male character, and that character had NOT done the weave scene, and given him a positive image response, then that's something that should probably get sent in as a bug – include the save file, if the result can be replicated.

I can't agree that his 'issue' should be thought of as unnecessary – I think it likely feels that way right now because it's just been placed on us without any kind of boon or benefit, or any real progress at all, and it also doesn't, currently, have any downside if you refuse him, so it comes across as seemingly without point or purpose. It's a bad place to leave it, but I think a lot of things can be considered 'unnecessary', that still ultimately add to the game in a positive way. This need is part of Gale's personal story – it's a tool that is put there as a means of suggesting that his situation is genuinely cursed and dangerous. Yes, they probably could have done that a number of other ways, but they clearly wanted to put you in a position of having the option to tangibly give something up to assist him. It may not be handled very well, all told, but I'm giving it the leeway of being just a 'hook' at this stage, and going to be a part of his greater personal quest as we go.

==

For Wyll, I'm not sure what dialogue lines you're referring to, honestly; they clearly dind't stay with me or have any large impact. I've tried pretty much all dialogue choices (with the exception of a few event-chain triggered ones) with the companions at this stage of my play-throughs, and these ones are only ringing the very faintest of indistinct bells for me... I feel like this one might have been in the initial slew of dialogues you have when you first add him to your party? If you ask them initially, he'll give you a little, but most of them are brush-offs and he tells you that some stories the blade only shares with his close friends... but the options disappear after you ask them, and don't come back.. and if you simply Don't ask them, with the intention of leaning them there to ask him alter, when he is at higher approval, they simply disappear as soon as his approval value changes.

If I'm mistaken here and this came out during one of his fireside chats, and I'm not remembering rightly, then I'd probably chalk it up to him outright lying to you, or mixing up his persona's origin story and his real one... of course, we're never allowed to know when our mary-sue origin npcs are lying to us or being deceitful – we don't get those checks, they're just allowed to lie to us as much as they like with no consequence, so it's hard to be sure. Thanks Larian. If you do have a genuine conflict of information that doesn't seem like an in-game fib, then probably consider sending it along to their bug form, or their feedback form.

As an aside – Wyll approves of you taking the hag's side in the initial conflict with the brothers, because you're 'saving an old lady from some boorish miscreants'. But if you got a negative for mistrusting her, you don't get that back when she's revealed to be the villain later, it's a problem with the system, but also with Larian's placement of the markers, you're correct – ideally, you should get your approval values at the end of events, based on your intentions and choices... the other big issue is when you hit one of Larian's collapsing dialogue railroads, where you have two outcomes, but one requires four or five successful checks, and any failure diverts you back to the 'never tried' outcome... anyone who disapproves of the failure path being taken voluntarily also heaps that on you, regardless of the fact that you *tried your best* to do otherwise.

==

Quote
Are you talking about the argument between the human and the tifling (sorry, can't remember their names) after the siege of the Grove?

That, and others. Halflings get a line there that allows them to diffuse the situation so no-one leaves the grove, *and* no-one gets punched – they're the only ones who can do that without causing further bad blood. They also get a line a little further in that let's them be polite to the stew lady... no-one else would ever even conceive of being polite to her, apparently... My main compliant is that race dialogue flag lines literally never have anything in them that is actually relevant or dependant on your race – just on playing to racial stereotypes, which is vile. They contain things that literally anyone should be allowed to say, but we're instead told than only someone of 'this' race would ever even contemplate of saying this thing... which is ridiculous in every case that it shows up.

==

Combat and initiating it from dialogue; I agree that in many of the cases where you can do this, you should arguably get the benefit of surprise, but in a lot of cases, where it's a tense or alert situation anyway, someone suddenly drawing and attacking is not off-guard enough to warrant surprise. I agree there should be many places where it is, but certainly not everywhere. If surprise isn't granted (as it's not, in any situation of attacking from dialogue currently), then initiative is rolled as normal. In the case of you being slower, think of it this way – yes you initiated by drawing your weapon and going for them, but that act itself could have been quicker, or smoother than it was this particular time, and the other person had a faster reaction time, this time around – perhaps they're able to jump back and ready their own weapons, and potentially act, before you manage to do what you're trying to.

Would it be nice if they could wrangle it to allow you to take one action of your choice, and then roll initiative as normal? Yes it would.. but I sadly don't see BG3's Larian engine being up to the task of managing something like that. We can hope I suppose.

==

Regarding hitting... If you hit, you'll never do zero damage, expect in particularly extenuating circumstances. The rule system doesn't have grazing blows, or anything of that nature... and if it did it would certainly be beyond Larian's ken, at the moment... If you meet the target's AC, then you've scored a hit that deals useful damage, while if you fail to meet the AC, then you haven't managed to do useful damage. That can be understood in any number of aesthetic ways, but that's the baseline of it.

Are you meaning that you'd prefer it if you visually always 'hit' what you aim for, and just dealt zero damage if you failed to actually meet its AC? That could work, after a fashion, but it would cause other problems and other confusions, since a lot of abilities are based around when you hit a target.

Either way, Orges should not be limbo break-dance dodging your shots.

==

For goblins, they have a base Intelligence of 10 – which means they fall into exactly the same intelligence average bracket as humans, no more, no less; so if human villages can have a town apothecary or alchemist, then so can goblin tribes. Goblins may be depicted as dirty and stupid by other races, and they may be pitched as such in other media, but in D&D they are (as a species at least) perfectly capable of all intelligent higher pursuits to the exact same degree that humans are. For comparison, the kobold inventor – who makes and uses alchemist's fire among other 'inventions' – has an Intelligence of 8. (That said: human villages aren't stuffed full of guards carrying explosives and acid arrows and dark cloud shots and roaring knock-back arrows... so neither should goblin camps be)

==

For magic... It seems to me that you just have a very laid back idea of how 'easy' spellcasting is for someone who doesn't have an innate magical ability (and remember, wizards don't; that's why they're wizards). These are meticulous, precise things, every minute detail of which matters, and which must be executed with exacting specificity. Can you Remember well enough to quote flawlessly, every letter, word and punctuation mark of a 100 page technical thesis? No, you can't. Nor can Wizards. Each spell, formally speaking, takes up a umber of pages in your spell book, full of text, descriptions, diagrams and other necessary information, equal to the level of a spell; can you imagine having perfect, quotable, precise-to-the-letter recall of even the six pages of complex spell text required to cast disintegrate without turning yourself to dust?

If you want someone who learns a spell and then innately knows it and can choose to cast it whenever they want, so long as they've got the energy for it, then that's a sorcerer you're thinking of, or possibly a bard... it's not a wizard.

Wizards don't have an innate connection to the weave as sorcerers do; they don't have a powerful mediator serving as their connection and conduit as clerics do with their deities, or warlocks do with their patrons. Wizards don't have any help whatsoever, and they don't have even the faintest hint of a natural or innate connection. They do magic functionally blind – they cannot feel the flow of the weave itself, not in the way that sorcerers do. They create the magical constructs and shapes, forging the the forms that cause weave energy to flow in defined ways to evoke the effects that they want, but those formulae are laboriously worked out, and what they feel when they cast a spell is not raw weave flowing through them, but rather, they feel its passage passing through them in the same way that you feel vibrations and coolness when you put your hand to a water pipe – you feel its presence and passage, but you don't feel the water itself, and you can't actually see it; you just trust that it's there because you know you built the pipes correctly.

(And if you wonder why Gale is so completely gaga over his magic it's potentially because his experience with Mystra allowed him to feel – and really feel – something that few wizards ever do, and which made every other act of wizardry, ever other magic, every other part of life, feel bland and washed out by comparison... and knowing that that's what sorcerers feel every day probably eats him alive...)

The execution might take only a few seconds, but that doesn't mean that the act isn't phenomenally complex. ANYONE can become a wizard – unlike sorcerers and such... anyone can. The reason few DO is because it's HARD.

A wizards can keep a certain number of spell meticulously memorised for immediate execution. The amount that she can keep perfectly fresh in her mind is based on her memory retention and ability to order information and retrieve it in her mind – that's her Intelligence ability score. A wizard might know sixty spells, while a sorcerer only knows nine... but that wizard can't keep all of those spells perfectly formalised and meticulously recalled well enough to cast reliably at a moment's notice. They can do that with a handful of them, by revising them thoroughly each morning.... maybe late game as many as twenty... which might account to a little over 100 pages of technical text, depending on which spells. That's a feat beyond any of our comprehension... expecting that wizard to know the other four spellbooks that contain their other eighty known spells (spells they know and can cast accurately reading the book, or can cast reliably with a few minutes of revision in the morning, mind you) by that point is not really a reasonable assumption.

(Sorry if that became a tangent...)

==

Weapons!

By 'physically play it out' I meant just that. Get a friend, mark out some five foot squares, and get a two metre length of broom handle for the spear and a 30cm ruler or two for the daggers. Play about with it in real time (safety first of course); you might be surprised. I'll say for certain that if you give me a chain glove for my right hand and 16cm blade for my left, and I can absolutely show you how to put it in a trained spear-wielding person in a head-on encounter without exposing myself to the pointy end. ^.^ (What... I do fencing...)

==

Quests!

Thanks for the kind words... I think this is where different elements of the conversations resonate and stay with different people. The detail I remember most clearly about the paladins is that when they were at their lowest, they asked their gods for help and none answered, and then they asked Anyone for help... and Zariel answered, and they Accepted. She wouldn't have killed them if they refused, or damned them... just left them to die in misery. (Though it's likely that she engineered a lot of the tragedy that befell them between their rejection of her first offer and their acceptance of her second)

They are definitely in a similar position to Wyll, though in many ways even more sympathetic than him, especially if Zariel engineered their misery in order to get them to break oath... but they did still break an oath they'd taken to a deity, and they are willing to condemn any soul Zariel tells them to to save their own, even if they want to do good acts in between. That said, I don't wish them ill. I don't think they deserve a death that also bears eternal souls damnation with it.

They owe Zariel a soul (each, I presume... but Larian has a blind spot for remembering that more than one person is involved, all over the place); that should be a route we can pursue.

Karlach didn't ask for it at all – she was enslaved, and compelled after being caught up in the war, or so the vision implies. She wasn't given a choice in the same way, because when Zariel claimed her, it was to accept, or to be eternally destroyed on the spot; she was damned either way, while the paladins were not, and had even sworn oaths that they forsook in accepting Zariel's help.

I find Karlach more sympathetic than the paladins, even if her personality is more abrasive. She's on the run and she wants out of it. She's scared and cautious, and doesn't trust random strangers that she doesn't recognise... perfectly legitimate reaction in my book. If you do her a kindness, she fears drawing targets on the rest of you as her reason for continuing alone. Where you find her depiction to be like a rabid, dangerous dog, she struck me as simply someone serious, war-worn and jaded, untrusting and cautious, and on the run. I don't think she's dangerous at all, at least not to anyone who doesn't attack her first. She also owes Zariel a soul, and we should be able to pursue that as well. I don't think she deserves a death that also bears eternal soul damnation with it.

But walking away from the quest is not progress – it's just 'not playing the game'. It's 'skipping content'. It's utterly unsatisfying, and as per larian's normal way of writing things, it will almost definitely just lead to a default outcome that will be one of our two presented options.

Last edited by Niara; 11/06/21 04:11 AM.
Joined: Nov 2020
P
member
Offline
member
P
Joined: Nov 2020
Visually marking out the 5ft square

Here's another one, this time talking about attacks of opportunity

On the subject of "if you start the fight you should get first hit" well... not really.
If you have a nice DM, they might let specifically that character throwing the first punch to act first without initiative, then ask for initiative rolls. If you have a really nice DM, they will give each party member one action outside initiative before asking for initiative rolls. The AI that counts as BG3's DM fluctuates between borderline nice, and a sweaty rules lawyer who makes shit up for themselves, but never lets their players get away with anything.

Joined: Apr 2021
Tey Offline OP
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
Joined: Apr 2021
I'm not sure what to tell you about experience with Gale. It was my very first play-through, my very first character. I didn't try to romance anyone at all, I discovered the possibility through dialogues with them, by accident, as I discover everything else in this game or others. I prefer it this way.
That character is a male elf warrior. I was simply going through the game, getting used to it, for I have never played this kind of games before (point-click). I'm used to the games like Skyrim, TW, AC, etc... This is my very first game of this sort, so romancing was the least of my worries, especially Gale, not with a male character anyway. I was still struggling with the camera and those controls... So I was just following the storyline, clearing some, let's call them "dungeons" for conversation's sake, if any were around, taking rest as necessary...
I think I just realized the possible problem... Right now I can progress deep into the game with fewer rests. Much fewer rests. In fact, I can clear the ruins, save the Grove, clear the village (spider queen and cellar included)with max of 2 long rests. Sometimes not even that, depending on whom I am playing with and if the dice are in a good mood. I also think that Gale should be in your party all the time, and that's not always the case with my later characters. I doubt it's ever the case now. Usually I swap him with Wyll, to avoid Wyll's nagging about not taking him to play with goblins. Plus, I can use Wyll a bit more effectively in a fight then Gale after 3rd level. However, with my first character, he was a permanent member of the group... I should test that theory sometime.


Quote
For Wyll, I'm not sure what dialogue lines you're referring to, honestly; they clearly dind't stay with me or have any large impact.
I believe it's the dialogue when he tells you about his devilish girlfriend. When from a spoiled kid she made him a hero he is today. There should be a question about "spoiled kid" part. Follow it.

Quote
That, and others. Halflings get a line there that allows them to diffuse the situation so no-one leaves the grove, *and* no-one gets punched – they're the only ones who can do that without causing further bad blood.
I am not sure what do you mean by that. I'm guessing I'll have to make a halfling just to see.
But when it comes to those two at the gate, you can defuse the situation between them with everybody, either through persuasion or intimidation. Then those adventurers don't leave the Grove and you can take the quest from them right there, while they are licking their wounds. Punching that guy is just my preference, not a necessity.
However, if you mean that a halfling can defuse the situation to the point that the tiflings become permanent residents of the Grove and don't move to Balder's Gate after you defeat the goblins, then it's something else entirely.

Quote
Would it be nice if they could wrangle it to allow you to take one action of your choice, and then roll initiative as normal? Yes it would.. but I sadly don't see BG3's Larian engine being up to the task of managing something like that. We can hope I suppose.
I simply adopted another way of initiating fights that resonates with... let's say me. You just start with killing something, sometimes a few of some things and then the fight begins. I wish I could do it to the gith, but hiding a couple of characters in different strategic places usually sufficient enough.

Quote
Are you meaning that you'd prefer it if you visually always 'hit' what you aim for, and just dealt zero damage if you failed to actually meet its AC? [/qote]
Absolutely. I just can't bare the idea of my Wood Elf Archer can't hit a freaking mountain with an arrow.
Though, 1~2 dmg for the fail will suffice. Doesn't have to be 0 and their HP can be increased if compensation for that DMG is required. I think it's simple enough to achieve.


[quote]For goblins, they have a base Intelligence of 10 – which means they fall into exactly the same intelligence average bracket as humans, no more, no less;
You're talking game mechanics, I am talking about general goblin concept. Sorry, no contest here.
I'm guessing, with the caged goblin inside the Grove, you pick the line "She's a real person, not a target practice" during that little scene? You're such a softy =D


Quote
If you want someone who learns a spell and then innately knows it and can choose to cast it whenever they want, so long as they've got the energy for it, then that's a sorcerer you're thinking of, or possibly a bard... it's not a wizard.
I see, you're basing your opinion on this particular lore, well, that actually makes sense... I am not familiar with it beyond I've learned inside this game. Do we even have sorcerers in this game?

Quote
By 'physically play it out' I meant just that. Get a friend, mark out some five foot squares, and get a two metre length of broom handle for the spear and a 30cm ruler or two for the daggers. Play about with it in real time (safety first of course); you might be surprised. I'll say for certain that if you give me a chain glove for my right hand and 16cm blade for my left, and I can absolutely show you how to put it in a trained spear-wielding person in a head-on encounter without exposing myself to the pointy end. ^.^ (What... I do fencing...)
Well, now you're teasing, I would love to take you up on that. Though, it seems you think of a spear just as a stretched out pointy end, when it's a bit more then that. You also probably assume that I'd be aiming at your torso... That glove won't help you, you won't be grabbing anything. Better learn to throw that dagger. =)

Which of the 3 is your weapon in fencing? I'm just curious.


Quote
...and they are willing to condemn any soul Zariel tells them to to save their own...
Correction, not any soul, just that specific one, which already belongs to Zariel. Though something tells me that they are being played. However, it is too outside the range of my concerns. There is nothing I can do about this even if I wanted to, but what I can do is to pick the lesser evil. At least that's what I see with the information that quest provides. (I won't let the gnoll matter rest)

And yes, they broke their oath to an indifferent god, which is between them and that god. I don't judge men wearing pink, for example, even though it hurts my eyes. It's purely between them and their lack of dignity and taste, which can be considered as betrayal, but it is not for me to judge... at all... =) Terrible example, I know, but I'm sure you get the point.


Quote
I find Karlach more sympathetic than the paladins, even if her personality is more abrasive. She's on the run and she wants out of it. She's scared and cautious, and doesn't trust random strangers that she doesn't recognise... perfectly legitimate reaction in my book. If you do her a kindness, she fears drawing targets on the rest of you as her reason for continuing alone. Where you find her depiction to be like a rabid, dangerous dog, she struck me as simply someone serious, war-worn and jaded, untrusting and cautious, and on the run. I don't think she's dangerous at all, at least not to anyone who doesn't attack her first. She also owes Zariel a soul, and we should be able to pursue that as well. I don't think she deserves a death that also bears eternal soul damnation with it.
Not at all, my perception of her is very similar to yours, the rabid dog example is to describe her foreseeable behavior in the nearest future. She won't have the choice, at least I don't think she will. You know what people who are constantly on the run have in common? Ever-growing paranoia.
The paladins will be able to operate openly, she isn't safe even in the shadows. She may be three times more noble then all of those paladins together, but her quest is just as selfish and may have far more dire consequences. At least that's how I see it. Like I said, I am not making a morel decision here nor sympathetic one. I am making decision that makes sense to me, for better or worse.


Quote
But walking away from the quest is not progress – it's just 'not playing the game'. It's 'skipping content'. It's utterly unsatisfying, and as per larian's normal way of writing things, it will almost definitely just lead to a default outcome that will be one of our two presented options.
No, walking away is not the way for me either, but for those who wish to keep their hands clean, it is the only option in this quest.

We seem to have strayed away from the topic a bit here, though I enjoyed this exchange of thoughts and perspectives very much.
Thank you, again.


My heart will take me there, where my feet cannot...
Joined: Jun 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Jun 2020
I'm happy to chat ^.^ The feedback is good to chew over, though my main point of encouragement was to make sure you send it along to Larian directly too.

Gale: Yeah, it sounds like your main issue was the resting. In your first play, you rested enough to not miss out on any of Gale's hooks, and had him in the party long enough to trigger his 'respect actions' count, and thereby got all of his scenes (You know what I'm referring to when I reference the weave scene, where you do magic with him?). In your subsequent play-throughs, you didn't rest as much, and almost certainly missed a scene or two from him as a result, locking yourself out of his romance path. It's a much discussed thing about Gale – his invitation is the most fiddly to trigger by far.

I have indeed not seen that line from Wyll, and I could believe that it's one I've inadvertently missed – I find the mean and snarky lines the hardest ones to click on, even when I'm playing a crueller or more evil character. Absolutely bug report the contradiction, would be my advice – if you're lucky, you'll get a bug-team response that will either acknowledge looking into it, or confirm that it's correct. If they tell you the latter, then we can presume it's a deliberate lie on his part.

Regarding the grove scene: I did a double check of this, and the scene runs slightly differently now, to how I first recall it. In my earlier plays, the halfling line bypassed the need to make an insight check and a persuade/intimidate/punch check, and skipped straight to 'she's right, the bickering is pointless', and ended the conversation at the 'at least we agree on that' line. Now, in my latest test, it just acts like any of the other three lines above it, and dumps you straight into the insight and diffusion checks, like the others... so... it's now another false choice that does nothing, apparently? Huh.

==

Quote
Quote
Are you meaning that you'd prefer it if you visually always 'hit' what you aim for, and just dealt zero damage if you failed to actually meet its AC?

Absolutely. I just can't bare the idea of my Wood Elf Archer can't hit a freaking mountain with an arrow. Though, 1~2 dmg for the fail will suffice. Doesn't have to be 0 and their HP can be increased if compensation for that DMG is required. I think it's simple enough to achieve.

Okay, so, there are a number of reasons why that simply cannot work, mechanically... If they did something like that, then it would unbalance the game further (increasing hp is not a valid solution for a swathe of other reasons that are interconnected), and more to the point, you'd then also need to rewrite a truly massive portion of the rules further to accommodate for the change that that you literally always hit and always deal a minor amount of damage. At that point it wouldn't even resemble D&D any more... not that Larian's rendition is very compelling as is, but accommodating this change and balancing the system for it would take it so far away that there'd be nothing left but the IP itself.

Your wood elf can absolutely shoot arrows at a mountain all day – and they will absolutely shoot those arrows, and those arrows will definitely strike the rugged rocky face of that mountain. What they will NOT do, is any damage to that mountain; they will not, ever, score a successful blow against the mountain.

You've mentioned a language barrier a couple of times – perhaps something of that nature is happening here? Just because you didn't successfully 'hit' a target ('Hit' Mechanically – your attack roll did not meet or exceed the ac of the target), doesn't necessarily mean that you missed the creature entirely. Your wood elf may certainly have shot that ogre – and indeed, the arrow struck the ogre. It struck his shoulder, deflected off his thick hide and clattered off into the rafters. Your elf absolutely hit ('Hit' standard language – the literal arrow physically connected with the target; it hit it) the ogre; their aim was just fine... they just didn't successfully score a blow against it, through no real fault of their own, potentially.

Those are the base rules of the system we're working with, no matter how much Larian stretches it; if you're looking to change that, at an actual mechanical level, then you're looking for a different game that isn't D&D.

BG3 as presented at the moment doesn't really convey this well, since everything, even very slow and clumsy things, just 'phase dodge' ranged attacks, and it looks silly.

=

Goblins: I have to ask – what 'general goblin concept'? Whose 'general goblin concept'? Because here, we're talking about goblins as defined and described in the forgotten realms setting and lore as written by WotC, which is very clear about the fact that Goblins have alchemists, apothecaries and priests, social structure and hierarchy, and are, very much and every bit as capable as humans, on the averages, in matters of intelligence – they tend to have fewer opportunities, but they are no less capable. It might not be your personal conception of goblins, but your individual conception is not relevant here – these are the goblins that exist in the forgotten realms, this universe and this game; they're not any less intelligent or capable than humans on average, and can absolutely follow any higher order pursuits that humans can. That's simply a fact of the lore for these goblins, in this setting.

I did talk about statistics, yes, but the statistics reflect the species averages and they align with the established lore... And yes, Sazza IS a person (within the fiction of the game space ^.^), and it says more about someone who would claim that she's not, based on her race and species, than such a judgement would about her.

Goblins are also a playable race, though not in BG3 as of yet; they can be wizards, clerics, bards and any number of other things too, just like anyone else. (On the averages, they're also smarter than kobolds, one to one, who are also a playable race)

==

No sorceress in game yet – coming, supposedly. Just to be clear, regarding wizards; it's not just my personal opinion on how to interpret them – I don't want to seem like I'm talking hot air on the matter. That's just the functional lore for magic users in the forgotten realms setting (and most D&D realm-spaces)... It does sometime catch people off guard to be reminded that the most 'archetypal' magic user in the setting, the wizard, is the one that literally has no innate magical ability at all... being a wizard is hard; in-universe, it's probably the hardest thing to do out of all of the options.

==

Paladins: I feel saying 'this particular soul' is not a correction on 'any soul she tells them to'. If Zariel had directed them to a thug in Neverwinter, they'd have done it. If she'd directed them to a noble in Mintarn, they'd have done it. If she'd directed them to a milk maid who lived on the outskirts of Luskan, they'd have justified it to themselves and done it... and when Zariel says 'Okay, but...” and sends them after three more souls, they'll justify it to themselves, and they'll do it.

Though, if it makes any of this feel any better, Karlach is intended to be another companion, as you can tell from her extremely overblown and utterly ridiculous mary-sue origin story... so siding with the paladins now will probably save you a handful of distasteful and unenjoyable conversations down the track.

==

Fencing ^.^ Spoilers for off topic...

Off topic at this point, but... No, the mail glove is a parrying glove, and you Never grip or grab with it. For dagger-wielding, you use it in an aggressive way, but you still use it to deceive the momentum or motion of your opponents and divert or deflect it subtly, in order to open up space in what would otherwise be a solid guard or stance. For actual parrying as well, but the action in practice flows together. Properly used, a parrying glove can deflect a sharpened blade safely enough with little risk to your hand. I've not worked against spear directly, but against staff I have, and many of the principles of solid staff work get passed into good spear work as well.

For formal fencing, I'm a foil kinda lady... I really don't care for sabre at all, and epee never really suited me. I'm actually a very small woman, but lightning quick and good with covering distance faster than expected of my reach and size, so foil suites me just fine.

Joined: Apr 2021
Tey Offline OP
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
Joined: Apr 2021
Quote
so... it's now another false choice that does nothing, apparently? Huh.
Not exactly. There are 3 possible outcomes in that scene. Doesn't seem as a false choice to me.

Quote
Okay, so, there are a number of reasons why that simply cannot work, mechanically...
There are guardian statues in the Grove's tunnel, a very good example of a solid low damage. Regardless, I am just a humble user, all those technical explanations are utterly lost on me. I don't know how it all works, nor will I pretend to care. I just point out something that doesn't make sense to me and it is up to the creators to deal with it or not.

Quote
...('Hit' standard language – the literal arrow physically connected with the target; it hit it)...
You seem to be confusing language barrier with stupidity. If we were talking face to face, I fear you would be speaking veeeeery sloooowly to me right now. XD
When I say that the arrow didn't hit the target, I mean it missed the target, it passed by the target, made no impact on the target by failing to connect with the target. =P
My vocabulary may be poor and my grammar leaks on occasion but I know the definition of the words I use =)


Quote
Goblins: I have to ask – what 'general goblin concept'? Whose 'general goblin concept'? Because here, we're talking about goblins as defined and described in the forgotten realms setting and lore as written by WotC
I see, well I stand corrected then, for I did not read The Forgotten Realms written by WotC. You're right, their lifestyle within the game does not reflect their level of intelligence. Living covered in shit and bones does not make you stupid, you're just yet to realize the importance of hygiene, and they even have the scribes... You know, there is a video on YouTube where a chimpanzee shoots AK-47 and quite effectively actually, I think it shut a camera man, though I can't be certain, he could just drop the camera and ran...

I was right about you and that goblin in the Grove, wasn't I? You called that thing a "person"? =) What a softy...


Quote
No sorceress in game yet – coming, supposedly. Just to be clear, regarding wizards; it's not just my personal opinion on how to interpret them – I don't want to seem like I'm talking hot air on the matter. That's just the functional lore for magic users in the forgotten realms
I figured as much, no worries. And I should get to know the lore better. However, in my humble opinion, it should be up to the game to introduce its lore to the player in an adequate and fulfilling way without additional readings. Feel free to disagree =)

Quote
Paladins: I feel saying 'this particular soul' is not a correction on 'any soul she tells them to'. If Zariel had directed them to a thug in Neverwinter, they'd have done it.
Perhaps, but it doesn't matter. The dialogue clearly states that it is her soul or theirs.

To be clear, I don't side with anyone, to me, there isn't the right side, I just do whatever makes sense to me. The main point stands - they really need to fix that quest by removing idiotic, irrelevant dialogue options and clarifying the gnoll issue.


(Dear Havens, not the freaking goblins...)
Hm.. I love sabre and it's the fastest of them all, you would be like a lightening bug with it. But if you don't care for it, it can't be helped. I've no doubt that you've made the right choice. And the image of a tiny woman with a long blade is absolutely terrifying. =)

Last edited by Tey; 12/06/21 01:24 AM.

My heart will take me there, where my feet cannot...
Joined: Jun 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Jun 2020
Originally Posted by Tey
Not exactly. There are 3 possible outcomes in that scene. Doesn't seem as a false choice to me.

I just meant that apparently now the 'halfling' locked line, there, is functionally identical to the three other lines that appear directly alongside it (one about you getting out of here because it's dangerous, one about asking for payment and one other I'm not recalling right now) – now they ALL do nothing except move you along to the insight check and then option to diffuse if you catch that, etc., whereas in earlier plays, that halfing one let you skip past the checks to a successful defuse.

Quote
You seem to be confusing language barrier with stupidity. If we were talking face to face, I fear you would be speaking veeeeery sloooowly to me right now. XD

Not my intention, I promise. I can promise I wouldn't be speaking slowly either, hehe... I'd be writing it down or I'd have someone translating for me; I speak with my hands, and I assume you don't read auslan ^.~ No, all I wanted was to make a clear distinction between the technical, rules-and-mechanical 'hit', and the more aesthetic/visual aspect of the action looking like it physically hits (which might not and need not actually be a successful 'hit' by the mechanics). I just felt like we might have been talking across one another there and wanted to make sure I was being clear, myself.

Quote
I see, well I stand corrected then, for I did not read The Forgotten Realms written by WotC. You're right, their lifestyle within the game does not reflect their level of intelligence. Living covered in shit and bones does not make you stupid, you're just yet to realize the importance of hygiene, and they even have the scribes...

I mean... I've seen humans living in worse conditions, and it's not because they're unaware of it... But in the case of goblins, when their social ordering is heavily dependant on pillage and conflict, and their settlements don't usually last long, comparatively to, say, dwarves or elves, their actual access to higher standards of living is more restricted. That said, while I'm not super thrilled with BG3's depiction of them, in terms of society and behaviour... I've definitely seen worse depictions in other D&D game material.

Quote
I was right about you and that goblin in the Grove, wasn't I? You called that thing a "person"? =) What a softy...

Personally, I'd just called that being a functionally decent human being... I feel like you're being humorous here, though, so I won't split the hair. ^.^

Quote
I figured as much, no worries. And I should get to know the lore better. However, in my humble opinion, it should be up to the game to introduce its lore to the player in an adequate and fulfilling way without additional readings. Feel free to disagree =)

I absolutely agree with this – if it's not clear to a new player, then the game NEEDS to provide a way for that information to be delivered. That it doesn't do this is a failing of the game.

Joined: Apr 2021
Tey Offline OP
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
Joined: Apr 2021
Quote
Personally, I'd just called that being a functionally decent human being... I feel like you're being humorous here, though, so I won't split the hair. ^.^
Let me remove my steel paper-cutter, which I impulsively planted in my eye from reading this and I'll get back to you on that subject... Actually no, this would be too far off topic. We could take this conversation to PM or more relevant section of the forum, if you desire so. Though I must warn you, you may not be able to resist splitting hair in the future, actually split hair is guaranteed =D. And just in case, no I didn't harm myself, in fact your comment inspired a smile and raised a question...

Thank you again for your enthusiastic involvement in this thread =)


My heart will take me there, where my feet cannot...
Joined: Apr 2021
Tey Offline OP
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
Joined: Apr 2021
Here is another thing that doesn't make sense.
The passing number of the roll may change for the same character. That should not be possible, but it happened at least 3 times for me already.


My heart will take me there, where my feet cannot...
Joined: Nov 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by Tey
Here is another thing that doesn't make sense.
The passing number of the roll may change for the same character. That should not be possible, but it happened at least 3 times for me already.

Are you using effects like Bless, Bane, and/or Guidance?

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
Originally Posted by Tey
Here is another thing that doesn't make sense.
The passing number of the roll may change for the same character. That should not be possible, but it happened at least 3 times for me already.
Did your stats change?
Since Larian is showing pass number after they deduct(?) the proficiency ... instead of adding it to roll.


I liked original spellcasting system more ... frown

Anyway ... i cast Eldritch Blast!
Joined: Apr 2021
Tey Offline OP
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
Joined: Apr 2021
Quote
Are you using effects like Bless, Bane, and/or Guidance?
Definitely no effects.

Quote
Did your stats change?
Since Larian is showing pass number after they deduct(?) the proficiency ... instead of adding it to roll.
I am not sure about earlier encounters, but for the last one they didn't. I was lvl 4 then, I am lvl 4 now. However I did went back to kill an owlbear between the 2 attempts and the requirement jumped from 16 to 18.


My heart will take me there, where my feet cannot...
Joined: Jun 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Jun 2020
If I had to guess, you may have picked up an item that was giving you a +2 (such as the circlet which gives you a +2 to animal handling).

The way Larian does it right now, they deduct all modifiers and then say what you need to roll on the die - things like guidance are currently throwing that off, since it rolls it once to show you, then rolls again to actually do it, making the display inaccurate, however if that wasn't the case, then it's worth looking into.

If you've still got the save file for that (ideally both - the earlier save and the later one), get to the dialogue that presents you the roll and mouse hover the check - it'll show you a detail screen about what modifiers you're working with; if you've got 'key of the ancients' or anything like that showing up in the latter one ,that may be the reason.

If the original DC, at the top of the hovering tooltip is actually changing, and you're not taking any different dialogue options etc., then that's worth submitting as a bug report, save files included.

Last edited by Niara; 13/06/21 03:29 AM.
Joined: Apr 2021
Tey Offline OP
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
Joined: Apr 2021
Originally Posted by Niara
If I had to guess, you may have picked up an item that was giving you a +2 (such as the circlet which gives you a +2 to animal handling).
Well, no. It would mean that I've picked something that would give me -2, since the requirement jumped from 16 to 18.


Originally Posted by Niara
If you've still got the save file for that (ideally both - the earlier save and the later one), get to the dialogue that presents you the roll and mouse hover the check - it'll show you a detail screen about what modifiers you're working with; if you've got 'key of the ancients' or anything like that showing up in the latter one ,that may be the reason.
If you roll your mouse over the attributes of your choices: [persuasion], [intimidation], etc, it will give you the same information (except the target number) before you have made your choice.
Right now the target is 19, I have +2 on intimidation and -1 on charisma, so all seems to be in order. I wish I knew about the possibility to check the target number sooner. I'll be keeping an eye on it from now on (thanks for showing me how).
However, if the target number was raised in the last couple of days, I don't think previous saves will matter, for the scene will trigger the new settings. At least that's what I think will happen.

This shtuff is getting more confusing by the minute. This isn't the only time it happened, so it's safe to assume it might happen again, I'll just have to pay closer attention to it. Perhaps then I'll get my answer.
By the way, I've mentioned this 16 point requirement in my 1-st post. Same game, same character, same situation, just different freaking number. Shadowheart became even harder to threat. I think in the studio someone really likes that bitch =)

Last edited by Tey; 13/06/21 06:12 AM.

My heart will take me there, where my feet cannot...
Page 1 of 2 1 2

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5