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

[Cryomancer]

Baldur's Gate 1 had you fight gibberlings, gnolls, and hobgoblins for half the game and it's still one of the best RPGs ever made.

BG2 is better. Liches, Dragons, Underdark with a lot of powerful enemies(contrary to the """"underdark"""" of BG3, with spiders), BG2 >>>> BG1.

And same with other D&D games. NWN2 MoTB > NWN2 (which starts at lv 3 after the tutorial). NWN1 Hotu > NWN1 OC. Dark Sun : Wake of The Ravager > Dark Sun : Shattered Sands.

From your previous post it is clear, that you personally like high-level gameplay more than low-level. But I have the impression that most players don't.

Depends. On D&D 5e, I believe that most players prefer lv 4~8 range. However, on D&D 2e, Paladins only get their most basic spells at lv 9. I an playing a high fantasy game? I wanna be a wizard controlling my floating Netherese city, I wanna have an epic adventure escaping the pits of Carceri, try to deal with a powerful Dark Lord of the realms of dread, explore the limbo, deal with Efreets in the city of embers, not fight kobolds and low level bandits.

PK starts falling apart mid- to high levels, because this is where spellcasters get the powerful aoes and the enemy ai doesn't know how to move out of aoes. The few high level spellcaster battles exemplify further that the ai also doesn't handle spellcasting well. So no, as much as I like PK, the game handles low level battles better. E.g. wererats in the cave in chapter 1.

Picking flashy spells for your wizard is not what makes combat interesting. It's how the enemies use their spells and abilities that matters. And usually what happens is that they get more hit points, stats, spells etc., but are stuck with the same ai as their low level brethen.

Wrong. Arcane triskter focused on ranged touch attacks can rock most mid to high level content. Finger of Death is a non flashy spell and amazing. And the problem with most cheesy options of PF:KM is due the AWFUL AI, not due the level range. Enemies should't walk into your deadly earth zone and should try to avoid cloudkill spells for eg. And compare the 2 Dark Sun games. The Shattered Sands is "I attack" the entire game. The Wake of the Ravager is far more challenging and interesting. And the lv cap is 15.

Low level is just "i attack" with a eventually "I canst one or two magic missiles/sleep/etc and can't do shirt the rest of the day and go back to I attack"

PF:WoTR will allow you to become a freaking Lich and even reach the point where you are godlike to the point that you can grant divine spells to your minions and reanimate bosses to serve you. Or a Azata with a dragon companion. This is much more interesting than fighting spiders in a pseudo underdark.

 

[Efe]

no casters should be stronger than nwn 2 warlock.
it is epitome of a table top class balanced for crpg.

 

[Cryomancer]

no casters should be stronger than nwn 2 warlock.
it is epitome of a table top class balanced for crpg.

Please. Say that you are joking.

Do you know how the warlock main character plays on nwn2? On the ground "dying" while you play your party members. The eldritch blast DC is bugged and deals half of the damage that a fighter can do, all iconic invokations got removed, no teleport, no flight, tentacles with a fix +5 to hit instead of caster levle + 8 to hit, the dead walk creates a single low CR undead that is worthless, in nutshell, the class is a TORMENT to play. Warlock reworked is a must have mod for anyone wanting to play NWN2 as a warlock. It makes the class exponentially better. https://neverwintervault.org/project/nwn2/other/warlock-reworked-102g

I saw people who played warlock on nwn2 saying that BG3 warlock is overpowered and people who played P&P warlock saying that 5e/BG3 warlock is nerfed.

 

[underground nymph]

BG2 >>>> BG1

And thus you know you’ve nothing to discuss with such a person nor listen to any of his arguments, he and his opinions are dead for you now. Of only you had the power to restrict this person from accessing the internet and smearing his blasphemy all over the digital scape. Though you’ve none. Thus you’re updating your txt and go on.

 

[Storyfag]

The Wilderness being too big (along with the crickets) is an essential part of the atmosphere/charm.

No. The empty wilderness is the core of the game's charm. Themeparks are cancer.

Not going to address the other two points?

No. Because I'm not arguing BG1 is a flawless masterpiece. I'm arguing that your point about the wilderness was not very well thought through.

 

[Storyfag]

Baldur's Gate 1 had you fight gibberlings, gnolls, and hobgoblins for half the game and it's still one of the best RPGs ever made.

BG2 is better.

No. It lacks the space for you to roam freely.

 

[Nano]

No. It lacks the space for you to roam freely.

You're a Morrowind fan, aren't you?

 

[Efe]

such low quality bait and he still took it.
come on victor, you can do better.

 

[Storyfag]

No. It lacks the space for you to roam freely.

You're a Morrowind fan, aren't you?

Not really, no.

 

[Larianshill]

It seems the default character will have more voices than 4.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Amelia Tyler's voice(narrator)

 

[hell bovine]

Wrong. Arcane triskter focused on ranged touch attacks can rock most mid to high level content. Finger of Death is a non flashy spell and amazing. And the problem with most cheesy options of PF:KM is due the AWFUL AI, not due the level range. Enemies should't walk into your deadly earth zone and should try to avoid cloudkill spells for eg. And compare the 2 Dark Sun games. The Shattered Sands is "I attack" the entire game. The Wake of the Ravager is far more challenging and interesting. And the lv cap is 15.

Low level is just "i attack" with a eventually "I canst one or two magic missiles/sleep/etc and can't do shirt the rest of the day and go back to I attack"

PF:WoTR will allow you to become a freaking Lich and even reach the point where you are godlike to the point that you can grant divine spells to your minions and reanimate bosses to serve you. Or a Azata with a dragon companion. This is much more interesting than fighting spiders in a pseudo underdark.

I already stated that the problem is due to the ai being more competent at low level ranges. The point that you don't get is: this is what makes combat interesting, namely enemies that can actually handle the abilities & spells they have.

What do I care about your arcane trickster spamming touch attacks, or whether your "freaking lich" can reanimate bosses? What matters is what the enemy spellcasters can do.
Unmodded BG2 & ToB are a classic example of this. The teleporting spiders in BG3 put up more of a fight than liches in BG2.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Original Sin games on tactician difficulty have some of the best enemy AI in any turn-based cRPG, especially with regards to enemy units working together. So it's not surprising that BG3 on the equivalent difficulty probably will too.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

The most consistent, at least so far? Dragon Age...

Fun fact: the details of the entries in your codex change depending on your background and -- I suspect -- certain choices you make.
Also, the Mass Effect 1/2/3 codex contains blatant falsehoods that are obvious counsel/alliance coverups -- you know because they're things you were involved in.

Could you give examples of both? I'm honestly curious.

dragon age: can't remember off the top of my head
mass effect: in ME2 check the codex entry about the attack on the citadel, it lays the blame on something else(geth? I think?) with zero mention of sovereign/reapers

Mass Effect's codex is underrated. There's even a voiceover for each entry, I liked reading through it.

 

[Miserable Panda]

The difference between LV 1 to 20 in 5e is far smaller than on 3.5e and 2e. But why ALL D&D 5e adaptations insists in ultra low Dungeons & Kobolds gameplay? Not only BG3. Solasta has a lv cap = 10. BG3 IDK.

Meanwhile, PF:WoTR will feature a campaign till lv 20 and mythic paths. And a lv 20 Lich casting wail of the banshee is far more powerful than any 5e spell.

I DM'ed and played some D&D 5E campaigns in the last few years, and my groups hardly manage to go over lvl 15. When I was a DM, I really had a bad time. Post lvl-15, I had to homebrew almost everything, consider over 80 different spell and abilities from the party to keep it interesting, and when the players were not engaged it got boring really fast. I personally enjoy high-level play, but I understand why developers and even some players don't enjoy it or take it into account too much. Too many variables at hand, and you have to consider that some people won't even reach lvl 11 in a normal campaign.

 

[Storyfag]

The difference between LV 1 to 20 in 5e is far smaller than on 3.5e and 2e. But why ALL D&D 5e adaptations insists in ultra low Dungeons & Kobolds gameplay? Not only BG3. Solasta has a lv cap = 10. BG3 IDK.

Meanwhile, PF:WoTR will feature a campaign till lv 20 and mythic paths. And a lv 20 Lich casting wail of the banshee is far more powerful than any 5e spell.

I DM'ed and played some D&D 5E campaigns in the last few years, and my groups hardly manage to go over lvl 15. When I was a DM, I really had a bad time. Post lvl-15, I had to homebrew almost everything, consider over 80 different spell and abilities from the party to keep it interesting, and when the players were not engaged it got boring really fast. I personally enjoy high-level play, but I understand why developers and even some players don't enjoy it or take it into account too much. Too many variables at hand, and you have to consider that some people won't even reach lvl 11 in a normal campaign.

All too true, especially regarding video game developers. I mean... PFK is likely the best implementation of 3.5 to date, and even then it didn't implement stuff like Teleport properly. And that's an easy case which doesn't really require outstanding gameworld reactivity only a GM could provide. But there are other, much more complex spells.

 

[Cryomancer]

Unmodded BG2 & ToB are a classic example of this. The teleporting spiders in BG3 put up more of a fight than liches in BG2.

Because only the enemy can teleport on BG3. Games where cool things are restricted to enemies aren't fun IMHO.

such low quality bait and he still took it.

I saw balancefags saying that PoE wizards are great. Saw balancefags saying that people who play nwn2 with spell fixes mod is no different than "cheating" in a multi player game. And they saying it serious. IS hard to differentiate a balancefag from a parody/bait of a balancefag.

and my groups hardly manage to go over lvl 15. When I was a DM, I really had a bad time. Post lvl-15, I had to homebrew almost everything, consider over 80 different spell and abilities from the party to keep it interesting, and when the players were not engaged it got boring really fast. I personally enjoy high-level play, but I understand why developers and even some players don't enjoy it or take it into account too much. Too many variables at hand, and you have to consider that some people won't even reach lvl 11 in a normal campaign.

D&D 5e is not meant to be played past lv 14. The way that damages and hp scales makes high level content too tedious.

Is hard to create a interesting challenge for a lv 17 character on 5e. On 2e, is easy. Since the hp gain is extremely smaller than the damage gain, mainly past lv 10. Most mage spells gain +d6 each lv on 2e while most mages only gain +1 hp per level past lv 10. On 5e, mages gain d6 + CON MOD per level and zero increased spell damage(only new spells)

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Because only the enemy can teleport on BG3.

This is false, there's a teleport at the second level of the arcane spell list(Misty Step)

 

[Sharpedge]

Unmodded BG2 & ToB are a classic example of this. The teleporting spiders in BG3 put up more of a fight than liches in BG2.

Because only the enemy can teleport on BG3. Games where cool things are restricted to enemies aren't fun IMHO.

such low quality bait and he still took it.

I saw balancefags saying that PoE wizards are great. Saw balancefags saying that people who play nwn2 with spell fixes mod is no different than "cheating" in a multi player game. And they saying it serious. IS hard to differentiate a balancefag from a parody/bait of a balancefag.

and my groups hardly manage to go over lvl 15. When I was a DM, I really had a bad time. Post lvl-15, I had to homebrew almost everything, consider over 80 different spell and abilities from the party to keep it interesting, and when the players were not engaged it got boring really fast. I personally enjoy high-level play, but I understand why developers and even some players don't enjoy it or take it into account too much. Too many variables at hand, and you have to consider that some people won't even reach lvl 11 in a normal campaign.

D&D 5e is not meant to be played past lv 14. The way that damages and hp scales makes high level content too tedious.

Is hard to create a interesting challenge for a lv 17 character on 5e. On 2e, is easy. Since the hp gain is extremely smaller than the damage gain, mainly past lv 10. Most mage spells gain +d6 each lv on 2e while most mages only gain +1 hp per level past lv 10. On 5e, mages gain d6 + CON MOD per level and zero increased spell damage(only new spells)

Every time I read one of your posts I feel like I am reading a backer NPC from Pillars of Eternity. Only I think the backer NPCs probably add more of value than you do.

 

[hell bovine]

Because only the enemy can teleport on BG3. Games where cool things are restricted to enemies aren't fun IMHO.

You can misty step in BG3. And anyway BG2 is full of enemies (including teleporting spiders) that have abilities your character doesn't. But that is not the reason.

The spiders in BG3 are better at what they do than liches in BG2, because they have a very limited set of abilities (teleporting, attack, poison spit for the big one). So they actually can manage these abilities in the fight. Combined with the area design, this makes for a fun battle: the spiders can teleport around, but you can burn their webs from under them.

Liches in unmodded BG2 have plenty of potential arcane spells to choose from. Except they actually don't use most of them, because the devs gave them scripts that (and if my memory serves correctly they are forced) have them cast the same batch of spells, occassionally frying themselves with their own fire.

 

[Cryomancer]

Every time I read one of your posts I feel like I am reading a backer NPC from Pillars of Eternity. Only I think the backer NPCs probably add more of value than you do.

Why? Pillars greatest problem is the high amount of balancefaggotry in the game.

Except they actually don't use most of them, because the devs gave them scripts that (and if my memory serves correctly they are forced) have them cast the same batch of spells, occassionally frying themselves with their own fire.

Is a AI problem, not the fact that liches are high level enemies problem.

My point is simple. I wanna use powerful spells on high fantasy games just like I wanna use powerful warplanes in a game like war thunder.

 

[Gargaune]

And same with other D&D games. NWN2 MoTB > NWN2 (which starts at lv 3 after the tutorial). NWN1 Hotu > NWN1 OC.

That's overly reductive, MotB is absolutely better than the NWN2 OC, but that's primarily on account of artistic direction and narrative design, not level range. As for NWN1, I prefer SoU to HotU, and the low-to-mid level range is part of the reason. Where 3E is concerned, I personally find the 6-12 mid-range to be the sweet spot.

I an playing a high fantasy game? I wanna be a wizard controlling my floating Netherese city, I wanna have an epic adventure escaping the pits of Carceri, try to deal with a powerful Dark Lord of the realms of dread, explore the limbo, deal with Efreets in the city of embers, not fight kobolds and low level bandits.

It might account for the difference of opinion, I'm fond of more subdued adventures, usually. It's not a hard pass, but I prefer exploring ancient ruins and bashing skellies rather than chasing Mephistopheles across the planes. And I expect I will have enjoyed Kingmaker more than Wrath, at least thematically.

 

[mediocrepoet]

Every time I read one of your posts I feel like I am reading a backer NPC from Pillars of Eternity. Only I think the backer NPCs probably add more of value than you do.

Why? Pillars greatest problem is the high amount of balancefaggotry in the game.

Except they actually don't use most of them, because the devs gave them scripts that (and if my memory serves correctly they are forced) have them cast the same batch of spells, occassionally frying themselves with their own fire.

Is a AI problem, not the fact that liches are high level enemies problem.

My point is simple. I wanna use powerful spells on high fantasy games just like I wanna use powerful warplanes in a game like war thunder.

What you never seem to appreciate is that once you reach these high levels where everyone's throwing hyperbeams around and stopping time, many of the reasons to play an RPG get kicked out. There's generally no more progression, your characters have more in common with gods than anything a person can relate to - it's more like a superhero game than the game you started playing in the first place. Have you ever considered just switching to Champions or something? Then you can go ahead and make the munchkin wet dream of your choosing and stop shitting up these threads.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

MotB is good despite being high level, not because of it. It just speaks of the strength of MotB's other parts.
High level D&D is basically just superhero/DBZ-tier stuff. Which is fine if that's what you want, but it's not what I want from my fantasy cRPG.

The spiders in BG3 are better at what they do than liches in BG2, because they have a very limited set of abilities (teleporting, attack, poison spit for the big one). So they actually can manage these abilities in the fight. Combined with the area design, this makes for a fun battle: the spiders can teleport around, but you can burn their webs from under them.

Divinity Engine uses a utility theory based AI for choosing the optimal ability to use. Each action is simply defined by a set of parameters and ranked by some function of its utility in the current context plus other variables(difficulty, unit type/class, personality, ....), it's elegant and simple. It allows them to add abilities to enemies without having to write a single custom script for the enemy AI in most cases.

 

[Sharpedge]

Replying to Victor is probably a mistake, since he is not a learning animal, but I guess I will bite.

Why? Pillars greatest problem is the high amount of balancefaggotry in the game.

Combat in Pillars can be fun, the problem with it has nothing to do with the classes, they are all individually interesting enough, but with the way most of the encounters in the game are designed. There is an overuse of trash fights and very few iconic encounters, so most of the time you feel like a broom sweeping away the dust. Wizards have a fair amount of interesting powers, in particular walls add another dimension to gameplay which isn't really there in D&D simulators (they are similar to clouds, but require more precision to properly use). Are casters as strong as they are in <insert d&d 3.5 or earlier edition> game of choice? No they aren't, but that doesn't mean they aren't powerful.

Here is a wizard in Pillars soloing one of the harder fights. Blood Mage in the 2nd game is arguably the strongest class, just look at the completions of the Ultimate Challenge for illustration of that. Sure, these Wizards are not quite the equivalent of gods (unlike casters in earlier editions of D&D), but they are still strong, have plenty of options and are (arguably, unless you want to roleplay as a god) fun to play.

Balance does not make a game boring, poor encounter design does. Encounters like the Ooze Megaboss show a distinct lack of creativity. You can have interesting boss fights within a balanced system.

My point is simple. I wanna use powerful spells on high fantasy games just like I wanna use powerful warplanes in a game like war thunder.

And there are lots of other people who don't. Fun is subjective. What is fun for you, is not necessarily fun for anyone else and there are plenty of people who prefer low level adventures.