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

[Grunker]

ackknowledges the above user's agenda

 

[ERYFKRAD]

ackknowledges the above user's agenda

You know we got buttons for that right?

 

[Desiderius]

Some of us can handle the truth. Some aren't there yet.

Embrace who you always were, Grunker.

 

[Grunker]

ackknowledges the above user's agenda

You know we got buttons for that right?

But the post was also funny. I was in a bind, sir

 

[NJClaw]

ackknowledges the above user's agenda

You know we got buttons for that right?

But the post was also funny. I was in a bind, sir

Just like Baldur's Gate 3, the Codex won't be complete until they introduce multiclassing

And just like that the thread is back on track babyyyy

 

[Gargaune]

Stopped reading that review at the point where he wrote a paragraph about availability of save scumming and how its source of all evil ... JUST DONT FUCKING DO IT problem solved.

You probably stopped reading a long time ago 'cause that's not what he was saying. His point was that 5E's meager specialisation is a generally disappointing mechanic worth improving upon, and even more so in a medium where the temptation to save-scum is also present. Though I don't know how much Larian could do here since, short of reworking WotC's whole character progression, the only alternative would be fixed thresholds.

 

[Atchodas]

Stopped reading that review at the point where he wrote a paragraph about availability of save scumming and how its source of all evil ... JUST DONT FUCKING DO IT problem solved.

dumb game designers start to plan and balance their game around the expectation that success or progress only is one reload away.

Thats not how BG3 is balanced tho. So these savescumming rants not really relevant

 

[Tuco Benedicto Pacifico]

The thing is, Larian keeps claiming that they are attempting to design a game where "failing rolls is fun" but so far there are very few instances where it works as intended and in most cases failing a roll simply precludes you some options.

Conversely, there IS one virtuous example I can mention. It's when you are dealing with one of the goblin leaders, Priestess Gut.
If you go down a certain approach, you'll end up drugged and chained in a cell in her private quarters. At that point you are offered two different chances to free yourself from the chains and escape, but here's the kick: if you fail BOTH chances, a new NPC appears, introduces herself and frees you, while telling you that she's an agent of Raphael (the devil who already tempted you with a deal) and that you will own him a favor for it.

See? This is a great example of how to do it right: you turn a failure in something that doesn't simply force a reload, but opens an interesting minor subplot and potentially will have repercussions down the line.

 

[Atchodas]

But you cant expect the game to bail you out of all failures sometimes failing just has to be failing.

So then when you succeed it feels like actual success and not “this should have happen by default” also failing and missing certain opportunities will just add to replayability.

 

[Gargaune]

See? This is a great example of how to do it right: you turn a failure in something that doesn't simply force a reload, but opens an interesting minor subplot and potentially will have repercussions down the line.

Yeah, that's a great instance, but you also don't want to put too much of that in the game lest success become superfluous or, worse, a way of "winning" yourself out of too much content.

 

[Desiderius]

That kind of content increases replayability. Guess the problem is monetizing replaying from their perspective.

Solution: it gets monetized as brand loyalty.

 

[Tuco Benedicto Pacifico]

Of course, you can't use the same trick every time. And sometimes failing is a perfectly viable alternative too (i.e. "you attempt diplomacy, things go south, combat ensues" OR "You try to save a kid, fail the roll, kid dies. Well, tough luck", etc).

The problem is when just "rolling low" cuts you out of a certain portion of content "Just because".
For instance it wouldn't be reasonable that the option to hire or not a potential new companion would depend entirely on a single random roll.
Or to fish for another example yet, it would suck being cut out of an entire questline because you rolled low once at a random point during the playthrough.

 

[copebot]

I didn't mind the combat in BG3 when I played some patches ago apart from the various silly homebrew things that made it too easy, but I found a lot of the dialogue and roleplay totally superfluous, as if it was just there to be there, to say that there was noncombat gameplay. The fiction was overly convoluted in order to create situations for skill checks, to be able to wiggle eyebrows a lot claiming that there are noncombat paths through the game because you can roll the d20 to avoid combat encounters here and there.

 

[Anonymous Wife Scholar]

"You try to save a kid, fail the roll, kid dies. Well, tough luck"

No!

 

[Larianshill]

The problem is when just "rolling low" cuts you out of a certain portion of content "Just because".

There is one notable example of this with Karlach, a future companion. If you approach her, she tells you to stay away. Unless you roll high on persuasion or intimidation, you can't talk to her further. That's it, your only further interactions with this character will be violent, unless you choose to leave her alone.
They'll almost certainly retool it for when Karlach actually becomes a companion, but it's not like it's the only example of such a thing happening.

 

[Storyfag]

Why do liches always have creepy sex dungeons anyway? Why not live in a house or a castle?

Habits of a lifetime might just refuse to die. This includes harems of succubi.

 

[Larianshill]

A lich wouldn't know what to do with a succubi, if she was sitting on his lap. All liches are incels, whose dicks have fallen off from underuse years before their undeath.

 

[Storyfag]

No, indeed, no lich would know what to do with "a succubi".

 

[Abracadabra]

Why do liches always have creepy sex dungeons anyway? Why not live in a house or a castle?

Habits of a lifetime might just refuse to die. This includes harems of succubi.

So they are like Bub in Day of the Dead?

 

[Pink Eye]

No!

Don't worry broski. They're just a bunch of no good evil doers. This place is a den of stinky evil!

 

[Anonymous Wife Scholar]

No!

Don't worry broski. They're just a bunch of no good evil doers. This place is a den of stinky evil!

Thank you Monk anon! Bestest friend forever anon! Do not worry Monk anon it is okay Monk anon because I will punish evil with big strong wife scholar penis! I will! You are my bestest friend forever anon!

 

[Xie Ma]

Stealth's always been crippled by the design not accounting for noise. As things stand even Anomen could creep up behind a guard, rattling his chainmail and his breadbox all along his merry way.

The armour gives disadvantage to the stealth check. Or am I misunderstanding what you're getting at?

It should, and in game they are labeled as if they would do it.
Too bad that according to Larian's custom modification of the rule you'll have to pass a stealth check only if in the "cone of vision" of enemies. If you are out of it you can basically moving at will without any risk of being detected.
It could sort-of work if it was only as initiation when you are in real time, but this actually applies even after the enemies are already alerted, during turn based combat. What's worse, you can exploit the system introducing your party members ONE BY ONE to the combat sneaking around in real time, while enemies are frozen in the combat queue (which your characters will join only after their first attack).

There would be easy ways to fix every single one of these problems, IF Larian actually cared about how laughably exploitable their current system is.

- For a start, at least once already in combat, enemies should be considered as "alerted" and watching around themselves at 360 degrees
-approaching them in stealth should require a check, not being a guaranteed effect.
- If you are in a forgiving mood you could make so that sneaking "outside of their cone of vision" while already in combat would give a marginal bonus, making the stealth check a bit easier, under the assumption that "their attention isn't equally distributed on their entire surrounding" or something.
- Once the first party member makes his first real-time initiation from stealth, any other character close enough to the fight should immediately be put in the turn-based initiative queue, even if remaining in stealth for the current turn.

I guess Larian's worry is "What if it's a multiplayer session and the other player doesn't want to join the fight started from his partner?".
To which my answer would be "Well, tough luck, motherfucker". If you are hanging around with a psychopath murderhobo it makes only sense that as the idiot procures a fight you'll be involved even if you didn't want to. Choose better company next time. And don't attempt to ruin the game for everyone else with your stupid whiny "What ifs" as we are on it. Sucker.

This game often feels like 1 step forward 2 steps back. It sucks because I think they're on the edge of something great, only to have really basic retarded stuff like this.

Last patch were only steps forward though. Rest of the system mechanics will become better as well with time.

Woah, are you really swen? as in swen vincke, the head of Larian studios?

 

[Larianshill]

I certainly hope so.

 

[Pink Eye]

I will punish evil with big strong wife scholar penis!

Omg. I'm dying xD

 

[deama]

Stealth's always been crippled by the design not accounting for noise. As things stand even Anomen could creep up behind a guard, rattling his chainmail and his breadbox all along his merry way.

The armour gives disadvantage to the stealth check. Or am I misunderstanding what you're getting at?

It should, and in game they are labeled as if they would do it.
Too bad that according to Larian's custom modification of the rule you'll have to pass a stealth check only if in the "cone of vision" of enemies. If you are out of it you can basically moving at will without any risk of being detected.
It could sort-of work if it was only as initiation when you are in real time, but this actually applies even after the enemies are already alerted, during turn based combat. What's worse, you can exploit the system introducing your party members ONE BY ONE to the combat sneaking around in real time, while enemies are frozen in the combat queue (which your characters will join only after their first attack).

There would be easy ways to fix every single one of these problems, IF Larian actually cared about how laughably exploitable their current system is.

- For a start, at least once already in combat, enemies should be considered as "alerted" and watching around themselves at 360 degrees
-approaching them in stealth should require a check, not being a guaranteed effect.
- If you are in a forgiving mood you could make so that sneaking "outside of their cone of vision" while already in combat would give a marginal bonus, making the stealth check a bit easier, under the assumption that "their attention isn't equally distributed on their entire surrounding" or something.
- Once the first party member makes his first real-time initiation from stealth, any other character close enough to the fight should immediately be put in the turn-based initiative queue, even if remaining in stealth for the current turn.

I guess Larian's worry is "What if it's a multiplayer session and the other player doesn't want to join the fight started from his partner?".
To which my answer would be "Well, tough luck, motherfucker". If you are hanging around with a psychopath murderhobo it makes only sense that as the idiot procures a fight you'll be involved even if you didn't want to. Choose better company next time. And don't attempt to ruin the game for everyone else with your stupid whiny "What ifs" as we are on it. Sucker.

This game often feels like 1 step forward 2 steps back. It sucks because I think they're on the edge of something great, only to have really basic retarded stuff like this.

Last patch were only steps forward though. Rest of the system mechanics will become better as well with time.

Woah, are you really swen? as in swen vincke, the head of Larian studios?

Sadly not as otherwise he'd have the "Developer" tag.