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

[Ontopoly]

From the perspective of a Baldurs Gate fan, can anyone actually tell me why this game would appeal to you?

Honestly, I only see larian cultists DOS2 fans chilling this game.

But for real though. Give me one quote from this thread that you consider to be shilling for BG3. Genuinely curious how the Lich King defines this term.

Anything Rusty says.

Yeah but the Lich King spoke in plurals. Besides pointing at Rusty is low effort, he's just a master troll.

I think you're a larian cultist

 

[SoupNazi]

Both of you, deux and Hongwelbing, are misinterpreting my response. I don't mind the "potential" lore existing, but it has the same drawbacks as running a game in the "real world", when it has such a vast history and events some people can't possibly remember. "Learning the lore is teh hard" is not an argument, it shouldn't be a requirement to read 20 shit books, ever. The rulebook and maybe the DM/player guides should be more than enough, everything else is voluntary flavor. Now, ideally, you'd have a decent group of players who won't go all Rules As Weapons on you, or speak up against an event you made up just because it was never in said books, but we all (presumably) know that's not the case a lot of the time. Could you kick that player out? Sure, but a lot of DMs experience a player drought, or play with IRL friends/colleagues where that's more difficult to do.

For those cunts, it's just good to have an "official" quote to shoot back when your 98 percent lore accurate campaign has an element that disagrees with a book, because that usually shuts that kind of a player up. That's all I'm saying. The statement that the books are non-canon does nothing to anyone who wants to follow the books, and has read them, but it gives the DM dealing with an unnecessarily pedantic player ammunition to shut it down. That's literally the only effect.

 

[Saravan]

From the perspective of a Baldurs Gate fan, can anyone actually tell me why this game would appeal to you?

Honestly, I only see larian cultists DOS2 fans chilling this game.

But for real though. Give me one quote from this thread that you consider to be shilling for BG3. Genuinely curious how the Lich King defines this term.

Anything Rusty says.

Yeah but the Lich King spoke in plurals. Besides pointing at Rusty is low effort, he's just a master troll.

I think you're a larian cultist

Still waiting on that quote. :/

 

[d1r]

I want Forgotten Realms.
No, not that one. The real Forgotten Realms.

Long Forgotten™.

 

[Ontopoly]

If I'm reading a book, it's sure as hell not going to be a forgotten realms book or any other dnd based book. There's a ton of book out there that are a lot better and worth a lot more of your time. Table top campaigns have always had horrible plot and world building because you have some DM who's job isn't dedicated to this type of stuff. Your campaign can have the best lore, but it's still in the hands of an amateur. They have no experience. If it's world building and story you're playing DnD for rather than the stuff it actually excels at, I feel like your priorities would be better somewhere else.

If you want something, you should always go to the medium best conducive of it. Gameplay, atmosphere, choice impact? Video games. Story, characters, plot, lore? Books. Sound? Music. I don't understand people who play video games for story or the OST when there are much better ways of getting that experience.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

Both of you, deux and Hongwelbing, are misinterpreting my response. I don't mind the "potential" lore existing, but it has the same drawbacks as running a game in the "real world", when it has such a vast history and events some people can't possibly remember. "Learning the lore is teh hard" is not an argument, it shouldn't be a requirement to read 20 shit books, ever. The rulebook and maybe the DM/player guides should be more than enough, everything else is voluntary flavor.

We don't really disagree in practice, but I think that such things should be settled at the table rather than through a dismissal of the canonicity of such works. Pedantic players should stick with pedantic DMs, non-pedantic ones with non-pedantic DMs.

The statement that the books are non-canon does nothing to anyone who wants to follow the books, and has read them, but it gives the DM dealing with an unnecessarily pedantic player ammunition to shut it down.

Here I disagree with you since such a statement negatively impacts the development of the expanded universe of a particular setting. If the books aren't canon, then there's no reason for the various writers to strive to maintain lore consistency across them (ergo this negatively impacts the enjoyment of the setting for the lorefags, whether they are DMs or regular players).

You don't need an arbitrary copout as a DM to shield you from a pedantic player if you set rulers in advance of starting the campaign which forbid such behavior (i.e. having a restricted canonicity in your worldbuilding as a home rule - if things contradict this or that novel regardless of the DM's intentions to keep true to the expanded universe, that's nevertheless legitimate as part of the DM's worldbuilding and not something up to the players to decide).

 

[SoupNazi]

Both of you, deux and Hongwelbing, are misinterpreting my response. I don't mind the "potential" lore existing, but it has the same drawbacks as running a game in the "real world", when it has such a vast history and events some people can't possibly remember. "Learning the lore is teh hard" is not an argument, it shouldn't be a requirement to read 20 shit books, ever. The rulebook and maybe the DM/player guides should be more than enough, everything else is voluntary flavor.

We don't really disagree in practice, but I think that such things should be settled at the table rather than through a dismissal of the canonicity of such works. Pedantic players should stick with pedantic DMs, non-pedantic ones with non-pedantic DMs.

The statement that the books are non-canon does nothing to anyone who wants to follow the books, and has read them, but it gives the DM dealing with an unnecessarily pedantic player ammunition to shut it down.

Here I disagree with you since such a statement negatively impacts the development of the expanded universe of a particular setting. If the books aren't canon, then there's no reason for the various writers to strive to maintain lore consistency across them (ergo this negatively impacts the enjoyment of the setting for the lorefags, whether they are DMs or regular players).

You don't need an arbitrary copout as a DM to shield you from a pedantic player if you set rulers in advance of starting the campaign which forbid such behavior (i.e. having a restricted canonicity in your worldbuilding as a home rule - if things contradict this or that novel regardless of the DM's intentions to keep true to the expanded universe, that's nevertheless legitimate as part of the DM's worldbuilding and not something up to the players to decide).

We're in agreement, but I try to take into account that there are DMs who seriously love the hobby and would like to do as you suggest, but simply aren't assertive enough to do so. I guess it's very uncodexlike, but I like the fact that those sort of DMs now have an "out" to be able to play with people that maybe I, if I were to DM, would just force to sit down, but others aren't able to. And those players might not even be actually cuntish, could even be good friends and fun people to chill with, but they read 2 books more than you did and like to show that off.

In the end, both our arguments are dealing with one simple fact: shitty people exist. Shitty players, shitty DMs, shitty authors. You raise an interesting point about future authors being unmotivated to keep existing lore relevant in their books, but just like you might say (and have a point, to a degree) "you just need better players", I could counter your argument with "a good, respectful author will not retcon another person's work and will keep their books in mind" - but we both know that's not the case.

Perhaps I'm arguing for the lesser of two evils, then, thinking this has the sum total of a better result than them saying "these 50 published books are all canon. yes, including the shit ones" ... and I see the inherent problem with that, but, meh.

 

[Cryomancer]

Dark Sun is feeling pretty forgotten right about now.

Thanks Mystra. Can you imagine Dark Sun on 5E with modern woke culture? I Watched a bit of a 5E Dark Sun stream and was pure BS. Pronouns in character sheet, they started on lv 1 instead of 3(which is the bare minimum level to have a small chance of survival in the safest areas of the desert), killed a couple of templars at lv 2 and got a "sandship" quickly. Ahh forgot to mention. They invented a democratic city state in Athas.

In CRPG's, Can you guys imagine Larian making a sequel to Dark Sun : Wake of The Ravager? How awful that game will gonna be?

 

[SoupNazi]

Dark Sun is feeling pretty forgotten right about now.

Thanks Mystra. Can you imagine Dark Sun on 5E with modern woke culture? I Watched a bit of a 5E Dark Sun stream and was pure BS. Pronouns in character sheet, they started on lv 1 instead of 3(which is the bare minimum level to have a small chance of survival in the safest areas of the desert), killed a couple of templars at lv 2 and got a "sandship" quickly. Ahh forgot to mention. They invented a democratic city state in Athas.

In CRPG's, Can you guys imagine Larian making a sequel to Dark Sun : Wake of The Ravager? How awful that game will gonna be?

Bro I love you bro but you're seriously starting to overdo it

 

[Saravan]

Dark Sun is feeling pretty forgotten right about now.

Thanks Mystra. Can you imagine Dark Sun on 5E with modern woke culture? I Watched a bit of a 5E Dark Sun stream and was pure BS. Pronouns in character sheet, they started on lv 1 instead of 3(which is the bare minimum level to have a small chance of survival in the safest areas of the desert), killed a couple of templars at lv 2 and got a "sandship" quickly. Ahh forgot to mention. They invented a democratic city state in Athas.

In CRPG's, Can you guys imagine Larian making a sequel to Dark Sun : Wake of The Ravager? How awful that game will gonna be?

Bro I love you bro but you're seriously starting to overdo it

Really you say this now?

 

[SoupNazi]

Really you say this now?

I really like his shtick when it's in the appropriate places

 

[Saravan]

Really you say this now?

I really like his shtick when it's in the appropriate places

Appropriate places? Man that reminds me of 5e Larianism where they try to push wokeism by adding "appropriate places" for ethnic characters like Wyll in BG3 so they feel included.

Literally every post by Meredoth.

 

[SoupNazi]

Really you say this now?

I really like his shtick when it's in the appropriate places

Appropriate places? Man that reminds me of 5e Larianism where they try to push wokeism by adding "appropriate places" for ethnic characters like Wyll in BG3 so they feel included.

Literally every post by Meredoth.

His name's Victor, man.

 

[Saravan]

Really you say this now?

I really like his shtick when it's in the appropriate places

Appropriate places? Man that reminds me of 5e Larianism where they try to push wokeism by adding "appropriate places" for ethnic characters like Wyll in BG3 so they feel included.

Literally every post by Meredoth.

His name's Victor, man.

Apologies, S0rc3r3rVict0r the l33t Lich

 

[RPK]

How the fuck does that work? You can't just say "novels aren't canon" to FR when they clearly are.

In short: you don't need to know what the canon is in order to be able to play DnD.

Yeah, I was gonna say that. I don't follow the politics shit when it comes to D&D but to me, that just sounds like stopping asshole players telling the DM who thought up a story without reading some shitty, obscure D&D book "uh, buddy, that can't happen, because in the year 456, Drizzt eradicated all the pink dragons, lol, duh, read the books"

At that point, why not just play a good setting? Forgotten Realms and maybe Dragonlance are the only settings that have to deal with this. Planescape, Ravenloft, and Dark Sun have only a small number of books that are universally ignored for being crap, Spelljammer has one comic series that's OK but totally unimportant in the grand scheme of things, Eberron has decent books that were written with the intent they weren't canon.

I thought I, Strahd by P. N. Elrod was pretty decent.

 

[Grunker]

wait. someone actually plays forgotten realms by novel-canon? what the fuck is wrong with you people

 

[deuxhero]

wait. someone actually plays forgotten realms [...]? what the fuck is wrong with you people

Fixed

 

[Grunker]

I like Forgotten Realms. It's the perfect vanilla high fantasy setting, and the lore box sets from AD&D are some of the best setting materials ever printed for a fantasy rpg

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

Baldur's Gate 3 is to Baldur's Gate what fallout 3 was to fallout.

I like Forgotten Realms. It's the perfect vanilla high fantasy setting, and the lore box sets from AD&D are some of the best setting material ever printed for a fantasy rpg

The Forgotten Realms was created to serve as a bland, generic, standard, default setting replacement for Greyhawk, and it's easily the worst of the full-scale D&D/AD&D settings published by TSR.

 

[Grunker]

The Forgotten Realms was created to serve as a bland, generic, standard, default setting replacement for Greyhawk, and it's easily the worst of the full-scale D&D/AD&D settings published by TSR.

My feeling that anyone who purports this fallacy has 1) a strange approach to what a vanilla fantasy setting needs to accomplish 2) never as much as leafed through the box sets released for the setting. I suggest your start with this one:

But you really can't go wrong with any of them.

 

[MajorMace]

Does this game has some cities/towns and taverns now?

So far it has just three things VAGUELY resembling a settlement:
1- a druid grove with something like 20 druids and 20 tieflings, give or take.
2- A goblin camp where assuming you manage to infiltrate without opening hostilities from the get go you'll get a whole lot of goblins, a hobgoblin, a drow and couple of vendors.
3- A fungal colony in the underdark, with tons of humanoid fungi, spore-infested zombie slaves and a couple of vendors.

Nothing like a proper town or city that you can reach yet. And definitely no tavern yet.

Are you guys upset about having a fungal colony in the underdark with humanoid fungi and their brainsapped slaves roaming around instead of a banal shit boring medieval city with tavern® ?

 

[Cryomancer]

and it's easily the worst of the full-scale D&D/AD&D settings published by TSR.

Yep. And the best places of FR are the less "generic" areas. Like Thay.

If I could add a single location to any modern D&D CRPG would be Thay. Thay is rarely depicted in video games. Icewind dale is cool too but more common. IMO sword coast is the most boring place to have a D&D campaign.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

medieval city with tavern®

Taverns have barmaids and bar brawls. Where is your fungal god now?

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

My feeling that anyone who purports this fallacy has 1) a strange approach to what a vanilla fantasy setting needs to accomplish 2) never as much as leafed through the box sets released for the setting. I suggest your start with this one:

But you really can't go wrong with any of them.

"The Unapproachable East. Legendary region of unrivaled magic and profound mystery, the lands on the border of the Endless Waste have tantalized and captivated adventurers in the Forgotten Realms since word of their existence reached the west. Few have returned from those lands, and those who did reveal tales too peculiar for truth---or so it was thought until now."

Even the attempt of the Forgotten Realms to create more interesting countries on the distant outskirts of the core setting could barely manage to depart from the conventional, generic formula already applied to the vast, homogeneous area called the Heartlands --- far larger than just the Sword Coast, and all of it boring.

 

[eli]