Originally Posted by Benny89
Originally Posted by Klawz
Hi Benny,

That's an interesting perspective, however i've been playing DnD on and off for years now and have a different one.

Expecting a DnD 5e emulation in 3d is unreasonable. There are design decisions in 5e that were made because it was tabletop, translating this into an isometric RPG game will require changes and optimisation. So when playing this game it needs to be faithful to the world and *general* mechanics of 5e - which they've succeeded with. It is more closer to the source than past games, such as Neverwinter Nights, BG1&2, Planescape, etc. They've also added extra combat mechanics that make combat more fun - all of which needs to be balanced in time of course.

If it "feels" like DoS3 - why is that? Is that the result of:

> AoE throwable items
> The story being so similar (prisoner from crashed ship, need to control strange powers, manipulation by higher powers)
> Similar graphics engine

I've gone through 3 playthroughs of act1 at this point, and from someone who plays more iRPGs on the reg than DnD, this game feels *super* 5e to the point that it's probably confusing players who have to google what advantage in combat means. Anyways to your points specifically:

Originally Posted by Benny89

Ground elemental effects SHOULD absolutely be not part of DnD game

Environmental effects may need a reduction in damage or/and duration, but removing them completely would be a mistake - environmental effects add extra complexity in combat without friction which makes combat more tactical

Originally Posted by Benny89

You already have balanced system and play-tested in years

Hate to break it to you Benny, but DnD 5e is not balanced. There's multi-class cheese, rogue meta, spells that can be abused, and ect... luckily there's a DM that will tell you "no" if you're going OTT. The thing is that RNG needs balance: too little and things are predictable, too much and things are fustrating. In DnD the DM is the director, you don't have this in video-game form so there needs to be a reduction to RNG from table top.

Originally Posted by Benny89

Please remember that 5e is designed to be PERFECTLY viable for melee classes (when it comes to AC/HP vs hit chance/damage) without ANY MAGIC ITEMS AT ALL

Compared to other iRPGs the magic item pickup is still limited, IIRC it's similar to the previous BG games. The warrior class is underwhelming at this point, this is because rogues have the same AC, are quicker, and there's no strength based ranged weapons. It's also likely to do with the hieght bonuses, and number of enemies per encounter (focus-fire has always been the go-to strat, something ranged classes excel at).

Originally Posted by Benny89

Beginning is little too much for 1st level characters and party members you meet - it's very unrealistic

Most DnD campaigns I've rolled dont start at lvl1. The intro of this story indicates that the adventurers are not randoms but people of exceptional ability, so I really dont see this problem. There are plenty of RPGs that start off with killing rats in the basement, and it's boring. You do have a point tho, there is a risk of unrealistic escalation - if you're fighting observers at level 4, what will you have to deal with at level 8?

Originally Posted by Benny89

Alignments are big part of 5e system.

Alignments are not a big part of 5e.. they removed most of this to add more rpg flexibility. IIRC Larian were thinking about adding in allignment, and Wizards told them "no".

I will go with it fast

1. There is no point in increasing complexity of combat system. 5e is complex enough with hundreds of spells, tons of subclasses and it's features etc. There is no point in tweaking it more.

2. 5e is the most balanced DnD system version ever. Complare to 3.5 it's like night and day. Of course there are some things that are unbalanced (Sorcadins, Hexblades, Simulacrum, dips for caster classes etc.) but NO RPG SYSTEM EVER will be perfectly balanced. It's been proved in tens of years of table/video game RPGS that it's impossible. The best we can get is as balanced as possible. Which I believe 5e is. Adding additional stuff ON TOP of that will only make overall game less balanced, because every additional mechanical factor you add - increase possibilities of exploiting it in a way that devs/authors did not think about. That was the reason why 3.5 was such a balance mess - there were tons of new spells, races, prestige classes etc. added in every book and so many books were added that nobody could keep up with new OP builds, combos etc. 5e takes slower time with new books for the reason to preserve balance as much as possible. Perfect one in RPG is just no achievable.

3. Rogues are as good as Fighters becaue again Larian messes with 5e rules. In 5e book Rogue is not a Fighter. He does not have simillar AC (the highest AC rogue can have is 17 with 20 DEX, while Fighter in Plate Armor, Defense Style and Shield can have 21 AC. Also Fighters have higher HP pool, two attacks at level 4 and 3 at level 11 and Action Surge, while Rogue is always stuck with 1 attack/turn, but with Sneak Attack on top of that. They also get Expertises, while Figherrs get things like Battlemaster Manouvers, Eldricht Knight magic boosts or Samurai Fighting Spirit.

The only reason that Fighter may feel not good for you compare to Rogue is because Larian messed with 5e balance. Rogues are balanced around 1 attach/turn with Sneak Attack. Fighters are balanced around up to 4/attacks per turn + Action Surge that can give them another 4 attacks on level 20. Add to that Precision Strike from Battlemaster, Great Weapon Master Feat, Polearm Master Feat + Sentinel Feat and you have combat monster. Rogues can't compare when it comes to DPS with Fighters in 5e. Arcane Trickster is only one who can get really good DPS thanks to Familliar Help Action + Haste later.

4. Most DnD campaigns do start at level 1. Take a look at most published campaigns by Wizards. Most start at level 1.

Another Larian fanboy obliterated by a d4 dice.