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

[AwesomeButton]

Meanwhile you have a bunch of humble developers living and working in much worse conditions, who decide to put a HoMM3-lite in their Unity-based RPG, because they thought it would be cool.

Feature creep isn't a good thing fyi

Yeah, I said so myself in the WotR thread. That's not my point though.

 

[holla_cabezas_de_mierda]

A dagger? Ok. An axe? Ok. A fire flask..ok...shoes? If somebody threw shoes and hit you from 30 feet away and you are wearing Armour they are doing no damage. Its dumb as hell. Not to mention unlacing you boots and throwing them should take at least 10 to 20 seconds. If they are a back pack item, okay, but still shoes are not doing any damage to anyone unless you are a roach or something.

Are you using realism argument? Here is the rule:

Improvised Weapons

Sometimes characters don't have their weapons and have to attack with whatever is at hand. An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands, such as broken glass, a table leg, a frying pan, a wagon wheel, or a dead goblin.

Often, an improvised weapon is similar to an actual weapon and can be treated as such. For example, a table leg is akin to a club. At the GM's option, a character proficient with a weapon can use a similar object as if it were that weapon and use his or her proficiency bonus.

An object that bears no resemblance to a weapon deals 1d4 damage (the GM assigns a damage type appropriate to the object). If a character uses a ranged weapon to make a melee attack, or throws a melee weapon that does not have the thrown property, it also deals 1d4 damage. An improvised thrown weapon has a normal range of 20 feet and a long range of 60 feet

shoes should do no damage. Can you throw an apple at a dragon and kill it? Honestly an apple would do more damage than shoes though, because I could at least throw it like a baseball and get some speed on it like 70 MPH. Shoes are going to tumble and have no force behind them at all.

There should be some semblance of reality, yes, or otherwise what are we doing? Why do we have the rules? You should not be able to sit down and unlace your shoes and then throw them and have them do as much damage as a combat dagger and have it take less time than it would to swing sword. otherwise, why have rules at all? Why not just say you pick up pebbles and throw them for 2d12? Whats the difference?

 

[AwesomeButton]

I'm not a game developer. What would take longer to implement. A boot throwing feature or a day/night cycle feature? Which would you prefer to be in the game?

Who the fuck cares about day-night cycle? Mah-immersun-tards?
If the only thing this cycle does is making me to play part of the time with shit visibility hurting my eyes, or forcing me to press "wait N hours" button
just too see an NPC I need, I will take boot-trowing feature or any other crap instead of it.

I like it how day-night cycles suddenly became unimportant, the minute we learned they won't be featured.

 

[Nortar]

I probably missed the moment when that cycle was important.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

A dagger? Ok. An axe? Ok. A fire flask..ok...shoes? If somebody threw shoes and hit you from 30 feet away and you are wearing Armour they are doing no damage. Its dumb as hell. Not to mention unlacing you boots and throwing them should take at least 10 to 20 seconds. If they are a back pack item, okay, but still shoes are not doing any damage to anyone unless you are a roach or something.

Are you using realism argument? Here is the rule:

Improvised Weapons

Sometimes characters don't have their weapons and have to attack with whatever is at hand. An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands, such as broken glass, a table leg, a frying pan, a wagon wheel, or a dead goblin.

Often, an improvised weapon is similar to an actual weapon and can be treated as such. For example, a table leg is akin to a club. At the GM's option, a character proficient with a weapon can use a similar object as if it were that weapon and use his or her proficiency bonus.

An object that bears no resemblance to a weapon deals 1d4 damage (the GM assigns a damage type appropriate to the object). If a character uses a ranged weapon to make a melee attack, or throws a melee weapon that does not have the thrown property, it also deals 1d4 damage. An improvised thrown weapon has a normal range of 20 feet and a long range of 60 feet

shoes should do no damage. Can you throw an apple at a dragon and kill it? Honestly an apple would do more damage than shoes. There should be some semblance or reality, yes. You should not be able to sit down and unlace your shoes and then throw them and have them do as much damage as a combat dagger and have it take less time than it would to swing sword. otherwise, why have rules at all? Why not just say you pick up pebbles and throw them for 2d12? Whats the difference?

Getting mad at Larian for implementing the rules as written: the post

 

[holla_cabezas_de_mierda]

A dagger? Ok. An axe? Ok. A fire flask..ok...shoes? If somebody threw shoes and hit you from 30 feet away and you are wearing Armour they are doing no damage. Its dumb as hell. Not to mention unlacing you boots and throwing them should take at least 10 to 20 seconds. If they are a back pack item, okay, but still shoes are not doing any damage to anyone unless you are a roach or something.

Are you using realism argument? Here is the rule:

Improvised Weapons

Sometimes characters don't have their weapons and have to attack with whatever is at hand. An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands, such as broken glass, a table leg, a frying pan, a wagon wheel, or a dead goblin.

Often, an improvised weapon is similar to an actual weapon and can be treated as such. For example, a table leg is akin to a club. At the GM's option, a character proficient with a weapon can use a similar object as if it were that weapon and use his or her proficiency bonus.

An object that bears no resemblance to a weapon deals 1d4 damage (the GM assigns a damage type appropriate to the object). If a character uses a ranged weapon to make a melee attack, or throws a melee weapon that does not have the thrown property, it also deals 1d4 damage. An improvised thrown weapon has a normal range of 20 feet and a long range of 60 feet

shoes should do no damage. Can you throw an apple at a dragon and kill it? Honestly an apple would do more damage than shoes. There should be some semblance or reality, yes. You should not be able to sit down and unlace your shoes and then throw them and have them do as much damage as a combat dagger and have it take less time than it would to swing sword. otherwise, why have rules at all? Why not just say you pick up pebbles and throw them for 2d12? Whats the difference?

Getting mad at Larian for implementing the rules as written: the post

boot throwing is retarded as fuck. Don't care if they are in the rules. Its fucking dumb. What other items of clothing do damage? Does that mean my shirt also does 1d4 damage? My socks? Your bra?

 

[rusty_shackleford]

A dagger? Ok. An axe? Ok. A fire flask..ok...shoes? If somebody threw shoes and hit you from 30 feet away and you are wearing Armour they are doing no damage. Its dumb as hell. Not to mention unlacing you boots and throwing them should take at least 10 to 20 seconds. If they are a back pack item, okay, but still shoes are not doing any damage to anyone unless you are a roach or something.

Are you using realism argument? Here is the rule:

Improvised Weapons

Sometimes characters don't have their weapons and have to attack with whatever is at hand. An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands, such as broken glass, a table leg, a frying pan, a wagon wheel, or a dead goblin.

Often, an improvised weapon is similar to an actual weapon and can be treated as such. For example, a table leg is akin to a club. At the GM's option, a character proficient with a weapon can use a similar object as if it were that weapon and use his or her proficiency bonus.

An object that bears no resemblance to a weapon deals 1d4 damage (the GM assigns a damage type appropriate to the object). If a character uses a ranged weapon to make a melee attack, or throws a melee weapon that does not have the thrown property, it also deals 1d4 damage. An improvised thrown weapon has a normal range of 20 feet and a long range of 60 feet

shoes should do no damage. Can you throw an apple at a dragon and kill it? Honestly an apple would do more damage than shoes. There should be some semblance or reality, yes. You should not be able to sit down and unlace your shoes and then throw them and have them do as much damage as a combat dagger and have it take less time than it would to swing sword. otherwise, why have rules at all? Why not just say you pick up pebbles and throw them for 2d12? Whats the difference?

Getting mad at Larian for implementing the rules as written: the post

boot throwing is retarded as fuck. Don't care if they are in the rules. Its fucking dumb. What other items of clothing do damage? Does that mean my shirt also does 1d4 damage? My socks? Your bra?

Go complain to wizards of the coast

 

[Ontopoly]

Getting mad at Larian for implementing the rules as written: the post

My favorite feature in dnd is the day night cycle.

 

[holla_cabezas_de_mierda]

A dagger? Ok. An axe? Ok. A fire flask..ok...shoes? If somebody threw shoes and hit you from 30 feet away and you are wearing Armour they are doing no damage. Its dumb as hell. Not to mention unlacing you boots and throwing them should take at least 10 to 20 seconds. If they are a back pack item, okay, but still shoes are not doing any damage to anyone unless you are a roach or something.

Are you using realism argument? Here is the rule:

Improvised Weapons

Sometimes characters don't have their weapons and have to attack with whatever is at hand. An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands, such as broken glass, a table leg, a frying pan, a wagon wheel, or a dead goblin.

Often, an improvised weapon is similar to an actual weapon and can be treated as such. For example, a table leg is akin to a club. At the GM's option, a character proficient with a weapon can use a similar object as if it were that weapon and use his or her proficiency bonus.

An object that bears no resemblance to a weapon deals 1d4 damage (the GM assigns a damage type appropriate to the object). If a character uses a ranged weapon to make a melee attack, or throws a melee weapon that does not have the thrown property, it also deals 1d4 damage. An improvised thrown weapon has a normal range of 20 feet and a long range of 60 feet

shoes should do no damage. Can you throw an apple at a dragon and kill it? Honestly an apple would do more damage than shoes. There should be some semblance or reality, yes. You should not be able to sit down and unlace your shoes and then throw them and have them do as much damage as a combat dagger and have it take less time than it would to swing sword. otherwise, why have rules at all? Why not just say you pick up pebbles and throw them for 2d12? Whats the difference?

Getting mad at Larian for implementing the rules as written: the post

boot throwing is retarded as fuck. Don't care if they are in the rules. Its fucking dumb. What other items of clothing do damage? Does that mean my shirt also does 1d4 damage? My socks? Your bra?

Go complain to wizards of the coast

Larian is making the game and they don't seem to have any trouble changing the rules, for instance making it more likely to hit, an adding their trademark barrels of acid, chemicals and oil stacked deep into the wilderness and unexplored dungeon areas of the world.

So, Wizards could change the rule, but it does not mean Larian would change it too. I get the feeling Larian loves the idea of boot throwing, its right up there with cheese jokes and skeleton romance. I think they would keep it no matter what wizards of the coast changed or did not change. Larian loves stupid shit, they can't help themselves, so complaining to them makes more sense even if its futile-- because ultimately they will do what they want no matter what the actual rules might be. The truth is its not changing, so just bitching about it is the best I can hope for.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

A dagger? Ok. An axe? Ok. A fire flask..ok...shoes? If somebody threw shoes and hit you from 30 feet away and you are wearing Armour they are doing no damage. Its dumb as hell. Not to mention unlacing you boots and throwing them should take at least 10 to 20 seconds. If they are a back pack item, okay, but still shoes are not doing any damage to anyone unless you are a roach or something.

Are you using realism argument? Here is the rule:

Improvised Weapons

Sometimes characters don't have their weapons and have to attack with whatever is at hand. An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands, such as broken glass, a table leg, a frying pan, a wagon wheel, or a dead goblin.

Often, an improvised weapon is similar to an actual weapon and can be treated as such. For example, a table leg is akin to a club. At the GM's option, a character proficient with a weapon can use a similar object as if it were that weapon and use his or her proficiency bonus.

An object that bears no resemblance to a weapon deals 1d4 damage (the GM assigns a damage type appropriate to the object). If a character uses a ranged weapon to make a melee attack, or throws a melee weapon that does not have the thrown property, it also deals 1d4 damage. An improvised thrown weapon has a normal range of 20 feet and a long range of 60 feet

shoes should do no damage. Can you throw an apple at a dragon and kill it? Honestly an apple would do more damage than shoes. There should be some semblance or reality, yes. You should not be able to sit down and unlace your shoes and then throw them and have them do as much damage as a combat dagger and have it take less time than it would to swing sword. otherwise, why have rules at all? Why not just say you pick up pebbles and throw them for 2d12? Whats the difference?

Getting mad at Larian for implementing the rules as written: the post

boot throwing is retarded as fuck. Don't care if they are in the rules. Its fucking dumb. What other items of clothing do damage? Does that mean my shirt also does 1d4 damage? My socks? Your bra?

Go complain to wizards of the coast

Larian is making the game and they don't seem to have any trouble changing the rules, for instance making it more likely to hit, an adding their trademark barrels of acid, chemicals and oil stacked deep into the wilderness and unexplored dungeon areas of the world.

So, Wizards could change the rule, but it does not mean Larian would change it too. I get the feeling Larian loves the idea of boot throwing, its right up there with cheese jokes and skeleton romance. I think they would keep it no matter what wizards of the coast changed or did not change. Larian loves stupid shit, they can't help themselves, so complaining to them makes more sense even if its futile-- because ultimately they will do what they want no matter what the actual rules might be. The truth is its not changing, so just bitching about it is the best I can hope for.

I throw my boot at you

 

[Valky]

 

[Elex]

I like to play competitive aoe2. It's still kicking even though it's been around for a long time. At least the people in charge of that game know how to treat a series properly.

Check age of empire 3 and 4 before talking.

 

[Elex]

Can you fucking autists please stop? RTWP is good because when you watch Boromir and Aragorn defend the hobbits in Moria, the entire scene doesn't freeze so that Boromir can make his move, thwack an orc on the head and then freeze in turn.

Turd-based is for people who like numbers, not adventures, it's as simple as that.

You mean broromir don’t stand still while uruk hai spam arrows?

 

[Ontopoly]

I like to play competitive aoe2. It's still kicking even though it's been around for a long time. At least the people in charge of that game know how to treat a series properly.

Check age of empire 3 and 4 before talking.

They came back around with the definitive edition. I believe all people are capable of redemption, no matter how low they've fallen.

 

[Elex]

Unrelated to the previous games in almost everything to the point it's a different franchise.

But Baldur's Gate 3 name sells more than Divinity Original Sin 3.

That's the reality, we all know that, regardless of Larian fanboysm or hate.

Is the reverse, Dos 2 name sell more than BG name.

the numbers are not even conparable.

the sales numbers of BG1/2 was good 20 years ago, now any random game pubblished on pc and consoles sell 10x BG numbers.

 

[Elex]

Wait until you find out that tabletop D&D employed real time gameplay elements... wait, who am I kidding, you will still be shilling.

Tabletop is turn based with pause.

 

[Elex]

"It" in a sense whatever is being sold under BG trademark - of course not. Just like in Larian case. I'm very clear about what kind of "it" I want.

Sent from my NX551J using Tapatalk

That sound like you will never like it no matter what they do.

 

[Elex]

A proper BG3 si not a Beamdog's game using BG1 assets.

A proper Baldur's Gate 3 would have the overall aesthetic of BG1/2 with more or less subtle changes and visual elements that would make it recognizable by the fans of the franchise and would preserve the writing which is "distinctively non-modern in style and employs the vocabulary and tone characteristic of Forgotten Realms literature."

So show me your pathfinder pledge, both pathfinder games.

 

[Harthwain]

shoes should do no damage. Can you throw an apple at a dragon and kill it? Honestly an apple would do more damage than shoes though, because I could at least throw it like a baseball and get some speed on it like 70 MPH. Shoes are going to tumble and have no force behind them at all.

There should be some semblance of reality, yes, or otherwise what are we doing? Why do we have the rules? You should not be able to sit down and unlace your shoes and then throw them and have them do as much damage as a combat dagger and have it take less time than it would to swing sword. otherwise, why have rules at all? Why not just say you pick up pebbles and throw them for 2d12? Whats the difference?

I understand your point (I like semi-realistic and simulationist aspects in games myself), but that's a very selective approach to take to a game that's about the rules. Holding against Larian the fact that they are actually implementing the rules very faithfully (all things considered) is nothing short of insane. It's like a child complaining "Maaaamaaa! I don't waaaannaaaa!".

It also shows how many people here simply have no idea what they're talking about. Probably because they didn't touch anything else than 3.5, so they are talking out of their asses like, uh... "resident authorities on everything rpg", rather than checking out if they are talking bullshit or not. That is pretty sad. I am all for criticizing Larian, but there should be a solid ground for that, in my opinion. Otherwise it's pointless.

By the way, do we know anything about modding the game for the singleplayer (it's mentioned that it's up to a DM to change the values for throwing objects)?

 

[Elex]

-We're doing so much innovation!
-Like what?
-Well, we're turn based, and we have cinematics!
-Erm... okay. BTW do you have multiclassing?
-No, not at the moment

Classic D&D experience folks.

well multi classing is a variant house rule, fuck you sorcadin players.

 

[Anonona]

Larian is making the game and they don't seem to have any trouble changing the rules, for instance making it more likely to hit, an adding their trademark barrels of acid, chemicals and oil stacked deep into the wilderness and unexplored dungeon areas of the world.

Where did this come from? As far as I'm aware, the chances of hit follows the rules of PnP but presents the info in percentiles for more clarity. You can see the real rolls on the logs. Also we still don't know how their encounters will really be designed.

 

[NJClaw]

This thread enlightened me: RTwP is the superior system because you can fight 400 gibberlings and get bored watching the same meaningless "sword swing" animations, periodically pausing to throw in the occasional fireball, and that's all I want from my rpgs.

This entire thread makes me wish Larian had gone with RTwP, just to avoid 200 pages of bullshit. I would still be excited for the game, because a well-developed RTwP D&D game is still better than no D&D game. But, apparently, for a lot of people no D&D game is still better than a well-developed TB D&D game and that's so retarded I can no longer process reality.

Can we at least agree that a TB D&D game is better than getting AIDS? Please, just give me this one

 

[Dwarvophile]

The fuck you're talking about? Out of literally EVERYBODY in this thread you're the one who uses the goddamn royal "we" here.

I'm not using the royal we, I just have a hamster in my pocket.

 

[Elex]

shoes should do no damage. Can you throw an apple at a dragon and kill it? Honestly an apple would do more damage than shoes though, because I could at least throw it like a baseball and get some speed on it like 70 MPH. Shoes are going to tumble and have no force behind them at all.

There should be some semblance of reality, yes, or otherwise what are we doing? Why do we have the rules? You should not be able to sit down and unlace your shoes and then throw them and have them do as much damage as a combat dagger and have it take less time than it would to swing sword. otherwise, why have rules at all? Why not just say you pick up pebbles and throw them for 2d12? Whats the difference?

if the players want to throw apple at a dragon i will allow them to roll for it. imagine if he crit i will describe the dragon chocking after shallowing the apple.

then the dragon will grab the player fly up 120 feet and let it go.

 

[holla_cabezas_de_mierda]

Larian is making the game and they don't seem to have any trouble changing the rules, for instance making it more likely to hit, an adding their trademark barrels of acid, chemicals and oil stacked deep into the wilderness and unexplored dungeon areas of the world.

Where did this come from? As far as I'm aware, the chances of hit follows the rules of PnP but presents the info in percentiles for more clarity. You can see the real rolls on the logs. Also we still don't know how their encounters will really be designed.

https://www.pcgamer.com/baldurs-gate-3-will-combine-the-best-of-divinity-and-dandd-5th-edition/

Swen "You miss a lot in D&D—if the dice are bad, you miss," he says. "That doesn't work well in a videogame. If I do that, you're going to review it and say it's shit."



Larian and swen can't control themselves. Just like they promised two "funny" Larian joke responses in every conversation choice, they will implement environmental damage exploding barrels/puddles in every single encounter. he will tell his designers there must be at least "X" number of exploding puddles or barrels or whatever, and "X" number of ledges to jump up on, and "X" number of boxes to stack in every encounter, because Swen does not know how to limit himself once he has what to him is a good idea. He just has a nerdgasm and spazes out, spittle flying everywhere.

He thinks the more times you use the idea the better it becomes. The more times you say "cheese" the funnier it is. The more exploding barrels, the more fun it creates. That is how things work. If something is "Fun" then you can assign it a number like lets say "6" and then each time you implement it you can multiply the fun by that factor. Thats how fun and humor work to swen.

So if dipping his balls in fire is '6' on the fun scale, then doing it 800 times means he had 6(800)=4800 fun. That is how you design games and that is how you design magic items and humor.... or anything really. He trademarked and patented it.