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

[Varnaan]

4e had bloodied if you were below 50% HP. Stronger enemies could have different abilities if they were bloodied, too, which was sometimes fun in boss fights.

4E had many interesting mechanics, too bad ye old wizard messed up the rest

 

[gunman]

I wonder if the game will have an Ironman mode in final version. On one hand, given D:OS and the other important RPGs out there (Pillars, PK), I guess it should. On the other hand, with the current skill check rolls it will be very unfun...

 

[NJClaw]

It was a variant rule in Unearthed Arcana, and there were actually a few to pick from.

Yeah, I know. There are a lot of variant rules in UA, saying that "3.5 had blooded" because there's a variant rule in that handbook is an impressive leap. It's almost like saying that "armors in 3.5 always gave damage reduction" or "wizards in 3.5 used a spell points system". In fact, it's exactly like saying that.

There are plenty of videos of people getting shot multiple times and still fighting, yet are seconds away from collapsing.

Sure, but is it a wise choice to minimize the importance of those moments? Because if you play the game like that, you have enemies that act like that in every single fight.

I mean, in the end you just have to find an interpretation that makes the game fun. When playing against monsters with 250 HP, thinking that every single hit wounds the target kinda ruins my immersion, so I avoid it.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

It was a variant rule in Unearthed Arcana, and there were actually a few to pick from.

Yeah, I know. There are a lot of variant rules in UA, saying that "3.5 had blooded" because there's a variant rule in that handbook is an impressive leap. It's almost like saying that "armors in 3.5 always gave damage reduction" or "wizards in 3.5 used a spell points system". In fact, it's exactly like saying that.

All rules are optional to me so it's all the same

 

[Roguey]

Each side rolls their initiative, it's not individual. There is no "turn-based" using standard initiative rules as would be understood in modern D&D.

Doesn't negate what I said. Either you win initiative and hit or or you lose and all/most/some of the monsters move out of the way.

The RTwP "cheating AI with a homing fireball" example is entirely within how spells are allowed to be targeted by the rules. Again, IE's fault. A "homing fireball" is not cheating at all RAW, a person was a valid target for a spell. From the PHB:

It would be kind of silly if it didn't cast it at the target you wanted when you stop thinking in terms of strict rules. Why would you cast a spell towards the place where someone was? AD&D was not that gamey or rules heavy.

Unless you want to target a specific area to make the most of the spell rather than a specific person in that area (especially if they've all moved into such a close range that there's no way you can cast it so it will only hit them without hitting you or your party members).

Regardless, going by your reasoning, this is a real-time-with-pause specific issue that doesn't apply to turn-based or phase-based.

 

[JohnSmith24601]

And they wonder why fans of the originals hate this game so much. Nothing feels familiar. Not the story, not the combat, not the companions, not anything.

Nobody likes a "sequel" that shits on its own predecessors.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

And they wonder why fans of the originals hate this game so much. Nothing feels familiar. Not the story, not the combat, not the companions, not anything.

Nobody likes a "sequel" that shits on its own predecessors.

It's hardly a sequel in any sense of the word. Just happens to share the same setting and to be named after an iconic location which you get to visit.

 

[JohnSmith24601]

And they wonder why fans of the originals hate this game so much. Nothing feels familiar. Not the story, not the combat, not the companions, not anything.

Nobody likes a "sequel" that shits on its own predecessors.

It's hardly a sequel in any sense of the word. Just happens to share the same setting and to be named after an iconic location which you get to visit.

Try telling that to the swarms of fanboys on the steam forum and Larian's own forum. They would retardedly insist that it's a great sequel and a great game worthy of the BG name.

 

[onemananadhisdroid]

3. There are unfortunately, a large number of players who "do not like missing" and so by increasing HP and lowering AC, you can simulate a monster with the same effective HP, but with much less missing.

This reminded me of the much quoted PC Gamer article from last year's Summer.

https://www.pcgamer.com/baldurs-gate-3-will-combine-the-best-of-divinity-and-dandd-5th-edition/

"You miss a lot in D&D—if the dice are bad, you miss," he says. "That doesn't work well in a videogame. If I do that, you're going to review it and say it's shit. Our approach has been implementing it as pure as we can, and then just seeing what works and what doesn't. Stuff that doesn't work, we start adapting until it does."

 

[jackofshadows]

You have to remember somehow people are dying against the intellect devourers at the start, on the beach. Even with a cleric who has busted spells. Just look at the complaints on reddit and even on the Larian forums. It's clear, people are bad at the game. Even though the game is 5E.

Yeah, I've read that, the most funny thing imo there is that Gale died like gazillion times. They just 'helping' him round after round and he cannot do shit w/o action and dies again and again and again...

But I was mostly talking about guys here. Like oh, noes, HP bloat! Let's buckle up, gonna wack this boss for an hour straight. What a shitty design.

I mean, like Sharpedge described earlier, with the right approach so called bloat mean nothing. And I don't consider it cheesing. Cheesing is when you're using gimmicks like luring gith guys up on the bridge and then kick them from it, or even well-known burning web under said spider boss.

 

[Varnaan]

Nothing feels familiar. Not the story, not the combat, not the companions, not anything.

We don't know the story yet, we don't know who's gonna appear yet, and the combat is D&D...

 

[JohnSmith24601]

3. There are unfortunately, a large number of players who "do not like missing" and so by increasing HP and lowering AC, you can simulate a monster with the same effective HP, but with much less missing.

This reminded me of the much quoted PC Gamer article from last year's Summer.

https://www.pcgamer.com/baldurs-gate-3-will-combine-the-best-of-divinity-and-dandd-5th-edition/

"You miss a lot in D&D—if the dice are bad, you miss," he says. "That doesn't work well in a videogame. If I do that, you're going to review it and say it's shit. Our approach has been implementing it as pure as we can, and then just seeing what works and what doesn't. Stuff that doesn't work, we start adapting until it does."

I had brian cancer just reading that. It's not even remotely the same because crits exist. When you hit every other time, you increase the crit chance by a shit ton.

 

[JohnSmith24601]

Nothing feels familiar. Not the story, not the combat, not the companions, not anything.

We don't know the story yet, we don't know who's gonna appear yet, and the combat is D&D...

That's bullshit. Never in a million years would it have anything to do with the Bhaalspawn saga and you know it. The combat has NOTHING in common with BG1&2. We're men of the Codex, lies do not become us.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

It's going to be a decent game, just not a proper BG sequel. I can live with that.

 

[Varnaan]

Nothing feels familiar. Not the story, not the combat, not the companions, not anything.

We don't know the story yet, we don't know who's gonna appear yet, and the combat is D&D...

That's bullshit. Never in a million years would it have anything to do with the Bhaalspawn saga and you know it. The combat has NOTHING in common with BG1&2. We're men of the Codex, lies do not become us.

It's almost certain that the story will involve the Dead Three. And I hope Cyric as well.

 

[JohnSmith24601]

It's going to be a decent game, just not a proper BG sequel. I can live with that.

I can honestly respect that. But then there's also this significant portion of the players who wanted an actual sequel. And it looks like we are not going to get it until humanity has colonized Mars.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Each side rolls their initiative, it's not individual. There is no "turn-based" using standard initiative rules as would be understood in modern D&D.

Doesn't negate what I said. Either you win initiative and hit or or you lose and all/most/some of the monsters move out of the way.

The RTwP "cheating AI with a homing fireball" example is entirely within how spells are allowed to be targeted by the rules. Again, IE's fault. A "homing fireball" is not cheating at all RAW, a person was a valid target for a spell. From the PHB:

It would be kind of silly if it didn't cast it at the target you wanted when you stop thinking in terms of strict rules. Why would you cast a spell towards the place where someone was? AD&D was not that gamey or rules heavy.

Unless you want to target a specific area to make the most of the spell rather than a specific person in that area (especially if they've all moved into such a close range that there's no way you can cast it so it will only hit them without hitting you or your party members).

The spell wouldn't be targeted until the mage's turn, there would be no time to move out of range. Individual initiative optional rule(which IE somewhat uses) has you declare your intention, but the target does not have to be declared until it is your turn as shown in the example in the PHB. The Combat & Tactics Player's Option book further expands upon the individual initiative with more examples once again showing that the target is not chosen until the spell is cast, not when it is declared.

"Moving out of range" of a spell is something IE made up itself, it's not part of the rules.


The main issue with casting fireballs indoors in AD&D is that it doesn't have a fixed radius, it has a volume. Again, IE didn't implement it correctly. Odds are that unless you're in a very open indoor space you will end up getting hit by your own fireball. And destroying all your loot.

 

[Poseidon00]

Imagine caring about the story of BG3 after WoTC ruined the lore for the entire realms. Bhaal lives again. The entire Bhaalspawn trilogy was meaningless. That's all you need to know.

 

[JohnSmith24601]

Imagine caring about the story of BG3 after WoTC ruined the lore for the entire realms. Bhaal lives again. The entire Bhaalspawn trilogy was meaningless. That's all you need to know.

Wtf? Yeah, I'm so done.

 

[Shinros]

It's going to be a decent game, just not a proper BG sequel. I can live with that.

It remains to be seen whether the game will connect to the past ones but this is largely my opinion as well. It's a decent game I can enjoy and kill hours with.

 

[rado907]

It's going to be a decent game, just not a proper BG sequel. I can live with that.

I always assumed that would be the case. Don't see how we can have a proper sequel outside of an infinity engine v2. Which Larian don't have. Besides, BG ended. It doesn't need a sequel.

I take BG3 as "Larian does D&D". Which is a fine proposition in itself. Not sure getting the BG trademark is helping them any. For me it's a minor turn-off.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Why would anyone want a sequel to the BG games?
The story is finished, just let it go.

 

[Thonius]

 

[Desiderius]

The solution to people not liking to miss is to teach them how to miss less, not to warp the game to prevent that which makes games worth playing.

 

[BarbequeMasta]

Why would anyone want a sequel to the BG games?
The story is finished, just let it go.

You should say that to swen next time you pass by to give a blow job.