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

[Infinitron]

 

[Ontopoly]

You actually have no idea how it'll link with the original series because they haven't finished the game yet.

At the very most I know it will link to the original series as much as any other fanfic links to its root series. I would put this a place above harry potter erotica fanfics though.

As to your actual question... it's hard to tell if you're trolling or autistic to be honest. Can you not be "neutral" towards a game and buy it now?

You can't stay neutral on a moving train but either way, supporting decline in any form is not being neutral. It's clearly picking a side.

 

[kangaxx]

You actually have no idea how it'll link with the original series because they haven't finished the game yet.

At the very most I know it will link to the original series as much as any other fanfic links to its root series. I would put this a place above harry potter erotica fanfics though.

As to your actual question... it's hard to tell if you're trolling or autistic to be honest. Can you not be "neutral" towards a game and buy it now?

You can't stay neutral on a moving train but either way, supporting decline in any form is not being neutral. It's clearly picking a side.

Ok well, I respect your opinion but disagree. The 40 quid or whatever I paid for it was worth it to me in order to satisfy my curiosity. It's not like I'm wetting myself with excitement over the game though.

 

[Sweeper]

None of those are required to understand to finish BG or BG2.
You don't even need to understand THAC0 and AC, and the good spells are obvious because the others are either useless or non-functional.
There is nothing mathematically challenging about the BG games.

This isn't really an argument. You don't have to understand the ruleset of any RPG in order to complete it. By randomly clicking on shit you'll eventually get there. It's like saying I don't have to understand the rules of a board game, I can just be a retard and move the pieces around and have fun.
But to say that Baldur's Gate is as simple as D:OS is lunacy. Just by the fact that it utilizes D&D 2E it makes it more complex (to understand) than anything Larian has ever made.
As for BG3, I've not played it, I've not looked into it, nor will I. But I assume there is ample simplification of the already simplified 5E.
Am I wrong?

 

[Varnaan]

This isn't really an argument. You don't have to understand the ruleset of any RPG in order to complete it. By randomly clicking on shit you'll eventually get there. It's like saying I don't have to understand the rules of a board game, I can just be a retard and move the pieces around and have fun.
But to say that Baldur's Gate is as simple as D:OS is lunacy. Just by the fact that it utilizes D&D 2E it makes it more complex (to understand) than anything Larian has ever made.
As for BG3, I've not played it, I've not looked into it, nor will I. But I assume there is ample simplification of the already simplified 5E.
Am I wrong?

OS2 is legitimately more complex than either BG games because it's not D&D.
It also allows for more personalisation because D&D is legitimately retard proof, especially in games like BG where only combat stats matter and Wisdom saving throws are not even implemented.
BG3 is relatively faithful to 5E in its implementation although it's still D&D at least your stats have an influence on dialogues, interactions and quest resolutions.
I like Baldur's Gate but when you loot at it and BG2 objectively it's not the superior CRPG it's made out to be by nostalgic boomers and zoomers who never played them.
If you compare BG to its direct contemporary Fallout 2 it's even more egregious.

 

[Sweeper]

It also allows for more personalisation because D&D is legitimately retard proof, especially in games like BG where only combat stats matter and Wisdom saving throws are not even implemented.
BG3 is relatively faithful to 5E in its implementation although it's still D&D at least your stats have an influence on dialogues, interactions and quest resolutions.

We obviously aren't on the same page. I don't give two flying fucks about dialogues, interactions and quest resolutions. The only thing that matters in RPGs is combat, the complexity of it and its ruleset and character building related to it. How you deal with NPCs outside of it, isn't and shouldn't be any measure of worth. And on those grounds OS2 is one of the simplest CRPGs in existence, because you can make anything work without much thought and you don't really need to understand it because there isn't really anything to understand. It's so simple that a mere glance at ability descriptions is enough. The extent of min maxing and theorycrafting in OS2 comes down to whether you want to make your entire party physical or magical.
That's a good thing for some people, but not for me.

 

[Varnaan]

The only thing that matters in RPGs is combat

Wut so BG is now a combatfag series ?
Did I miss the memo ?

 

[Sweeper]

Wut so BG is now a combatfag series ?
Did I miss the memo ?

Every RPG is a combatfag RPG for me bro. If I can't get into the combat I regard it as shit.
Hence my hatred of all things Larian.

 

[Harthwain]

Wut so BG is now a combatfag series ?

It would be inaccurate to say that combat wasn't the main course of the game. I mean, what can you accomplish without engaging in a fight in any Infinity Engine game besides Planescape: Torment?

 

[Varnaan]

It would be inaccurate to say that combat wasn't the main course of the game. I mean, what can you accomplish without engaging in a fight in any Infinity Engine game besides Planescape: Torment?

To me the high point of BG is the story and atmosphere, I think the first game masterfully translated a low level D&D adventure, the combat is just serviceable, not good not bad.
Past a certain point you can automate most of it with scripts and by the mid point of BG2 you're pretty much a walking breathing nuclear bomb anyway.

 

[Harthwain]

To me the high point of BG is the story and atmosphere, I think the first game masterfully translated a low level D&D adventure, the combat is just serviceable, not good not bad. Past a certain point you can automate most of it with scripts and by the mid point of BG2 you're pretty much a walking breathing nuclear bomb anyway.

I don't disagree. Still, the point remains - if you take the combat out, there isn't much left you can do with the game, because in most cases your only way forward is through combat. In Planescape: Torment combat is also present, but you have more options to navigate, so the combat aspect does not dominate the gameplay.

 

[Tuco Benedicto Pacifico]

I have mixed feelings about the combat in BG2.

On one hand I enjoyed going through it a lot and it was by far a predominant part of my enjoyment with the game compared to the story (which I never found anything to write home about). The variety of set ups, encounters and how easy and intuitive it was to control everything were all things that made it entertaining for me.

On the other hand, being RTWP always felt like a compromise to me, rather than an ideal solution, and going back to it now it bothers me more than I should care to admit that the game is locked at 30 fps and with CHOPPY 3-frames animations on top of that.

 

[underground nymph]

120 hours is a lot.

Alt-tabing gives you any needed hours.
Just saying.

 

[underground nymph]

Oh c’mon combat in BG was fun. Remember those two assassins in Candlekeep. Gold.

 

[Ontopoly]

Oh c’mon combat in BG was fun. Remember those two assassins in Candlekeep. Gold.

Good enough to inspire a spin off specifically built around combat.

 

[Tuco Benedicto Pacifico]

Oh c’mon combat in BG was fun. Remember those two assassins in Candlekeep. Gold.

My fondest memories about Baldur's Gate combat were those occasional fights against entire parties of "evil adventurers" and similar stuff.

 

[Spectacle]

Oh c’mon combat in BG was fun. Remember those two assassins in Candlekeep. Gold.

My fondest memories about Baldur's Gate combat were those occasional fights against entire parties of "evil adventurers" and similar stuff.

The ones that love fireballing their own party as long as they hit your party at the same time. Definitely evil!

 

[underground nymph]

Oh c’mon combat in BG was fun. Remember those two assassins in Candlekeep. Gold.

My fondest memories about Baldur's Gate combat were those occasional fights against entire parties of "evil adventurers" and similar stuff.

Yeah, my favorite one was with that guy who’s the fastest darts thrower in the sword coast.

 

[Thac0]

Btw how about ranking the 6 current classes by power, with the current rule implementations as Larian has them?
It could help Lilura 's agenda of making her blog the biggest in the world.

I would say:
1. Warlock. Lilura is right on this one, unconditional 1d10+3 at range at will with high AC due to mage armor and easy ranged advantage access is unbeatable. Also current implementation of familiars is insanely strong, making Pact of the Chain slightly OP.
2. Ranger. I actually think that due to the way BG3 handles summoned creatures Ranger is much stronger than in paper play. Free familiar at lvl 1 for harassment and 1d8+3+1d6 at +2 accuracy from Archery as insane as usual.
3. Cleric. 5e does not enforce the bonus action + action spell forbidden rule, so Healing Word + Guiding Bolt is fair game for a massive powerturn. Also the game has nothing against playing roly poly with 0 hp heroes.
4. Rogue. Advantage from height is incredibly easy to gain, making 100% uptime on sneak attack very free. Due to the way jump works uncanny movement is heavily nerfed however. Fast hands for 2 bonus actions is very good with how many uses those have in BG3.
5. Wizard. The weaker buddy of Warlock in this game. Has 1d10 at range and Mage armor AC aswell, and a good array of early game spells like sleep.
6. Fighter. Absolute Heresy but I think a fighter has the weakest early game in this BG game. Their double turn feature is obviously still amazing, but their implementation of battle master maneuvers is MUCH weaker than in paper. Also the game is stingy with giving out halfway good armor, which hurts all martials but fighters the most. Also melee is pretty cucked in general due to how easy you get advantage with ranged attacks. Archer Fighters are much better, about as good as clerics probably.

Strongest companion is Wyll due to being a Warlock with adequate stats. +3 in Cha and +1 in dex +2 in con is ok.
2. Gale, perfectly built Wizard +3 in main stat +2 in dex and con
3. Shadowheart, new Shadowheart is still a rather mediocre cleric, but no longer awfull +3 in main stat but only +2 in dex which is basically a second mainstat for dex clerics since their standard auto attack is bow or rapier. +1 in con.
4. Astarion, ok thief
5. Lae'zel ok melee fighter

Any changes on new patch? Played that very little.

 

[vota DC]

The guys of Age of wonders live in Atlantis/Damland/Netherlands. Larian Is belgian so no flood for them.

 

[Sharpedge]

Btw how about ranking the 6 current classes by power, with the current rule implementations as Larian has them?
It could help Lilura 's agenda of making her blog the biggest in the world.

I would say:
1. Warlock. Lilura is right on this one, unconditional 1d10+3 at range at will with high AC due to mage armor and easy ranged advantage access is unbeatable. Also current implementation of familiars is insanely strong, making Pact of the Chain slightly OP.
2. Ranger. I actually think that due to the way BG3 handles summoned creatures Ranger is much stronger than in paper play. Free familiar at lvl 1 for harassment and 1d8+3+1d6 at +2 accuracy from Archery as insane as usual.
3. Cleric. 5e does not enforce the bonus action + action spell forbidden rule, so Healing Word + Guiding Bolt is fair game for a massive powerturn. Also the game has nothing against playing roly poly with 0 hp heroes.
4. Rogue. Advantage from height is incredibly easy to gain, making 100% uptime on sneak attack very free. Due to the way jump works uncanny movement is heavily nerfed however. Fast hands for 2 bonus actions is very good with how many uses those have in BG3.
5. Wizard. The weaker buddy of Warlock in this game. Has 1d10 at range and Mage armor AC aswell, and a good array of early game spells like sleep.
6. Fighter. Absolute Heresy but I think a fighter has the weakest early game in this BG game. Their double turn feature is obviously still amazing, but their implementation of battle master maneuvers is MUCH weaker than in paper. Also the game is stingy with giving out halfway good armor, which hurts all martials but fighters the most. Also melee is pretty cucked in general due to how easy you get advantage with ranged attacks. Archer Fighters are much better, about as good as clerics probably.

Strongest companion is Wyll due to being a Warlock with adequate stats. +3 in Cha and +1 in dex +2 in con is ok.
2. Gale, perfectly built Wizard +3 in main stat +2 in dex and con
3. Shadowheart, new Shadowheart is still a rather mediocre cleric, but no longer awfull +3 in main stat but only +2 in dex which is basically a second mainstat for dex clerics since their standard auto attack is bow or rapier. +1 in con.
4. Astarion, ok thief
5. Lae'zel ok melee fighter

Any changes on new patch? Played that very little.

I'd rank them depending on how much you are willing to abuse certain aspects of the current EA. Different classes behave differently depending a huge deal on mechanics abuse. I'll list the ways different classes can abuse different mechanics currently in the EA, these aren't ranked in any particular way, its just an unordered list.

Rest Spamming:
• Wizards benefit a lot from this. In particular wizards with Magic Missile spam if they have the amulet that adds 1d3+1 psychic damage/missile.
• Light Clerics benefit a lot from this. Aside from Guiding Bolt, they can also use Radiance of the Dawn to deal more AoE damage than any other class.

Dipping:
• Any class that relies on weapons to deal damage gains a big damage bonus from dipping their weapons. Fighters with Action Surge and Rogues with the extra bonus action to hit while duel wielding are the stand out offenders here that benefit the most.

Pets:
• Warlocks have some fairly potent familiars in the Imps and Quasits.
• The ranger Spider pet is an outlier in terms of animal companions. It can use web every turn, which, aside from being an easy way to pin down enemies, is also particularly powerful when used in combination with dipping to create lit surfaces.

Elevation:
• The AI struggles to deal with elevation correctly, positioning your characters in high areas, or using Misty Step and putting yourself out of reach and then attacking them, pretty much breaks the AI. This favors any class which can deal ranged damage, but in particular rangers and warlocks. This is especially true since currently high ground gives advantage on attacks.

Stealth:
• The AI does not know how to handle stealth properly. A player can move behind an enemy, enter stealth and then end their turn and the enemy will act as if that player does not exist. This strongly favors the classes with additional actions or bonus actions like fighter and rogue.

Broken Items:
• The Magic Missiles amulet, the staff which gives a significant improvement to bless, the weapons which heal you when you damage an enemy, the list goes on. There are several items which heavily skew the balance of classes.

If you abuse everything, I would probably rank the classes as follows.

1. Light Domain Cleric
2. Wizard
• Ranger > Warlock
• Rogue > Fighter

I am not sure whether the rogue/fighter pair is stronger or weaker than the ranger/warlock pair, so I left them merely as bullets. I do consider rogue stronger than fighter and ranger stronger than warlock, just not how to compare those 2 pairs against each other. On the one hand, ranger and warlock can do fairly consistent damage and both have very strong pets, on the other hand, the rogue/fighter pair can do significant damage, especially when considering some of the items that exist. When it comes to sheer damage per turn, the rogue/fighter pair are definitely ahead of the ranger/warlock pair. The only question is if they actually get to do that damage, because it usually relies on being in close quarters and actually hitting the enemy.

If you do not abuse any of these, I would pretty much agree with your assessment.

 

[CodexTotalWar]

I don't think I can agree that Warlocks are at the top of power rankings, since they were hit the most hard by Larian's changes and mechanics.


1. Easy, unlimited long resting makes most full casters far more attractive IMO. Full casters can empty their spell books every fight. A Warlock needs to resort to Eldritch Blast after 2 rounds (1 if you're using Hex), while Clerics and Wizards are still unloading level 2 guiding bolts and magic missiles (psychic-empowered in the late game) 3 rounds in.


2. I found melee backstab advantage easier to sustain then high ground advantage - tougher monsters have powerful jump abilities (minotaur, owlbear, etc.) that lets them close in, making sustaining ranged advantage hard without burning a Misty Step. Whereas the bonus action jump basically guarantees you advantage on every melee attack. Obviously, if you're sniping from a point where the AI can't react (i.e. shooting from the roof Goblin throne room), you've basically won already and the advantage only speeds things up.


3. Lack of attunement requirements, Larian mechanics, and a wealth of treasure and magical weapons means warriors have way too many toys in BG3 compared to Warlocks, for the purposes of sustained damage

The 1d10+4 (9.5 avg, 13 with Hex) Eldritch Blast is respectable, but not amazing compared to the toys weapon users get. A +1 longbow will close the gap you gain from the 1d10 die, and is also more accurate. If you factor in +2 from archery style, a bow user is 15% more accurate without advantage, and even more with. Also, every character can dip their weapon (including bows) in poison and fire to gain 2d4 bonus damage every hit. Both can actually be used infinitely due to the necklace that poisons your weapon on heal, and you being able to dip a torch.

For example, there are ridiculous combos like using the +2 Vampiric Flail, the Poison Weapon Necklace, the Self-Bless on heal ring, and torch to have a Warrior who's every hit is 1d6+2d4+8* (16.5 avg), with a bonus extra 3-6 attack bonus thanks to the Weapon Enchantment and Bless, that self-heals on every hit. The vampiric heal sustains the poison and bless for as long as you are hitting (easy with advantage + high enchantment). And because it's a 1 hand weapon, you add a second weapon or something like the Shield of the Absolute for an effective +4 AC. This is before anything else like Hunter's Mark, Colossus Slayer, Superiority Die or Action Surges.

* 8 is from Dueling, STR, and Weap Enchantment

 

[Elex]

Until the game put some limit on long rest, warlock are trash tier.
if the game keep going in the direction of OP magical items fighter will become god tier.

Full casters will be always top half with wizard a little better than the others based on how many scrolls the game put around, sorcerer is the lower tier full spellcaster.

paladin always good.

 

[Spectacle]

If anything, Larian wants you to rest often since a lot of story development happens in the camp. So I don't expect BG3 will ever have any restrictions on spamming long rests, and having a party of full casters unloading all their spells in every fight will be a viable, if boring way to play.

 

[Sharpedge]

If anything, Larian wants you to rest often since a lot of story development happens in the camp. So I don't expect BG3 will ever have any restrictions on spamming long rests, and having a party of full casters unloading all their spells in every fight will be a viable, if boring way to play.

Pretty much this. I did an EA playthrough with no casters and no resting and I lost a huge amount of story progression just by virtue of that.