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

[Delterius]

seems more like a development choice to me

Sure, but not a good one.

seems like they focused on reactivity instead, thats fine by me

 

[Abu Antar]

No day/night cycle is a bummer, but not a deal breaker for me.

 

[Cryomancer]

crazy multiclass chains of late-3.5E and Pathfinders.

The problem with multiclassing in 3.XE is that it makes no sense.

If I'm DMing a game and one of my players is a fighter and wanna to get a level in cleric, he MUST join a Church, convert to a God(if he doesn't have one), pass some religion skill check and only after a small personal campaign(which can be made "offscreen" or not) and so on. In video games this is even worse, you can become a Red Wizard of Thay in NwN2 while spending your entire life in Neverwinter. Imagine becoming a "magical baron" of a empire which you never visited.

 

[MerchantKing]

becoming a "magical baron" of a empire which you never visited.

I would tell you how to. But that's a guild secret. Not for non-Gnome eyes.

 

[Tuco Benedicto Pacifico]

I’m generally not a fan of any “piecemeal” multiclassing system that let you pick a bit of this and a bit of that.

For all its shortcomings in other areas I think that’s an aspect that Pillars of Eternity II managed better than most.

 

[Desiderius]

Most multi-classing in PF is actively bad. The hybrids were designed to obviate the need for multi-classing in the first place. Probably should have simply eliminated it.

 

[Mortmal]

No day/night cycle is a bummer, but not a deal breaker for me.

Not a deal breaker but its sad we 've lost such technology and a thing that was in my 8 bit rpgs is no longer possible.

 

[Nifft Batuff]

The night/day cycles in the Ultima games were very advanced for 2023.

 

[Cat Headed Eagle]

Day Night cycles mattered more in BG2 than 1, but it's still something pretty negligible I'd say. It doesn't do more than changing the filter and moving some npcs around. Rest spamming is more of a problem, and at least they are limiting this somewhat in 3.

 

[Delterius]

The Holy Mission of Sven Vicke is to bring the lost technology of turn based combat back to D&D. It is only fair that God, in their infinite wisdom, chose to reserve the art of NPC Schedules to Todd Howard. Balance in All Things.

 

[Tuco Benedicto Pacifico]

Day Night cycles mattered more in BG2 than 1, but it's still something pretty negligible I'd say. It doesn't do more than changing the filter and moving some npcs around. Rest spamming is more of a problem, and at least they are limiting this somewhat in 3.

It does a freaking ton, I'd say.
Even in absence of complex, Ultima-like NPC scheduling, the day/night cycle in BG can enhance the experience significantly:

- it maintain the illusion of the fictional world being a simulated and persistent environment.
- it offers cosmetic variety
- it creates occasions for differentiating factors even in already-explored areas, through a rotation of population/potential encounters (i.e. day-exclusive or night-exclusive monsters).
- it opens to context-exclusive scenarios
- it sets the mood for certain scenes and encounters

Random example: Imagine roaming the streets of the city stuck in a permanent noon and contrast it with having the option to navigate both its crowded market during the day and its dark alleys during the night, or seeing street lights being turned on at dusk as it gets darker gradually, etc, etc..

 

[Spectacle]

how easy it is to start most of combat encounters with surprise round?

Not too hard (currently) in the game and in general "first-round only" abilities aren't too shabby because you'll typically spend two or three rounds for combat at most, outside of the most challenging ones.

That said, from what I've heard assassins aren't considered particularly good as a subclass.

Assassins are not that strong in tabletop play because it's hard to reliably surprise anyone, but in a game like BG3 where the player can usually see enemies on the screen before they detect the PCs, assassins should be quite powerful.

That said, a lot of the harder encounters will probably be set piece fights that start with some forced dialogue, so optimizing for surprise means that you're super strong in encounters that are already easy, while your build doesn't help much in the tougher challenges.

 

[Alienman]

Does it have weather at least, or is that location-based?

 

[Cohesion]

crazy multiclass chains of late-3.5E and Pathfinders.

The problem with multiclassing in 3.XE is that it makes no sense.

If I'm DMing a game and one of my players is a fighter and wanna to get a level in cleric, he MUST join a Church, convert to a God(if he doesn't have one), pass some religion skill check and only after a small personal campaign(which can be made "offscreen" or not) and so on. In video games this is even worse, you can become a Red Wizard of Thay in NwN2 while spending your entire life in Neverwinter. Imagine becoming a "magical baron" of a empire which you never visited.

How many games did you DM? Just curious.

 

[Tuco Benedicto Pacifico]

Does it have weather at least, or is that location-based?

As far as EA was concerned, I didn't see "weather" in any form. Location-based OR dynamic.

 

[Cryomancer]

a guild secret.

That is not hard. You just make them dependent upon credit and make demands each day higher demands for maintaining their credit flow. That way you gradually build economical and political influence. After a couple of years, you can buy nobility titles.

How many games did you DM? Just curious.

One OSR game after my DM leaved the group in internet. And during high school, my group played with a DM rotation as no one wanted to be the DM. As expected, it ended being a crazy adventure.

Assassins are not that strong in tabletop play because it's hard to reliably surprise anyone, but in a game like BG3 where the player can usually see enemies on the screen before they detect the PCs, assassins should be quite powerful.

But this applies to almost every class. Enchanting in games where you can quick save and quick load is much more powerful than in tabletop or in a roguelike.

 

[Desiderius]

a guild secret.

That is not hard. You just make them dependent upon credit and make demands each day higher demands for maintaining their credit flow. That way you gradually build economical and political influence. After a couple of years, you can buy nobility titles.

How many games did you DM? Just curious.

One OSR game after my DM leaved the group in internet. And during high school, my group played with a DM rotation as no one wanted to be the DM. As expected, it ended being a crazy adventure.

Assassins are not that strong in tabletop play because it's hard to reliably surprise anyone, but in a game like BG3 where the player can usually see enemies on the screen before they detect the PCs, assassins should be quite powerful.

But this applies to almost every class. Enchanting in games where you can quick save and quick load is much more powerful than in tabletop or in a roguelike.

If you choose to abuse it. Tinman (and designing for it) is always an option, or Ironman for those with a lot of time in their hands.

 

[SpoonFULL]

Does it have weather at least, or is that location-based?

As far as EA was concerned, I didn't see "weather" in any form. Location-based OR dynamic.

So instead of embracing the strengths of the original BGs and building on this strong foundation, Larian decided to go for the 'cinematic experience' and dumped features that would have enhanced and expanded the core gameplay!

But worry not, if you buy the game now, you get the delux edition with D:OS goodies!

 

[Delterius]

strengths of the original BGs

really

the bgs barely had npc schedules. weather there was raining, which means that as easter egg you sometimes get hit by lightning.

oh yeah there's like a quest where an npc goes to sleep and you can steal from them unopposed.

woopidedoo

It's not the 'strong foundation' of BG that makes NPC schedules an interesting consideration for development. It's all the advantages for immersion that they might add. And even so not all good RPGs have them. It's clear to me that BG3's focus is on reactivity, which is a good thing. If night/day cycles were sacrificed for it, and the reactivity is good enough (it certainly seems to be), so be it.

Not every RPG has to be Oblivion.

 

[SpoonFULL]

By strengths I was not only referring to day and night cycles and npc scheduling - even though there is huge potential to build on these as previously mentioned. The other strengths that I consider is the writing, story telling, choices and consequences, and the ability to tackle quests in any order and through a variety of approaches.

In the original BGs it felt that you are making your own decisions, paths and stories through the narrative and these also changed dynamically through your decisions and builds - the player have almost total control over that. If the gameplay sometimes become boring, the narrative and interesting stories carries the player forward.

 

[Cat Headed Eagle]

In the original BGs it felt that you are making your own decisions

You mean, just like when both of the companion pairs constantly push you to do as you are supposed to, or when kicking them out of the party meaning both of them will leave, or if you don't do their quests in time they'll leave as well?
And in BG2 you kinda have arrows pointing at the directions you should go, but that game is linear, so it doesn't really hurt.

 

[Delterius]

In the original BGs it felt that you are making your own decisions, paths and stories through the narrative and these also changed dynamically through your decisions and builds

it is a 2e game with no skill checks and barely any choices in it. its the ruleset where character building is what weapon you'll use throught the trilogy and why its the flail of ages with belm.

fucking choices and consequences. really. what the fuck this isn't fallout.

baldur's gate 1 and 2 have strengths, no doubt. comfy explorations in the first, mage duels/beastiary/environmental variety in the second. the games are also pretty and the 2e ruleset is a novelty unto itself. but this renown for their writing is a bioware marketing construct. its nonsense. its the minsc game where jaheira starts thinking of fucking her friend's foster kid 20 minutes after her husbands tragic and horrifying death. the story is serviceable, its not a pearl of the genre.

 

[Jermu]

I wonder if you can change companions attributes after recruiting there are few awful distributions (class and stuff would most likely require mod)
oh well I have read too much wiki figuring out builds going to chill now until there is more information
none of the companions looked too interesting to me so most likely going to go with custom party but going to test em out anyway

retarded theorycrafted party

11 devotion paladin / 1 fiend warlock
6-9 devotion paladin / 2-3 fighter / 1-3 fiend
1 level dip to warlock looks very good for dark one's blessing, need to see spell list + invocations before deciding which level warlock to get

11 moon druid / 1 monk
melee potential, 6th level spells and dip for unarmored defense + martial arts (no idea if arts work with wild shape might depend on beast)
might be trash build since needs lvl 18 for casting while wild shaped

11 lore bard / 1 life cleric
10 lore bard / 2 the great old one warlock
full caster 6th level spells, cleric dip for disciple of life + medium/heavy armor, shield and other proficiencies
or 5th level spells + agonizing blast. if resting is not much limited I would think 1 cleric is better than 2 warlock

12 evocation/abjuration/necromancy wizard or 11 wizard / 1 x for final level need to see if something would be useful after playing
don't remember last game where pure wizard was a bad choice

looks pretty good, 3 chars able to cast 6th level spells and 2 chars should be decent enough for melee / tanking
no high level cleric spells but lore bard can pick any up to 5th level with magical secrets

 

[Gargaune]

Day Night cycles mattered more in BG2 than 1, but it's still something pretty negligible I'd say. It doesn't do more than changing the filter and moving some npcs around. Rest spamming is more of a problem, and at least they are limiting this somewhat in 3.

It does a freaking ton, I'd say.
Even in absence of complex, Ultima-like NPC scheduling, the day/night cycle in BG can enhance the experience significantly:

- it maintain the illusion of the fictional world being a simulated and persistent environment.
- it offers cosmetic variety
- it creates occasions for differentiating factors even in already-explored areas, through a rotation of population/potential encounters (i.e. day-exclusive or night-exclusive monsters).
- it opens to context-exclusive scenarios
- it sets the mood for certain scenes and encounters

Random example: Imagine roaming the streets of the city stuck in a permanent noon and contrast it with having the option to navigate both its crowded market during the day and its dark alleys during the night, or seeing street lights being turned on at dusk as it gets darker gradually, etc, etc..

You forgot a big one - interplay with stealth mechanics. Light-based visibility is pretty well fleshed out in BG3, both for the players and NPCs, a dynamic day/night cycle could've provided some very interesting tactical choices. It's a missed opportunity.

 

[Non-Edgy Gamer]

it is a 2e game with no skill checks and barely any choices in it.

There were a ton of choices, just not ones that altered anything significant in terms of quests. And only a few resulting from your actual stats.

But BG3 has much more freedom than BG1 or 2. Especially in terms of linear plot structure.

In terms of linearity BG1 was probably the least linear since most of the maps could be found by exploring, but a lot of the maps outside of the city were just assorted combat encounters. The overall plot was very linear:

Candlekeep > Nashkel > Nashkel Mines > Bandit Camp > Cloakwood Mines > City > Candlekeep > Endgame

You could never deviate from this exact path. You could only do side-quests in between. Your choices during all of this are mainly who gets to come along and what reputation you'll have. BG2 was similar.

However, in B3's first act, it actually seems less linear:

Nautiloid > Beach > Choice of which of two camps to side with, with questlines for each, or ignore both and head straight for the Underdark > Underdark (multiple ways to get here) > End of first act

But I do understand the *feeling* SpoonFULL seems to speak of. And I kind of agree. It does *feel* less like it's my own game with my own choices. I do feel led around more.

And I think the reason for this is simply that there's more narrative. More cinematics. More of having everything explained. Encounters that clearly were designed with different ways around them - e.g., the giant spider encounter where you can knock the spiders off their webs.

It's harder for the player to fill in the gaps with their imagination when there's less to imagine.