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

[Immortal]

expect about the same game with a bellcurved D20

buncha_shit.jpg

why?

?

using a normal distribution rather than a d20 doesn't change much of anything for a binary pass/fail system.

It's meant to bias rolls towards the median.

If something had a Skillcheck DC of 12.. and you have 4 + D20.. Any Roll below 8 is a fail.
With a number bias you may get less 19's or nat 20's.. but that's fine.
You only need that (12-4)+ to succeed the check, so it's almost always in your favor.

D20's are shit design anyways.
That much RNG without a Human being as your DM - is just begging for save scumming especially when you lock large portions of content behind asinine skill checks.

 

[Poseidon00]

It's meant to bias rolls towards the median.

If something had a Skillcheck DC of 12.. and you have 4 + D20.. Any Roll below 8 is a fail.
With a number bias you may get less 19's or nat 20's.. but that's fine.
You only need that (4-12)+ to succeed the check, so it's almost always in your favor.

D20's are shit design anyways.
That much RNG without a Human being as your DM - is just begging for save scumming especially when you lock large portions of content behind asinine skill checks.

5e is such bad design and the fact that it always punishes you for skill checks is part of that. You can never properly build a character to ensure success in certain skills, you are always at the mercy of the D20. The best you get is a few percentage points in your favor. Characters who focused too much on skills did so at the expense of combat and that was the tradeoff and it worked. BG3 is good game design with a bad system. There should be skill checks locking content, but you should make characters to ensure success in those areas you want rather than having to save scum.

 

[Cryomancer]

You just know that crazy fuck wanted to have Diablo 3 items exploding out of every chest.

Diablo 3 has the shitest itemization ever. Stat stickie itemization + everyone being a clone with hundreds of legendary items. Larian copied the shitest armor mechanic possible(secondary health bar), shitest itemization and shitest spells ever on DOS2. I don't like 5E, but I am pretty sure that 5E mechanics > DOs2 mechanics.

Characters who focused too much on skills did so at the expense of combat and that was the tradeoff and it worked.

Yep. the difference between a lv 1 wizard arcane check to a lv 20 is mere +4 to hit. So the strongest who reached the peak of arcane arts is mere 20% more likely to pass a arcane check than a nobody who casted his first lv 1 spell today. And for Woketards of the C*** if you prefer retroclones/2e/3e is only because you are a power gamer. Skill monkey rogues was very valuable on campaigns with few encounters but a lot of social and environmental things to do.

D20's are shit design anyways.

That depends. But for small numbers, 3d6 from GURPS > d20 from 5E. A -4 penalty on GURPS is much more impactfull than a -4 on 5E. D20 works better when is like 15 BAB + d20 vs AC of 24. Not for smaller numbers.

 

[Storyfag]

D20 works better when is like 15 BAB + d20 vs AC of 24. Not for smaller numbers.

But how is that different to a 5 BAB vs an AC of 14? The real issue with D20 is that a +1 modifier is pitiful. Replace the 5 BAB with 6 (or 15 with 16), and there is barely any difference. A minimal modifier of +2 would be much better to give items and skill levels more impact.

 

[Cryomancer]

D20 works better when is like 15 BAB + d20 vs AC of 24. Not for smaller numbers.

But how is that different to a 5 BAB vs an AC of 14? The real issue with D20 is that a +1 modifier is pitiful. Replace the 5 BAB with 6 (or 15 with 16), and there is barely any difference. A minimal modifier of +2 would be much better to give items and skill levels more impact.

If each lv up gives +1 to hit, d20 can work. But for a game where from lv 1 to 20, the difference is minuscule, something like 3d6 would be better.

 

[Cyberarmy]

Why can't I just start in a tavern? I like taverns.

That's why I liked very much Solasta's begining.

 

[Swen]

Guys I have a new idea for a character for Larian's Successor to Le epic DOS2: Balder gate 3

It's like this:
Imagine, a big ol stack of BACON:

BUT you can TALK to it if u get the "talk to le epic bacon" trait in character creation!
And the bacon says:
"I AM LE EPIC BACON!!!!! FOR THE WIN!!!!" and does a cool funny BACON dance

and you get a steam gamer achievement that's like "LE EPIC BACON!!!!!!!"
Then u can make a reddit post like "LARIANS BALD GATE 3 IS THE BEST GAME EPIC EVER I FOUND LE EPIC BACON FOR THE WIN!!!!!! POGGERS POGGERS POGGERSS!!!!" and everyone's like:

Why are you posting pictures of JRPG fans?

 

[fantadomat]

Guys I have a new idea for a character for Larian's Successor to Le epic DOS2: Balder gate 3

It's like this:
Imagine, a big ol stack of BACON:

BUT you can TALK to it if u get the "talk to le epic bacon" trait in character creation!
And the bacon says:
"I AM LE EPIC BACON!!!!! FOR THE WIN!!!!" and does a cool funny BACON dance

and you get a steam gamer achievement that's like "LE EPIC BACON!!!!!!!"
Then u can make a reddit post like "LARIANS BALD GATE 3 IS THE BEST GAME EPIC EVER I FOUND LE EPIC BACON FOR THE WIN!!!!!! POGGERS POGGERS POGGERSS!!!!" and everyone's like:

Why are you posting pictures of JRPG fans?

Why are you so derogatory toward your fan base ? Jrpg and lariantards are the same people,racism and bigotry are bad!

 

[Mr. Magniloquent]

D20 works better when is like 15 BAB + d20 vs AC of 24. Not for smaller numbers.

But how is that different to a 5 BAB vs an AC of 14? The real issue with D20 is that a +1 modifier is pitiful. Replace the 5 BAB with 6 (or 15 with 16), and there is barely any difference. A minimal modifier of +2 would be much better to give items and skill levels more impact.

If each lv up gives +1 to hit, d20 can work. But for a game where from lv 1 to 20, the difference is minuscule, something like 3d6 would be better.

You're both off mark. Rolling a single die then adding integer is how you get bloat and poor scaling at each extreme of the die range.

You need dice pools. Roll NdX, take highest. You don't get range bloat, can simulate reliability and potency, and have many ways to manipulate the outcome. Furthermore, while a master can still trip on their shoelaces, it's very unlikely outside of some adverse situations.

 

[Tuco Benedicto Pacifico]

Honestly when it comes to "picking your dices" as a default I have no idea how the MERP's D100 didn't become the standard in most pen & paper RPGs.
Reasoning in "percentages" rather than fractions of 20 is far more intuitive, way more granular and just equally quick to use/apply to a set of rules.

 

[NJClaw]

Honestly when it comes to "picking your dices" as a default I have no idea how the MERP's D100 didn't become the standard in most pen & paper RPGs.
Reasoning in "percentages" rather than fractions of 20 is far more intuitive, way more granular and just equally quick to use/apply to a set of rules.

The explanation is simple: the d100 didn't become the standard because the general public doesn't care about that level of granularity.

Most people are fine with D&D, a system that could never abandon the d20 since it's an important part of what makes it iconic. Of the few people who want to try something different, 90% usually look for simpler narrative-focused games, whose standard system is the usual roll X dices and get at least Y successes. Therefore, systems more complex than D&D (that could benefit from a d100) are too niche to become relevant.

Having "NATURAL 20: CRITICAL HIT!" in your game sells more than the autistic precision of a d100-based skill system.

 

[Maxwell's Demon]

...why?

The point of using a a Gaußian, 3d6, or whatever is to change the variance.

 

[Lacrymas]

Whether you have a d100 or d20 doesn't fix the problem of the RNG being too swingy. PoE uses d100 and fell into the same traps D&D did.

 

[d1r]

except occasionally remark on your tactics

View attachment 19790

I wish I could Goldfist you for this picture.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

...why?

The point of using a a Gaußian, 3d6, or whatever is to change the variance.

All it does is shift the chance to succeed to the lower end and hurts you if you're trying to actually hit higher rolls. It's not a quick fix for a binary pass/fail system as people seem to think it is.
If you need to hit a 10 and have 3d6 and 1d20, the odds aren't that significantly different(62.5% for the 3d6, 55% for the 1d20.) The d20 is favored over the 3d6 for everything above 11.

https://anydice.com/program/508


If the intent is to fudge the dice in the players favor, then you just want to add a flat +N.

Whether you have a d100 or d20 doesn't fix the problem of the RNG being too swingy. PoE uses d100 and fell into the same traps D&D did.

It's not about fixing being "too swingy", it's about being more logical.

 

[Maxwell's Demon]

3d6 also makes a natural 3s and 18s significantly less probable than natural 1s and 20s (1/216 vs 1/20).

 

[Desiderius]

There’s a decent amount of replayability design space in a game that plays more like poker with bad beats and lucky runouts.

You’d have to invest in unique content on both ends with some savescum prevention since people have been so conditioned to that. Would have more of a coin-op feel since back then you couldn’t afford (literally) to savescum.

 

[Lacrymas]

It's not about fixing being "too swingy", it's about being more logical.

What? The problem is the binary nature of success and failure, and how you are at the mercy of the dice, especially in 5E. The point of creating the bell curve is to standardize the rolls and balance the DCs and ACs around the averages.

 

[Immortal]

Whether you have a d100 or d20 doesn't fix the problem of the RNG being too swingy. PoE uses d100 and fell into the same traps D&D did.

Are you conflating combat with skill checks?

Josh Sawyers argument would be that grazes mitigate the RNG problem in combat, they have no RNG in skillchecks / dialogue (AFAIK).
Neither did Fallout New Vegas.

For the PoE board game I believe he's using 2D10 over 1D20.

If the intent is to fudge the dice in the players favor, then you just want to add a flat +N.

The argument AFAIK isn't "Players should win more!", It's - with skill investment players should get fucked less.
The flat +N is added by the player skill investment.

If Median Value (Most likely roll) + Skill investment = success, then more die or a bell curve bias favors a player's success at the cost of less higher rolls that would be an auto success with or without a skill investment. Which I think feels more fair to a player.

You can also stop clogging the thread up with charts btw - this isn't rocket science, I assume everyone here finished High school.

There’s a decent amount of replayability design space in a game that plays more like poker with bad beats and lucky runouts.

You’d have to invest in unique content on both ends with some savescum prevention since people have been so conditioned to that. Would have more of a coin-op feel since back then you couldn’t afford (literally) to savescum.

In a DMed game with friends - losses can produce just as fun results as success.
In a game with a release deadline and a budget - it's just content gating where success means interesting story / opening up new avenues or advantages to the player and loss means "get fucked" or "combat"

I'm willing to accept a loss if it plays into how I built my character, you take the good with the bad. But if it's the fact that I made my character specifically to be an expert at one thing and they still lose all the time because "muh equal distribution" well that's pretty deflating.

 

[Lacrymas]

It doesn't matter whether it's for combat or for skill checks. It's always when a die is being used to determine the result.

 

[Immortal]

It doesn't matter whether it's for combat or for skill checks. It's always when a die is being used to determine the result.

In combat bad or good rolls can wash out over time and you can mitigate / react to the bad ones and maximize the good ones.
A single skill check at a crossroads can completely make or break your experience with no way of recovery.

Many games opt to not use RNG in skill checks for that reason.. but still use them in combat. Did you even read that post?

 

[Tuco Benedicto Pacifico]

Whether you have a d100 or d20 doesn't fix the problem of the RNG being too swingy. PoE uses d100 and fell into the same traps D&D did.

Well, that may very well be because they are two entirely separate issues? The issue with "swingy RNG" is mostly tied to how much weight you give to proficiencies and similar shit.
Still, the increased granularity being dismissed as "autistic" here (not even sure why, given that the degree of complexity doesn't change a single bit, the execution is pretty much the same and rolling for "56% chance" is far more intuitive than "facing a 9 DC") would also give a better foundation to apply multiple variations in a more intuitive manner.

 

[Butter]

People grok small numbers faster than large numbers. Low granularity also means that every +1 modifier matters, and you're never dealing with worthless +5% damage perks.

 

[Storyfag]

People grok small numbers faster than large numbers. Low granularity also means that every +1 modifier matters, and you're never dealing with worthless +5% damage perks.

That would require granularity lower than DnD, ie: a D10 instead of a D20.

 

[underground nymph]

Where’s the fecking update?!