Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 4 of 5 1 2 3 4 5
Joined: Sep 2015
veteran
OP Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2015
@Maximuus:
I agree. Solasta is easy but fair. I used the default rules and spend 2h rerolling my 4 chars. (half elf paladin of devotion, dwarf cleric of fire, high elf greenmage, wood elf marksmen ranger)
I did not use spirit guardian because after reading the description I was not sure what it should do: summon a creature, buff yourself, debuff the enemy???
New players may find it challenging but it can be done. Only big problem was vampire lords use AOE dark/blind spell where I found no way to remove the debuff.

BG3 is about: abuse the system and nuke the enemy before they nuke you.

In Solasta my paladin would cast protection from good and evil and then stand between several huge elementals forever.
In BG3 they would bleed fire, making the ground burn and end concentration.
In Solasta the blur spell protects your char from a goblins fire arrow.
In BG3 the arrow misses but it damages the char anyway and break concentration.

Last edited by Madscientist; 13/06/21 02:56 PM.

groovy Prof. Dr. Dr. Mad S. Tist groovy

World leading expert of artificial stupidity.
Because there are too many people who work on artificial intelligence already :hihi:
Joined: Feb 2021
P
addict
Offline
addict
P
Joined: Feb 2021
Originally Posted by The Composer
Enough, Pandemonica. If you don't want to participate in their discussion, then stay out of it. It's a perfectly productive and constructive discussion, and it's fine to have comparative discussions about what people enjoy in other games and how that may be worth considering for BG3. What ever other forums and discussions going on out there is irrelevant to this thread.

Composer, I am replying to Dragonsnooz who asked for links and proof. So basically Dragonsnooz can say there is no basis for what I was saying, demand proof, then when I link it, it is not relevant?

[quote DragonSnooz]- Again without links or evidence it sounds like people agree on some things and disagree on others. I have to take it as a wash if you want me to buy into your anecdote. Especially since it doesn't make sense for anyone to criticize Larian on another developer's forum. Would you expect to see forum members bash EA here? Consistently?[/quote]

Not to mention, Dragon has not posted one thing in regards to the subject of this thread, just focusing on engaging me. But I am the only one called out?

Whatever, I am out.

Last edited by Pandemonica; 13/06/21 03:00 PM.
Joined: Mar 2021
Location: Austin, TX
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Mar 2021
Location: Austin, TX
Originally Posted by Madscientist
@Maximuus:
I agree. Solasta is easy but fair. I used the default rules and spend 2h rerolling my 4 chars. (half elf paladin of devotion, dwarf cleric of fire, high elf greenmage, wood elf marksmen ranger)
I did not use spirit guardian because after reading the description I was not sure what it should do: summon a creature, buff yourself, debuff the enemy???
New players may find it challenging but it can be done. Only big problem was vampire lords use AOE dark/blind spell where I found no way to remove the debuff.

BG3 is about: abuse the system and nuke the enemy before they nuke you.

In Solasta my paladin would cast protection from good and evil and then stand between several huge elementals forever.
In BG3 they would bleed fire, making the ground burn and end concentration.
In Solasta the blur spell protects your char from a goblins fire arrow.
In BG3 the arrow misses but it damages the char anyway and break concentration.

Yeah, they need to fix concentration. This is a known issue. It makes concentration-related spells not worth using. It would also be good to have access to a Feat like War Caster or whatever that one in Solasta is that lets you ignore the first 10 points of damage in regards to concentration checks. Or if they are going to be so free with the burning ground damage, set a minimum threshold on concentration check damage for everyone - ie. 5 damage or above.

It needs testing.


Blackheifer
Joined: Sep 2015
veteran
OP Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2015
@Blackheifer
Looks like we have a very different play style.
I play games on the default difficulty and I expect to progress unless I make a big mistake or it is a very hard boss.
For me a role playing game is about experiancing a great story. Lots of reloading is bad for my immersion.
I do not play games to seek the ultimate challenge and I have no problem to lower the difficulty if I hit a hard wall.

Yes, Solasta is easy but I do not complain about it.
It is a good game for new players to learn the 5E rules.

I like the big freedom of BG3. There are several ways to aproach most quests and often you can avoid combat.
But combat often feels unfair because it is labeled as DnD 5E game but it changed so many rules.
Maybe I would feel better if the devs change the game description to: "The game is losely based on DnD 5E with many homebrew changes to please D:OS2 fans."

One more general thing:
I am not a fan of the BG3 shopping system. You have to move items between characters all the time to get good prizes. And you should buff your shopping char before shopping.
In Solasta the prize is dependent on your reputation, but all chars get the same prize.
The BG3 system is frustrating, but you do it because it increases your profit and the game becomes easier when you can afford magic items.

I liked the scavanger system in Solasta to avoid an inflated inventory, but I can understand that this cannot be done in BG3. BG3 is less linear and with this party and story it makes less sense that a group of people cleans up the place after you killed the monsters.


groovy Prof. Dr. Dr. Mad S. Tist groovy

World leading expert of artificial stupidity.
Because there are too many people who work on artificial intelligence already :hihi:
Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by Blackheifer
Yeah, they need to fix concentration. This is a known issue. It makes concentration-related spells not worth using. It would also be good to have access to a Feat like War Caster or whatever that one in Solasta is that lets you ignore the first 10 points of damage in regards to concentration checks. Or if they are going to be so free with the burning ground damage, set a minimum threshold on concentration check damage for everyone - ie. 5 damage or above.

It needs testing.
The following suggestion would be slightly more complex to implement, but a feat that allows you to ignore damage from all surface effects in regards to a concentration check would be more balanced imo. "Calloused Feet" or "Surface Hopscotcher" or "Coal-standing Master" or something.

Ignoring up to 5 or 10 damage from ALL sources in regards to concentration feels a bit too powerful for a single feat.

Implementing War Caster that grants you advantage on all concentration checks would also be a great solution (of course, in addition to making it so enemies had to either target you OR the ground when throwing a flask, not both).

Joined: Mar 2021
Location: Austin, TX
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Mar 2021
Location: Austin, TX
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
Originally Posted by Blackheifer
Yeah, they need to fix concentration. This is a known issue. It makes concentration-related spells not worth using. It would also be good to have access to a Feat like War Caster or whatever that one in Solasta is that lets you ignore the first 10 points of damage in regards to concentration checks. Or if they are going to be so free with the burning ground damage, set a minimum threshold on concentration check damage for everyone - ie. 5 damage or above.

It needs testing.
The following suggestion would be slightly more complex to implement, but a feat that allows you to ignore damage from all surface effects in regards to a concentration check would be more balanced imo. "Calloused Feet" or "Surface Hopscotcher" or "Coal-standing Master" or something.

Ignoring up to 5 or 10 damage from ALL sources in regards to concentration feels a bit too powerful for a single feat.

Implementing War Caster that grants you advantage on all concentration checks would also be a great solution (of course, in addition to making it so enemies had to either target you OR the ground when throwing a flask, not both).

Well hopefully the next patch has some sort of adjustment because currently Concentration based spells are much too difficult to waste spell slots on.


Blackheifer
Joined: Mar 2021
Location: Austin, TX
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Mar 2021
Location: Austin, TX
Originally Posted by Madscientist
@Blackheifer
Looks like we have a very different play style.
I play games on the default difficulty and I expect to progress unless I make a big mistake or it is a very hard boss.
For me a role playing game is about experiancing a great story. Lots of reloading is bad for my immersion.
I do not play games to seek the ultimate challenge and I have no problem to lower the difficulty if I hit a hard wall.

Yes, Solasta is easy but I do not complain about it.
It is a good game for new players to learn the 5E rules.

I like the big freedom of BG3. There are several ways to aproach most quests and often you can avoid combat.
But combat often feels unfair because it is labeled as DnD 5E game but it changed so many rules.
Maybe I would feel better if the devs change the game description to: "The game is losely based on DnD 5E with many homebrew changes to please D:OS2 fans."

Listen, to be fair, Solasta has its own significant number of homebrew changes that make players OP. The Concentration Feat for Wizards, the Twin Blade Defense Feat, and the Follow Through feat which grants players another full attack (Polarm master is NOT the same as it only allows 1d4). Then there is the Mage subclass that gives you an automatic upgrade on all your spells so they are cast at 1 level higher. That shit is straight OP.

The difference is that this all buffs the Players and not the monsters/villains.

In BG3 they throw around Advantage a lot but it affects everyone. Enemies will run up ladders to get advantage when shooting at you. Enemies will go after players who run away and leave their flank exposed because of advantage. Enemies can disengage as a bonus action just like players.

The truth is most people don't really want an even playing field against the enemy (except me and my friends) - they want an easy win - but that is against the spirit of D&D where you are supposed to make sure you are balancing encounters to make sure they present enough of an obstacle to players that they have to deal with. The irony is not lost that Solasta gets the rules right but fails at the spirit. Where Larian says "to hell with the rules" and goes for the spirit of the game.

I am not talking about the broken stuff or exploits. Throwing people, barrlmancy, tossing potions to heal people, abusing the hide mechanic, healing food all needs to go.


Blackheifer
Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Icelyn
Originally Posted by Madscientist
- Fast travel: In Solasta you can fast travel on the map if the path to your target is free. This feels OK. In BG3 it feels wrong that you can instandly teleport to any waypoint from anywhere, even from the underdark to the top of a mountain.

- Resting: It is OK if you can rest at dedicated rest points (or you build them up as in Kingmaker) or if you have to walk back to your camp. In BG3 it feels wrong that you can instantly teleport to camp, sleep and teleport right back to the position you have been before. It feels also wrong in BG3 that the camp is NOT a place anywhere on the normal map. I hope you will use a different camp when you have more acts and visit other regions.
Disagree with these! I like to fast travel where I want and when I want and not have to waste time doubling back. Same with resting. I like to rest when I want and don't like restrictions and having to waste time walking back to camp.

I respecfully disagree on your disagreement wink For me RESTRICTIONS is what separates the great RPGs from the forgettable one. When you start going down the <quality of life> and <quick and easy> route, the whole game becomes that. Classes become pointless. Environments become pointless. No need for day/night cycles. No point for a backpack/inventory. Items become common and boring. There is no more thrill of the battle. No more thought given to gameplay due to certain WEAKNESSES you may have.

Last edited by mr_planescapist; 13/06/21 03:59 PM.
Joined: Aug 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Aug 2020
Originally Posted by Blackheifer
Originally Posted by Madscientist
@Blackheifer
Looks like we have a very different play style.
I play games on the default difficulty and I expect to progress unless I make a big mistake or it is a very hard boss.
For me a role playing game is about experiancing a great story. Lots of reloading is bad for my immersion.
I do not play games to seek the ultimate challenge and I have no problem to lower the difficulty if I hit a hard wall.

Yes, Solasta is easy but I do not complain about it.
It is a good game for new players to learn the 5E rules.

I like the big freedom of BG3. There are several ways to aproach most quests and often you can avoid combat.
But combat often feels unfair because it is labeled as DnD 5E game but it changed so many rules.
Maybe I would feel better if the devs change the game description to: "The game is losely based on DnD 5E with many homebrew changes to please D:OS2 fans."

Listen, to be fair, Solasta has its own significant number of homebrew changes that make players OP. The Concentration Feat for Wizards, the Twin Blade Defense Feat, and the Follow Through feat which grants players another full attack (Polarm master is NOT the same as it only allows 1d4). Then there is the Mage subclass that gives you an automatic upgrade on all your spells so they are cast at 1 level higher. That shit is straight OP.

The difference is that this all buffs the Players and not the monsters/villains.

In BG3 they throw around Advantage a lot but it affects everyone. Enemies will run up ladders to get advantage when shooting at you. Enemies will go after players who run away and leave their flank exposed because of advantage. Enemies can disengage as a bonus action just like players.

The truth is most people don't really want an even playing field against the enemy (except me and my friends) - they want an easy win - but that is against the spirit of D&D where you are supposed to make sure you are balancing encounters to make sure they present enough of an obstacle to players that they have to deal with. The irony is not lost that Solasta gets the rules right but fails at the spirit. Where Larian says "to hell with the rules" and goes for the spirit of the game.

I am not talking about the broken stuff or exploits. Throwing people, barrlmancy, tossing potions to heal people, abusing the hide mechanic, healing food all needs to go.


I would like to respectfully and mildly disagree with you you. I don't think it's just a matter of people wanting difficulty, and I don't think it's a matter of Solasta being easy and Baldurs Gate 3 being hard. I haven't played the full version of Solasta yet, I'm in the process of playing another game and want to complete that first, but I played through most of the early access stuff. If they made any significant changes for full release, let me know if they seriously alter the experience. From the first proper mission I was challenged and I died repeatedly, a trend which remained the case throughout the playthrough, with me often barely pulling through several of the tougher encounters, and me feeling really triumphant during the times when I won a fight handily. And I'm not exactly a beginner with crpgs. I've played D:OS (dipped into the sequel but just never clicked with it and so never left fort joy), I've played both Pillars of Eternity games, I've played Dragon Age: Origins, Tyranny, Pathfinder: Kingmaker, have Pathfinder: WotR pre-ordered, I've always been more interested in narrative than combat challenge, but I've got at least a modestly broad range of experience with the genre. And I really loved Solasta and I've found BG3 to be...kinda meh in a lot of ways. Not just combat, but the combat definitely feels weird and off to me, while Solasta's combat was always super satisfying. I probably died more often in BG3, but part of that I put down to being limited to level 4 and not being able to meet the really tough fights at an appropriate level.

I will say that there have been a lot of times when I've been in a position where several of my party have been downed and it's a constant struggle to try and get them back up only for enemies to down them again, which is always frustrating. Some fights, like the Hag (which I'm not even gonna bother touching again until I can get to level 5 at least, haven't won and don't expect to) and the phase spider (I eventually beat that but again don't want to fight it again until higher level) feel frustrating and gimmicky. Other fights like the Githyanki patrol (same situation as the Hag) are just waaaaay too difficult. At the same time, I've seen loads of people on this forum claim they find the game and these fights really easy for one reason or another. I consider myself a pretty average player, while a lot of you here are clearly very skilled to a degree that I'm genuinely not interested in becoming, but remembering that average players who aren't hardcore and aren't especially good, nor especially bad at these games and find them legitimately challenging all the same, is gonna be instructive and useful, I think.

Joined: Jan 2017
G
addict
Online Content
addict
G
Joined: Jan 2017
In my eyes, the biggest difference between the home-brewing in Solasta and BG3 is that in Solasta, the home-brewed stuff tends to make the PCs more interesting and unique in their skill sets and in BG3, the home-brewed stuff tends to make all of the characters feel the same because they overshadow or obsolete class features.

If the home-brew in Solasta makes the characters OP (I don't agree that it does), then it can be fixed with any number of balancing techniques. It doesn't really matter if the BG3 home-brew makes the characters over- or under-powered, because it made them boring, which is far worse.

Joined: Mar 2021
Location: Austin, TX
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Mar 2021
Location: Austin, TX
Originally Posted by grysqrl
In my eyes, the biggest difference between the home-brewing in Solasta and BG3 is that in Solasta, the home-brewed stuff tends to make the PCs more interesting and unique in their skill sets and in BG3, the home-brewed stuff tends to make all of the characters feel the same because they overshadow or obsolete class features.

If the home-brew in Solasta makes the characters OP (I don't agree that it does), then it can be fixed with any number of balancing techniques. It doesn't really matter if the BG3 home-brew makes the characters over- or under-powered, because it made them boring, which is far worse.


This feels very subjective in regards to a distinction. Can you provide me with some examples of BG3 Home Brew that makes all the characters feel the same? I think disengage BA is the only one I can think of. What other examples of Homebrew do you mean?

What balancing techniques do you feel would fix the overpowered Solasta characters?


Blackheifer
Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Not the person you responded to
Originally Posted by Blackheifer
This feels very subjective in regards to a distinction. Can you provide me with some examples of BG3 Home Brew that makes all the characters feel the same? I think disengage BA is the only one I can think of. What other examples of Homebrew do you mean?
- All characters can cast any spell a scroll, making every character a wizard
- All characters benefit from high ground/backstab (whereas in other games e.g., DOSII only certain classes benefitted from high ground; and backstab is typically a rogue thing)
- Many enemies have a free disengage and tend to target low-AC characters, which removes the role of frontline tanky characters. This turns every party member into more of a frontline warrior
- The "Help" action restores HP to downed allies; this makes every character a mini-cleric. Furthermore, the abundance of healing food removes the need for a cleric
- Everyone can shove as bonus action, whereas in 5e this is limited to a shield-wielder with a dedicated feat.
- And ofc disengage makes every character more of a rogue/monk
Originally Posted by Blackheifer
What balancing techniques do you feel would fix the overpowered Solasta characters?
Many Solasta characters would be made less OP if feats were tweaked to be less powerful. But this would still allow each character to retain a sense of personality based on their class-feat combo.

As you mentioned, the Concentration feat should just provide advantage. The Follow-up should just provide a single BA attack (In my latest playthrough, that's what the feat said it did).

For the mage class, maybe the ability should instead allow you to reroll 1's (you must use the new result) on evocation spells' damage dice?

Joined: Dec 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Dec 2020
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
Not the person you responded to

- All characters can cast any spell a scroll, making every character a wizard
- All characters benefit from high ground/backstab (whereas in other games e.g., DOSII only certain classes benefitted from high ground; and backstab is typically a rogue thing)
- Many enemies have a free disengage and tend to target low-AC characters, which removes the role of frontline tanky characters. This turns every party member into more of a frontline warrior
- The "Help" action restores HP to downed allies; this makes every character a mini-cleric. Furthermore, the abundance of healing food removes the need for a cleric
- Everyone can shove as bonus action, whereas in 5e this is limited to a shield-wielder with a dedicated feat.
- And ofc disengage makes every character more of a rogue/monk

Going to add a couple things.

Point 1: Agreed. Probably a coding carryover from DOS2 as well, as every character could use every scroll there as well. I don't expect this to stick.

Point 2: DOS2 did have high ground that benefited everyone (and a low ground penalty), but it was several degrees far less severe than BG3's system. It affected damage bonus and attack range instead of accuracy. The amount of damage for being on high ground starts at +20% and increases by +10% for every point in Huntsman. The low ground penalty was -10% damage and never dropped any further than that. Granted, the Huntsman scaling was one of the reasons why archers became absolutely busted later on, but it's a stat bloat problem rather than a flaw with the actual mechanic. Huge difference from BG3's +5/-5 hit modifiers.

Point 3: Agreed, but to be fair, goblins DO have a bonus action disengage. What shouldn't happen though is Minotaurs, Bulettes, and Harpies being able to jump away without provoking opportunity attacks. Coupling jump and disengage together is such an odd decision from any reasonable standpoint that I think the reasons for it are entirely engine-related rather than something to do with the balance, because we've seen goblins just disengage without jumping already, but we've never seen any enemy in the game use a jump without disengage tied to it. I suspect it's part coding carryover from DOS2, and part 'very bad stuff happened that the engine couldn't handle if someone gets attacked mid-jump'.

Point 4: Agreed. There's another thing to this, the ability to throw healing potions at people to heal them, which means they DO have an advantage over food healing, but it's another thing that invalidates the existence of Healing Word, even if actually using it is a little more clunky.

Point 5: Agreed. If Larian wants to keep bonus action shove that badly, I feel the push function of it should require a minimum strength score to pull it off (14 sounds reasonable), and additionally restricted to martial classes and certain archetypes in the remaining classes (Fighter, Rogue, Monk, Paladin, Ranger, College of Valor Bard as examples). Everyone else only gets access to the knock prone function, unless they get the Shield Master feat and don't fulfill any of the other requirements for the push function (and the Shield Master feat should probably be modified to confer advantage on knock prone attempts too).

Point 6: Agreed.

Last edited by Saito Hikari; 13/06/21 07:06 PM.
Joined: Mar 2021
Location: Austin, TX
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Mar 2021
Location: Austin, TX
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
Not the person you responded to
Originally Posted by Blackheifer
This feels very subjective in regards to a distinction. Can you provide me with some examples of BG3 Home Brew that makes all the characters feel the same? I think disengage BA is the only one I can think of. What other examples of Homebrew do you mean?
- All characters can cast any spell a scroll, making every character a wizard

This is just something that has not been implemented. No class tags have been assigned to spells. As it is Wizards can learn every spell regardless of class.

Originally Posted by mrfuji3
- All characters benefit from high ground/backstab (whereas in other games e.g., DOSII only certain classes benefitted from high ground; and backstab is typically a rogue thing)

I mean I guess you mean advantage because backstab is still a rogue only ability. No one gets an extra 1d6 from an attack from advantage. Advantage is not something that is a specific class ability but reflects certain conditions.

Originally Posted by mrfuji3
- Many enemies have a free disengage and tend to target low-AC characters, which removes the role of frontline tanky characters. This turns every party member into more of a frontline warrior

Goblins have this as part of their actual ability set in the Monster manual. This is correct. I don't recall anyone else having it. Tanks are not really a thing anymore. This is part of 5e which opened up class versatility.

Originally Posted by mrfuji3
- The "Help" action restores HP to downed allies; this makes every character a mini-cleric. Furthermore, the abundance of healing food removes the need for a cleric

Clerics are not pigeonholed as healers anymore, this is part of 5e class versatility. Furthermore Clerics bring someone back up as a bonus action from range. So I don't think this really holds water. There is stuff in PHB that would technically allow this under certain conditions (Nat 20 using a healing kit).


Originally Posted by mrfuji3
- Everyone can shove as bonus action, whereas in 5e this is limited to a shield-wielder with a dedicated feat.

Ok, fair enough. I think it makes the game funny as hell but if you don't that's your opinion.

Originally Posted by mrfuji3
- And ofc disengage makes every character more of a rogue/monk

Yeah I mentioned this.

Originally Posted by mrfuji3
Originally Posted by Blackheifer
What balancing techniques do you feel would fix the overpowered Solasta characters?
Many Solasta characters would be made less OP if feats were tweaked to be less powerful. But this would still allow each character to retain a sense of personality based on their class-feat combo.

As you mentioned, the Concentration feat should just provide advantage. The Follow-up should just provide a single BA attack (In my latest playthrough, that's what the feat said it did).

For the mage class, maybe the ability should instead allow you to reroll 1's (you must use the new result) on evocation spells' damage dice?

Yes but they are not going to do this. Being fair to both games the problem in my eyes is not the homebrew stuff, its creating a challenge that reflects the increased power level. I think - so far - BG3 does a better job of encounter building to balance against the homebrew. Solasta has a long way to go to both 1) increase the quality of the AI and 2) give the other side appropriate tools to provide a solid fight.

I honetsly think that Solasta doesn't have the energy and resources to spend on encounter balancing where I think Larian obsesses over it.


In a fight in BG3 with Goblins I feel like I am fighting Goblins. They are shifty little shits that fight dirty. I don't always know what they will do. Which is great. They have surprised me with some nasty behavior. The same goes for bugbears, red caps, humans, clerics, and wizards. I have observed separate AI scripts for different enemies, which is awesome!

In Solasta I know what most enemies are going to do 90% of the time. Some variations for spellcasters and flying enemies but even then they follow a pretty predictable pattern.

And listen, I went into Solasta expecting a grand challenge - I put the time and energy into learning the rules and being super meticulous about my loadout, character build, equipment, crafting and spell prep and I ended up never running into an encounter where it was ever really tested. So for me that was a letdown. Just one encounter where I barely scraped by would have been nice.

Last edited by Blackheifer; 13/06/21 07:04 PM.

Blackheifer
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
Originally Posted by Blackheifer
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
The problem with BG3's antinational tools is that they're way too powerfull on both side.

- The game is extremely easy if you use them and it would be terrible if the AI was able to use them as much/as smart as us (diping, shove, backstab, avoid 100% of the AOO, and so on)

On the other hand, the tools they added to creatures and the combat design supposed to balance our "homebrewed tools" are also completely broken.

- A lot of creatures can litterally kill one or more of your characters during their first turn, concentration is broken way too easily, the harpy fight is a pain because they can fly, the combat outside the goblins camp is a pain because there are way too many ennemies, you miss more often because they increased some AC, they increased the goblins HP so you have 0 chance to OS one of them, lots of creatures makes better ST than they should because their dexterity has been increased, and so on...

The result is that combats are often unfair and frustrating (please, try to set your mind in the head of a new player that hasn't played hundreds of hours and/or that doesn't know DnD) and that your sucess rely on several custom and OP mechanics. The most challenging combats are limited to "smart moves to nuke your opponent before being nuked". This makes combats way less deep than they should and reduce A LOT our creativity and the usefullness of many tools that are included in DnD (and in BG3).

Solasta may be too easy but Solasta has fair combats and every spells and choices are valuable even if some are better than others depending the situation.
You can end the game without spirit guardian and fire wall even in scavenger or cataclysm mode because other level 3 and 4 spells are also powerfull. Will we be able to end BG3 at higher difficulty without using any "op larianisms" ? (from mechanics to consumables and so on...) I really doubt.

If Larian's will was to create more challenging combats (I don't think so, really), their answer was completely wrong according to me.
If their will was to add new custom mechanics and/or tools, I'm 100% fine with it but the answer was also wrong and created many huge issues everywhere that doesn't exist neither in DnD, neither in Solasta.


This is a difficult conversation to have because the charge of 'elitist gamer' starts getting thrown around, so I will take this in a different direction. There are some gamers out there that are what some would describe as "high functioning" - and people who are high functioning are constantly trying to stave off boredom by finding greater and greater challenges and things to occupy their minds. If they get bored then they get self-destructive.

In the gaming world there have only ever been a handful of games that are designed to have the challenge level necessary to keep the attention of a high functioning individual. Invariably these games - over time - have been nerfed into oblivion to allow for greater mainstream appeal. The most famous example of this is of course World of Warcraft. In Vanilla it was an uncompromising and incredibly fun experience. You couldn't just run around soloing anything you wanted. The world, especially in pvp, did not make any attempt to be fair. Like all great Art it mirrored the unfairness of life. It rewarded cooperation, and punished those who were anti-social and avoidant. It was easy to learn but hard to master. Only 2-3% of players even managed to kill the final boss before the expansion was released (although this was party because Blizzard released the expansion too early. I think it would have been much higher if they gave people a few more months).

And people complained. "Too hard" they said. "Why should we be forced to get better? Make the game easier." And Blizzard listened, and they proceeded to nerf the game until it because not a game, but a simple interactive experience designed for innocent unremarkables. No accomplishments were celebrated because no accomplishments mattered. And once everyone was standing side by side wearing all the same Epic gear they realized how hollow unearned accolades are and they simply stopped playing. Subscriptions plummeted so much that by the third "expansion" they stopped tracking them out of embarrassment.

But then an interesting thing happened, someone figured out how to run a vanilla server based on the original game. And so private servers started to pop up, and people flocked to them by the thousands. And they would run them for 2 year cycles and then reset them and everyone would start over. People just wanted a taste of that original difficult and uncompromising experience. The game was so complex and well made that people were still figuring out new things to do 10 years after the game was released. It was genius.

The gaming world follows the general model of not creating games, but instead creating "Interactive Experiences". An Interactive Experience does not force the player to learn and adapt to move forward. An Interactive Experience is simply meant to be consumed, you are not expected to learn or grow.

IMHO In a real game if you are not losing then its not challenging enough and you need to move on. When I started BG3 I made all the mistakes and had to learn 5E rules to understand what I was doing wrong (a lot it turns out). I lost a lot of fights and loved every second of it. What is wrong with New players losing fights? Good for them. You're welcome!

I cannot comprehend the mentality of a person who expects to win all the time and is convinced they were created perfect straight from God's hands and no additional knowledge or growth is needed. However, I don't need to. There is a whole world of "games" for people that just want to constantly win with no expectation of improvement. Meanwhile the rest of us don't have a lot of options. Sometimes the hardest difficulty setting isn't enough. Witcher 3 on Blood and Broken Bones? yes please! Honor mode, heck yes!

Larian does a great job of trying to make games that require you to adapt and learn. If people are coming to Solasta/BG3 and having trouble but don't think they need to learn and adapt whose fault is that exactly?

No one is ever forced to use Exploits. I never use them and never will.

One other small point. It is rare to see a game that creates so many optional encounters as Larian does. I want them to create more of these. I want there to be areas of the game that if you start a fight then you are going to die and you have no hope of winning. That's proper D&D right there! So many people that complain about combat difficulty are complaining about optional encounters. Can you imagine a world where you can't win every single battle? Where running is the only thing you can do? or successful dialog, or being sneaky?

So this is my ask, let us have THIS game - I am sure there will be nerfed AI settings/easier combats for new players. Meanwhile I will have my crew on Tactician/Honor mode getting occasionally destroyed by the jerk AI and loving every second of it.

I can't talk for anyone but me but don't get me wrong if that's what you understood. I'm not frustrated at all when I'm dying. I LOVE dying because it means that my choices were not so good. That I can find a better strategy than what I tried.

I'm definitely not the most "hardcore" gamer, the best at creating builds and the best to exploit games mechanics but I'm far from being a "casual" gamer (I'm using those words to explain my feeling, not to hurt anyone).
Dying is a challenge to me and retrying the same combats 3, 4, 5 times or more is never a problem to me whatever my "skills". I'm never starting any game in the "normal" difficulty mode because I like being challenged.
I can also retry some combats if a character is dead or if things aren't going how I wants. To give a BG3 exemple I did the combats at the mill more than once because I didn't understood that killing ALL the goblins wouldn't be possible if I did not prevent damages on "the named one" (don't remember his name).

My challenge is to find ways to improve my strategy and make better personnal choices. When a game keep throwing at my head that what I choose is NOT an optimal strategy, I don't feel rewarded at all. And that's exactly what BG3 is doing : it forces me to play a suboptimal gameplay if I want a bit of challenge and variety OR to embrace the optimal mechanics that will make the game way too easy or repetitive.

That is completely unfair and uninterresting to me.
I want to feel that my choices are optimal even if yours may be even more. I want my creativity to be rewarded.

Here's another disclaimer but I personnaly never complained about what I call "choices for fun" : barrelmancy, stealing merchants, throwing a chest to OS anyone in DoS, being able to put tons of things in their backpack, being able to make the bulette fights the minotaurs, being able to rez any creatures with guth (guth ? the mushroom... not sure of his name), being able to take the 2D12 weapons of minotaurs... All these choices and many others require efforts from the players and when they achieve it, they are rewarded. Being able to blow the entire map is not a reward I'm interrested in but who am I to say that the others shouldn't be able to have this reward ?

When you're a player that wants to find the best tactics he can think of depending the situation and depending your character/party build... the game is not satisfying at all after a few hours because the best tactics are obviously always the same.

Of course you can choose not to use the buttons but it has a huge impact on the experience and the difficulty. The only reward doing this is something like "cool, I beat the game without using the OP buttons". You may like this reward but I don't think that it's something most players are looking for.

The game is definitely balanced arround highground and backstab, free disengage and so on...
Higher difficulty levels will be "nuke even faster or being nuked even faster", which means using dipping, eating the best healing items, shoving creatures as a bonus action, using the broken consummables, eventually using surfaces to break our ennemie's concentration and deal damages to creatures that aren't smart enough to jump, and so on...

A balanced game doesn't prevent you to find "more" optimal builds and tactics and it doesn't prevent the game to offer you a challenge that suits you.
An unbalanced games doesn't make me feel rewarded when I click a suboptimal button for the sake of not cliking the optimal button that is right next to the other.

DnD is balanced to offer so many choices and creativity. Rewarding players whatever their choices is probably what every DM is doing and I think that this is what most games succeed at.
That is my feeling when I played Solasta and any other tactical turn based games.

Baldur's Gate 3 only rewards me if I use the mechanics created by Larian (see the disclaimer). If I don't it punishes me, making the game harder.
Games shouldn't ever have so obvious and so easy better tactics. It's not a matter of difficulty at all. It's only a matter of balance.

EDIT : Please, like other did on other threads don't come with obvious exploits. No one has ever used cloudkill and the fog of war exploit in BG2 because it's an interresting and optimal strategy. Players used them because they cannot killed the dragons without it smile This is the old equivalent of barrelmancy, not to highground advantages and any other unbalanced mechanics (>< choices for fun)

EDIT 2 : you didn't answer but what were the abilities of your characters in Solasta when you started the game ? Did you roll or used point buy ?
Feats are obviously more OP when you don't have to increase your abilities at level 4 and 8 smile

Last edited by Maximuuus; 14/06/21 12:36 PM.
Joined: Dec 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Dec 2020
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
My challenge is to find ways to improve my strategy and make better personnal choices. When a game keep throwing at my head that what I choose is NOT an optimal strategy, I don't feel rewarded at all. And that's exactly what BG3 is doing : it forces me to play a suboptimal gameplay if I want a bit of challenge OR embrace the optimal mechanics that will make the game way too easy or repetitive.

That is completely unfair and uninterresting to me.
I want to feel that MY choices are optimal even if yours may be even more. I want MY creativity to be rewarded.

Or in shorter words, the most overpowered things in BG3 in its current state don't actually have anything to do with your character builds (outside of maybe Great Weapon Master, and even then it's mostly the minotaur axes that enables that to be way stronger than usual). Most of the cheese consist of tools available to every single character from level 1. It's why some have the opinion that the classes feel homogenous, the cheese feels like an overwhelming factor in every facet of the game's combat design, and it's going to lead to combat feeling very stagnant later on.

I will keep saying that there may be people that are fine with everything as is, but I absolutely know a lot of people will quickly change their tunes once they realize exactly what all of this spread out over a 80-100+ hour cRPG actually means. Some people have a higher tolerance for this sort of stuff, but I figured out that I don't - I currently have about 60 hours in BG3 and have zero desire to go back to it until there's even a hint that some of the problematic mechanics are being addressed, Bard or Paladin is officially added, or reactions/ready actions are being put in. But I have 600+ hours in DOS2, 50+ hours in Solasta EA, and 250+ hours in WotR Beta, and none of those games have yet to give me the same feeling that something is extremely off with the balance like BG3 already has.

Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
Originally Posted by Saito Hikari
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
My challenge is to find ways to improve my strategy and make better personnal choices. When a game keep throwing at my head that what I choose is NOT an optimal strategy, I don't feel rewarded at all. And that's exactly what BG3 is doing : it forces me to play a suboptimal gameplay if I want a bit of challenge OR embrace the optimal mechanics that will make the game way too easy or repetitive.

That is completely unfair and uninterresting to me.
I want to feel that MY choices are optimal even if yours may be even more. I want MY creativity to be rewarded.

Or in shorter words, the most overpowered things in BG3 in its current state don't actually have anything to do with your character builds (outside of maybe Great Weapon Master, and even then it's mostly the minotaur axes that enables that to be way stronger than usual). Most of the cheese consist of tools available to every single character from level 1. It's why some have the opinion that the classes feel homogenous, the cheese feels like an overwhelming factor in every facet of the game's combat design, and it's going to lead to combat feeling very stagnant later on.

I will keep saying that there may be people that are fine with everything as is, but I absolutely know a lot of people will quickly change their tunes once they realize exactly what all of this spread out over a 80-100+ hour cRPG actually means. Some people have a higher tolerance for this sort of stuff, but I figured out that I don't - I currently have about 60 hours in BG3 and have zero desire to go back to it until there's even a hint that some of the problematic mechanics are being addressed, Bard or Paladin is officially added, or reactions/ready actions are being put in. But I have 600+ hours in DOS2, 50+ hours in Solasta EA, and 250+ hours in WotR Beta, and none of those games have yet to give me the same feeling that something is extremely off with the balance like BG3 already has.

That's not a lot shorter to be honnest grin

Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by Saito Hikari
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
- All characters benefit from high ground/backstab (whereas in other games e.g., DOSII only certain classes benefitted from high ground; and backstab is typically a rogue thing)
Point 2: DOS2 did have high ground that benefited everyone (and a low ground penalty), but it was several degrees far less severe than BG3's system. It affected damage bonus and attack range instead of accuracy. The amount of damage for being on high ground starts at +20% and increases by +10% for every point in Huntsman. The low ground penalty was -10% damage and never dropped any further than that. Granted, the Huntsman scaling was one of the reasons why archers became absolutely busted later on, but it's a stat bloat problem rather than a flaw with the actual mechanic. Huge difference from BG3's +5/-5 hit modifiers.
You mention Huntsman right there though. Weren't they the only 'class' that got increased bonuses for high ground? That was my point, that only a singular class (skill tree) was able to get significant bonuses from high ground.

@Blackheifer, I'm not quoting you because that would be long
1.) By and large we don't know what Larian plans to implement, so we have base our discussion off what we see in the game so far.
2.) No. Backstab is not a rogue ability. Sneak Attack is a rogue ability. These are separate. I was referring to Advantage from Backstab (which everyone gets), not 1d6 from sneak attack.
3.) Minotaur/phase spiders/bullete have a disengage+jump/teleport ability. I've also seen posters say that Patch 4 added more of these disengage abilities to BG3 but I don't remember which enemies were brought up...but that's still 3 of the hardest fights in the game. (Edit: Saito Hikari mentions the harpies)
4.) You literally give an example in your response, that in 5e, healing someone to 1hp is allowed under certain conditions. I'd be fine if you had to make a medicine check to bring an unconscious member back to 1 hp, as this would reward characters who put a proficiency there.
- 4b) I'm not claiming that this Help action invalidates clerics. But it does infringe on their typical abilities: namely bringing someone back from unconsciousness via Healing Word/Cure wounds/Paladin's Lay on Hands
5.) Shove: I don't disagree that shoving is fun (as long as it doesn't instakill bosses). But every class being given the ~low-cost ability to do so does make classes feel more uniform. Plus, at level 5 fighters/barbarians/paladins should be able to shove 2x per round using both of their attacks. Fights can shove 3x at level 11! This will not be possible in BG3. So if you like shoving, you want to be able to Shove using an attack-equivalent action.

About Solasta, I agree that the combats probably won't be made more difficult by changing the enemy AI, and this is an issue with it.

Last edited by mrfuji3; 13/06/21 07:49 PM.
Joined: Jan 2017
G
addict
Online Content
addict
G
Joined: Jan 2017
Originally Posted by Blackheifer
This feels very subjective in regards to a distinction. Can you provide me with some examples of BG3 Home Brew that makes all the characters feel the same? I think disengage BA is the only one I can think of. What other examples of Homebrew do you mean?

Off the top of my head, here are some of the many ways in which Larian homebrew devalues class features:
-Ubiquitous food and healing potions devalue classes that can heal.
-Anyone can cast any spell from a scroll; this devalues all spellcasters.
-Wizards can scribe any spell from a scroll; this devalues all non-wizard spellcasters.
-Advantage is readily accessible by anyone who moves to high ground or takes a couple of steps around an enemy; this devalues numerous spells and class features that impose advantage/disadvantage.
-The wide variety of magic arrows/throwables devalues characters who train to create effects that these consumables allow anyone to replicate (mostly evocation spells, but there's more).
-The same low range on all ranged weapons devalues characters that specialize in ranged attacks. A longbow requires more training than a shortbow (i.e. less classes have proficiency) and should be able to shoot much farther accurately (80/320 feet for the shortbow vs 150/600 feet for the longbow). Instead, they both have a range of 60 feet; the longbow just has a tiny damage boost. This problem carries over to spells with longer range as well.
-Reducing enemy AC and boosting their HP devalues spells with saving throws and particularly spells, like sleep, that care about an enemy's HP.
-Disengage as a bonus action for everyone devalues rogues and monks, for whom this is a significant feature of their low-level kit. It also devalues any character that cares about positioning in battle; enemies can just hop past your front line to get at your ranged characters with no repercussions.
-The ability to shove a cartoonishly long distance, potentially for significant damage, creates a tool that anyone can use and that overshadows most class features. It devalues every class.
-The lack of ability to shove prone removes a useful tool, both for battlefield positioning and for imposing advantage/disadvantage.
-Lack of a robust reaction system devalues any class that has more options for reactions than just "hit the first thing that moves away from me each round".

In general, Larian's drive to give everyone more bonus actions devalues classes with features that give them versatility with their bonus actions. D&D is not designed to give everyone a bonus action every round or even every fight. The ability to use bonus actions for lots of things is part of what makes rogues and monks shine. It makes sorcerers' quicken spell, bards' bardic inspiration, and paladins' various smites really valuable. These things become a lot less interesting when everyone gets a very useful shove/jump every turn.

I'm sure I'm missing a bunch of examples, but this should be plenty. If it was just one or two things, you could argue that they'd just overlooked something. But this is very clearly Larian's M.O.; their homebrew is systematically devaluing the things that are special about individual classes, which makes all characters feel samey.

Originally Posted by Blackheifer
What balancing techniques do you feel would fix the overpowered Solasta characters?
I'm a designer, not a developer - it's someone else's job to tweak things until they are balanced. I care about the broad strokes. I want the gameplay to feel engaging and immersive; to do that, your game needs to have good bones first. Solasta has good bones - you might not like some of the quirks and the details of how they balanced things, but the mechanics are solid and the UI is solid. At any moment, it's very easy to know what your options are and what it means to choose one of those options.

BG3, on the other hand, is terrible on both mechanics and UI. Until you have a solid foundation to build on, talking about balance is meaningless.

Last edited by grysqrl; 13/06/21 08:01 PM.
Joined: Dec 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Dec 2020
I meant to add that mages can benefit pretty heavily from huntsman bonuses as well. A 2 level dip in Huntsman is recommended for Tactical Retreat alone as mages generally lack mobility skills otherwise and the haste attached to it is always great to have. The bonus +20% high ground damage is a significant boost in damage too. And they can get more levels in Huntsman from gear, which late game becomes a better investment once your favored elements are close to getting maxed out and provided that you can always get to high ground.

It's the same kind of principle as archers and necromancy builds investing in Warfare even if they have little use for the actual skills in it, because Warfare boosts ALL physical damage inflicted. It's why archers were able to one-round almost everything they looked at mid-late game in vanilla DOS2 until the definitive edition slightly nerfed them.

Last edited by Saito Hikari; 13/06/21 08:06 PM.
Page 4 of 5 1 2 3 4 5

Moderated by  Nicou 

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