Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General RIP the patch every 2 weeks

I'm still holding out the hope that they will surprise us big time with massive changes down the road: revamped engine, "toilet chain" gone, much better balanced rules - both homebrews and DnD, 6-person party, much more companions, better writing, etc. It's like, they had this very ambitious idea for this project, but needed to gather an appropriate amount of fund, so they used the label Baldur's Gate and the DnD appeal, and threw out a full-price EA. But they had to quickly put together something to show people, so they just used the DOS engine with its existing systems to make the demo/EA. Now that they have their money, who knows, they might be conducting large-scale overhauls of everything. The fact that they haven't said anything for such a long time may just mean that they're very confident that the changes they have implementing would justify the silence. Is this too optimistic I wonder?

Exactly. There is an overlap on certain priorities though. Speaking for the people in Multiplayer Nation we would be happier with Larian sticking closer to the core 5E rules and also removing barrlemancy. The ability to throw already incorporates bombs and flasks it doesn't need to include throwing monsters around (maybe Goblins, but with a check of some sort).

If you have not tried multiplayer I would encourage you to give it a shot with a good group.

And I also thought Solasta not having multiplayer was unfortunate as hell. I get why, but it still stings. Maybe Solasta 2.

And honestly, I always felt the Origin characters were more problem than they are worth. I get having them as companions, but I still think it makes more sense to not play one as an origin. You end up feeling serious FOMO when presented with the choice of an Origin character with all this extra backstory or your own character that is walking their own path.

Ready to be dissapointed ?

I have the same hopes but unfortunately I think their vision is to adapt the setting to their style rather than adapt their style to the setting.

Far too optimistic. A leopard doesn’t change its spots and I really can’t envisage Larian suddenly having an Ebeneezer Scrooge-like epiphany.

Would love to be wrong of course. Can’t see it though.

I still maintain that Origin characters are a waste of resources that take away from a lot of other things in the game. What should have really been done is emphasizing backgrounds for a custom main character like what DA:O did, instead of a misguided attempt to add replay value by locking dialogue options and cutscenes behind making one of the companions your designated main character. There's talk about a dream scene that's exclusive to Astarion origin. I feel like such a thing would be FAR better utilized as something you'd get to see as part of romancing Astarion.

At the same time, the writers could tighten up the companion writing, instead of being forced to make them open ended enough to have them all become plausible 'main character' material. A very subtle thing I've noticed is that your character is not allowed to actually disagree with what the companions suggest by explaining why you believe certain things are a bad idea, all you can do in most situations is either drop the subject or forcefully deny them. I've been comparing BG3 dialogue options to Pathfinder WotR options lately. The options where you disagree with others in the latter tend to be framed more as coming from an alignment/background standpoint instead of a pure contest of influence/power, and some disagreements actually do result in the companions taking what you've said to heart or arguing back, instead of a simple 'character disapproves' message. Stuff like this has an extremely subtle effect at making your character feel like your own character rather than a bystander in the world.

(Honestly, rolling skill checks against your party members at the frequency that BG3 makes you do it is kind of a ridiculous concept too. If the companion has high enough approval or you did a great favor for them, you shouldn't have to roll. You don't have to roll against your party members in most other cRPGs because them opening up to you inherently shouldn't be left up to random chance.)

I am fine with them having Unique dialogue options for if they enter a conversation, adds some depth where you can reckon that Laezel should be the face and decider of what happens when encountering Zorru or Wyll might be able to say something to Kagha, etc etc. But making them preset fully playable characters with their own sequences and dreams and such honestly is a bit much, and I'd genuinely think those resources would be better spent on non origin companions. Its something that makes sense for DOS but doesn't really work out for BG3 in my eyes.

Origin characters is a concept that will never work. It was fine in DoS because it was the first time but the point of playing such role playing game is to create your own characters.

- Origin would be fine (choose an origin for your custom character)
- "Origin" companions could be fine (deep companions that have their own story)

But Origin characters takes a lot of ressources (money, writting constraints,...) for a very debatable interrest.

You don't need origin characters to have preset characters and I'm not sure Larian's game need even more replayability through origin characters.
There are so much classes and builds, and skills and story pathes and so on that the replayability is probably already enough for everyone.

I want Larian to release a staement, where they tell us that they do not wish to change anything, bcs game is perfect as it is ...
Just for the fun of all those angry coments, that will be here.

Now for real ...
My list is quite short surprisingly ...
1) Popup reactions
Well ... that is it. I had second thing, but i forgot it ... so it was probably not so important.

What i really want to see is something like list of our "mega-threats" with notes like: concidering implementation / noted, will be concidered / absolutely not ... so we at least know their vision a little.

//edit:
Oh and statement if they are concidering implementing all races, classes and subclases into EA ... or if some (and preferably wich one) will stay hidden until full release ... would be apreciated.

If we're making a wish-list - count me in!

1) Fix dialogues at camp so that players no longer can accidentally overlap / miss conversation due to not camping often enough. c:
2) I'd like to see some changes to the character creation screen. First of all, I find it really odd that the class is picked AFTER pure customization - I feel like one often has to go back and fourth in order to get all stats and proficiencies right unless one knows EXACTLY what they are doing from the beginning.
3) I really hope they add the missing classes / sub-classes soon so that they get their proper testing time - not even necessarily because I want to play them myself since the only one I want to try is a paladin in a full custom party (for RP reasons alone).
4) I would at least like to know who our new companions will be (both origin and non-origins if that is relevant) - even if they do not directly add them to the game itself just yet. c:
5) I have joined the height advantage crew and would rather see a flat bonus instead of just pure advantage.

Point 2 was basically already confirmed to be in the plans. Or at least so Larian claimed at some point, still unsure if something changed.
Point 4 is also something that they talked about, even if TOR wasn't something they mentioned explicitly. They just said they are working on an UI "to make all party members feel part of the conversation", whatever that translates to in Larian terms.

I'd also add "Fuck Halsin", but then again I guess that's pretty much the whole idea there.

But since we are doing wishlists, here's mine.

1- Unsurprisingly, "Get rid of the toilet chain and give us a control scheme that doesn't induce cancer on the user" is indeed my top priority. If nothing else because it's the thing I can't confidently hope will be addressed by modders without having the foundations in place. Not only it's an absolute priority, but there's absolutely no sensible, acceptable argument to be made about why it couldn't be addressed relatively easily if they only TRIED.
2- I'd put "day/night cycle" here, but it's more a pipe dream than a realistic expectation, given Larian bizarre adversity for this feature and the way they treat it as it would be fucking quantum physics to figure out. So I'll settle for addressing a lot of minor "larianisms" currently affecting the core ruleset like a terminal illness. You know the drill: jump/disengage as bonus action, shove as bonus action and a comedic cartoon gag, loads of surprisingly light explosive barrels every-goddamn-where, etc. Basically: "stick closer to the core mechanics".
3- A proper reaction system would marry very well with the previous point.
4- A decent rest system that doesn't rely on convoluted, bizarre instancing in a parallel pocket universe would be ideal here, but it's another pipe dream and not something they are going to address this late in development, so I guess the ability to manage an extended party would be ideal here. Both in terms of being able to have a larger active group (you know, the canonical six-men group) and in terms of having all your companions gathering in one place and playing an active role even when not actively grouped, as it happens in games like Kingmaker, WOTR, DA, etc.
5- Making a more liberal use of the world map for travels and encounters, eventually separating minor locations in distinct maps, without this insistence of sticking everything few meters away from the next thing in an intricate diorama-like structure (which admittedly Larian is very good at leveraging... It's just not necessarily a good fit for every scenario).

It's also bizarre that so many people (and journalists) claim that they LOVED the feature when speaking in abstract, but then if you are having a frank conversation one-on-one with them and you try to pressure them into giving more details on how this affected their behavior they start to rethink about it.

Typical case:
"Oh, I love the playable Origins. I want it in every game".
"Yeah? So when you finished playing DOS 2, which is the companion that you felt this urge to replay the entire game as main character"
Follows awkward silence. Then someone attempts to namedrop some companion.
"So, did you actually replay the game as him/her? How far did you actually go with it? Did your perspective on the character changed significantly having him/her as playable rather than as a companion?"
What follows here is typically stumbling and muttering, with some reticent admission that no, it didn't really do much for them and maybe they didn't even finish the game once, actually. And not twice for sure.
They just liked it in principle, without a single care in the world for what it would imply design-wise and what else got sacrificed in the process of allowing this feature to exist.

As a general question, I'd be tempted to ask to anyone who played BG2 if they ever found themselves thinking something among the lines of "Man, this game was good, but IF ONLY I COULD REPLAY THE WHOLE THING as Jaheira/Viconia/Minsc/Edwin/whatever, that would be the best thing ever witnessed in RPG".
I know the thought never even crossed my mind, frankly.

Honestly, with the companions getting slaughtered thing, I felt almost obligated to play Red Prince in my playthroughs because I wanted to be able to do as many companion quests as I could and he is the one that makes the most sense as a summoner. But if I could have kept everyone alive and experience their stories, I totally would have played a custom character.

I could see a game being built around it, where it genuinely gets very very very different depending on which character you choose, but I don't think that type of project is for BG3 and would be more for DOS3.

I really don't think it's about playing as Jaheira , Minsc or anyone else. Of course I never thought " Would be huge to play as one of them!!". Cause the child of Bhaal backstory is good as it is. If anything Larian gives you the option to play the same game with different lores so the idea is actually huge. You can choose yourself what kind of main character you want to play. If in BG2 I could be the Child of Bhaal OR Jaheira, Viconia etc then...why not?

The only problem I see is they design EVERY character quest as if it was the PC character. And because of it we have less characters to choose from. Not every single character needs to be the origin character for crying out loud.

If you take BG2 as an example ( could be any game , really) then the story of the Child of Bhaal would still be the main quest.
It's like playing DOS2 and not playing Fane as your PC. It's...strange.

Well, I don't think it is, and that's exactly the problem.
I think the strain it puts on the production in terms of variable to consider and the constrictions it puts on quest and companions design is out-weighting by far the benefits it offers.

I did play DOS 2 from more than one perspective (even if most of them not to a completion point) and I'd be lying through my teeth if I claimed that the experience felt wildly different each time.
In fact I think I played games that don't offer the option of multiple protagonists where your custom character felt more distinctive than in DOS 2. Arcanum, Fallout and Fallout 2 come to mind.
Incidentally that includes BG3 already, even in its incomplete form.
Playing this build of BG3 as Drow or as a halfling feels way more distinctive than, say, playing as Beast or Ifan in DOS 2.

Yay!

No, never. Because I can't even start to imagine how the game would even play out. CHARNAME is vastly different from everyone else, everything is about CHARNAME and the whole story and all events revolve around them. They dictate what to do, how to do it, when to do it. Even if you get to replay the game as one of the companions and get to dictate what to do in minor quests and events, the most important events will be about CHARNAME and beyond your influence. I don't know what it would feel like, playing the game when everything is about someone else. Certain parts wouldn't make sense without major rewriting, like at the beginning of the game when Imoen opens your cell door: it wouldn't make sense that she would ignore CHARNAME and open someone else's cell first. Unless, of course, you rewrite that part, maybe have CHARNAME hidden somewhere and so Imoen can only find the companions first.

Replaying the game as different characters only makes sense if you at least get to do different things that yield different results and reactions in the world (even if these characters are not precisely "equal" in terms of role in the story). Something like DAO's origins. I played DOS2 twice and the second time I already played a custom character, and after that I was done. My question is: what is the point of replaying as different origin characters?. In DAO some NPCs will react to you differently based on your origin, but in DOS2 you can just switch to the origin character and have them do the talking, and there, you have your origin quests. All critical NPCs will still be there, greet the characters the same way, give you the same tasks which play out in the same manner.

This "origin characters" idea can still be good if these characters represent the different ways for you to start the game (in other words, like DAO origins, but maybe on a more extensive level), and after that you get "standard" companions that have nothing to do with the whole origin bs.

i'll admit i never played through DOS2 as an origin character, i used my own, was there some massive difference to playing as an origin character? Did a whole side of the game I never saw open up or something? Was it a completely different experience?

well, not really.
Did you ever play with companions, in general? Did you complete their specific side quests?
Playing as one of them was basically the same thing, except for occasional use of a character-specific tag during some conversation (not always with a meaningful outcome, either; it was more flavor than anything) and experiencing that same side quest was written by a slightly different perspective. And without the character's voice acting.

Fane has a unique ending, I liked his passing experience. But only if you use his answer options, otherwise there is no point in it.

Red Prince, Sebille, and Lohse get a tiny bit different when you play them, like you get to experience Red Prince's dream stuff, you can make Sebille not a murderhobo, and you can get more personal with Lohse's possession problems. Other than that... Honestly, nothing felt any different when I controlled a character instead of them being a companion, cause the things I mentioned were minor (other than Sebille really being way too trigger happy to fuck up Red Prince's questline...)