Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4
Joined: Dec 2020
old hand
OP Offline
old hand
Joined: Dec 2020
I would have liked to do this poll on Reddit instead, but polls are disabled in the BG3 subreddit for some reason, and seemingly have been for quite some time. So, next best thing.

I will specify that the options will assume that we will run into all of the various flaws of both systems. It's also why there won't be a neutral 'I don't mind/other' option, as it is far more useful to gauge what system people would prefer, even assuming we frequently run into the perceived worst aspects of both systems. We can argue all day about how each system may be theoretically implemented/improved or whatever hybrid systems may exist, but this is only meant as an exercise in finding out what the majority of the community here would prefer in the absence of such suggestions.

EDIT: Guess I need to add this in here.

I only put the absolute extremes here only to gauge which extreme people would prefer if it ever came down to that. Of course everyone wants something in the middle, but even something such as this would be useful for gauging exactly where that middle point should be. There is a big difference between the following two 'middle ground' concepts:

- Design for full automation first, with options for prompts afterwards.
- Design for full prompts first, with options for automation afterwards.

There are certain implications with either approach. The first approach has an implication that certain abilities may be designed and implemented based on ease of automation foremost, with options to control how they are used through prompts later. The second approach has an implication that certain abilities may be implemented in ways much closer to their tabletop versions, with options for automation to reduce the frequency of prompts in situations that players may find redundant later.

We already have dozens of other threads for specific middle ground suggestions, the purpose of this poll wasn't to create yet another one. (Plus I already knew the poll would be absolutely pointless if I put such an 'other' option in there, because we can't even agree on what a middle ground should even LOOK like to begin with, AND we all know that option would win with how insanely broad it would be. Evidently the replies here have already validated the decision to leave it out.)

Automatic Reactions or Prompt Reactions?
single choice
Votes accepted starting: 07/08/22 06:16 AM
You must vote before you can view the results of this poll.
Last edited by Saito Hikari; 08/08/22 05:24 PM.
Joined: Mar 2022
S
member
Offline
member
S
Joined: Mar 2022
Oh, yet another reaction post, this will surely move the debate forward /s.

I would like the option where I'm not being spammed by mandatory popups like Windows Vista every time I tried to do a modification on my system, thank you very much.

Joined: Aug 2014
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Aug 2014
I can't vote because I don't want either extreme as such.

Current system clearly doesn't work because you have no control over what happens. Prompting for everything will be extremely tedious.

I would first see which "reactive" abilities could be changed into active abilities while maintaining their function. E.g. Shield > BA with 1 minute duration or Paladin's Smite > Free Action, discharge on next hit. Then I would see how many reactions are left and which system would work best for them.

Last edited by 1varangian; 07/08/22 06:55 AM.
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
Can't vote cause there aren't any "other" option.
I don't like the current system at all but I would like something different than the Solasta system in BG3 (and related).

Joined: Dec 2020
old hand
OP Offline
old hand
Joined: Dec 2020
Like I said, I only put the absolute extremes up there only to gauge which extreme people would prefer if it ever came down to that. Of course everyone wants something in the middle, but even something such as this would be useful for gauging exactly where that middle point should be. (Plus I already knew the poll would be absolutely pointless if I put such an 'other' option in there, because we can't even agree on what a middle ground should even LOOK like to begin with, AND we all know that option would win with how insanely broad that option would be. Evidently the replies here have already validated the decision to leave it out.)

We already have dozens of other threads for middle ground suggestions, the purpose of this poll wasn't to create yet another one.

Last edited by Saito Hikari; 07/08/22 07:21 AM.
Joined: Jun 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jun 2020
Assuming one extreme or the other, and assuming that we will still need to come up against and deal with the downsides of either option, regardless, then within the scope of this question I definitely would prefer to be prompted for reelevant reactions, and to thus have the ability to accurately control and make choices for my characters in combat, and so that is my vote ^.^

Joined: Dec 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Dec 2020
I voted the prompted Solasta version from the two choices , since I want more control over my reactions.


"We are all stories in the end. Just make it a good one."

Doctor Who
Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
I mean, it’s an easy pick if you really understand the implications.

A “prompt system” could *still* be automated with toggles for those who don’t want to deal with it.

Conversely an intrinsically automated solution couldn’t offer the granularity and control of the former no matter what.

But even going with an absurd scenario where you have to deal with all the downsides of one method or the other I would still vote for prompts. They are called reactions because you’re supposed to be able to REACT to things as they happen, after all.

Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
Originally Posted by snowram
Oh, yet another reaction post, this will surely move the debate forward /s.
It’s not meant “ to move the discussion forward” but as a recap of where people here currently stand.

You’d be more aware of it if your contributions to this forum consisted in anything more than a reply every blue moon just to scoff at people.

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
Easy choice ... full control. :3


In the words of the senior NCO instructor at cadet battalion:
“If you ain’t cheating you ain’t trying. And if you got caught you didn’t try hard enough!”
Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
Between the two options my choice was clear... I'd prefer prompts. Prompts allow for greater control and, like Tuco said, it would still be possible to have an option for automated reactions if a player don't want to be interrupted/bother with reactions.

Joined: Aug 2014
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Aug 2014
I'll just add that I've never missed reactions in previous D&D games that use older rulesets. BG1, BG2, NWN... I'm not convinced reactions are needed in the first place. And they seems to be VERY difficult to implement properly in a CRPG, even a turn based one. Something for designers of 5.5 / 6e to think about for sure. I think it's pretty obvious there needs to be less reactions overall if they are to remain. And less spells requiring concentration.

Joined: Jun 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jun 2020
I never missed music in my video games, when I had only played video games without it; does that mean that we're better off without music in our games? No, it doesn't.

I didn't miss the reaction system in NWN or NWN2 - no-one did. Because it didn't exist yet, so it was literally impossible to miss it. Does that mean that we should go back to not having options that can occur outside of our own turns? No, it doesn't.

Cinematic cutscenes are not 'needed'; music is not 'needed'; colour graphics are not 'needed'; more than one class is not 'needed'... so no, technically (and an empty, meaningless statement) a proper reaction system is not 'needed' - but much like colour graphics, multiple class options and good music direction, it makes for a better and more enjoyable game if it is included in a turn-based game (which NWN etc., were not - so of course it would not have been appropriate for them).

Originally Posted by 1varangian
I think it's pretty obvious there needs to be less reactions overall if they are to remain. And less spells requiring concentration.

You thought wrong! If it were 'pretty obvious' there wouldn't be so much discussion, or so many staunch defenders. So, clearly, it's not an obvious truth, like, at all, even remotely. It's an opinion you have - and it's one that very few people seem to genuinely share.

Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
I, like some others, would like a blend of the two extremes, but if one or the other I would pick prompts.

I still think the preset/toggles could cut down on the need for frequent prompts, allowing players to set their own preferences.

Joined: Mar 2020
Location: Belfast
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Mar 2020
Location: Belfast
Easy choice - of course Solasta could use some streamlining and better presentation and implementation, but out of the two the downsides of popups are minor in comparison to issues that come will full automation.

Joined: Aug 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Aug 2020
As with most things Larian changed, they should have started by iterating on 5e and its design/intentions, rather than changing chunks wholesale. 5e isn't perfect, neither is Solasta. But Larian could have iterated and polished things to create an improved version of 5e, rather than making numerous clumsy changes that end up having knock-on effects which require more changes or just generally end up leaving stuff broken. Do people who are against the Solasta method really think that it's the ultimate version of that approach and thus cannot be altered or changed to be more palatable or have more flow? If Larian is good enough to be given this license, they should be good enough to improve on the reaction system, rather than just replacing it wholesale and altering everything connected to it. Furthermore, 5e has its flaws, and there are folk around here who understand that far better than me, but surely they aren't so great that talented devs couldn't improve them, rather than just replacing them outright, seemingly without a lot of initial thought as to what the effects of it on overall balance will be.

Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
Originally Posted by 1varangian
I'll just add that I've never missed reactions in previous D&D games that use older rulesets. BG1, BG2, NWN...

Yeah, well, no shit. They weren't turn-based games to begin with and reactions weren't a thing in that system.
The equivalent of a "Counterspell" back then was interrupting a caster in real time with a physical attack or something like a Magic Missile.

Quote
And less spells requiring concentration.

Concentration is something that exists with a very deliberate design purpose: to prevent "pre-buff stockpiling" from becoming a thing.
Like in Buff Finder: Buffmaker and Wrath of the Buffer.

"Bounded accuracy" is a thing for a reason: https://dungeonsdragons.fandom.com/wiki/Bounded_accuracy

Last edited by Tuco; 07/08/22 01:14 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by 1varangian
And less spells requiring concentration.
Agree! Druids have too many concentration spells!

For reactions I am not sure if I would like pop-ups or not. I am fine with BG3’s current system, though.

Joined: Dec 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Dec 2020
hmm, If I have to choose between having reactions and not being able to automate them and a completely automated system, then I choose the automated system. I play these kinds of games first for story/role-playing, and second for a combat simulator. Being bogged down by even a minor fight isn't fun for me.

That said, ideally, options would be there, and people can choose what they want.

Last edited by Boblawblah; 07/08/22 01:51 PM.
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
Originally Posted by Saito Hikari
Like I said, I only put the absolute extremes up there only to gauge which extreme people would prefer if it ever came down to that. Of course everyone wants something in the middle, but even something such as this would be useful for gauging exactly where that middle point should be. (Plus I already knew the poll would be absolutely pointless if I put such an 'other' option in there, because we can't even agree on what a middle ground should even LOOK like to begin with, AND we all know that option would win with how insanely broad that option would be. Evidently the replies here have already validated the decision to leave it out.)

We already have dozens of other threads for middle ground suggestions, the purpose of this poll wasn't to create yet another one.

Thank you for clarifying things but as I said, I personnaly cannot vote if there's nothing in the middle.

The current system is absolutely a waste.

The DnD reaction system is absolutely awesome and a good implementation could radically change and improve turn based games for decades.
But the main drawback of the turn based system is the flow of combats and as proven by Solasta, it is even worse with prompts.

I don't want a better flow with no control aver reactions and I don't want a full control with a bad flows.
I want a reaction system that gives us "enough" control AND that improve the flow of combats / ennemies turns.

That's my hope for BG3 so both options are bad options to me.

Last edited by Maximuuus; 07/08/22 02:28 PM.
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4

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