Sarathiour
Cipher
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2020
- Messages
- 3,264
Some discussion are already popping about it , and because neither of those games will ever be finished, now might be a good time as any to discuss this topic. In mind, it's somewhat interesting because they're a clear divide in the gameplay philosophy.
Disclaimer : I'm only in act 1 of BG, sofeel free to correct me on anything wrong about it fuck you because not a game has never stopped anyone here out of talking out of his ass, nor do I need to swallow a whole turd to accurately describe the aroma.
COMBAT:
WOTR:
- The combat is obviously designed with rtwp in mind, it's less jarring than in Kingmaker and overall the turn-based option is better integrated, but shit like wave of trash mob, or the tavern fight were obviously not designed with turn-based in mind.
- Combat is mostly about overcoming stat block with careful preplanning and characters build, you're mostly trying to stack every buff under the sun in order to reach your victory condition. The victory condition itself can take large variety a form, a flurry of powerful physical attack, multiple amped up chain lightening, crowd control trough spell or combat maneuver, devastating charge ... Lot of flavor her given the insane combination of class + mythic path, though it's bit less than it first appear given SOME SHIT STILL AREN'T CORRECTLY IMPLEMENTED.
- 6 characters party also allow a lot more flexibility regarding the composition.
-Difficulty is very granular, ranging from journalist to sado-autismo.
-Conversely, it's rather easy to have reliable strategy that doesn't rely too much on rng, it's just a matter of how willing you are to stack up buff and abuse min-maxing.
BG3:
- Combat itself is turn-based and it tend to show in encounter design, which rely considerably less on trash encounter designed to drain ressources, and you will rarely get into mega-brawl of 15+ participant. Even goblin got a few nasty trick able to hurt you, taking a fire arrow into the face at level 2-3 will deal some damage. You can probably shove off a lot more thing later on as your AC and overall defense improve.
-Combat rely also considerably more on gimmick and lateral thinking, pushing and shoving is often quite a strong move, dark messiah was probably the last time I saw those as a powerful option. The downside to these is that it can also get quite retarded, most of the people here now about the infamous barrelomancy.
- Combat rely on gimmick because there is simply no such thing as a character build in 5E. You choose a class, an archetype that will change a few things at best, and might even dip if you're into that, but that's it. If you pick a fighter, you're going to do exactly the same shit as laze'l.
- 4 character party is obviously not very flexible, you're going to need someone that could heal, someone with sleight of hand, one or two physical characters, and probably a caster or at the very least scroll reader. That does not leave of lot of room.
- 3 difficulty mod, which result in a 10% hitchance difference between each, and malus/bonus hp for the ennemy. The AI is also supposedly smarter, because ennemies basically don't know how to react to a uncommon situation. I humiliated an ogre just by climbing on a wall, and saw phase spider unable to reach, as they were walking backward to first try to reach me on foot, only for them blink back to the same spot they started at they end of the turn.
Story and Presentation:
-Both are obviously extremely gay and "don't you know it's current year ", though why the fuck would you expect anything from paizo and wotc ? It's often detrimental to the story, the crusade is a complete clownshow that tie with the demon only because they are as grossly incompetent. Halsin is an embarrassment for an archdruid.
- Both of those characters are mostly trash, the only somewhat decent one came later ( Jaheira/Regill ) and the waifu are bad. I really don't want to talk more about this, so maybe let's focus on the difference.
- BG3 give you a lof of choice, often, but will systematically railroad you, and most of those seem rather about flavor than option. Typically, you will get an option to either deceive, persuade or intimidate someone, and all of those lead to the same outcome. A positive thing that should be noted however is that failing sometimes allow different option. For example, failing to persuade the goblin to enter their camp will result in one of those asking you to clean shit on the ground, which you can use instead to blind him and give you an advantage in combat.
-Wotr basically only allow success or failure as possibility, and give a lot less option for roleplaying. However those tend to make a bigger impact, you won't have the same allies and the same fight depending on your Mythic path, and contrary to BG3, you do have the nuclear evil option to eat nearly everyone in the game (except the storyteller that is protected by literal ass magic)
-BG3 inventory is an horrible mess, and the trading menu is even worse. It's clearly embarrassing compared to wotr.
-On the other hand, I would rather wipe myself with sandpaper rather than doing another owlcat puzzle. They're bad, and the way to interact with it are horrendous. It also tie with how little interactivity there is with world, which why such a jarring solution was implemented for them.
- The overall interactivity with the game world make BG3 trap way more interesting than, even if you can now dodge them.
Might edit and write more later, but that's it for my rant for now.
Disclaimer : I'm only in act 1 of BG, so
COMBAT:
WOTR:
- The combat is obviously designed with rtwp in mind, it's less jarring than in Kingmaker and overall the turn-based option is better integrated, but shit like wave of trash mob, or the tavern fight were obviously not designed with turn-based in mind.
- Combat is mostly about overcoming stat block with careful preplanning and characters build, you're mostly trying to stack every buff under the sun in order to reach your victory condition. The victory condition itself can take large variety a form, a flurry of powerful physical attack, multiple amped up chain lightening, crowd control trough spell or combat maneuver, devastating charge ... Lot of flavor her given the insane combination of class + mythic path, though it's bit less than it first appear given SOME SHIT STILL AREN'T CORRECTLY IMPLEMENTED.
- 6 characters party also allow a lot more flexibility regarding the composition.
-Difficulty is very granular, ranging from journalist to sado-autismo.
-Conversely, it's rather easy to have reliable strategy that doesn't rely too much on rng, it's just a matter of how willing you are to stack up buff and abuse min-maxing.
BG3:
- Combat itself is turn-based and it tend to show in encounter design, which rely considerably less on trash encounter designed to drain ressources, and you will rarely get into mega-brawl of 15+ participant. Even goblin got a few nasty trick able to hurt you, taking a fire arrow into the face at level 2-3 will deal some damage. You can probably shove off a lot more thing later on as your AC and overall defense improve.
-Combat rely also considerably more on gimmick and lateral thinking, pushing and shoving is often quite a strong move, dark messiah was probably the last time I saw those as a powerful option. The downside to these is that it can also get quite retarded, most of the people here now about the infamous barrelomancy.
- Combat rely on gimmick because there is simply no such thing as a character build in 5E. You choose a class, an archetype that will change a few things at best, and might even dip if you're into that, but that's it. If you pick a fighter, you're going to do exactly the same shit as laze'l.
- 4 character party is obviously not very flexible, you're going to need someone that could heal, someone with sleight of hand, one or two physical characters, and probably a caster or at the very least scroll reader. That does not leave of lot of room.
- 3 difficulty mod, which result in a 10% hitchance difference between each, and malus/bonus hp for the ennemy. The AI is also supposedly smarter, because ennemies basically don't know how to react to a uncommon situation. I humiliated an ogre just by climbing on a wall, and saw phase spider unable to reach, as they were walking backward to first try to reach me on foot, only for them blink back to the same spot they started at they end of the turn.
Story and Presentation:
-Both are obviously extremely gay and "don't you know it's current year ", though why the fuck would you expect anything from paizo and wotc ? It's often detrimental to the story, the crusade is a complete clownshow that tie with the demon only because they are as grossly incompetent. Halsin is an embarrassment for an archdruid.
- Both of those characters are mostly trash, the only somewhat decent one came later ( Jaheira/Regill ) and the waifu are bad. I really don't want to talk more about this, so maybe let's focus on the difference.
- BG3 give you a lof of choice, often, but will systematically railroad you, and most of those seem rather about flavor than option. Typically, you will get an option to either deceive, persuade or intimidate someone, and all of those lead to the same outcome. A positive thing that should be noted however is that failing sometimes allow different option. For example, failing to persuade the goblin to enter their camp will result in one of those asking you to clean shit on the ground, which you can use instead to blind him and give you an advantage in combat.
-Wotr basically only allow success or failure as possibility, and give a lot less option for roleplaying. However those tend to make a bigger impact, you won't have the same allies and the same fight depending on your Mythic path, and contrary to BG3, you do have the nuclear evil option to eat nearly everyone in the game (except the storyteller that is protected by literal ass magic)
-BG3 inventory is an horrible mess, and the trading menu is even worse. It's clearly embarrassing compared to wotr.
-On the other hand, I would rather wipe myself with sandpaper rather than doing another owlcat puzzle. They're bad, and the way to interact with it are horrendous. It also tie with how little interactivity there is with world, which why such a jarring solution was implemented for them.
- The overall interactivity with the game world make BG3 trap way more interesting than, even if you can now dodge them.
Might edit and write more later, but that's it for my rant for now.
