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

[passerby]

It's not 2AP TB system... Your movement is separate from your action.

So, it's even worse than 2AP, but it's also what D&D always was and it's just simple enough to handle at gaming table by everyone.

The thing that makes D&D enjoyable, is extremely wide and creative selection of spells, special abilities, statuses, buffs and debuffs, the basic core of the system is bsb.

 

[Elex]

I've played DoS2 so unless I see something radically change I don't think I will. DoS has a shit story, shit companions, shit writing in general, shit atmosphere, shit easy combat, slow shit animations, shit Itemisation, shit design aimed at boring coop, etc.

What is BG3 really looking to change? The Itemisation?

Notice how I didn't mention TBvsRtwP?

Better itemization, better ruleset, better spells, better class system, better mosters, etc..

 

[rusty_shackleford]

LDS: larian derangement syndrome
victims of it have gone so insane that they now beg for rtwp games and call D&D trash

 

[Elex]

Your movement is separate from your action.

The differences are minuscule, and to 5E's disadvantage at that. Instead of freely assignable action pool representative to your character's time share in combat round, you have:
1 AP) a dedicated movement pool that gets pretty much wasted if unused, which is ridiculous.
2+ AP) bastardized action pool (if you have bonus actions), that can be spent only on single quantified activities like attack or bonus move.

Systems like that are OK for P&P because they're there for their simplicity to be resolved by humans. Plus GMs have infinite capability to interpret player's declarations according to common sense. But P&P RPGs don't equate cRPGs, which have always had their own way of presenting combat because it's trivial for a machine to represent more numerically complex systems like AP proper. With regular action pool the control over characters is much more precise and allows virtually any combination of actions, taking things like turning or varied attack times into consideration. In fact both RTWP and proper TB are superior to that, because both allow more complexity. Simplification is the steeple of decline.

You just randomly assume how 5e work.
Movement don’t work like that.
Action don’t work like that.
Bonus action don’t work like that.

for example you know that in 5e a lvl 11 fighter can attack move attack move attack move attack move attack move attack moveAnd use a bonus action?


6 different attack at 6 different target and a 7th attack if the fighter have haste on him, and a 8th attack with bonus action if dual wield or poleweapon master..

also if the fighter is battle master he can perform his manouver during each one of his attack.

That stuff is impossible to do outside of turn based combat.

we need to put a 5e test before talking about BG3.

also 5e is not that easy and dumbed down, there is tons of people that still have no idea how bonus action/reaction work, and how many spells they can cast in a turn, how free interaction work etc etc etc...

it’s easy to start but not all rules are simple.

 

[passerby]

Your movement is separate from your action.

The differences are minuscule, and to 5E's disadvantage at that. Instead of freely assignable action pool representative to your character's time share in combat round, you have:
1 AP) a dedicated movement pool that gets pretty much wasted if unused, which is ridiculous.
2+ AP) bastardized action pool (if you have bonus actions), that can be spent only on single quantified activities like attack or bonus move.

Systems like that are OK for P&P because they're there for their simplicity to be resolved by humans. Plus GMs have infinite capability to interpret player's declarations according to common sense. But P&P RPGs don't equate cRPGs, which have always had their own way of presenting combat because it's trivial for a machine to represent more numerically complex systems like AP proper. With regular action pool the control over characters is much more precise and allows virtually any combination of actions, taking things like turning or varied attack times into consideration. In fact both RTWP and proper TB are superior to that, because both allow more complexity. Simplification is the steeple of decline.

I'd also prefer my unrelated to licensed system tactical CRPGs to abandon their PnP roots in this regard, but the game is an adaptation of D&D ruleset, for people who like D&D. It is what it is and it's pointless to expect anything else in a licensed product.

 

[Van-d-all]

for example you know that in 5e a lvl 11 fighter can attack move attack move attack move attack move attack move attack moveAnd use a bonus action?

You are trying to sell me something freely possible to any character with high enough AP and/or low enough attack cost in any decent TB game as a high point gimmick in BG3...

also 5e is not that easy and dumbed down, there is tons of people that still have no idea how bonus action/reaction work, and how many spells they can cast in a turn,

If only there was a way to represent it clearly. Like, say, a set AP cost in clearly defined AP pool, but yea, it's 2020, let's reinvent the wheel!

 

[Elex]

for example you know that in 5e a lvl 11 fighter can attack move attack move attack move attack move attack move attack moveAnd use a bonus action?

You are trying to sell me something freely possible to any character with high enough AP and/or low enough attack cost in any decent TB game as a high point gimmick in BG3...

also 5e is not that easy and dumbed down, there is tons of people that still have no idea how bonus action/reaction work, and how many spells they can cast in a turn,

If only there was a way to represent it clearly. Like, say, a set AP cost in clearly defined AP pool, but yea, it's 2020, let's reinvent the wheel!

You are missing the point where 5e don’t work like nuxcom, but work like a multi AP game because a single action in 5e don’t mean “you do a single thing”

 

[Cryomancer]

I've played DoS2 so unless I see something radically change I don't think I will. DoS has a shit story, shit companions, shit writing in general, shit atmosphere, shit easy combat, slow shit animations, shit Itemisation, shit design aimed at boring coop, etc.

What is BG3 really looking to change? The Itemisation?

I'm too cheap to purchase it. I'll pirate it instead!

LOL... I will wait to see how much from divinity is on it.

D:OS2 has as lot of problems

• Cooldowns
• Bows with 13m range
• Wow style endless number inflation on gear
• Nothing epic to be learned. IS not like gothic 1/2 where when you get a new spell circle, a lot of opportunities open and if you are focused on melee, getting the Uriziel or Beliar's Claw is a HUGE progression.
• Dumb initiative system
• Dumb armor system
• Too much focus gimmicky environmental puzzles
• Extremely slow animations that makes even trash encounters takes eternities

Some of DOS2 problems are part of BG3(range of bows and the slow animations) but most D:OS2 BS aren't on BG3. At least on the demo.

------------------------------------------------------------------

And to be really honest i liked the BG3 gameplay; probably because i was expecting a turn based sword coast legends game and see a decent(not masteripiece) RPG was unexpected

 

[Van-d-all]

for example you know that in 5e a lvl 11 fighter can attack move attack move attack move attack move attack move attack moveAnd use a bonus action?

You are trying to sell me something freely possible to any character with high enough AP and/or low enough attack cost in any decent TB game as a high point gimmick in BG3...

also 5e is not that easy and dumbed down, there is tons of people that still have no idea how bonus action/reaction work, and how many spells they can cast in a turn,

If only there was a way to represent it clearly. Like, say, a set AP cost in clearly defined AP pool, but yea, it's 2020, let's reinvent the wheel!

You are missing the point where 5e don’t work like nuxcom, but work like a multi AP game because a single action in 5e don’t mean “you do a single thing”

I'm missing the point of shilling convolution and branding it as accessibility, yes.

 

[Jimmious]

The only real similarity to nuXCOM is the initiative system/ team turns.
Other than that you can theoretically do the following with a character during a turn: run-do an action-run-do a bonus action-run a bit more
This is absolutely not comparable to the 2AP system where you can only run-do something.

 

[Van-d-all]

The only real similarity to nuXCOM is the initiative system/ team turns.
Other than that you can theoretically do the following with a character during a turn: run-do an action-run-do a bonus action-run a bit more
This is absolutely not comparable to the 2AP system where you can only run-do something.

It's absolutely comparable by being confined to artificially convoluted non-uniform and more restrictive action system, while far simpler and elastic systems were being implemented for years now. Although I agree, that for some characters it won't be as bad as strict 2AP.

 

[Jimmious]

The only real similarity to nuXCOM is the initiative system/ team turns.
Other than that you can theoretically do the following with a character during a turn: run-do an action-run-do a bonus action-run a bit more
This is absolutely not comparable to the 2AP system where you can only run-do something.

It's absolutely comparable by being confined to artificially convoluted non-uniform and more restrictive action system, while far simpler and elastic systems were being implemented for years now.

There are no TUs or APs in AD&D and there have never been. You can say you don't like DnD, that's fine. But I think that you are just not willing to admit that you exaggerated and you are defending something that makes no sense

 

[Van-d-all]

The only real similarity to nuXCOM is the initiative system/ team turns.
Other than that you can theoretically do the following with a character during a turn: run-do an action-run-do a bonus action-run a bit more
This is absolutely not comparable to the 2AP system where you can only run-do something.

It's absolutely comparable by being confined to artificially convoluted non-uniform and more restrictive action system, while far simpler and elastic systems were being implemented for years now.

There are no TUs or APs in AD&D and there have never been. You can say you don't like DnD, that's fine. But I think that you are just not willing to admit that you exaggerated and you are defending something that makes no sense

Stop strawmanning. DnD is P&P, and should you actually care to read what I wrote, (most) P&P systems prioritize being fluent in gameplay and that's OK, because GM's reasoning will (and should) always outrule any system when situation calls for it. We are talking cRPG which lack that, but have lots of computing power. I don't care about retards trying to say I don't like D&D in general because they lack actual arguments, but you seemed to be reasonable.

 

[Jimmious]

The only real similarity to nuXCOM is the initiative system/ team turns.
Other than that you can theoretically do the following with a character during a turn: run-do an action-run-do a bonus action-run a bit more
This is absolutely not comparable to the 2AP system where you can only run-do something.

It's absolutely comparable by being confined to artificially convoluted non-uniform and more restrictive action system, while far simpler and elastic systems were being implemented for years now.

There are no TUs or APs in AD&D and there have never been. You can say you don't like DnD, that's fine. But I think that you are just not willing to admit that you exaggerated and you are defending something that makes no sense

Stop strawmanning. DnD is P&P, and should you actually care to read what I wrote, P&P systems prioritize being fluent in gameplay and that's OK. We are talking cRPG. I don't care about retards trying to say I don't like D&D in general because they lack actual arguments, buy you seemed to be reasonable.

Then I don't get what are you proposing. They want to make a DnD game, you want them to implement completely new systems and somehow adjust everything to them?

 

[Strange Fellow]

There's a massive, massive difference between doing what nuXCOM the squad tactics game did (which by the way is bad not because of 2 AP, but because of silly design choices across the board of which 2 AP is only one), and a fantasy game with a system built on a decade-long standard for how turns should work.

 

[Grotesque]

Retard time with pause.

I enjoy both modes, turn based and real time. On M&M VI, when i an facing a lot of trash mobs, i put RT. When i an facing a challenging encounter. o use turn based. IMO real time with pause is better in action aspect and turn is better in tactical aspect.

That said, ToEE is amazing because the animations are fast, and you can enable concurrent turns, speeding a lot the enemy moves, removing the greatest problem of turn based games(watching the same animation of 10 kobolds if you are facing 10 kobolds) every turn.

Sometimes I have nightmaires where z0mbies in Dead State each move in consecutive turns...

 

[Van-d-all]

The only real similarity to nuXCOM is the initiative system/ team turns.
Other than that you can theoretically do the following with a character during a turn: run-do an action-run-do a bonus action-run a bit more
This is absolutely not comparable to the 2AP system where you can only run-do something.

It's absolutely comparable by being confined to artificially convoluted non-uniform and more restrictive action system, while far simpler and elastic systems were being implemented for years now.

There are no TUs or APs in AD&D and there have never been. You can say you don't like DnD, that's fine. But I think that you are just not willing to admit that you exaggerated and you are defending something that makes no sense

Stop strawmanning. DnD is P&P, and should you actually care to read what I wrote, P&P systems prioritize being fluent in gameplay and that's OK. We are talking cRPG. I don't care about retards trying to say I don't like D&D in general because they lack actual arguments, buy you seemed to be reasonable.

Then I don't get what are you proposing. They want to make a DnD game, you want them to implement completely new systems and somehow adjust everything to them?

Well, kind of, I guess. What I'm saying is that the current P&P system of D&D is mostly fine tuned to suit human GMs, and I'd rather have it represented by regular AP pool (like cRPGs did before), simply because it will always lack the flexibility of a GM, and the 5E system is more convoluted yet still more restrictive. It's not coincidental that cRPGs rarely implement P&P rulesets 1:1.

Sometimes I have nightmaires where z0mbies in Dead State each move in consecutive turns...

You should try Paradise Cracked then.

 

[Jimmious]

The only real similarity to nuXCOM is the initiative system/ team turns.
Other than that you can theoretically do the following with a character during a turn: run-do an action-run-do a bonus action-run a bit more
This is absolutely not comparable to the 2AP system where you can only run-do something.

It's absolutely comparable by being confined to artificially convoluted non-uniform and more restrictive action system, while far simpler and elastic systems were being implemented for years now.

There are no TUs or APs in AD&D and there have never been. You can say you don't like DnD, that's fine. But I think that you are just not willing to admit that you exaggerated and you are defending something that makes no sense

Stop strawmanning. DnD is P&P, and should you actually care to read what I wrote, P&P systems prioritize being fluent in gameplay and that's OK. We are talking cRPG. I don't care about retards trying to say I don't like D&D in general because they lack actual arguments, buy you seemed to be reasonable.

Then I don't get what are you proposing. They want to make a DnD game, you want them to implement completely new systems and somehow adjust everything to them?

Well, kind of, I guess. What I'm saying is that the current P&P system of D&D is mostly fine tuned to suit human GMs, and I'd rather have it represented by regular AP pool (like cRPGs did before), simply because it will always lack the flexibility of a GM, and the 5E system is more convoluted yet still more restrictive. It's not coincidental that cRPGs rarely implement P&P rulesets 1:1.

I think that would be a very risky thing to do - imagine all the balancing issues. If for example they decided to use some sort of an Action Point system, just deciding what each and every possible action should cost would be.... crazy. They'd have to "reinvent the wheel".

 

[Grotesque]

What impact? Nobody at Larian will read this thread. Even the Steam forums have more of a chance of having an impact.

Simp!y not true

eSwen reads this thread

Bester can confirm this, he knows everything that goes down at Larian

 

[Van-d-all]

I think that would be a very risky thing to do - imagine all the balancing issues. If for example they decided to use some sort of an Action Point system, just deciding what each and every possible action should cost would be.... crazy. They'd have to "reinvent the wheel".

Well fine, accusing reinvention is a double edged sword I guess. I've had my share of weird P&P systems (one even used logarithmic slipstick) trying to be super precise since it was kind of a running theme in '90 RPG, and it always boiled to that noting can substitute GMs common sense (which separates good GMs from bad BTW). Not to go off on a tangent - I believe cRPG devs also knew that, and RTWP origin story aside, that's why it was virtually obvious that P&P systems need to be transitioned to cRPGs of old - because to some extent they rely on something no computer can achieve, and as such I find it weird that Larian finds a P&P system acceptable in a computer game, but I guess it has to be a WOTC/licensing issue indeed.

 

[passerby]

6 different attack at 6 different target and a 7th attack if the fighter have haste on him, and a 8th attack with bonus action if dual wield or poleweapon master.. also if the fighter is battle master he can perform his manouver during each one of his attack.

That stuff is impossible to do outside of turn based combat.

How is it not possible in RTwP ? You just click on enemy each time you want to change a target and it's only much better, since enemies don't just stand and wait for their turn, while you maul them to death with your 6 attacks.

Or did you just mean that it's impossible to take turns in RTwP ? What a revelation, who would have thought ?

 

[fantadomat]

Ahh it is not the argument,but a bunch of the people that argued.

Also for all the sailor bros in here.

Yes, the problem is with the quality of the debate. From "quality shit" to just "shit".

IDK, for me lack of day-night cycle sucks, the writing is pretty much a lost battle, and the best I'm hoping for from the game is at least to have fun combat. However, based on my previous experience if a game shouts inane stuff at me all the timе, I just can't enjoy it for the combat alone.

So, for me it will most probably be ruined by Larian and their juvenile bullshit.

The game lacks in enough department that you could say "to each their own" and end up with with a room of people that won't play it. At this point the game lacks any connection to BG games and lore,and old school d&d. The only people that are still left prising the game are people that hated IE and the games made in it. I don't see what is to look forward to in this game,the writing and the lore are broken,there is 4 people party,not isometric,not rtwp,no vancian magic,no day/night cycle,everyone is a bi-faggot romance shit,plastic graphics,etc etc.

 

[Elex]

6 different attack at 6 different target and a 7th attack if the fighter have haste on him, and a 8th attack with bonus action if dual wield or poleweapon master.. also if the fighter is battle master he can perform his manouver during each one of his attack.

That stuff is impossible to do outside of turn based combat.

How is it not possible in RTwP ? You just click on enemy each time you want to change a target and it's only much better, since enemies don't just stand and wait for their turn, while you maul them to death with your 6 attacks.

Because in 5e movement and action are 2 separate things that don't limit each other if a monk have 120 ft of movement he can attack the enemy close to him move 120 feet and attack another enemy 3 times.

Animation will translate that in a total mess the fighter will look like a super sayan or some other retarded anime like jojo that attack and teleport from target to target (because it all happen in 6 seconds).

Translate that in a RTWP will break the balance of 5e at the point of not being 5e anymore.

Enemy in 5e don't simply stand and wait, they have reactions, and you should change your tactics when they use one.

This is why is important that larian creat a good reaction system in the game.

Solasata demo showed all this stuff pretty well.

 

[Anonona]

6 different attack at 6 different target and a 7th attack if the fighter have haste on him, and a 8th attack with bonus action if dual wield or poleweapon master.. also if the fighter is battle master he can perform his manouver during each one of his attack.

That stuff is impossible to do outside of turn based combat.

How is it not possible in RTwP ? You just click on enemy each time you want to change a target and it's only much better, since enemies don't just stand and wait for their turn, while you maul them to death with your 6 attacks.

Or did you just mean that it's impossible to take turns in RTwP ? What a revelation, who would have thought ?

I think he is referring to making all of those actions on a single turn/round, not in multiple turns. That is why he mentions a 7th attack if the fighter has haste and an 8th with the proper bonus action, as those two things increase the amount of possible actions a character can make in a single turn. I guess it could be possible in RtwP if you pause after an enemy's death to allow the player to choose the next target without the enemy attacking. Also most RtwP game are not actually simultaneous even if they look like it, they are still following rounds and initiative, so enemies actions usually do not take effect before you finished your attacks. If we are talking about an hypothetical RtwP system without rounds, then yeah, i think it could work like that.

no vancian magic.

But the game uses the vanician system of magic.

 

[DeepOcean]

99% of the guys here who is criticizing BG3 will purchase on the first week.

Nah, learned my lesson doing that with DOS 2, no way I will waste my money buying the sequel day one.