Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Low pool of EA testers worries me

I am not playing because I am waiting for the full release. Impatiently waiting. For the game I am expecting, which is a Dungeons and Dragons game with lots of stuff about mind flayers *as told by Larian*, which means I shall be *extremely* disappointed if it does not strongly resemble Divinity Original Sin.

Maybe not so much that the entire screen ends up on cursed fire, but if all of the year of teeth gnashing over high ground and surfaces completely eliminates them, I will be upset.

It’s not Larian’s fault that they want to make a 3D world when D&D is made for a flat one.

That’s my feedback on that. Back to waiting until this game is released. *twiddles thumbs*

Yes, it is. The made their own decisions and had the freedom, funding and resources to do so. If they design themselves into a broken, poorly implemented or non-functional corner, it will be Entirely their own fault.


No, it isn't. Nothing about current D&D is made for flat worlds, at all. Boring DMs may design their spaces that way, but it's not a fault of the system and the system is in no way designed towards flat worlds. It handles unusual terrain and 3D environments perfectly comfortably, and with no more difficulty than a flat or land-based set-up.

It would be interesting to see what that broken, poorly implemented and non-functional corner looks like. So far the game isn't perfect, but it's good enough that if it came out with roughly the same mechanics, I would still consider it head and shoulders above the competition. And I'm sure they will make it even better. Look at other successful EA titles - DoS and Mount and Blade for example. They turned out to be great.

I'm mostly worried that BG will get the Star Wars treatment, disregardment of the fans and such. I want more feedback angles. We barely have topics of interest anymore. I want an insight into the development process of the rest of the game. A snippet, a quick 5 minute video of some models, areas, concept art, armor / weapon designs, interviews with the development team, I would even settle for a goddamn screenshot - instead of wasting everyones time with a pointless PFH show. Not to bash on that, I think they're adorable in their way and I support their playfulness about it, but since the beggining we are in the dark. I don't care for it. It doesn't get me hyped up as a solid example of a developmental process could. A bunch of smaller game studios give out information like that as the norm.

A patch is introduced and then silence comes which in turn makes the people branch out into wild theories and suggestions (both on here and discord alongside the amazing content/lore creators on youtube) which will probably not see the light of day. Silence is NOT Larians friend. Not when you're developing a game of this scope, with a name that has cemented itself into the nostalgia filled hearts of so many people.
You can paint onto me whatever opinions you want but I seriously don't think thats too much to ask for. Especially because I'm not the only one requesting it. I want monthly updates on where they're at. I'm not asking for a new playable area or new levels in the EA as it is because I can understand the problematics that would arise from those additions.

I want to see how it will be. What they envision it to be so maybe they could see how the community would react to it, gather some feedback from us etc.... not just drop it on us when the full release rolls out and hope for the best and fix it along the way if the crowd isn't pleased.
They succeeded in making the (arguably) most passionate part of the playerbase feel disregarded. I feel more pleased when I see a new datamine than their hotfix post. Feed me the spoilers I don't care anymore, I am so starved of information about this game that I will take whatever I can. Sure they say they're aware of some problems that plague us but they don't adress others or say they're even considering on making a compromise.

I'm worried mate. I'm just worried we built this game up in our heads to be something it will never live up to. Until I see changes in that chain system thats been talked ad nauseum I doubt my feelings will change. Hate to sound defeatist but thats the way it is.
I was oh so hopeful for the developmental stage of this game but I can now, in hindsight, see that my money could have been spent on game studios that give at least some sense to the point of a being an early access player.

I don't even have the strength to come back to this forum as I can't stand to read the same feedback from new people (and some very well established old ones!!!)
It became depressing as I can't type anything that won't echo their own words back to them and obviously typing ''I agree/I support this'' isn't accomplishing anything and I can't in good conscience recommend anyone to buy the game as it is.
Sorry for the blog post but this is where I currently stand with the whole situation. Mentally pacing back and forth, awaiting to hear what news Larian brings about in the new patch. See you around when the time comes.

Well, I can commiserate I guess. Cause honestly, sometimes kicking around this place reminds me of attending the longest wake ever. Like we'd all be putting our hands on each other's shoulders and saying stuff like "Don't worry. Everything is going to be alright. It just takes time" hehe. Achieving critical mass with feedback here on a given issue seems to just mean getting moved to the Mega-thread Hospice where it can wait to expire out of sight. The longest thread on these BG3 boards is about how people are disappointed with the small party of 4 and the lack of party-combo-dynamism that follows. The second longest is about frustrations with party movement, esp pathing, selection and general camera controls. The third longest thread on these boards is about another game entirely, like versus. So if there's a fall off in playtesting maybe that's cause there's nothing new lately, and nothing new on the horizon. Combined with not wanting to court burnout and it makes a certain sense. Not surprising if people turn to other things or other games. I mean Larian has plenty of hotlists for things they could promo to keep the train steaming along and pull some of the eyes back. Right now it's like a year gone by and the BG3 game still feel like its hardly changed at all. Or really only at the margins. I wish they'd put more up front. I don't really mean direct communication with plans and reveals, since they don't seem to care for it. I mean actually changing the way the game feels from the launch window to char creation, UI, class list, inventory, prologue, splash screens, so it feels like more stuff is happening and the game is actually growing. In the meantime I can run around in Pathfinder with my next character, Restartus, the most Primal Druid yet! And his faithful companion Dimbo the Last Mastedon lol. You know, where at least I know shit is sure to get hectic, while I wait for something new to happen with BG3 hehe.

I'm kinda sad that I won't be building my sniper-lock in BG3: Sorceress with a couple of Warlock levels, Eldritch Spear (Plus agonising), Spell-Sniper Feat and Distant Spell Meta, for a 1200ft Eldritch Blast ^.^ Depending on stat rolls, you skip the warlock levels altogether and take the Invocation feat to get Agonising and Spear, and get Eldritch blast itself from spell sniper...

(this is just a random aside to an earlier comment that I missed.... it was a fun character design)


Edit:

On the news angle, I'm with others here that say they'd like there to be more open communication. I think the important point to get across though is this: We are EA tester... WE Understand that a lot of this is fluid, subject to change or being tested. It's okay. They can tell us what they're planning to do, what they're thinking of doing, how they're intending to approach something, or what they're testing out... and it's Okay if it doesn't work, doesn't end up that way, or turns out to need a drastic a change, or ultimately gets scrapped for something completely different along the way... we understand that that's part of the process, and for the most part the mature testers here aren't going to complain about that or be upset by it. Just talk to us more.

Can't say I've followed the conversation much up to this point, but I can say one thing in particular is that I doubt you'll ever see some of the crazy ranged options like hundreds upon hundreds of feet like you can in tabletop setups here in BG3, let alone just about any CRPG for that matter. Even without that, given something like height advantage, ranged characters do typically come out pretty much on top very frequently, even more so given how safe it can be to just use said height advantages in combination with stealth, and you get an endless routine just stealth sniping on a rouge, or possibly even warlock if you want the added bonus of occasionally knocking someone into a pit of death. Granted, I know many people here want height advantage to be all but removed, but I don't see ranged characters really being all that weak at all in the current game unless you outright ignore several mechanics inherent in the game itself, and try to play it like a standard DnD game, which is just denial of its current mechanics more than anything if I'm being honest.

Granted, this is mostly coming from a playthrough, and first time through the game at that, where I played a mix of a ranger and Astarion for my primary damage dealers, with Gale mostly providing support, and Shadowheart for healing, so I COULD be biased just from that experience alone, plus having played stuff like Divinity in the past. Of course, having done another playthrough since on patch 5, Battlemaster is insanely strong with the sheer damage it can quickly out put, as can rogue given the right circumstances up close (even pretty much capable of completely destroying the Githyanki patrol in one turn with a lot of buffing/setup), so its pretty unrealistic for me to say that melee ISN'T insanely powerful currently, because it really is, though Battlemaster being strong at lower levels isn't much of a shocker honestly.

A bit of an aside and to touch on the issue at hand though, I do hope they look at height advantages in the game currently as it stands, and at least retweak the numbers on it if nothing else, as it really is just insanely strong given how much of an advantage it can give you, ESPECIALLY if you combine it with constantly dipping in and out of stealth. I do think its fair to at least give it a small buff of some kind, especially given the lack of a cover system to take the place of advantage/disadvantage in that sense. Maybe just keep the increased range from up high, or maybe just revert the height advantage to a smaller percentage so it doesn't completely invalidate what is currently there, while also giving ranged characters on the ground a decent shot at landing a hit. Though, I do think it should probably be completely removed in the case of spellcasters minus the increased range at higher heights, as that just feels right in a sense I guess you could say.

All in all though, I guess it really depends on the style of play, but with actions like pin down, plus rangers having both hunters mark and colossus slayer, and rogues being able to near infinitely kite and hide away from enemies with cunning actions and stealth, ranged seems pretty damned strong overall. I do plan to give a ranged fighter a try at some point too, just to see how well it can work really, though I do have some pretty big doubts on that one without added bonuses like sneak attack/colossus slayer. Realistically though, I'm just glad that for once Ranger actually feels pretty damned decent in a D&D anything, though with how good they can be in both melee and ranged currently I think its a bit skewed for them to be a little too strong realistically.

That said, shove should most definitely be made a Action instead of a bonus action, I get they probably want to make things feel more actiony every turn, as well as allow for some really crazy shenanigans given the way they make things, but being able to dash, and potentially even free action dash/cunning action dash into a shove that could potentially outright kill an enemy before it can do much of anything does seem PRETTY imbalanced in my opinion, though I do suppose there is at least the caveat that you have to have a pretty decent Strength to actually pull it off reliably, somewhat lessening the problem for rogues. Though, even in the case of making it an action, you'll still likely get people just taking misty step more often to place themselves behind enemies and shove them with their main action, or even just circumvent things the other way and use thorn whip to bring down enemies from up high for some pretty hefty damage in itself.

That's my point, Lunar Shower. Ranged characters do okay with the height advantage, but take that away and they're a total shadow of what they ought to be under 5E rules, even without all kinds of shenanigans that one could maybe forgive Larian for not supporting.

Longbows should be able to attack as far away as 180 meters. In the game they have a max range of a tenth of that. A tenth! Given a standard movement speed of 9 meters per turn, you can do the math on the number of attacks a longbow user should get against an enemy approaching on open ground before melee becomes a thing. In this game, however, ranged characters can barely squeeze in an attack before chaff can rush into melee range and mess with attack priorities.

Height advantage does counter-balance the lack of range a fair bit, particularly when you combine with damage boosters like sneak attack or Hunter's Mark or Hex, but it has so much of an effect on encounters that it starts to dominate the meta. Just find a high spot, control access to it, and shoot away. The mill encounter, which is a bit of a pain? Trigger it with Astarion, then dash and cunning dash away back to the village and start killing them from the rooftops.

True enough, it is plenty abusable to say the least, and without it I could definitely see ranged suffering a good bit. Its a pretty delicate balance to say the least though in either direction. Though, will say the windmill is actually a pretty decent example of being an encounter that seems extremely challenging/unfair at first, at least until you realize all you need to really do is focus down the boss of the group, something that isn't really readily apparent unless you have Wyll in your group, and even then its dubious at best. Will admit though, stopping the windmill after sneaking up into it, and just sneak killing everyone that comes to check on it till the group is culled to about 3/4 or 1/2 of what it was to start was both super cheesy, but also pretty amazing as far as moments go in the game for me, and that's just something I managed to luck out and do on my first attempt, and also where I learned just how busted the stealth mechanics can be in this game currently. Fun, but definitely overpowered.

All in all, I'm no game designer, but if they do end up removing the % to hit from height advantage, maybe they could just give ranged a general buff in its length throughout, while also maybe further expanding it up at higher elevations? Its tough to really say what might work best without further tipping things in the direction of ranged once more. Either way, plenty of things to think on, and more to hopefully give Larian a bit of food for thought, though I'm sure much of this is things that have already been on their mind in some form or another. More than anything, I hope they give us custom sliders/options for difficulty similar to Solasta, if there is ONE thing they could take from that games success, it would be that and allowing for a truly custom experience tailored to each player.

That is so true as that is what I'm waiting for

One of the often suggested changes to height bonuses would be to instead of advantage offer a +2 to hit below you. This mimics an inverted version of the cover mechanics of the book (half cover gives +2 AC, three quarters cover gives +5) while simulating that height gives you a greater overlook of the battlefield.

One could either remove disadvantage from low ground entirely or give the target-on-high the half-cover +2 AC bonus too.

This also has the added benefit of reducing the impact of "locational advantage" on gameplay -- a Rogue would for example not get automatic sneak attack for being above the enemy from constant advantage but need to have an ally next to the target -- and improve the utility of advantage-granting abilities and spells, similarly to how removing Backstab Advantage from the game made the combat more versatile and fun.

Also hello forumites, it's been a while. Good to see you again.

It would certainly be interesting to attack Karlach from Waukeen's Rest.
But i presume those numbers would never be translated to this game 1:1.


I know that having ally next to the target is allready working ...
For me in most situations its more used variation, since its easier to get.

But have you any specific encounter in mind, or was that just general?

No, these 2 points are much further away from each other. And besides, afaik shooting at 180 metres comes with a disadvantage.

I didn't say ally-adjacency wasn't working.

And it's definitely not easier to get. Putting your ranged people up high will give you advantage on nearly everyone, rendering ally-adjacency and other sources of advantage moot in terms of sneak attack validation. And every battle scene by and large is designed to allow you to take a position above the enemy, often before the combat even starts.

Never said you should hit.
Even tho it is still possible to hit even with disadvantage. :P

But yes, im aware that distances in game map are not quite equal to reality (could this word even be used for fantasy world? ).
It was just joke, dont take it too serious.

Thats the thing ... you do not "put" your ranged people up high ... you need to get there somehow, wich (unless you have really covenient position and misty step), could be matter of several turns.

So the best i can do is agree on: "it depends..."
(insert image of bald dude from Pawn Stars)

No. Like I already said (and you ignored) the majority of the combat encounters are designed to either let you take the high ground before combat starts, or get there in the first round. Height advantage is near omnipresent in-game.

I actualy see no real difference between your "game allows" and mine "you could". O_o

@op: The low pool of EA testers itself doesent worry me that much tbh. Larian made it very clear that the game is in EA and that it wont be for everyone. Ive been in multiple EA titles and if that made anything clear to me its that only a small minority will sign up, even a smaller minority will visit the forums and an even smaller portion of that group will provide feedback.

The game seems to track things done by the players itself without needing our input so that Larian can monitor us plaing the game and reading the decisions that we take. So even if only a very small portion of the people playing the game actualy come to the forums Larian gets input from all players who participate. Which is actually quite ingenous I think

About the 'this isent BG' argument that keeps coming up again and again and again and again and again.....

You have these options:
1: RPG in the same way as BG 1 and 2.
2: RPG true to 5th ed DND.

You cant have both. BG 1 and 2 were based on a (by now) very dated version of DND. BG3 would be based on 5th ed dnd rules. Which differ ALOT from the system BG 1 and 2 were based on. The difference between THAC0, to hit bonuses and how AC works is the most easy to point out difference. The spell system is also very easy to point out. Alot of the spells in BG1 and BG2 either dont excist anymore or were changed drasticly and nowadays we have concentration meaning we can only cast 1 of those per character. No more stacking buffs for us! (well some you can still stack, blur and mirror image for example. And mage armor. Just not concentration spells)

If 'this isent baldurs gate' means the lack of real time combat to you then I dont know what to say. Dnd is a turn based game. They cant make it real time and true to dnd 5th ed at the same time.

If 'this isent BG' you mean that the story isent about a bhaalspawn. Well first of all, we only see a small portion of the overall game. You dont know that. In act 1 you can find alot of books about the dead 3. Why would there even be a forshadowing reference to them if nothing in the story is tied to them? It could be easter eggs or just lore books I suppose but I found them so much im convinced they might be involved in the story. All we know SO FAR is that the story involves mindflayers and an overaching god or entity that seems to tie that all together. Secondly, the story of the Bhaalspawn was supposedly finished with throne of bhaal and the timeline has advanced since then. But only 100 years (IIRC?) so its still possible that characters from the previous games are still around. Specially the longer lived characters like elves, half-elves, etc. Point is, you dont know whatever or not its tied to the previous games or not. Just act 1 is a little bit to early to come to that conclusion

If 'this isent baldurs gate' you mean that the game is played in a more advanced engine that looks different to bg1 and bg2..... Well...Yes? Thats a good thing? It looks like DOS2 because its done by the same company and it uses their engine. Dont really see how that makes it less baldurs gate honestly... The gaming indsutry has alot of (most QOL) improvements since BG1 and 2 and id raise an eyebrow if we werent actually getting them.

If with 'this isent baldurs gate' you mean something else.... Then what? Just voicing generic feedback doesent help much, even if it is said alot. Because say 100 people say it, but it means something different for all 100 people then Larian cant really do anything with it now can they? Say 1 of people explains the comment and they change the game to acommodate the feedback then it wouldnt help the other 99 that dident explain their comment.

@high ground: I still feel it should just give a bonus to hit and/or ignoring cover for enemies on lower ground at most. Granting advantage that easily is indeed abit much. Having advantage (or disadvantage) is a pretty big thing in DND. Just standing on high ground shouldnt grant it imho. That said I dont feel forced to take it either. Given the many ways in which you can give yourself advantage in combat, high ground alone doesent stand out to much for me. Given that they also toned down advantage for standing behind someone (which did have some merit in the rules honestly) I feel confident Larian will take another look at advantage for high ground and change it in the future.

How about "this isn't Baldur's Gate" meaning that the story isn't a tale about a protagonist and the game isn't really designed to be a nice SP experience and the world is weird and dead and hyper-compressed and it seems to be made out of the nicest fisherprice plastic and time stands still everywhere and the game doesn't really give that nice D&D party exploration feel and frankly there is an argument to be made that the game isn't even designed for 5E.

We don't know where the Origin nonsense is going to go, but if it's anything like DOS2 then the game is literally designed to not reward the player for doing that D&D thing and rolling their own character. That's not very BG either, is it?

And this is entirely before we get into the old classics of the toilet chain movement system, the small party size, the slow combat, and seemingly much fewer companions but of course every companion you run into is an origin character and thus probably more central to the story and more powerful and Mary Sue than the player character. What happened to running into a funny guy like Jan, who isn't central to anything but still a valuable companion?

Or if you want some fun, try and imagine what BG1 and 2 would've been like if the party members all had to follow the pattern in BG3. Jehaira isn't just a seasoned adventurer and occasional Harper, she's actually the top covert agent and spec ops badass of the Harpers on a secret mission to save the world and get divorced. Imoen isn't just your little sister, she's actually the secret apprentice and mistress of Elminster. Nalia isn't just some random daughter of some random noble, she's actually a princess hiding as a random noble because a cabal of devils and vampiric kobolds want to turn her into a lich!!

Yes, I'm slightly exaggerating just a tiny bit, but you get the drift.

No I really dont. I dont understand when some of u guys write this longwinded and divorced from reality rants where I dont even recognise which game u talk bout then add that u are slightly exaggerating as if that saves ur bullcrap argument.