Larian Banner: Baldur's Gate Patch 9
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 78 of 115 1 2 76 77 78 79 80 114 115
Joined: May 2019
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: May 2019
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Originally Posted by Imora DalSyn
So long as the difficulty is exactly the same, which I'm afraid won't be possible. And that it's a hard toggle, and no way to recruit past 4 without it on.

Because if you can, you have to. That's just how it works sometimes.
But why is this Larian's problem? Isn't this your problem? You are choosing to make the game easier for you by taking six, in exactly the same way as those who are choosing to make the game harder for them by taking only one. You cannot legitimately complain about the game becoming easier by saying you are somehow "compelled" to take six. No one from Larian showed up at your home, put a gun to your head, and made you do it.
This is similar to the "don't like it? don't use it" argument that's also used for other Larian homebrew like lack of long rest restrictions, eating food to heal, shove instakills, bonus action jump+disengage, wizards learning cleric scrolls, trivial stealing from merchants, etc. (Note: I restricted these examples to things that are actually possible to avoid, unlike e.g., BA Shove which enemies will use against you.)

This is Larian's problem because games require restrictions; it's not fun to have to purposefully nerf yourself as a player. And Larian allowing a party size of up to 6 by default (meaning: the 5th+6th companion you find will automatically join your party if asked, and the game wont warn you that "BG3 is balanced for parties of 4") is poor game design. Players will have to consciously decide to continue to play with 6 or play with less than a full party, either making the game easy or having a game with less party banter & companion-specific-story-interactions respectively.

My proposed solution to the above is a hard toggle in settings that defaults to off, that isn't advertised, and that comes with a warning "this game is balanced for 4-person-parties." This would be enough of a disincentive that I wouldn't feel bad playing with 4, but would still allow people to play with 6 if desired. Also add a "split exp" toggle, so your party-of-6 can either be balanced or not: the player can choose.
I never said anything contrary to Larian issuing a warning to players who use the option. In fact, I have said it myself in previous posts that Larian can provide a very stark and clear warning, for example a large popup that comes up on your screen the moment you toggle that option.

Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by kanisatha
I never said anything contrary to Larian issuing a warning to players who use the option. In fact, I have said it myself in previous posts that Larian can provide a very stark and clear warning, for example a large popup that comes up on your screen the moment you toggle that option.
:thumbsup: (sorry, who has said what gets hard to keep track of over 78 pages)

Last edited by mrfuji3; 05/11/21 06:22 PM.
Joined: Sep 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Originally Posted by Zarna
Originally Posted by kanisatha
So then what happens when a player uses only a party of 1? That makes all the encounters too difficult and so Larian has to change the encounters to keep them from being too difficult, right?
I think most of us who play solo like it for the challenge and don't want the game to be changed to make it easier, takes all the fun out of it.
Right. Exactly. So how is it any different for those of us who want to play with six? If you get to have the choice to make the game harder for you (by getting to play solo), why shouldn't I have the SAME choice to make the game easier for me (by playing with six)?
You are arguing with the wrong person. I have said countless times I don't care if you guys get an option to play with your 6 people. I have also said that I think there should be two options, the current one for 4 and another for 6. Or that they could compromise and give us 5. What I don't want is to be stuck playing an overpowered character because some of you (maybe not you specifically, don't feel like rereading this thread) want to shove xp balancing on any number of party members just to get your larger party.

Originally Posted by mrfuji3
As always, this is easily solved by options and exp splitting. If you want to play a challenge solo mode, don't enable exp splitting and level up at normal speed. If you want to play a normal-difficulty solo mode, enable exp-splitting (and/or Lone Wolf). It'd take Larian ~zero additional effort to make such changes optional instead of mandatory settings.
If they go this route then it should make most everyone happy.

Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
Fair enough. That's why I was saying a Difficulty setting for 6, proper 5e stats and XP, and a Difficulty setting for 4, stats as is right now with XP rewards as is right now.

So, to be clear, the only change would be an option for players to set party size to 6 with an option to play the game using true D&D stats and XP rewards with XP split.

Last edited by GM4Him; 06/11/21 02:16 AM.
Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
Dang! Just tested the Bulette fight with the following character builds:

Level 5 Wood Elf Rogue Arcane Trickster
Level 5 Half Orc Barbarian
Level 5 Drow Mage
Level 4 Dragonborn Cleric
Level 5 Half-elf Druid
Level 6 Human Fighter

Bulette lost some health before it moved. Then it ran and jumped into the midst of three of them. Down went the Mage and Cleric, and the Fighter lost almost 30 HP out of 56. Then it bit the Barbarian, and he lost something like 24 HP. They pummelled it a few more times. It jumped. Down went the Druid, and the Barbarian lost most of the rest of his health. Then it bit the Barbarian, and he went down for good.

Rogue stabbed it with her short swords, then the Fighter finished it with two swings of his longsword.

Bulette fight via Tabletop. Two rounds. Most of the party wiped, and they were on average Level 5.

Bulettes are supposed to have +7 to hit and 4d12+4 damage per bite. Then, when they jump, everyone makes a DC 16 Strength or Dexterity Save. If you succeed, you don't get knocked prone and you take half damage, but you are still pushed 5 feet away from it. If you fail, 3d6+4 piercing + 3d6+4 bludgeoning damage. That's 6d6+8 damage total to everyone it lands near.

So yeah, is the Bulette SUPPOSED to be too tough for 4 level 4 characters? ABSOLUTELY. It was almost too much for 6 level 5 characters.

Should the game be a party of 6 and set to D&D stats? It should at least be an option for those of us who REALLY want a genuine D&D experience with a real challenge because if you gave us a real Bulette fight and let us be Level 5 or 6 by the time we go into the Underdark, with a party of 6, our characters would not be slaughtered by it, and you wouldn't have to nerf the creature to avoid pissing off your entire fan base.

Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
Ugh. This limit for multiplayer sucks! It's so dumb. Not only do you rescue Shadowheart on the nautiloid, and she says, "We should travel together." Then two seconds later she says, "Well, you have too many in your party. We wouldn't want to draw attention now would we?" And then she takes off running TOWARDS the helm, ya know, the same place you're going, BUT...

You arrive on the beach, all four of you. There's Shadowheart lying there. You wake her. She goes into an even greater litany on how she thinks it'd be really good to travel together and how we need each other and everything.

Two seconds later, "But it looks like you are really travelling with a full group, aren't you. That's a bit too much for me," and she gets kinda snarky with you for having a party of 4 already. Then you can either dismiss her completely or send her to camp and you tell her you'll mark it on her map. If you send her to camp, she says, "All right. That works for me, I guess. I'll wait for you there." Then she takes off running and vanishes.

Now... um... just woke up on the beach. I don't have a camp yet. How'm I sending her to camp and marking it on her map when I ain't got no camp yet?

It's all totally bad. Zalk was easy to kill. Cleric, Fighter, Ranger and Druid with Lae'zel, we were just beating the tar out of everything.

Until they give us an option for 6, why would anyone WANT to multiplayer this game? All encounters are super easy, you can't do any of the origin character side stories or quests because you can't take them with you in your party, dialogue doesn't make sense and they're constantly telling you that a party of 4 is just WAY too many for them. The only cool thing about 4 player multiplayer is that you can have a party of 4 custom characters. Oh, and I also like how your custom characters will dialogue with one another.

Other than that, 4 player multiplayer is severely limited BECAUSE the game only allows party of 4, and it's only been made worse with Patch 5 and 6.

Last edited by GM4Him; 06/11/21 05:58 AM.
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
Quote
It's like saying, "Here's the rules to DnD. Now, play DnD."

"Wait! We're changing the rules because DnD is too hard..."
(blah blah blah, we know what changes was made)

Are you still playing DnD?
I wonder how would you feel about this example. smile
I really, really wish to know your answer. laugh

Originally Posted by mrfuji3
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Originally Posted by Imora DalSyn
So long as the difficulty is exactly the same, which I'm afraid won't be possible. And that it's a hard toggle, and no way to recruit past 4 without it on.

Because if you can, you have to. That's just how it works sometimes.
But why is this Larian's problem? Isn't this your problem? You are choosing to make the game easier for you by taking six, in exactly the same way as those who are choosing to make the game harder for them by taking only one. You cannot legitimately complain about the game becoming easier by saying you are somehow "compelled" to take six. No one from Larian showed up at your home, put a gun to your head, and made you do it.
This is similar to the "don't like it? don't use it" argument that's also used for other Larian homebrew like lack of long rest restrictions, eating food to heal, shove instakills, bonus action jump+disengage, wizards learning cleric scrolls, trivial stealing from merchants, etc. (Note: I restricted these examples to things that are actually possible to avoid, unlike e.g., BA Shove which enemies will use against you.)
It is not similar ... its the same and valid argument in both cases. laugh

This is just how it is ...
Larian give us options ... its up to us if we want to use them or not.

Originally Posted by mrfuji3
My proposed solution to the above is a hard toggle in settings that defaults to off, that isn't advertised, and that comes with a warning "this game is balanced for 4-person-parties." This would be enough of a disincentive that I wouldn't feel bad playing with 4, but would still allow people to play with 6 if desired. Also add a "split exp" toggle, so your party-of-6 can either be balanced or not: the player can choose.
Best option would be to give everything on toggle ...
But its easier for Larian to simply create system they want, and leave the rest for mod-comunity. laugh

Originally Posted by GM4Him

Level 5 Wood Elf Rogue Arcane Trickster
Level 5 Half Orc Barbarian
Level 5 Drow Mage
Level 4 Dragonborn Cleric
Level 5 Half-elf Druid
Level 6 Human Fighter

Bulette lost some health before it moved. Then it ran and jumped into the midst of three of them. Down went the Mage and Cleric, and the Fighter lost almost 30 HP out of 56. Then it bit the Barbarian, and he lost something like 24 HP. They pummelled it a few more times. It jumped. Down went the Druid, and the Barbarian lost most of the rest of his health. Then it bit the Barbarian, and he went down for good.

Rogue stabbed it with her short swords, then the Fighter finished it with two swings of his longsword.

Bulette fight via Tabletop. Two rounds. Most of the party wiped, and they were on average Level 5.

Bulettes are supposed to have +7 to hit and 4d12+4 damage per bite. Then, when they jump, everyone makes a DC 16 Strength or Dexterity Save. If you succeed, you don't get knocked prone and you take half damage, but you are still pushed 5 feet away from it. If you fail, 3d6+4 piercing + 3d6+4 bludgeoning damage. That's 6d6+8 damage total to everyone it lands near.
Should the game be a party of 6 and set to D&D stats? It should at least be an option for those of us who REALLY want a genuine D&D experience with a real challenge because if you gave us a real Bulette fight and let us be Level 5 or 6 by the time we go into the Underdark, with a party of 6, our characters would not be slaughtered by it, and you wouldn't have to nerf the creature to avoid pissing off your entire fan base.
It should certainly not ... for reasons you described in spoiler part ...
I believe this is the part when mod-support come to play ... i bet that Larian counts on that someone who wish to have pure DnD stats for monsters will altern them ... it dont quite make sence for them to invest time and resources to create two completely separate systems just bcs someone like that, and someone else wants this. :-/

Last edited by RagnarokCzD; 06/11/21 10:58 AM.

If my comments bother you, there is nothing easier than telling me to stop.
I mean ... I won't ... but it's easy to say. wink
Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by GM4Him
No. Ragzlin... can I call you Ragzlin? Thanks. It's much shorter and easier to type.

Ragzlin, I'm basing it purely on what BG3 was supposed to be based on. It was meant to be based on D&D 5e. If you take the way the game is CURRENTLY designed, it really fits more for a party of 5-6 characters. It has nothing to do with what I'm wanting or presuming.

A party of 5-6 Level 1 characters could defeat 3 Imps at a time. A party of 1-2 could not. Period. That's the logistics of it. If Larian used proper Imp stats instead of their nerfed down homebrew stats, there is very little possibility that a party of 1-2 (MC + Lae'zel) could beat 3 Imps. Period.

And IF you only had a party of 1-2, then by the end of the very first encounter, even IF you managed to somehow beat 3 imps, you would gain, using XP Split, enough experience to level up to Level 2. So it is clear that:

A. They are not using proper D&D stats but have nerfed the enemies considerably because they know you will likely (in single player mode) only have 1-2 characters on average to face 3 imps, and

B. That if you only face said 3 imps you'd gain enough XP to gain a level up after your first encounter. So they severely nerfed how many XP's you should get from that encounter so you don't level up right away.

So, what I'm trying to say is that the encounters are already based on the expectation that you will start with a party of 4 (single or multiplayer) and you'll add at least Lae'zel (and possibly Us) to your party to make a party of 5 or 6 by the time you face your first Imp encounter. Again, however, that would only be IF they used actual D&D 5e stats. My point is that the way the encounters were initially constructed, it had to be assumed you'd have 5 or 6 in your party in order to defeat 3 Imps. Then they realized that "Oh dang! There might only be 1-2 characters in single player mode. We'd best nerf everything because most people are going to be playing this with only 1-2 characters in the party by this point."

So, what I'm saying is, make it so players start with 4 Customized Characters whether single or multiplayer, increase party size to 6, and use proper D&D stats, and the entire game would be perfect for a legit D&D 5e experience with proper XP gain per encounter and proper challenge ratings and so forth.

Then use Difficulty settings to allow players to adjust to their own desired number of characters. If you want 4, adjust Difficulty to make encounters easier (nerfed) like it is now.

But for the love of all that is holy, give players the option to have up to 6 and make that the norm. Then make options to allow players to balance it more for their preference.

You always start big and then work down to small. You never start small and work big or it never works right.

If they were to balance the game right now based on 1-4 party size, they'd need to nix every encounter in the prologue and almost every encounter in the game if they were to use proper D&D stats, and that's what I'm trying to say. The game is actually, literally built for 5-6 party size. I've tested it via Tabletop. I know what I'm talking about. It is WAY to hard with a party size of 4 unless you severely nerf EVERYTHING, which is the current state of the entire game.

I've sat at more than one table where we only had 4 total players, or less, including the DM. From Pamphlets to 4e. Balance then becomes up to the DM.

1. Why are those Imps injured? Because they've been fighting on a ship that's populated with Mindflayers, and being attacked by Gith with dragons. We see evidence of this throughout the tutorial, so it is beyond contestation. So having them injured is both logical, and a choice made by the DM.

2. The intellect devourer encounters at the crash site are presumably newborns. What makes me believe that? Us. We also have evidence to suggest that they were still under direct control by the Mindflayers. What am I basing that on? Again, Us, and the scene that plays out immediately after we rescue him. So not being as powerful as they could/should be is also understandable, and then there's the incident where Sven got wiped by that encounter, so it's evidently possible that they can, in fact, win that fight.

3. At the end of the day, this game is also a SP campaign. After release, we'll be able to do something that shoots a hole the size of Texas in your idea that the game is balanced for 6 players already, Tav doesn't have to exist. Yes, we'll be able to, if we wish, pick one of the Origin characters as the main character. Make no mistake, some will choose to play as one, or all of them, across multiple playthroughs. Even if the only goal is to see more of the Origin Character stories at once.

But to get closer to where I'm at with this whole idea, the game is balanced where it is because it includes a SP campaign. Even the addition of just SH playing SP trivializes any content that comes after, in the tutorial. I'm looking at how trivial it would be with a party of 4, let alone a party of 6 or more, and thinking that it wouldn't be a great idea. In fact, I could see a 6 person party being the next barrelmancy. One mage to create surfaces, another to ignite them, or otherwise activate them, and maybe even another to CC them in the surface, so they can't get out. Along with lots of ranged DPS to take out any survivors. Yep, sounds like a really fun game to me.

Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
Multiplayer. 4 players. Severely limited. Dumb dialogue that makes no sense. Too easy gameplay. Can't do origin side quests because you can't even have them in the party... Not even 1.

And injured imps and intellect devourers ain't the problem.

Imps don't have resistance or poison stings.
Intellect devourers aren't newborns if they have max HP that equals that of adults.
Intellect devourers don't do their very basic signature move, devour intellect.
Intellect devourers don't have resistance.
Phase spiders don't ethereal jaunt, they misty step across the board.
Phase spiders spit poison.
Bulette doesn't wipe the floor with 4 level 4 characters when it can almost wipe the floor with 6 level 5s.

And I could go on and on and on and on.

Fact:. Stats are severely nerfed to fit the mold of the very limiting 4 character max party.

Fact: 4 player multiplayer is severely limited and gameplay quality reduced because of 4 character party max.

Fact: 6 character max works IF proper stats are used for monsters. If not proper stats, party of 6 is too easy.

Solution: Provide an option for max 6 plus an option for true D&D stats.

Last edited by GM4Him; 06/11/21 01:52 PM.
Joined: Oct 2021
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2021
If you want to cheese the heck out of a game its your problem. Nobody dictates you how to play your playthroughs. Thats not the best example given.

Dont want to play with a party of 6? Then dont. Play with 4. Others will force their way into playing the game solo. Who am i to tell them how they want to play their playthrough? Blasphemous.

Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by GM4Him
Multiplayer. 4 players. Severely limited. Dumb dialogue that makes no sense. Too easy gameplay. Can't do origin side quests because you can't even have them in the party... Not even 1.

And injured imps and intellect devourers ain't the problem.

Imps don't have resistance or poison stings.
Intellect devourers aren't newborns if they have max HP that equals that of adults.
Intellect devourers don't do their very basic signature move, devour intellect.
Intellect devourers don't have resistance.
Phase spiders don't ethereal jaunt, they misty step across the board.
Phase spiders spit poison.
Bulette doesn't wipe the floor with 4 level 4 characters when it can almost wipe the floor with 6 level 5s.

And I could go on and on and on and on.

Fact:. Stats are severely nerfed to fit the mold of the very limiting 4 character max party.

Fact: 4 player multiplayer is severely limited and gameplay quality reduced because of 4 character party max.

Fact: 6 character max works IF proper stats are used for monsters. If not proper stats, party of 6 is too easy.

Solution: Provide an option for max 6 plus an option for true D&D stats.

None of this affects my opinion on the end result, nor my experience rescuing SH in the tutorial. If, as you claim, the game is balanced for 6, then a total party size of 4 shouldn't trivialize content.

Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
Ok. Let's put it another way:

4 party limits gameplay for those who play multiplayer with 4 players.

6 party limits no one.

4 party = current stats and so forth. No change.

6 party = option to use proper D&D stats. Change doesn't hurt or limit anyone.

So why not give those of us who want a 6 party the OPTION to have it and to have it with proper D&D stats so it isn't so easy it's boring? Why fight it if it doesn't limit or change your gameplay in any way?

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
Bcs it costs money ...
And people wants to see money spend on something they wish for. :P

Easy as that. laugh


If my comments bother you, there is nothing easier than telling me to stop.
I mean ... I won't ... but it's easy to say. wink
Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
A AAA budget. I think they might be able to afford a single difficulty setting using proper D&D stats and go into the code and change some 4s to 6s especially since they've said in the past they will do difficulty settings eventually and especially since it is obviously so important to a lot of people.

Mega thread page 79 now. I think they might need to just spend a tiny pit of cash on it.

Last edited by GM4Him; 06/11/21 03:16 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by GM4Him
Ok. Let's put it another way:

4 party limits gameplay for those who play multiplayer with 4 players.

6 party limits no one.

4 party = current stats and so forth. No change.

6 party = option to use proper D&D stats. Change doesn't hurt or limit anyone.

So why not give those of us who want a 6 party the OPTION to have it and to have it with proper D&D stats so it isn't so easy it's boring? Why fight it if it doesn't limit or change your gameplay in any way?

Only in as much as it limits SP. At this stage of development, Early Access, where we can't play as the Origin characters, then yes? What about all the other limits that we have because it's Early Access? As I said previously, once we're out of Early Access, and can play as the Origin Characters, your party of 4 could all be Origin Characters.

Party of 6 will trivialize the content. This is a point that has been made, and refuted with "so what".

Changing the party size as an option will have no bearing on the stats of NPCs throughout the game. The only way this is true is if they make the appropriate changes in the base game, or with difficulty modes, which again, we don't have because we're still in Early Access.

Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by robertthebard
Party of 6 will trivialize the content. This is a point that has been made, and refuted with "so what"..
It has also been refuted with "implement split exp," which (since the exp forumla can be freely modified) will basically by definition be able to balance the game.

But also, yes "so what?" Does it affect you if some people turn on a toggle to play an easier game with a party of 6?

Last edited by mrfuji3; 06/11/21 03:34 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
Originally Posted by GM4Him
A AAA budget. I think they might be able to afford a single difficulty setting using proper D&D stats and go into the code and change some 4s to 6s especially since they've said in the past they will do difficulty settings eventually and especially since it is obviously so important to a lot of people.
That is question of implementation ...
If you create whole system with lets say 1.000 creatures ... and then you implement your difficiulty like:

Story mode
HP * 0,5 ... AC * 0,5 ... Hit roll * 0,5 ... damage roll * 0,5 ... Dif for conversation rolls * 0,5

Easy
HP * 0,75 ... AC * 0,75 ... Hit roll * 0,75 ... damage roll * 0,75 ... Dif for conversation rolls * 0,75

Normal
HP * 1 ... AC * 1 ... Hit roll * 1 ... damage roll * 1 ... Dif for conversation rolls * 1

Hard
HP * 1,5 ... AC * 1,5 ... Hit roll * 1,5 ... damage roll * 1,5 ... Dif for conversation rolls * 1,5

Insane
HP * 2,5 ... AC * 2,5 ... Hit roll * 2,5 ... damage roll * 2,5 ... Dif for conversation rolls * 2,5

All walues will set themselves with zero additional work ...
You simply adjust single variable, everything else is made automaticly ...
But if you have to go through stats of all 1.000 creatures and check every of all those stats they have ... well, that is conciderably more work, dont you agree?

And im talking here about stats only ... note that if you would wish to give full DnD Difficiulty, then you would also need to check all their attacks and spells they should have ... then learn them to use them properly ... then learning all your other characters to react on them properly ...

Originally Posted by robertthebard
Party of 6 will trivialize the content. This is a point that has been made, and refuted with "so what".
Wich was never answered. laugh
I mean come on ... indulge me, please ... tell me at least single "so what", for why would you even care that im playing this game easier. laugh

Last edited by RagnarokCzD; 06/11/21 03:44 PM.

If my comments bother you, there is nothing easier than telling me to stop.
I mean ... I won't ... but it's easy to say. wink
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Sweden
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Sweden
If they were going to change it, they'd have either said so, or done it by now.

I still say it's too far along in development.

Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
Originally Posted by robertthebard
Party of 6 will trivialize the content. This is a point that has been made, and refuted with "so what"..
It has also been refuted with "implement split exp," which (since the exp forumla can be freely modified) will basically by definition be able to balance the game.

But also, yes "so what?" Does it affect you if some people turn on a toggle to play an easier game with a party of 6?

...and it's got nothing to do with me. I merely pointed to something that's been pointed out in the thread. By all means, turn the game down to Casual, and use however many comps you think you need to complete content. I really can't begin to explain how many F's I don't give. What I will be doing, however, is looking back on threads very much like this one, and this one, when people start complaining about the game being too easy. For me, in the current difficulty, a party of 4 is already trivializing some of the content, I listed the tutorial above. I won't be utilizing any options for more. Why would I, I'm finding a lot of this mind numbingly easy already. I expect that most of this will be countered by having difficulties added however.

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
Originally Posted by Imora DalSyn
I still say it's too far along in development.
To do what exactly? laugh
Switch single value? O_o


If my comments bother you, there is nothing easier than telling me to stop.
I mean ... I won't ... but it's easy to say. wink
Page 78 of 115 1 2 76 77 78 79 80 114 115

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