Yes. Larian can do whatever they want. Of course they CAN.
I just wanted to see you say it. :3
It honestly quite surprise me that you dont understand them ... I mean you are writing fanfiction, dont you? You could easily just copy whole passages from other stories and save lot of work ... instead you are creating your own plots and solutions (im guessing here, didnt read a single line honestly) ... why would you do that when you dont have to?
Maaaaaybe bcs you wanted to create your own story? Maaaaaaybe bcs you wanted to have your own mark on it? Maaaaaaaybe those things fits better your vision for the story?
Why is that so hard to imagine they simply feel the same about the game THEY are making?
I have to raise my voice up at this point. Larian isn't making fanfiction. Fanfiction is by its nature a self-indulgent exercise. It's being put out for free and even if the writer is writing it for other people to look at, the fact that it's free creates a very different expectation. Larian is creating this game with the approval of WotC, creating a sequel to a beloved game franchise that's foundational to an entire genre. Of course they can and should put their own spin on it, especially since the prior game is decades old at this point. But just because they can do something doesn't mean that what they choose to do is the right move for the game. You're describing a lot of puzzle-like combat that these weapons allow players to opt-into. To that I ask; "is combat in this game meant to be a puzzle? Is that a good approach to designing combat in this game? Is the fact that they're prioritizing that approach at this point a sign they're going in the right direction?"
I'm always wary of people who talk about respecting an IP and/or its fans, but respecting and disrespecting are things that can happen. There's a line between "wanting to put your own spin on D&D" and "assuming your approach to the IP is superior to the traditional approach." And the latter attitude is almost certainly disrespectful. Is that the approach Larian is actually taking? I don't know for sure, but I can certainly see why people would feel that way. Focusing on the magic items example, Larian introducing this whole slew of homebrew magic items and neglecting to include more of the classic, familiar ones does feel like them dismissing those items. Maybe that's not their intent, but their intent doesn't entirely matter. It's another instance of them opting to start with trying to make their own approach work rather than trying to build off of what D&D 5e already provides.
Of course they can and should put their own spin on it, especially since the prior game is decades old at this point.
And that was the whooole point.
Dont drag the money to this topic, they are not relevant ... Your 60€ are just as worthy for the company as my 60€, and since we are unable to get unified vision ... developer must make decisions themselves.
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost
But just because they can do something doesn't mean that what they choose to do is the right move for the game.
Same goes for our wishes and demands tho. I mean sure, "my" wishes serves the purpose to make the game perfect for "me" ... but is that the right move for the game itself? The difference is that they had vision, when they started creating this game ... they come with that vision to WotC ... and since the game is finaly being developed, it seems like WotC was okey with that vision ...
Some people are not, i get as much ... tough luck i gues.
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost
To that I ask; "is combat in this game meant to be a puzzle? Is that a good approach to designing combat in this game? Is the fact that they're prioritizing that approach at this point a sign they're going in the right direction?"
No ... but its a possibility. Yes it is ... its creative and offers much more potential combinations compared to flat buffs and stat bonuses. I dont think they do ... +1 items are right there, if that is your thing ... so everyone can be happy, and THAT is certainly the right direction! The only right direction i would even dare to say.
There is ofcourse problem that some people feels offended by the very existence of different than their own approach ... but that is quite honestly something they should rather discuss with some proffesional on menthal health care, than game forum. :-/
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost
I'm always wary of people who talk about respecting an IP and/or its fans, but respecting and disrespecting are things that can happen. There's a line between "wanting to put your own spin on D&D" and "assuming your approach to the IP is superior to the traditional approach."
This sounds like a matter of opinion ... I play only for around 15years now ... but in my eyes traditional approach in entertainment industry allways was that developers created whatever the hells they wanted, and people either buyed it or not ...
Sure, we are in different era now, there are possibilities to gather people thoughts and take them as potential source of inspiration ... and that is good.
Sadly, there are also people who "assume their approach to the IP is superior" ... and they keep demanding the game submits to their own expectations ... funny enough, those people seems to be unable to even agree on their own demands as long as there is at least two of them.
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost
And the latter attitude is almost certainly disrespectful.
Doesnt seem like that to me. O_o
Focusing on the magic items example, Larian introducing this whole slew of homebrew magic items and neglecting to include more of the classic, familiar ones does feel like them dismissing those items.[/quote] I mean ... it once again dont to me, since i have no personal feelings for them i gues. But i gues i can understand the feeling ... even tho it still fells like people being mad for not getting their favorite toy.
On the other hand why would they? I mean yes we all just play the game and try to enjoy it. But the main purpose of Early Acess is still testing ... why would they need to test if people like to get famous, favourite and years tested items?
I could understand people mentioning that they ALSO want some classical rewards, since they are used to them. That would seem like healthy approach. But topics like this sometimes starts to feel more like holy crusade against anything that dont have WotC sticker placed on its forehead.
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost
It's another instance of them opting to start with trying to make their own approach work rather than trying to build off of what D&D 5e already provides.
This makes sence to me ... This game will carry their name, if i would make something like that i would also want it to me as close to my vision as possible. :-/
Last edited by RagnarokCzD; 27/02/2201:17 PM.
I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings. Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!
Example:. You open a chest in the goblin lair behind Ragzlin's throne.
Longsword of Sharpness
Very Rare...Tier 3 magic item. Definitely not suitable for a tier 1 party.
Originally Posted by GM4Him
Instead of crafting a whole new weapon for Minthara, they could have simply given her a Mace of Terror:
Rare...Tier 2 magic item. Also not suitable for a tier 1 party.
Ugh. Technical much?
The point is that there are plenty of cool items to choose from already. They don't have to waste time, money, and so forth creating EVERY magic item in the game... Oh wait. Sorry...it's not EVERY... MANY... LOTS of...
I like to create homebrew items. It's fun. But having SO many homebrew is, again, too much.
That's my thing with Larian right now. Too much. Too much homebrew all the way around. They're home brewing classes, spells, potions, scrolls, weapons, rules, monsters, feats, PRETTY much everything instead of using a system that already has a ton of stuff worked out for them.
Thus, they create tons of extra work for themselves having to rework and rework things so that they are balanced and don't ruin the game.
If they'd just use what's there, add a few really cool homebrew peppered throughout, it'd work well. Instead, we're having this conversation.
So, for example, Dragon's Grasp. It originally set someone on fire when you hit. OP. Loved this weapon originally, but OP. So they made it so you just do 2d4 extra damage IF your target is burning.
Now I never use it because I don't go around sending enemies on fire. Very rarely are they on fire if I don't. So unless I start going around playing the creating fiery surfaces game, enemies are not on fire in the weapon is pretty much boring and dumb.
Instead of creating this item and giving it to us so early, to be purchased almost immediately from a vendor, why not keep the item the way it was and make it so that we find it later on in the game as a really cool treasure? Reduce the chance of setting on fire to a Dex Save DC 13 or something. Then it'd be a pretty good magic item more appropriate in the game.
At merchants, use premade items like +1 stuff, and if they do have cool stuff, make it more expensive so you have to really work and save for them.
And the latter attitude is almost certainly disrespectful.
Doesnt seem like that to me. O_o
Focusing on the magic items example, Larian introducing this whole slew of homebrew magic items and neglecting to include more of the classic, familiar ones does feel like them dismissing those items.
I mean ... it once again dont to me, since i have no personal feelings for them i gues. But i gues i can understand the feeling ... even tho it still fells like people being mad for not getting their favorite toy.
On the other hand why would they? I mean yes we all just play the game and try to enjoy it. But the main purpose of Early Acess is still testing ... why would they need to test if people like to get famous, favourite and years tested items?
I could understand people mentioning that they ALSO want some classical rewards, since they are used to them. That would seem like healthy approach. But topics like this sometimes starts to feel more like holy crusade against anything that dont have WotC sticker placed on its forehead.
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost
It's another instance of them opting to start with trying to make their own approach work rather than trying to build off of what D&D 5e already provides.
This makes sence to me ... This game will carry their name, if i would make something like that i would also want it to me as close to my vision as possible. :-/[/quote]
So with point 1, I think it's disrespectful when you're consciously choosing to use the D&D system and setting for your game as opposed to something you create yourself. If you think your vision of an IP is superior, that's fine and you may well be right, but if you think that, at every turn, your choices are better, then build something from the ground up, rather than taking something that a lot of people love as-is and impose your vision upon that. Even if your approach is actually better, it's kind of bad form to ask to join in on something like this and then toss out all the stuff you don't like and replace it with your own stuff. It's not even like they're advertising a new, better approach to D&D or anything like that.
With point 2 about why to test favorite, years-tested items, have they been tested for a video game? Larian themselves have said that some things won't translate well into a game and they're 100% right about that. Some things that work great in tabletop will feel weird or even bad in a video game. Maybe some of that stuff is a no-brainer as to how it would work in a video game, but I'd be surprised if they were so confident that they felt no need to test any of that stuff. And if there was stuff they felt needed testing, why not introduce it now alongside their new stuff.
And to your final point about their vision, this is a beloved IP that a huge amount of people still play and enjoy every day. They shouldn't be trying to bring it as close to their vision as possible,they should be trying to meld the original vision of both the series and the current 5e system with their own vision so that each one brings out the best in the other. Nobody is making them do this game. If they were concerned with Baldur's Gate and 5e being a hindrance to their name and reputation, they shouldn't have attatched it to their name in the first place. If they thought the baseline product required loads of heavy lifting to improve upon, they should have just made a game with its own IP. It's like a group that's playing D&D, but are homebrewing so many systems and changing so many things that after a point, it becomes clear that 5e isn't giving them the experience they want and they're better off trying a new system.
I think superhero comic books are a good example here. Superheroes have a core identity, but they've passed through many, many creative visions over their existence. Every writer for say, Superman, will come with their own vision for what Superman should be, but if their vision diverges too much from the core of Superman's character, then the story you get as a result isn't going to be well-recieved. If you're going to write a version of Superman that's too radically different, if you have to drastically change him to make the story work, then it gets to a point where the audience has to ask "why aren't you just creating a whole new character?" You're not trying to write a good story for Superman, you're trying to write your own story and using Superman as a vehicle to do so. And as a result, your story, which may have been genuinely great, is going to be viewed in a poorer light because it's a bad Superman story, because it fails to meet the expectations of what people expect of a Superman story, because it's actually NOT a Superman story.
[quote[ Larian themselves have said that some things won't translate well into a game and they're 100% right about that.[/quote]
I'm so tired of that being an excuse... Not that you were using it as one, but just that people keep saying that and using it to excuse every homebrew in the game.
Things that don't translate well:
Druid craft spell Encode Thoughts spell
Oh, Thaumaturgy. That's a good example. I agree with how they changed it because the normal tabletop for that spell would be weird in a video game.
You manifest a minor wonder, a sign of supernatural power, within range. You create one of the following magical Effects within range.
• Your voice booms up to three times as loud as normal for 1 minute.
• You cause flames to flicker, brighten, dim, or change color for 1 minute.
• You cause harmless tremors in the ground for 1 minute.
• You create an Instantaneous sound that originates from a point of your choice within range, such as a rumble of thunder, the cry of a raven, or ominous whispers.
• You instantaneously cause an unlocked door or window to fly open or slam shut.
• You alter the Appearance of your eyes for 1 minute.
If you cast this spell multiple times, you can have up to three of its 1-minute Effects active at a time, and you can dismiss such an Effect as an action.
How would that work in a video game? What real use would it have?
So changing that makes sense. It doesn't translate well.
Most things, however, translate just fine, but they are changing them anyway, and therefore, that is NOT a translation issue. That's a "I am just changing rules because I WANT to."
Which, by the way, is fine. I myself don't play by all the 5e rules. The problem, again, is they are doing it too much.
If it's because of testing, great. Fine. I get that. Test a bunch of homebrew to see what works for difficulty settings, etc. But if it's final game we're talking about, PLEASE tame it down.
That's what I'm saying about the items. Tame it down at least for final release.
See? Synergy ... that is the way to use magical items in this game ...
---
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost
So with point 1, I think it's disrespectful when you're consciously choosing to use the D&D system and setting for your game as opposed to something you create yourself.
Yeah, you said that before.
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost
Even if your approach is actually better, it's kind of bad form to ask to join in on something like this and then toss out all the stuff you don't like and replace it with your own stuff.
Nah, that is exactly how new ruleset, or next editions are born. Concidering this is "5e" it allready happened here aswell few times.
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost
With point 2 about why to test favorite, years-tested items, have they been tested for a video game?
That was just my own question, i dont speak for Larian.
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost
And if there was stuff they felt needed testing, why not introduce it now alongside their new stuff.
Dunno ... we are at least 3/4 of year far from release, it may still come to that ... Then this all will be just big fuss for nothing, since it would be just matter of what was implemented first ... and once again, i would keep saying it was good choice, since new things and ideas need a lot more testing than old and proven one.
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost
And to your final point about their vision, this is a beloved IP that a huge amount of people still play and enjoy every day. They shouldn't be trying to bring it as close to their vision as possible,they should be trying to meld the original vision of both the series and the current 5e system with their own vision so that each one brings out the best in the other.
Well, that is just your vision ...
But i believe they do, just your expectations are different than theirs, thats all.
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost
Nobody is making them do this game.
Aswell as nobody is making you to play it, right? (If not, the codeword is flamingo. :-/ )
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost
they should have just made a game with its own IP.
Wich they did ... and its sucess persuated WotC to give them their thrust.
Do you remember this video?
I mean i dont like that argument, but i feel incredibly strong urge to use it here ... So with no hard feelings: What have YOU achieved on this field to tell them how to make sucessful game?
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost
It's like a group that's playing D&D, but are homebrewing so many systems and changing so many things that after a point, it becomes clear that 5e isn't giving them the experience they want and they're better off trying a new system.
Yup ... and exactly as you said, they play with their own homebrewing rules and systems ... and gues what? They are having fun! Wich is main purpose of D&D ... its even written on first page of every single rulebook. :-/
Who cares if it is "enough 5e"? Its fun for them, thats what matter most.
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost
I think superhero comic books are a good example here.
Indeed they are ... have you read any? And if so wich one?
I can think about that run, where Superman finaly snapped and killed Lex Luthor ... and then he realized that killing vilains is the only solution, since otherwise they simply keep running off. Or about that one (wich turned out to be from alternative reality btw) where Superman was regular vilain ... Brightburn it was called i believe. Or i have just recently seen some comics adaptation for Justice League, where Joker manipulated Superman to kill Loise Lane (who was pregnant with his baby) ... hard stuff ... and then Superman get to him and simply smash his fist through Jokers chest in revenge. Or, when i just mentioned Joker ... there is even comics that adress the fact that there was several different Jokers across the Batman universe ... and presents them all to us as individual characters, wich are all different manifestations of same persona.
See? There is nothing new about writing completely different story based on something new, and (maybe to someone surprise) it isnt instant recipe for disaster.
//Edit:
Originally Posted by GM4Him
Most things, however, translate just fine, but they are changing them anyway, and therefore, that is NOT a translation issue. That's a "I am just changing rules because I WANT to."
Wich is exactly translation problem.
I mean the sentence "some things won't translate well into a game" ... at least as i understand it ... can be read in at least two different ways: 1) I have no idea how to make this working in this game ... and therefore i shall either change it, or not implement it at all. 2) I know exactly how to make this working in this game ... but i dont like the way it works ... and therefore i shall either change it, or not implement it at all.
And both is the thing not translating well in my (as a developer) eyes. :-/
Originally Posted by GM4Him
Which, by the way, is fine.
Agreed. I hope we get difficiulty settings to test soon ... cant wait to make this game REALLY hard.
Last edited by RagnarokCzD; 27/02/2203:28 PM.
I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings. Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!
It's hard to address every single point so I'll go in order but be skipping some of the less important ones. So firstly, no one is making me play this game, no. And the D&D-ness of it isn't honestly my biggest issue with the game. It's mainly an issue for me in that I can see how much it's upsetting some people and I agree with some of the ideas that people have put forward that align more with tabletop D&D. I don't expect to enjoy this game as much as I hoped when I first opted into EA, but I think it'll be a good enough time by the time the whole game is finished.
As for the question, what have I done to qualify to tell them how to make a successful game? I bought the Early Access that they put out explicitly asking for player feedback on. They have their own vision and that vision should guide them, but they asked for people to give feedback and that's what's going to happen. If I take issue with stuff they're doing, I'm going to say so, because they literally asked for people to do that. My vision for a good RPG clearly differs from theirs, so I do my best to try and limit my comments to places where I think they're failing to achieve what it seems like they want to achieve, rather than just harping on about what I dislike. Do I fail to keep myself in check on that account? Certainly, but I still try.
With the Superman stories you laid out, you gave some excellent examples of evil Superman stories. Though Brightburn is actually an example of my point, that's NOT Superman, it's a whole new character that is just incredibly similar to Superman. But I agree, that sort of thing isn't inherently a recipe for disaster, and in fact bold new takes on characters are, in my opinion, important for keeping age-old characters fresh. But I will also present to you the Electric Blue Superman era, where Superman had a massive overhaul in powers and costume and it's still derided as a terrible era in his history. Superman at Earth's End, another notorious comic series that messes up Superman terribly. And All-Star Batman and Robin, where Batman is presented as an absolute maniac and mildly fascistic, which hardly anyone liked. And for a more recent example, Booster Gold in Heroes in Crisis and the 3 issue storyline "The Gift" in Tom King's Batman run. That character bore barely a cursory resemblance to the actual character of Booster Gold, and acted the way he did simply because the story needed to happen. Again, there's a difference between exploring new ideas with a character or IP, and using said character or IP as a vehicle to get across whatever story you actually want to tell.
This wasn't in response to a point I made but I'll adress it all the same. Your second example isn't a translation problem. It's simply that you don't like how a thing works. That's like saying "I know exactly how this word is meant to translate from French to English, but I don't like that translation." That isn't a problem with the translation, that's a problem with the translator. If the only question is whether the translator likes it or not, then it's not the mechanic translating well or not. LArian is under no obligation to translate things perfectly when they can, but I would think that when you're dealing with something that's already beloved by a lot of people, you'd err on the side of not changing things that don't need changing. Because just because you don't personally like something, that doesn't mean the thing you do like is actually better. I didn't like D:OS2, but I can acknowledge that the game is good and had plenty of good ideas. The changes I would make to that game would make it better for me personally, but wouldn't necessarily make it a better game.
Well, there is the question if those comics were hated just bcs main character were changed ... Or bcs they were simply piece of shit anyway.
About the translation thing ...
In my eyes if something "dont translate well" it can mean both ... If i see something traslated and i feel like the translation isnt fitting the message i was trying to deliver ... it simply didnt translate well, even tho every word can be translated corectly. This is actualy quite common issue.
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost
just because you don't personally like something, that doesn't mean the thing you do like is actually better.
This works both ways ... What i was trying to say is exactly what you said in the end ... changes only adjust the game for the person who is making those changes.
There is Larian name on this game ... so its sucess (or failure) will affect them ... therefore it seems quite logical to me that they are making those changes that fits their vision best. Sure we were asked to provide feedback and that is what we do ... but i think there also should be a line between saying what we would like and demanding to acnowledge our opinion as superior and claiming that anyone who disagree with it is an idiot. (Note that i dont mean this against you, but you have to admit that there are some people on this forum with such attitude.)
And i dont even think there exist such thing as "actualy better" ... that would be possible to say only in that case when litteraly everyonw would agree on that. Wich, based on my experience from this forum is quite impossible.
I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings. Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!
If you're trying to translate something, then your goal should be to convey the message as clearly and truly as possible, not try to twist the message so that it suits your goals. The problem is still you, not the translation. Of course this metaphor breaks down somewhat because this is a game being made, not a text that already exists being translated into another language. But I think, in keeping with this metaphor, people need to accept that this isn't meant to be a translation of D&D 5e to a video game in the most direct way possible. I would say that something like Solasta is a better example of that. This is less translation and more like localization; getting across not only the meaning, but the cultural context, etc.
I think the place we diverge is that I don't think Larian's vision needs to diverge from the core 5e experience as much as it does to be successful. But I do get why they would change things and I do agree that some people hold their opinions a bit too intensely, even though I do agree with several of those opinions at times.
As for there being such a thing as actually better, I do think that such a state exists, it's just a matter of where you're looking. I think that for any creative venture, better is measured by "does the thing that the creator do get the reaction from the audience that the creator wants it to?" Obviously you can't make everyone feel the same thing, but better is measured by how many people in your audience feel the thing you want them to feel when you want them to feel it.
Well, I don't consider +1 items boring when they're 100% reliable all the time, instead of relying on a mechanic that means I have to waste my action with a 'Dash' (I get that it's probably aimed at thieves, but I can't *stand* Astarion. :P ) in order to get 'charges' of something that may or may not be usable for my current character. My current game is a Seldarine Drow dual-weapon fighter with the dual-wielding style, AND the dual-wielding feat (non-light weapons and a +1 to AC). She's got a 16 Dex, a +1 rapier in each hand (finesse!), +1 scale mail, and a +1 longbow as backup, and she pretty much mows through most enemies in a round or two. (I've gotten her the "Helmet of Haste" as well... that extra movement for the first 3 rounds of combat IS useful.)
I mean, it works, and it's very straightforward. I can't argue with that.
Example:. You open a chest in the goblin lair behind Ragzlin's throne.
Longsword of Sharpness
Very Rare...Tier 3 magic item. Definitely not suitable for a tier 1 party.
Originally Posted by GM4Him
Instead of crafting a whole new weapon for Minthara, they could have simply given her a Mace of Terror:
Rare...Tier 2 magic item. Also not suitable for a tier 1 party.
Ugh. Technical much?
Ugh. Powergamer much? You just want all the awesome items at the earliest stages of the game that render the entire game pointless to play. No thank you. By putting in items of limited use or less than optimal versions (the headband of intellect) they are injecting variety without the ridiculous levels of power creep you're requesting.
If you're trying to translate something, then your goal should be to convey the message as clearly and truly as possible, not try to twist the message so that it suits your goals. The problem is still you, not the translation. Of course this metaphor breaks down somewhat because this is a game being made, not a text that already exists being translated into another language.
I just recently heared a joke in one stand up that reminded me this topic ...
The joke was about word "prozvonit" from my language ... and the stand up comic claimed (dunno, dont care) that this word have no translation in any other world language. You see it means that you shall call someone, but hang it out just before he can manage to answer you ... joke was about "no other language needed a special word for: I want to hear you, but i dont want to pay for that."
But how does that reminded me this topic?
Thats exactly what i see in the methaphor of translation ...
As long as there is no word you can use ... the message dont translate at all. "ProzvonÃm tÄ› až tam budu" > Impossible (asuming the comedian was right) to translate ... you can say "I will call you once i will be there" but that would change meaning, since you are not going to "call" the person ...
The point is, words are perfectly corect ... but the meaning is lost in the proces. Therefore sometimes, even tho it may seem like paradox, you simply have to change the message in order to deliver it as true as possible.
Last edited by RagnarokCzD; 02/04/2202:01 PM.
I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings. Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!
What would it take for you to find fault with anything in this game, Ragnarok? You seem to just mindlessly quote every point and make some giggly comments about "hoo hoo HA this isn't bad because I have the power of OPINION! Riddle me this!"
There are DECADES of precedent for Dungeons and Dragons, which is what people are referring to in this thread. Larian is making a sequel to a game that was already drawing upon DECADES of them even though it came out 20 years ago. Why are they making this a sequel to that game if they are just going to throw out all of the things that made it what it was? That is the issue that people have here.
Well ... in general, i gues it would take for the fault to exists. Shocking, huh?
There is lot of things i like on this game ... There is lot of things i dislike on this game ...
That you more often see me expressing one or the other is really not my fault.
As for decades ... Quite honestly i dont care. People believed for thousands of years that our planet lays on back of 4 mighty elephants, who are carried by giant turtle flying through space ... and yet it was not corect.
From the start this game was advertised in every single material i have seen as Larian game, and in every single interview i have heared, seen, or read Swen repeately told people that they see forward to give this game their own ideas and vision ...
Its sad i gues that you people dislike it, but to be quite honest, i dont care ... dont see any reason to.
I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings. Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!
What would it take for you to find fault with anything in this game, Ragnarok? You seem to just mindlessly quote every point and make some giggly comments about "hoo hoo HA this isn't bad because I have the power of OPINION! Riddle me this!"
There are DECADES of precedent for Dungeons and Dragons, which is what people are referring to in this thread. Larian is making a sequel to a game that was already drawing upon DECADES of them even though it came out 20 years ago. Why are they making this a sequel to that game if they are just going to throw out all of the things that made it what it was? That is the issue that people have here.
He obviously is just a troll... OR he's the intern who actually did create that lightning set. One or another.
Obviously a redefinition of the word "troll" is about? People criticize the game, a person who does not share the criticism argues against it. That's not per se trolling aka starting flame discussions or annoying people by design without keeping to the discussed theme. Is someone a troll who is of a different opinion? Seemingly it is trolling to not share the DnD-is-betrayed paradigma?
These questions are rhetorical and not to answer. BTW I don't like the lightning items.
You know, I just don't understand why they created more work for themselves.
I think the answer is pretty simple; as Swen stated ,their intention was to use the D&D/BG IP to reach a bigger audience and to put their own slant on the BG saga. They could have referenced or even used the source material but they haven't, so we can only assume they no interest in doing so and will continue to do what they are already familiar with. I used to love getting rare items in the original games with the wonderful little bits of background blurb. Even the parchment style interface was a nice touch of immersion. Larian's colour coded weapons just feel like they are from a MMO.
Given Swen's insistence that players want fireworks and explosions, does he also think that a plain +1 weapon or armour is boring? I'd have to hazard a guess at yes.
OMG. Is that people's answer for everything? I'm tired of hearing it.
My point was they had a SLEW of magic items they could use so it could have been easier on them. Instead, they are reinventing the wheel at every turn and often it isn't working.
Look at this list. Tell me these weapons are boring:
A VERY small list of uncommon and rare items that are available in the 5th Edition System Reference Document - making them free to use without having to pay WotC for the D&D license like Larian did. I only included items that had binary powers that could be implemented into BG3 - so no flying, no climbing/swimming, no illusions, no telepathy, no summoning random critters. basically nothing that would need on-the-fly improvisation by the Dungeon Master.
Amulet of Health Wondrous item, rare (requires attunement)
Your Constitution score is 19 while you wear this amulet. It has no effect on you if your Constitution is 19 or higher without it.
Belt of Dwarvenkind Wondrous item, rare (requires attunement)
While wearing this belt, you gain the following benefits:
Your Constitution score increases by 2, to a maximum of 20. You have advantage on Charisma (Persuasion) checks made to interact with dwarves.
In addition, while attuned to the belt, you have a 50 percent chance each day at dawn of growing a full beard if you're capable of growing one, or a visibly thicker beard if you already have one.
If you aren't a dwarf, you gain the following additional benefits while wearing the belt:
You have advantage on saving throws against poison, and you have resistance against poison damage. You have darkvision out to a range of 60 feet. You can speak, read, and write Dwarvish.
Boots of Striding and Springing Wondrous item, uncommon (requires attunement)
While you wear these boots, your walking speed becomes 30 feet, unless your walking speed is higher, and your speed isn't reduced if you are encumbered or wearing heavy armor. In addition, you can jump three times the normal distance, though you can't jump farther than your remaining movement would allow.
Cloak of Protection Wondrous item, uncommon (requires attunement)
You gain a +1 bonus to AC and saving throws while you wear this cloak.
Gem of Brightness Wondrous item, uncommon
This prism has 50 charges. While you are holding it, you can use an action to speak one of three command words to cause one of the following effects:
The first command word causes the gem to shed bright light in a 30-foot radius and dim light for an additional 30 feet. This effect doesn't expend a charge. It lasts until you use a bonus action to repeat the command word or until you use another function of the gem. The second command word expends 1 charge and causes the gem to fire a brilliant beam of light at one creature you can see within 60 feet of you. The creature must succeed on a DC 15 Constitution saving throw or become blinded for 1 minute. The creature can repeat the saving throw at the end of each of its turns, ending the effect on itself on a success. The third command word expends 5 charges and causes the gem to flare with blinding light in a 30-foot cone originating from it. Each creature in the cone must make a saving throw as if struck by the beam created with the second command word.
When all of the gem's charges are expended, the gem becomes a non magical jewel worth 50 gp.
While this polished agate is on your person, you gain a + 1 bonus to ability checks and saving throws.
Wand of the Warmage Wand, uncommon (+1), rare (+2), or very rare (+3) (requires attunement by a spellcaster)
While holding this wand, you gain a bonus to spell attack rolls determined by the wand's rarity. In addition, you ignore half cover when making a spell attack.
