Baldur's Gate Baldur's Gate 3 Early Access Thread [GAME RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[Voids]

Since Swen has confirmed that the EA intentionally contains the neutral and evil companions, I wonder if the final game will have different companions in the place of some of those it has now. If swapping them is possible I wonder if it may even be possible that they be randomized.

Nah, I don't think so. I don't understand how they're going to cram a few more characters into the opening of the game. Then don't you have to decide on your final party by the end of act 1? Not sure how this is going to play out.

I don't mean cram more, I mean swap meeting Shadowheart or the mage guy for someone else. Their introductory dialogue could easily be redone, and some other character could easily get his own introductory dialogue which will work for meeting them in the same circumstances in which you now meet these two NPCs.

Maybe? Maybe they swap them out depending on the character class that the player chooses. Otherwise it'd feel really cluttered.

 

[AwesomeButton]

It makes sense to be able to meet all possible companions in the first 1/3 of the campaign though. You need time to develop them, and those you met later in BG/2 would rarely become regulars in your party. I think looking at PoE/2 would show the same tendency.

 

[Voids]

It makes sense to be able to meet all possible companions in the first 1/3 of the campaign though. You need time to develop them, and those you met later in BG/2 would rarely become regulars in your party. I think looking at PoE/2 would show the same tendency.

For sure - my issue is what Swen said about having to decide on the permanent composition of your party by the end of the first act. That doesn't feel like BG to me. It basically means that you're locked in with these people and that they no longer have any real agency or characterization. I understand having a restriction when you're in the Underdark or whatever, but this seems like a really stupid restriction.

 

[Harthwain]

If swapping them is possible I wonder if it may even be possible that they be randomized.

I strongly doubt it. Unless they already accounted for it. If you look at encounter with Shadowheart it seems to be totally deliberate (animations, dialogue, etc.). Randomized placement of companions would mean a lot of extra work as every character would have to cover everything, since the start to the end of the game.

Still, if we can only select companions in Act 1 (if I remember correctly, after that you're stuck with what you picked), then they need to provide the whole selection before the point of no return. Since they frontload the start of the game with Evil and Neutral characters, then it stands to reason there will be some Good characters in Act 1 when the game releases.

Right now we have 5 characters, all of which are on the "cover art" of Baldur's Gate 2. By the way, I am assuming there will be some other characters who may tag along for a while, but they won't work like the companions work. (Read: they won't be permanent members of your party and there won't be special interactions with them, etc.)

 

[Heroic Liberator]

If swapping them is possible I wonder if it may even be possible that they be randomized.

I strongly doubt it. Unless they already accounted for it. If you look at encounter with Shadowheart it seems to be totally deliberate (animations, dialogue, etc.). Randomized placement of companions would mean a lot of extra work as every character would have to cover everything, since the start to the end of the game.

If we can only select companions in Act 1 (if I remember correctly, after that you're stuck with what you picked), then they need to provide the whole selection before the point of no return. Right now we have 5 characters, all of which are on the "cover art" of Baldur's Gate 2. I am assuming there will be some other characters who may tag along for a while, but they won't work like the companions work. (Read: they won't be permanent members of your party and there won't be special interactions with them, etc.)

This sounds like a stupid design choice. Why couldn't they have just kept the Dragon Age Origins system (from which they've ripped off the exact camp style anyhow) where all of those companions remain with you even if you do not bring them along within your party?

 

[a cut of domestic sheep prime]

Maybe it's down to personal preference, but I strongly disagree here, I like stories that start with the mundane and gradually build up to the extraordinary, mirroring the protagonist's development in the process. All relative to the setting, naturally. BG3 packs a lot of high level material in its opening and, whichever way the plot goes eventually, it will rob it of some finesse and pacing compared to something like Kingmaker, where you gradually peel the layers off the supernatural onion.

I understand that you’re talking about the classic hero’s journey. However, think about what that usually looks like in games. For example, NWN2 OC: you start as some kind of farm boy...in a swamp...at some sort of pig contest.

Even the original Baldur’s Gate had an exciting intro, but you probably forgot it: Sarevok breaking down a door and throwing a man from a building. And then it moves to Candlekeep, which is basically a tutorial area. Then you get attacked and Gorion murdered. It’s pretty high-stakes stuff, considering.

BG2 starts with you being captured and tortured by an evil sorcerer who is fighting a battle against unnamed thieves. In fact, it wasn’t such a different introduction from this game’s mechanically speaking, except that you start on a beach in this one instead of in a city.

 

[Harthwain]

This sounds like a stupid design choice. Why couldn't they have just kept the Dragon Age Origins system (from which they've ripped off the exact camp style anyhow) where all of those companions remain with you even if you do not bring them along within your party?

Because that way you have to play the game again to "experience" what the characters you didn't pick have to offer in the long run.

 

[d1r]

I would be completely fine with 10 origin and a lot of temporary characters, tbh. I imagine that once you're in Baldur's Gate, characters like Jaheira, Xan, or Minsc will be temporary for a certain act.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

This sounds like a stupid design choice. Why couldn't they have just kept the Dragon Age Origins system (from which they've ripped off the exact camp style anyhow) where all of those companions remain with you even if you do not bring them along within your party?

Because that way you have to play the game again to "experience" what the characters you didn't pick have to offer in the long run.

Tyranny style branching all over again. Not a good thing in my view.

 

[a cut of domestic sheep prime]

Remember being able to take all the companions with you in BG2?

Me neither.

 

[a cut of domestic sheep prime]

I would be completely fine with 10 origin and a lot of temporary characters, tbh. I imagine that once you're in Baldur's Gate, characters like Jaheira, Xan, or Minsc will be temporary for a certain act.

I bet more will come with expansions or dlc.

Larian is doing a lot, considering that everything is voice acted, but there are still limitations. It’s not like the old days where a new companion means more writing. Everything is lip synced, animated, voice acted, scripted.

 

[Thonius]

Game is going to be released in TWO years, 1.5 minimum. Just a reminder.

 

[Lacrymas]

Tyranny style branching all over again. Not a good thing in my view.

Tranny's branching is its best part (unfortunately).

 

[d1r]

I would be completely fine with 10 origin and a lot of temporary characters, tbh. I imagine that once you're in Baldur's Gate, characters like Jaheira, Xan, or Minsc will be temporary for a certain act.

I bet more will come with expansions or dlc.

Larian is doing a lot, considering that everything is voice acted, but there are still limitations.

I think that 10+ origin characters with extensive voice acting, quests, interactions, and so on might even be a little bit too much for Larian themselves. I just can't see it happening, even if I really want to.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

Tyranny style branching all over again. Not a good thing in my view.

Tranny's branching is its best part (unfortunately).

Too constricting, particularly since it's tied to factions. I think that I had two full runs of the game and in both I've picked the Disfavored route because the Scarlet Chorus are too edgy, the Anarchist path seems too barebones beyond one's interactions with Bleden Mark and the Rebel path - while cool in theory - is made completely unappealing by the shit factions with which you are forced to collaborate. But eh, I'm probably in the minority here.

 

[Ol' Willy]

Maybe swen should try and throw a normal person and see how far it will fly.

When I toss you over, if you can fly, I won't shoot you down. Deal?

 

[AwesomeButton]

Randomized placement of companions would mean a lot of extra work as every character would have to cover everything, since the start to the end of the game.

I was thinking just the introduction dialogues, not from start to the end of the game.

 

[Joseph Stalin]

My guess is that some members of Minsc's adventuring party will be the Good companions, not just the ranger himself. There's a halfling thief, a priestess of Kelemvor, a wild mage, and the aforementioned son of Coran.

 

[Serious_Business]

People keep whining about the npcs being assholes, this actually make me want to play this. I enjoy antagonistic little bastards, after all I am one myself

 

[Heroic Liberator]

Since Swen has confirmed that the EA intentionally contains the neutral and evil companions, I wonder if the final game will have different companions in the place of some of those it has now. If swapping them is possible I wonder if it may even be possible that they be randomized.

Nah, I don't think so. I don't understand how they're going to cram a few more characters into the opening of the game. Then don't you have to decide on your final party by the end of act 1? Not sure how this is going to play out.

I don't mean cram more, I mean swap meeting Shadowheart or the mage guy for someone else. Their introductory dialogue could easily be redone, and some other character could easily get his own introductory dialogue which will work for meeting them in the same circumstances in which you now meet these two NPCs.

First full playthrough, I'll probably go with the vampire, the wizard and either the Githyanki or the warlock.

 

[Lawntoilet]

Finished Early Access and felt compelled to make an account to vent about the advantage/disadvantage system.

I rolled a rogue intended to dual wield, but found ranged combat stronger with how powerful sneaking is. Ranged sneak attacks do not seem to follow any consistent logic. Some of these issues might be bugs, but some might actually be design goals. I'm not 5e guru, so if anyone can tear my ass a new one correcting me, I'd appreciate it. Here's some examples of why I think the current implementation of advantage/disadvantage is sucky:

Rogue has high ground and sneak attacks with his shortbow towards an enemy facing the rogue. Sneak attack is successful.

Rogue has high ground and sneak attacks with his shortbow towards an proned enemy. Sneak attack is unsuccessful.

Rogue has high ground and sneak attacks with his shortbow towards an enemy in dim light (read: not obscured). Sneak attack is unsuccessful. One more caveat, it appears that if the Rogue is in dim light, he will also shoot enemies at a disadvantage independent of their lighting. I believe this to be a bug however.

Rogue has even ground and sneak attacks with his shortbow towards an enemy that cannot see the rogue, and the rogue is sneaking. Sneak attack is successful.

Rogue has even ground and sneak attacks with his shortbow towards an enemy that cannot see the rogue, but the rogue is not sneaking. Sneak attack is unsuccessful.​

Also, the UI element for advantage/disadvantage is obscure; it's telegraphed by a small green arrow in the bottom left of your screen area instead of a hover near the % to hit. Also, I dislike not seeing both my rolls for advantage/disadvantage in the combat log. If somebody knows how to see my 2 rolls, please share.

And sometimes when my sneak attack doesn't work no matter if I have advantage or not. I just don't get it... Is this really how 5e plays?

If you have advantage and disadvantage they cancel out (like in your second example, ranged attacks have disadvantage vs prone enemies).
This is the case regardless of how many sources of advantage and disadvantage you have. If you're sneaking, invisible, on high ground, unseen, and attacking a blind, paralyzed, prone enemy with a ranged attack, you won't have either advantage or disadvantage. You would have advantage on a melee attack though since you'd have no source of disadvantage.

 

[NJClaw]

Since Swen has confirmed that the EA intentionally contains the neutral and evil companions, I wonder if the final game will have different companions in the place of some of those it has now. If swapping them is possible I wonder if it may even be possible that they be randomized.

Nah, I don't think so. I don't understand how they're going to cram a few more characters into the opening of the game. Then don't you have to decide on your final party by the end of act 1? Not sure how this is going to play out.

I don't mean cram more, I mean swap meeting Shadowheart or the mage guy for someone else. Their introductory dialogue could easily be redone, and some other character could easily get his own introductory dialogue which will work for meeting them in the same circumstances in which you now meet these two NPCs.

First full playthrough, I'll probably go with the vampire, the wizard and either the Githyanki or the warlock.

Ehm... excuse me, what the fuck?

 

[Elex]

You can throw healing potions at allies to heal them btw

You can do it to enemies too, throw haste potion and wait until they get the debuff.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

Since Swen has confirmed that the EA intentionally contains the neutral and evil companions, I wonder if the final game will have different companions in the place of some of those it has now. If swapping them is possible I wonder if it may even be possible that they be randomized.

Nah, I don't think so. I don't understand how they're going to cram a few more characters into the opening of the game. Then don't you have to decide on your final party by the end of act 1? Not sure how this is going to play out.

I don't mean cram more, I mean swap meeting Shadowheart or the mage guy for someone else. Their introductory dialogue could easily be redone, and some other character could easily get his own introductory dialogue which will work for meeting them in the same circumstances in which you now meet these two NPCs.

First full playthrough, I'll probably go with the vampire, the wizard and either the Githyanki or the warlock.

Ehm... excuse me, what the fuck?

I ain't taking no Shar priestess with me. The Dead Three or bust as far as evil gods are concerned (and Laduguer for the Duergar).

 

[a cut of domestic sheep prime]

People keep whining about the npcs being assholes, this actually make me want to play this. I enjoy antagonistic little bastards, after all I am one myself

I grew to like them more and more as I played.

Shadowheart is an amazing bitch. She’s basically Viconia if Viconia were even more of a petty cunt. She lies and deflects about everything. It’s like they took some stuck up, mean girls high school slut and made her a cleric.

Lae’zel (the gith) is another spectacular cunt bag, but will be openly aggressive in spite of her clear intellect. When she’s not threatening to kill you, she’s being rude to everyone you meet.

Astarion is basically Milo Yiannopoulos if Milo were a vampire elf. There’s something fitting about taking the two most special snowflake tropes of fantasy (vampires and elves) and combining them into one evil faggot.

Frankly, these guys are all fantastic assholes and Larian did a great job with them.