Baldur's Gate Baldur's Gate 3 Pre-Release Thread [EARLY ACCESS RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[Lilura]

You'd probably like SoU even though it starts us off at first.

Prologue of OC is against goblins with 1 HP each. My gnome wizard meleed them. The level bumping is staggered. Prologue can also be skipped (straight to third)
SoZ bumps us up because there is a three-phase batiri battle to fight. On Core rules, a four-person first level party could not beat it. Impossible.
I generally slay a few people in Hommlet, so design allows for combat before Moathouse.

did you read that comment I linked to?

It's rather pertinent to this subject.

That comment doesn't rely on Sleep, Blindness or +ApR from bows. That is just super-optimal adventuring in early Baldur's Gate.

You don't need Sleep, Blindness and bows.

I took off lots of THAC0 points and showed warriors could still hit. Plus, it's a party-based game so if one Warrior misses, well, there's other party members isn't there.

We have access to collective ApR and collective spellcasting. It all adds up and makes adventuring pretty manageable. As long as we stop and think about what we're doing. It's really not miss chance that makes the first phase of BG deadly, anyway.

This really is a non-issue, a mountain out of a molehill that the current gen have made out of missing in low level D&D.

 

[Fairfax]

A big part of the problem is the fact that so-called "misses" were never meant to be actual misses, just like damage wasn't meant to be physical, and hit points were never meant to represent "health points" or physical endurance. From the 1E DMG:

(Remember the "fake attacks" in BG? This is what they were meant to represent. They were actually faithful to the game, just visually limited.)

Most RPG designers never bothered to read the works that created and defined the sort of game they were trying to replicate. The result is a decades-old, telephone game cargo cult where almost every concept has been bastardized beyond recognition in most of the genre. Issues such as casuals feeling bad about missing are completely self-inflicted. If the character swings once per attack and a failed one is represented by a clean miss, the effect on player psychology is obviously worse than a more reasonable and authentic representation like the one above.

 

[Lilura]

The "fake attacks" is what makes the newbies think they're missing, too. From my writings:

 

[rusty_shackleford]

A big part of the problem is the fact that so-called "misses" were never meant to be actual misses, just like damage wasn't meant to be physical, and hit points were never meant to represent "health points" or physical endurance. From the 1E DMG:

(Remember the "fake attacks" in BG? This is what they were meant to present. They were actually faithful to the game, just visually limited.)

Most RPG designers never bothered to read the works that created and defined the sort of game they were trying to replicate. The result is a decades-old, telephone game cargo cult where almost every concept has been bastardized beyond recognition in most of the genre. Issues such as casuals feeling bad about missing are completely self-inflicted. If the character swings once per attack and a failed one is represented by a clean miss, the effect on player psychology is obviously worse than a more reasonable and authentic representation like the one above.

I wasn't aware that better armor increases your chance to parry or dodge.
Mental gymnastics are performed to defend D&D's AC system.

 

[Mojobeard]

The Obsidian solution to unfun early game D&D was to just bump you up to level 3 immediately after the (skippable) tutorial in NWN2 and start you off at level 4 in SoZ.

But this is also what most of the official campaigns do. I might be thinking more of Pathfinder though. Honestly, I've been surprised how many times I've "earned" two levels two sessions in a row in those things.

I wasn't aware that better armor increases your chance to parry or dodge.

"Though you fail to avoid his attack, your fine plate deflects the spear harmlessly away", or even as simple as "his weak blow is easily stopped by your chainmail".

 

[Melcar]

A big part of the problem is the fact that so-called "misses" were never meant to be actual misses, just like damage wasn't meant to be physical, and hit points were never meant to represent "health points" or physical endurance. From the 1E DMG:

(Remember the "fake attacks" in BG? This is what they were meant to present. They were actually faithful to the game, just visually limited.)

Most RPG designers never bothered to read the works that created and defined the sort of game they were trying to replicate. The result is a decades-old, telephone game cargo cult where almost every concept has been bastardized beyond recognition in most of the genre. Issues such as casuals feeling bad about missing are completely self-inflicted. If the character swings once per attack and a failed one is represented by a clean miss, the effect on player psychology is obviously worse than a more reasonable and authentic representation like the one above.

I wasn't aware that better armor increases your chance to parry or dodge.
Mental gymnastics are performed to defend D&D's AC system.

Better armor class.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

A big part of the problem is the fact that so-called "misses" were never meant to be actual misses, just like damage wasn't meant to be physical, and hit points were never meant to represent "health points" or physical endurance. From the 1E DMG:

(Remember the "fake attacks" in BG? This is what they were meant to present. They were actually faithful to the game, just visually limited.)

Most RPG designers never bothered to read the works that created and defined the sort of game they were trying to replicate. The result is a decades-old, telephone game cargo cult where almost every concept has been bastardized beyond recognition in most of the genre. Issues such as casuals feeling bad about missing are completely self-inflicted. If the character swings once per attack and a failed one is represented by a clean miss, the effect on player psychology is obviously worse than a more reasonable and authentic representation like the one above.

I wasn't aware that better armor increases your chance to parry or dodge.
Mental gymnastics are performed to defend D&D's AC system.

Better armor class.

This is a good post because it reminds people that Armor Class was about fucking warships.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

"Though you fail to avoid his attack, your fine plate deflects the spear harmlessly away", or even as simple as "his weak blow is easily stopped by your chainmail".

Now do the person wearing chainmail with a padded undercoat getting hit with a warhammer.
Surely he wouldn't take as much damage as a naked person, but at the same time he wouldn't just ignore it. There actually was an attempt to represent this in AD&D, but it was too difficult for most people so it was done away with.

Something about this site I find amusing is the fetishization of D&D when it hates things that are streamlined for popular appeal. D&D is the call of duty of tabletop RPGs, streamlined and simplified for the masses.

 

[Lilura]

D&D is the call of duty of tabletop RPGs, streamlined and simplified for the masses.

And yet you can't even understand it, so what does that make you?

 

[rusty_shackleford]

D&D is the call of duty of tabletop RPGs, streamlined and simplified for the masses.

And yet you don't even understand it, so what does that make you?

Says the person who is butthurt because I insulted the thing he bases his entire life writing blogposts about

 

[Mojobeard]

Now do the person wearing chainmail with a padded undercoat getting hit with a warhammer.
Surely he wouldn't take as much damage as a naked person, but at the same time he wouldn't just ignore it.

Another weak blow that fails to penetrate or deflects, if it's the spiky end. Or the hammer doesn't hit the bone on your upper torso, but your belly, where it's barely noticeable.
There's no DR on most D&D armor, since it also encompasses that. And not every single hit does life threatening damage.
Even more simple, and also included in AC: he missed.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Now do the person wearing chainmail with a padded undercoat getting hit with a warhammer.
Surely he wouldn't take as much damage as a naked person, but at the same time he wouldn't just ignore it.

Another weak blow that fails to penetrate or deflects, if it's the spiky end. Or the hammer doesn't hit the bone on your upper torso, but your belly, where it's barely noticeable.
There's no DR on most D&D armor, since it also encompasses that. And not every single hit does life threatening damage.
Even more simple, and also included in AC: he missed.

Mental gymnastics used to explain away an overly simplified system that has no proper way to represent such a scenario.

 

[Lilura]

Says the person who is butthurt because I insulted the thing he bases his entire life writing blogposts about

Not my entire life. But yeah, four years or so, on and off.

I'd like to commentate on an Ars Magica cRPG, but there are none.

Not sure why you think I'm butthurt because you insulted D&D: I've criticized it on my blog.

But your criticisms just come off as salty shitposts. Lift your game, pls.

 

[Melcar]

rusty_shitstain

 

[Lilura]

rusty_shitstain

Perfect.

 

[Generic-Giant-Spider]

I hope you're all having a great day.

 

[FreeKaner]

I wasn't aware that better armor increases your chance to parry or dodge.
Mental gymnastics are performed to defend D&D's AC system.

It doesn't have to be parry or dodge, they are simply unsuccessful hits whatever the reason. Better armour would increase the weapon deflecting and glancing from armour rather than hit. It is fairly simple abstraction meant for easy P&P calculations, that is why AC gets better with lower numbers as well, easier to calculate against thac0.

The problem is not abstraction, it is that it is meant for PNP. In a computer game we can fairly easily represent parries, dodges, misses, glancing blows etc. separately and scale them with separate stats too. There is no reason to have one-size-fits-all abstraction. Just add parries, dodges and misses as different stats.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

The problem is not abstraction, it is that it is meant for PNP. In a computer game we can fairly easily represent parries, dodges, misses, glancing blows etc. separately and scale them with separate stats too. There is no reason to have one-size-fits-all abstraction. Just add parries, dodges and misses as different stats.

Goodluck convincing people that think D&D is the greatest creation ever invented by mankind of this

 

[Neanderthal]

AD&D was good for what it was, an accessible intro to RPGs.

 

[FreeKaner]

For many problems of PoE1, I thought that armour and saving throws being separate was a good way to do it. Your chance to get hit depends on a defensive roll like AC and If you get hit that is for damage reduction to handle. Shields giving defensive roll instead of damage reduction is more sensible as well. In D&D this could be done better with d20 and flat bonuses with class feats and whatever else. Like "+1 to defensive rolls with shields" per 5 levels for example.

Although I do not have much problems with just AC only, it is an adequate abstraction. Could be better but it is fine. The problem here is their talk about "missing is not good", really makes me wonder what is their "solution".

 

[lukaszek]

deterministic system > RNG

 

[Spectacle]

The actual effect of armor on a fight is a lot more complex than simple damage reduction. Most hits on a body part protected by armor will do no damage at all. This makes it harder for the attacker; there's no point in striking a location where your hit won't have any effect, so you hold back until there's an opening that lets you strike a vulnerable spot. This makes you less likely to hit your opponent in a given amount of time.
For the armored character it's the opposite. He has fewer vulnerable points to defend so can spend less effort on defense and thus focus more on offense, and he can also get away with using offensive maneuvers that would leave an unarmored character extremely vulnerable to a counterattack but that he doesn't have to worry about since he's only exposing body parts that are protected by armor.

You could of course make a CRPG that fully simulates the effect armor has on melee combat, but simply having dodge/parry chances based on skill and DEX + damage reduction form armor is probably less realistic than AC reducing the chance to be hit.

 

[Chippy]

Thing is if you take out missing, you might as well take out rolling a 1 on saves as well. In the old days you'd read a manual, and the bestiary would tell you basilisks in the game. You'd prepare for high level stuff. But at low level, it had an effect on the economy (do I buy that protect from petrification spell) and spell selection (I might need some summons). Missing effected gameplay as well - I'll invest in ranged and sacrifice being a killer tank for a while, and invest in weapon styles for protection.

So if you can't miss, it devolves gameplay by shifting it from tactical to just high AC and class based damage. And we go casual/backwards.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

The actual effect of armor on a fight is a lot more complex than simple damage reduction. Most hits on a body part protected by armor will do no damage at all. This makes it harder for the attacker; there's no point in striking a location where your hit won't have any effect, so you hold back until there's an opening that lets you strike a vulnerable spot. This makes you less likely to hit your opponent in a given amount of time.
For the armored character it's the opposite. He has fewer vulnerable points to defend so can spend less effort on defense and thus focus more on offense, and he can also get away with using offensive maneuvers that would leave an unarmored character extremely vulnerable to a counterattack but that he doesn't have to worry about since he's only exposing body parts that are protected by armor.

You could of course make a CRPG that fully simulates the effect armor has on melee combat, but simply having dodge/parry chances based on skill and DEX + damage reduction form armor is probably less realistic than AC reducing the chance to be hit.

There's a reason swords are a meme weapon, your situation does nothing to represent someone in armor getting smacked with a mace.

 

[The Bishop]

Nah, it works just as well for blunt weapons. In order to deal real damage against a target with armor you'd need a focused, well placed hit. A weak or superficial strike will only result in cosmetic damage to armor. Not so for an unarmored opponent, where even a glancing blow will tear skin, bruise, break bones and joints. Maces are short, front loaded and slow weapons. Unless your opponent is waiting for you in T-position, landing a solid hit is not a trivial task at all. Doubly so if you're trying to not have your head chopped off in the process.