Originally Posted by vometia
It does seem a bit serious business (I mean other than the random banter from the goblins). I just assumed D&D is like that.


DnD is first and foremost whatever you make of it. It is "anything particular" only second. Humor itself can be whatever we make of life, so it can go with anything or fail miserably.

A lot of the humor in DnD can come from good/bad rolls in combination with the player's intention.
All it needs is an engine (our mind) to provide for the physics. If the player can create their own humorous scenarios, then please continue to do so. The levity in conversation with the companions is pretty good already, so just keep going there. not too much and not too little.

Assume that humor is there to deal with a situation, not for humor's sake. At least in a serious situation. You can't speak plainly so you crack a joke, everybody is well aware that they are turning into tentacles and goo.

Jokes can go horribly wrong, perfect for the companions in the game currently. They do seem like they could take it the wrong way.

If you want funny, try DnD funny.
This can be in-lore jokes (Jan Jansen) or the d20 system of semi-random outcomes. Some things like the polymorphed chicken (Melicamp), an adventure like no other (limited wish spell), gender-swapping Edwin (cursed belt), putting the gate back in baldurs gate via wild magic or the very meta-gaming "player reloads" little episode in the underdark. The graveyard in nashkell is both funny and stupidly challenging.

DnD already provides for plenty of official items to play with. I mean, all the damn talking artifacts alone...

Baldur's Gate offered pretty much any companion one could think of with a narrow, medieval-fantasy mind.
It let the player decided who comes along and for how long. Banter didn't feel as imposed as it feels now with the limited selection. I just happen to like what we have already.


Baldur's Gate 1&2 never seemed too silly as the engine didn't allow for blowing up the entire map but if it did, people would have done so and bg would have become famous for it. for the wrong reasons.
Just watch out Larian, if you give us the ability to lessen our own immersion in the gameworld by doing funny/silly, we will do so. In the second playthrough.

I was never quite sure whether or not the divinity (not only DOS) games wanted their world and story to be taken as seriously as the competition. Or if this extreme levity was part of the design. As far as I can remember the humor in Larian games has been a double edged sword, humor but at the cost of world building, instead of supporting world building.
The literal void dragon, the arcade-arena-rpg map with 4 colors/seasons, the explosions and telekinesis without elevating the mechanics out of alpha, no serious economy, constant going from one crazy location to the next without ever getting to know the world. All with an ensemble of characters that are over the top more often than not.

Planescape perfected the balance between serious/funny, weird/believable. Not even Sigil is a place where litterally anything goes however. It felt Sigil, and BG felt like Sword coast. Larian games' worlds always feel like a Larian world, something not quite finished.

Here is a couple things that work great already

  • BG3 has great banter already and I think humor in general is good.
  • The ox in the barn is now the biggest ox, good for him.
  • The other barn scene.
  • Trapped inside bibberbang.
  • The tadpole trying to escape after nearly having been crushed only to fall victim to time dilation and the subsequent magic missile to the face(?).
  • Goblin shooting an explosive arrow at Gale? Gets reflected, explodes in the goblins face and thus takes down parts of the gate, having a total of 3 gobos fall down. comedy gold!
  • Talking to animals, getting a second opinion on the two-legs around. The snarky wolve, the horny boar, the new-alpha ox, so good, all of it.
    Every time a character fails at "their thing" with a natural one and it doesn't result in total war


Good job so far!