Larian Banner: Baldur's Gate Patch 9
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 4 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
And again, why not give us lots of baby minions to kill? Goblins are meant to be easy kills, but in greater numbers more deadly. It's so much more rewarding to kill droves of goblins than 4-6 tanky ones.

Same with the spider lair. It's so much creepier and fun to kill swarms of weaker spiders than 4 Phase Spiders, 2 Ettercaps and a Boss Mama. Yes, I want to face a few big tough monsters, like Boss Mama and such, but the battles should build up to that. Every battle shouldn't be against such tough enemies that, again, they need to be severely nerfed to beat them.

Joined: Nov 2020
O
OcO Offline
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
O
Joined: Nov 2020
I'm +1 more for keeping the monsters we know and love closer if not exact to the monsters we know and love. Yet another aspect of the game I expect I'll be looking for a good mod for after release.

As to poison surfaces... I can see a minimum explanation that walking through a poisoned surface causes some of the poison to splash up and hit exposed skin/clothing above the boots and soak through there, or even through the boots themselves at the seams/rivets/overlapping areas...I'm not sure if "Boot Armor" was made to be waterproof. I'm NOT saying I'm a fan of Larian's surfaces implementation...only that I can see at least some barely plausible possible reasoning for some of them.

Joined: Jan 2017
G
addict
Offline
addict
G
Joined: Jan 2017
I have no issue with Larian home brewing some new monsters. But if they're going to do that, they should just create new monsters. Phase spiders are iconic and, while many people haven't encountered them before, those who have are going to expect them to behave a certain way. It's not the end of the world to have your expectations confounded now and then, but the point of using icons is for quick recognition and understanding - don't mess with them.

Joined: Nov 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by grysqrl
I have no issue with Larian home brewing some new monsters. But if they're going to do that, they should just create new monsters. Phase spiders are iconic and, while many people haven't encountered them before, those who have are going to expect them to behave a certain way. It's not the end of the world to have your expectations confounded now and then, but the point of using icons is for quick recognition and understanding - don't mess with them.

I fully agree with you

Joined: Mar 2021
member
Offline
member
Joined: Mar 2021
Originally Posted by Tuco
Phase spiders are a notable example among many.

The issue at hand here is PRECISELY that this bastardization of the bestiary keeps happening over and over across the entire EA for no apparent other reason than Larian going all in with their “We put more divinity in your Forgotten Realms”.

Phase spiders are supposed to be basically rogue spiders, minotaurs are supposed to charge you, not Hulk stomp you into a fine paste, goblins are supposed to have nasty group tactics but not to be individually “Tanky”, spectators should have two RAY ATTACKS per turn and an average of 40 HP ( peak at 60 if maxed out) not four random actions readily available at will and 90 HP, hook horrors doing the hulk stomping sounds new as well, gnoll archers should NOT be medieval Gatlings who put wood elves to shame, those swamp monsters aren’t supposed to be low level enemies, etc, etc, etc.

The regularity of these ass-pulls is arguably even more grating than their egregiousness.

Pretty sure the reason Larian decided to monkey with all of the monster stats, is because they realized that they broke any semblance of balance in combat with their homebrew rules/barralmancy/surface spam etc, and then decided to just give every enemy a ranged and/or AOE attack.

Joined: Oct 2020
S
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
S
Joined: Oct 2020
To be charitable, I think it might also be because there could be situations things can't get to players, so giving them ranged attacks to avoid having to stand there being plinked away is done.

Joined: May 2019
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: May 2019
Sorry I'm late to this thread, but between this thread and others on elves and FR gods and itemization and connections to the original BG games I thought it might be useful to note for everyone here that very recently, in an interview, a WotC dude (Crawford?) stated very clearly that it is now WotC policy that EVERYTHING pre-5e is not considered canon anymore. So not only are the old video games and novels and comic books etc no longer considered canon but also even WotC-published sourcebooks from previous editions are no longer considered canon. ONLY 5e sourcebooks and nothing else. It is WotC's latest attempt to make anything pre-5e to be no longer relevant to D&D players, and in this way make people buy the new material if they want canon. And whenever 6e is released, all 5e material will become non-canon and irrelevant too.

With each passing day I come to hate WotC more and more, and can't help asking myself if I want to keep giving WotC even one penny of my money ever again.

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Sorry I'm late to this thread, but between this thread and others on elves and FR gods and itemization and connections to the original BG games I thought it might be useful to note for everyone here that very recently, in an interview, a WotC dude (Crawford?) stated very clearly that it is now WotC policy that EVERYTHING pre-5e is not considered canon anymore. So not only are the old video games and novels and comic books etc no longer considered canon but also even WotC-published sourcebooks from previous editions are no longer considered canon. ONLY 5e sourcebooks and nothing else. It is WotC's latest attempt to make anything pre-5e to be no longer relevant to D&D players, and in this way make people buy the new material if they want canon. And whenever 6e is released, all 5e material will become non-canon and irrelevant too.

With each passing day I come to hate WotC more and more, and can't help asking myself if I want to keep giving WotC even one penny of my money ever again.
Who gives a fuck if you like a monster from 3.5 or older use it! homebrew it. Use lore or whatever part you like that's the beauty of DnD. You play it the way you like.

Last edited by Lastman; 02/08/21 06:23 PM.
Joined: Aug 2020
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Aug 2020
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Sorry I'm late to this thread, but between this thread and others on elves and FR gods and itemization and connections to the original BG games I thought it might be useful to note for everyone here that very recently, in an interview, a WotC dude (Crawford?) stated very clearly that it is now WotC policy that EVERYTHING pre-5e is not considered canon anymore. So not only are the old video games and novels and comic books etc no longer considered canon but also even WotC-published sourcebooks from previous editions are no longer considered canon. ONLY 5e sourcebooks and nothing else. It is WotC's latest attempt to make anything pre-5e to be no longer relevant to D&D players, and in this way make people buy the new material if they want canon. And whenever 6e is released, all 5e material will become non-canon and irrelevant too.

With each passing day I come to hate WotC more and more, and can't help asking myself if I want to keep giving WotC even one penny of my money ever again.

I'm not gonna argue against anyone not wanting to give WotC money, but I do want to ask why this is that big of a deal. Is it just a matter of principle? Like, you're against the way WotC is disrespecting past editions? I can understand that. But the idea of canon for TTRPGs has always been pretty weird to me. I understand wanting to play in a world that's already been created for you, but what does it really matter if Wizards no longer considers past stuff canon? They're not gonna come and take the books you already have away, you're free to fold past stuff into canon at your tables and having the books that they declare canon only matters insofar as you want to use what's in the books. If you prefer the lore from a past edition, you can keep it when you play.

Joined: Sep 2017
member
Offline
member
Joined: Sep 2017
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Sorry I'm late to this thread, but between this thread and others on elves and FR gods and itemization and connections to the original BG games I thought it might be useful to note for everyone here that very recently, in an interview, a WotC dude (Crawford?) stated very clearly that it is now WotC policy that EVERYTHING pre-5e is not considered canon anymore. So not only are the old video games and novels and comic books etc no longer considered canon but also even WotC-published sourcebooks from previous editions are no longer considered canon. ONLY 5e sourcebooks and nothing else. It is WotC's latest attempt to make anything pre-5e to be no longer relevant to D&D players, and in this way make people buy the new material if they want canon. And whenever 6e is released, all 5e material will become non-canon and irrelevant too.

With each passing day I come to hate WotC more and more, and can't help asking myself if I want to keep giving WotC even one penny of my money ever again.
I thought the point of that article was not to say that nothing except 5E is canon, but that everything has its own canon and it doesn't make it any less "valid" or whathaveyou. It's basically a pass for Larian to do what they want. It's also a pass for DMs to do what they want.

Joined: May 2019
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: May 2019
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Sorry I'm late to this thread, but between this thread and others on elves and FR gods and itemization and connections to the original BG games I thought it might be useful to note for everyone here that very recently, in an interview, a WotC dude (Crawford?) stated very clearly that it is now WotC policy that EVERYTHING pre-5e is not considered canon anymore. So not only are the old video games and novels and comic books etc no longer considered canon but also even WotC-published sourcebooks from previous editions are no longer considered canon. ONLY 5e sourcebooks and nothing else. It is WotC's latest attempt to make anything pre-5e to be no longer relevant to D&D players, and in this way make people buy the new material if they want canon. And whenever 6e is released, all 5e material will become non-canon and irrelevant too.

With each passing day I come to hate WotC more and more, and can't help asking myself if I want to keep giving WotC even one penny of my money ever again.

I'm not gonna argue against anyone not wanting to give WotC money, but I do want to ask why this is that big of a deal. Is it just a matter of principle? Like, you're against the way WotC is disrespecting past editions? I can understand that. But the idea of canon for TTRPGs has always been pretty weird to me. I understand wanting to play in a world that's already been created for you, but what does it really matter if Wizards no longer considers past stuff canon? They're not gonna come and take the books you already have away, you're free to fold past stuff into canon at your tables and having the books that they declare canon only matters insofar as you want to use what's in the books. If you prefer the lore from a past edition, you can keep it when you play.
Yes, absolutely, and as far as I am concerned what I consider to be canon is what is canon, and WotC can kiss my ass. It is very much just my reaction to their attitude towards all that came before, and by "their" I mean the current people at WotC working on D&D who have often openly denigrated and mocked the fans of and the material from the older editions. It's that attitude that gets under my skin.

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by GM4Him
You know, I will say this, though. It is true that there aren't really a huge variety of spider types in 5e. Giant, Phase and Giant Wolf, along with Swarm of Spiders.

BUT, that said, why not use ALL these types in the spider lair instead of 2 Ettercaps and 4 Phase and 1 mama plus some babies maybe?

So, instead of how it is now, why not start with two Swarms of spiders that attack almost as soon as you enter the Apprentice lair with her journals? Then, maybe 2 more as you round a bend. Thus, showing this lair is FULL of spiders. Then, while roaming, two Giant Wolf Spiders attack, dropping from unseen webs above. Then two more.

Suddenly, as you are nearing the mama lair, THAT'S when you encounter the Ettercaps. Then, finally, in the heart of her lair, you face Mama and 2 Phase Spiders with proper stats. However, Mama has twice Phase Spider stats and can cast some magic with spell slots, etc. Maybe she can Poison Spray you and such. Whatever. The point is, give us baby monsters to enjoy slaughtering that weaken the characters a little. Then hit the player with the boss fight. Don't make every fight so tough. I'd love that lair to be full of baby spiders and then Mama comes out to play.

i agree with this, that fight could be done so much better. They need a better AI that uses better tactics and all attacks. Right now it's just spaming same things, range attacks all the time, same as Ettercaps... and this problem is all over EA.

The fight is not hard at all so i can't agree with that part and even if they used RAW stats that wouldn't change. Homebrew is not the problem in my book but other things need to improve AI attacks, monster placement and so on.

But you are right on this part, not sure why they only used Phase spider and Ettercaps other types need to be added, maybe a gobo fight vs spiders could happen somewhere and then you join in. That zone is so cool and fights could be designed in all sorts of way, surprise attacks, web traps they could even add a Drider on nightmare difficulty.

An that's one more thing i have to say we have no clue what stat will they use on harder difficulty. Right now it's walk in the part and even if they used RAw stats that wouldn't change.

Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
The main point of this entire post is that they aren't even using 5e monsters as they were designed. They throw tough 5e monsters at players and then Nerf them. Why? They could use different monsters and NOT nerf them. They could create their own and do whatever the heck they want. But why turn imps into baby grunts, intellect devourers into straight up thugs with no real special traits, phase spiders into teleporting spitters...etc?

That's the point, people. Do you want a teleporting, spitting spider? Use phase spider stats and tweak them and call them something new and different. Give players a new breed of spider to have fun with and enjoy and get excited about. Make up new lore about them. Thats how you do homebrew right. You don't call it a Phase Spider and then have it act totally different. That messes with people familiar with the premade monsters.

First time I went into the spider lair, I saw a Phase Spider and prepared myself for a melee fight. Next thing I knew, BAM! Ports over my head and blasts my whole party with poison. I, being knowledgeable about Phase Spiders, was butchered by them because they acted in no way like Phase Spiders.

See my point?

Joined: Mar 2020
Location: Belfast
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Mar 2020
Location: Belfast
Originally Posted by Some_Twerp753
To be charitable, I think it might also be because there could be situations things can't get to players, so giving them ranged attacks to avoid having to stand there being plinked away is done.
That is probably the most likely reason - teleport and range attack allows phase spiders to "skip" verticality of the level. That said, Druids can change into spiders, so spiders can climb ladders and such, so I don't think their mobility would be hurt that much.

Overall, for my taste Larian likes to make their enemies jump/teleport a bit too much.

Joined: Oct 2020
S
member
Offline
member
S
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Tuco
Inspired by a discussion we were having across several different threads and that started "spilling" a bit everywhere, I decided that this topic in particular should probably get its own thread.


The title should be pretty much self-explanatory, really, but just to elaborate a bit, here's a bunch of previous posts (not just mine) that already touched on the point.

Originally Posted by Tuco
What puzzles me about the phase spiders is that there ARE spiders who are canonically supposed to have ranged attacks in D&D, so it's not really clear why Larian felt the urge to use one that it's notorious for being a "melee only" beast and gift to it an arbitrary ranged aoe venom spit.

This complete disregard for implementing the "appropriate canonical movesets" for their bestiary is part of what often makes me feel that Larian goes through the handling the D&D license as a painful constriction rather than a pleasure or privilege.
Originally Posted by GM4Him
And, it isn't like they don't have enemies doing things like Ethereal Jaunt with Invisibility Potions and jazz, so implementing it correctly wouldn't be hard. I don't get it. If you think the battle is too easy, throw a few more spiders in the battle, don't mess with a monster's stats. I mean, messing with the stats makes a monster no longer the monster. Like you said, the phase spider then becomes like a whole different type of spider.


Originally Posted by 1varangian
I hate how Phase Spiders are now elusive spitters. I hate the sea of exploding poison in those caves even more.

Ethereal predators who would surprise you at melee range would be much more tactically interesting, distinctive and scary. But do we have ranged enemies and AoE surface spam oh boy. Protection fighting style would have a great use against proper Phase Spiders. You'd have to place your mages next to your Fighters in a tight formation which in turn would open the party up for AoE's.

It's like Larian has a one track mind for tactical combat where it's just about high ground and teleport/mobility on wide open battlefields. And surfaces. And if D&D has a monster that would provide more tactical depth, they assimilate it into a teleporting and/or surface spamming creature.


Originally Posted by GM4Him
Ok. This is driving me crazy. Use true D&D stats and stop nerfing enemies. I mean, BG3 is balanced fairly well right now but only because monsters aren't really genuine. A Mud Mephit should have more health and it gets only a 25% chance of multiplying and it should be hidden as mud to begin with. A Phase Spider should use Ethereal Jaunt to phase out of and into the material plane as a Bonus action, not teleport and spit but melee range. Intellect devourers should use Intellect Devour, one of their main attacks, and they and imps shoyld be resistant to different attacks.

Larian is taking some aspects of these monsters but not all. Why? Instead, why not allow bigger party size, less enemies and maybe even enemies that fit the encounter more. Im trying to play out these scenarios via Tabletop, and they are BRUTAL. 2 Mud Mephits and 2 Wood Woads is too much even for 4 Level 4 characters.


One thing of the game that is occasionally starting to grind on my nerves is how Larian is almost regularly disregarding the canonical stats/abilities for most of the monsters they are using.

Some get buffed with powers they shouldn't have, some get nerfed significantly, lose special powers, don't show any sign of their typical resistances or immunities, etc.
This is happening over and over across the entire portion of the game available so far.

Phase spiders that are gifted aranged AOE venom spit when they should just attack in melee (which is two times as bizarre, given that D&D DOES offer spiders that canonically have ranged attacks), Minotaurs that don't "charge" in a straight line but do the whole hulk jumping and ground stomping instead, mud mephits and wood woads as pointed by GM4Him have been gimped to the point of being husks of what they were supposed to be, etc.

Is there any reason for it? Does the core design of the game benefits in any way of this complete disinterest in sticking with the source material? I honestly don't get it.

It feels almost like people at Larian, after going through the negotiations to get the official D&D license, one morning woke up decided that they felt only contempt and disdain for it.
"Who cares about this worthless trash, we'll do our own bestiary, with blackjack and hookers" or something of that sort.

Couldn't agree more... So far, to me, Larian has only proved how bad their homebrew implementations suck in multiple dimensions.

Joined: Oct 2020
S
member
Offline
member
S
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by GM4Him
The main point of this entire post is that they aren't even using 5e monsters as they were designed. They throw tough 5e monsters at players and then Nerf them. Why? They could use different monsters and NOT nerf them. They could create their own and do whatever the heck they want. But why turn imps into baby grunts, intellect devourers into straight up thugs with no real special traits, phase spiders into teleporting spitters...etc?

That's the point, people. Do you want a teleporting, spitting spider? Use phase spider stats and tweak them and call them something new and different. Give players a new breed of spider to have fun with and enjoy and get excited about. Make up new lore about them. Thats how you do homebrew right. You don't call it a Phase Spider and then have it act totally different. That messes with people familiar with the premade monsters.

First time I went into the spider lair, I saw a Phase Spider and prepared myself for a melee fight. Next thing I knew, BAM! Ports over my head and blasts my whole party with poison. I, being knowledgeable about Phase Spiders, was butchered by them because they acted in no way like Phase Spiders.

See my point?


I guess, they think they show how creative they are and we admire that! In reality, they just piss most of us DnD players off.

Joined: Sep 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Sep 2020
Critters exist, whether in the real world or a fantasy world, to fit certain ecological niches - for both flora and fauna.

The various D&D critters, via Monster Manuals or whatever they call them now in 5.0, fulfilled this admirably.

As noted, when Larian determines what type of "niche" critter is needed for a certain area, they need only consult available material to find the appropriate critter (Boss mobs and other specials are always exceptions.) When they veer widely from this material, it creates unnecessary lore conflicts. It's as if they put "Shark-People" into a desert clime - instead of using "Snake-people" , or placed camels in a tropical environment- it defies common sense. Lions hunt in packs, while spiders walk across the ceiling, not the other way around.

And while we are at it, my sword does NOT fire arrows and my longbow is NOT used to bash gargoyles over the head - just in case you were wondering Larian....

One of my fondest memories of the old Gold Box games, involved my party entering the cavernous lair of low level critters - kobolds as I recall - where it was immediately riddled with several rounds of arrows. The kobolds had no need of massive ac or hp - those arrows created the sense of immediate danger - and subsequently whittling down the kobold masses bit by bit, added to the suspense. They were still wimp ass, 3 hp kobolds, with an ac of probably 6 or 7 (back in the old THACO days) but the large numbers armed with ranged weapons kept my level 3 or 4 party (with higher hp and ac) busy and the fight satisfying. Exploding, flammable, poisoned arrows were unnecessary.

Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
I like Larian. I really do. I just like consistency in a fantasy world. If you call a creature a red dragon, it should act like a red dragon. If you call a dragon a Cosmos Dragon, something no one has ever heard of, wow! Cool. You made up a new dragon. Tell me more. It flies in space? It can shoot stars out of its eyes? Great.

But don't make it look like a red dragon and call it a red dragon. I honestly think the easiest way for Larian to make us all happy about the monsters is to rename them and tweak their appearances. Call the Phase Spiders in the game now something like Zap Spitter Spiders and give them some new lore and change their appearance and we're good. Elliette created them or birthed them from her weird twisted magic.

But you gotta make goblins goblins and devourers devourers and imps imps.

Joined: Oct 2020
S
member
Offline
member
S
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by GM4Him
I like Larian. I really do. I just like consistency in a fantasy world. If you call a creature a red dragon, it should act like a red dragon. If you call a dragon a Cosmos Dragon, something no one has ever heard of, wow! Cool. You made up a new dragon. Tell me more. It flies in space? It can shoot stars out of its eyes? Great.

But don't make it look like a red dragon and call it a red dragon. I honestly think the easiest way for Larian to make us all happy about the monsters is to rename them and tweak their appearances. Call the Phase Spiders in the game now something like Zap Spitter Spiders and give them some new lore and change their appearance and we're good. Elliette created them or birthed them from her weird twisted magic.

But you gotta make goblins goblins and devourers devourers and imps imps.


I completely disagree. What Larian needs to do is staying faithful to 5e rules as much as possible rather than implementing unnecessary homebrew thingies. I didn't buy this game to fight zap spiders. This game was advertised as a 5e adaptation. What we need official 5e rules in the game.

Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
Hey. I support using 5e stats. I'm one of the guys saying it. However, I'm not opposed to creating new monsters. However, the whole game shouldn't be new monsters. It should be mostly standard monsters with standard stats. Don't call it a goblin and then make it an orc. Either let me fight proper orcs or proper goblins. Don't give it a goblin skin but orc stats. That's my point.

Make a new monster? Give it a new name and lore. Don't make a Misty Step Spitter monster look like a Phase Spider and call it a Phase Spider.

Page 4 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

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