Baldur's Gate Why do YOU hate Baldur's Gate 3?

[JohnSmith24601]

But then they don't tell you whether it's a light weapon you're holding.

I see you have the inventory opened, but do they show you this in the equipment screen though? I didn't even notice it because of the clusterfuck of a UI that they have.

 

[KevinV12000]

I was agreeing with you, you fucking *merican.

I'm Italian, but nice try.

And to my defense you didn't exactly worded it like an agreement.

Love your name. "Wanted in 14 counties of this state...."

 

[rusty_shackleford]

But then they don't tell you whether it's a light weapon you're holding.

I see you have the inventory opened, but do they show you this in the equipment screen though? I didn't even notice it because of the clusterfuck of a UI that they have.

Just hover over the weapon in the equipment screen.

 

[Black]

But wait, there's more!
Dual wielding is very limited, for some reason two short swords is fine but a rapier and a dagger is a no no. Don't know if it's by design or part of the EA charm.

That's 5e. When you're dual-wielding both weapons have to be Light (unless you get a feat), and a rapier isn't.

Simply being behind someone, having an advantage etc doesn't make you sneak attack, you have to choose sneak attack, which is its own special attack instead of a mechanic. Also you can't sneak attack while dual wielding. The best you can do is sneak attack and then attack with your off-hand as a bonus action but those won't be sneak attacks even if they should be per rules.

This is retarded, it definitely should be triggered automatically when you qualify and should work with dual-wielding. You can only apply Sneak damage once per turn but dual-wield should let you make 2 attacks, if you hit with the first one you apply your Sneak damage and the second attack is just normal, and if you miss with the first but hit with the second then the second should apply Sneak damage.

So you're saying rogues only get one sneak attack PER TURN, no matter if they're dual wielding or how many attacks they have?

 

[rusty_shackleford]

But wait, there's more!
Dual wielding is very limited, for some reason two short swords is fine but a rapier and a dagger is a no no. Don't know if it's by design or part of the EA charm.

That's 5e. When you're dual-wielding both weapons have to be Light (unless you get a feat), and a rapier isn't.

Simply being behind someone, having an advantage etc doesn't make you sneak attack, you have to choose sneak attack, which is its own special attack instead of a mechanic. Also you can't sneak attack while dual wielding. The best you can do is sneak attack and then attack with your off-hand as a bonus action but those won't be sneak attacks even if they should be per rules.

This is retarded, it definitely should be triggered automatically when you qualify and should work with dual-wielding. You can only apply Sneak damage once per turn but dual-wield should let you make 2 attacks, if you hit with the first one you apply your Sneak damage and the second attack is just normal, and if you miss with the first but hit with the second then the second should apply Sneak damage.

So you're saying rogues only get one sneak attack PER TURN, no matter if they're dual wielding or how many attacks they have?

The classes are still being heavily worked on, I wouldn't judge balance based on anything that's currently ingame.

 

[Black]

But wait, there's more!
Dual wielding is very limited, for some reason two short swords is fine but a rapier and a dagger is a no no. Don't know if it's by design or part of the EA charm.

That's 5e. When you're dual-wielding both weapons have to be Light (unless you get a feat), and a rapier isn't.

Simply being behind someone, having an advantage etc doesn't make you sneak attack, you have to choose sneak attack, which is its own special attack instead of a mechanic. Also you can't sneak attack while dual wielding. The best you can do is sneak attack and then attack with your off-hand as a bonus action but those won't be sneak attacks even if they should be per rules.

This is retarded, it definitely should be triggered automatically when you qualify and should work with dual-wielding. You can only apply Sneak damage once per turn but dual-wield should let you make 2 attacks, if you hit with the first one you apply your Sneak damage and the second attack is just normal, and if you miss with the first but hit with the second then the second should apply Sneak damage.

So you're saying rogues only get one sneak attack PER TURN, no matter if they're dual wielding or how many attacks they have?

The classes are still being heavily worked on, I wouldn't judge balance based on anything that's currently ingame.

I meant in 5e.

 

[Black]

By the way, if you cast Bane or Bless (which have a maximum number of targets here) you don't get to pick who gets it, the game does, AT RANDOM.
So if you have a big battle and want to Bane specific enemies- good luck.
Compare that to ToEE's clicking specific enemies/allies.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

By the way, if you cast Bane or Bless (which have a maximum number of targets here) you don't get to pick who gets it, the game does, AT RANDOM.
So if you have a big battle and want to Bane specific enemies- good luck.
Compare that to ToEE's clicking specific enemies/allies.

It's not random, it's the targets closest to the cursor. And they've acknowledged it as an issue in one of the streams.

 

[Darth Canoli]

This thread is becoming far more informative and helpful than the official one.

Now i know i'm not going to buy this before full release + 2 years and a 75% discount.

 

[jackofshadows]

Yeah, so far the most convenient way to use sneak attack to me was firing a bow shots from above. Dual-wielding is a mess but I took the feat and with two Thief's bonus action you can do 1 sneak attack and two more attacks per turn which is not bad at all. Still, they should apply sneak to every attack or don't cap it by 1d6.

 

[NJClaw]

I meant in 5e.

Yes, you get one sneak attack per turn. This means that, if somehow you get to attack in another creature's turn (thanks to an attack of opportunity), you can deal sneak attack damage twice that round. This is how it works in 5E, but I don't know if they implemented the "sneak attack with your attack of opportunity" thing in BG3. They already nerfed the rogue pretty bad, since they let you deal sneak attack damage only with your attack action (while you should be able to do it also with your bonus action, if you missed the first attack).

Still, they should apply sneak to every attack or don't cap it by 1d6.

Even with only one sneak attack per turn, the rogue still is one of the classes with the highest damage potential. However, the 1d6 cap doesn't make any sense to me.

 

[JohnSmith24601]

Agh. This sounds way too complicated than it needs to be. Sneak attack was glorious in previous games. (It's a bit op in Pathfinder, but still). Don't fix what's not broke.

 

[Ontopoly]

This thread is becoming far more informative and helpful than the official one.

Now i know i'm not going to buy this before full release + 2 years and a 75% discount.

At this point, I think it's more a matter of not wanting to waste your time on a bad game rather than what the price is. At no price will this game be worth the time, and 2+ years of development isn't going to somehow wipe away all the larian muck or make them actually competent in any way

 

[Drakortha]

Everything about 2020 is shit. Including this game. Thanks Larian for making a shit year even shittier. They couldn't even have the decency to wait until 2021. Just add it to the top of the shit pile that is 2020 alongside Cyberwank 2077.

 

[Grampy_Bone]

-Only six classes. 5e is babbys' first arrpeegee and they couldn't even put in all the classes? Hard fail. BG 1 had all the 2e base classes. This is pretty much non-negotiable for a D&D game so I don't know who to be more disappointed in, Larian or WotC.

-Le opening cinematique. I have an issue with D&D games specifically that pit you against out-of-depth monsters at low level but use dumb plot contrivances to help you win. There is no reason a bunch of level 1 newbies would stand a chance against mind flayers or cambions or have any way to survive the crash.

-Companions. If you can't put a full breadth of companion classes/alignments in the game, then you have the obligation to make the available companions non-insufferable. BG1/2 did it right--evil party members cause drama, good ones don't. The evil guys were better in combat as a tradeoff. In this game everyone causes drama. Oh look, the only healer is an evil cunt who hates the only fighter who is an arrogant cunt. Lovely. The only rogue is a fucking vampire. Why would I want ANY of these losers? (the mage is actually alright)

Ugh. Custom built party or bust.

-Character building. When I pick my class, can I see what skills and abilities I'll get when I level up? Nope. How should I pick between Fighter and Ranger, what are the tradeoffs? Warlock vs Wizard? No idea. If you don't own a 5E PHB, lol sucks 4 u. Plus who knows how they actually implemented the rules. When you level up the game doesn't make it clear you can even pick stuff. It just says "You get spells X Y Z," you have to click on the customize button to bring up the full spell selection. WTFFFFFFFFFF. I didn't realize my ranger could even pick from more spells at first. Don't make my fucking picks for me game, that's the entire fun of leveling up.

-The biggest problem: Larian world design. It's so myopic. WTF is going on? I just fell out of the sky and I'm on a beach. Time to go find a town. Except you can't, you're stuck in this tiny narrow path. God dammit, have these assholes played ONE fucking tabletop session in their lives? I have never played a D&D game that started with so little freedom, besides dungeon crawlers. Even ToEE let you visit a few places.

BG1: Whole sword coast to explore
BG2: Whole Athkatla to explore
BG3: Small beach to explore, plus the nearby woods.



If they follow the OS2 path, then each chapter will be this smallish area of narrow paths and encounters strung between inane side quests and "humor." Mixed with 5E's flaccid combat and non-existent character building, I can't picture the game as being anything other than a meandering, dull chore.

 

[Grampy_Bone]

Agh. This sounds way too complicated than it needs to be. Sneak attack was glorious in previous games. (It's a bit op in Pathfinder, but still). Don't fix what's not broke.

Don't even get me started on the sneak attack bigots.

Back in 3e a bunch of faggy DMs saw the '10d6 sneak attack' level 20 ability, imagined a dual-wield rogue getting 40d6 damage, and promptly hyperventilated over the idea of players being able to win fights.

What they forgot was:

-rogues have meh BAB and won't hit all the time
-Many things can't be sneak attacked
-The damage of other melee classes is very comparable at level 20, not to mention spellcasters
-rogues are squishy and take a lot of risk to deal this damage
-level 20 characters will fight monsters with many hundreds of HP not weak ass orcs and goblins

There's just this persistent sect of DMs who can't handle high level play and freak out every time their players get past fifth level or so. You could always tell when you met one because they would have a house rule limiting sneak attack, if not outright banning it. When I pointed out nerfing rogue damage only took away the one thing that made them competitive in combat they would screech "Powergamer!" at me while flinging cheetos and mountain dew cans.

Those are the exact people 5th Edition was made for.

 

[Black]

However, the 1d6 cap doesn't make any sense to me.

That may be the part of EA.

 

[Darth Canoli]

So, about the poll, it's now missing a few options like :
- Retarded drama queens companions
- Butchered Sneak Attack
- 6 classes...

We need 4 options to vote for because Corridor Maps is still on top of my list and 6 classes second.

I'm not a Kingmaker fan but they released their first cRPG with a million of classes.
KotC 2 has 2 billions of classes and races.
Meanwhile, BG 3 is competing with Solasta to see which one will end up with less classes...

 

[NJClaw]

We need 4 options to vote for because Corridor Maps is still on top of my list and 6 classes second.

I'm not a Kingmaker fan but they released their first cRPG with a million of classes.
KotC 2 has 2 billions of classes and races.
Meanwhile, BG 3 is competing with Solasta to see which one will end up with less classes...

It's in early access... it will feature 12 classes when it gets released as a "complete" game.

 

[Darth Canoli]

It's in early access... it will feature 12 classes when it gets released as a "complete" game.

It's better of course but still cheap with their budget.
I'm slowly switching sides, looks like WotR could be way better after all if they really sniped the kingdom management and seriously improve their quest design, encounter design, loading times (and their save size shenanigan) and turn-based mode.
That's a lot of if but even with half this, it'll probably be better than BG 3.

 

[Fedora Master]

We need 4 options to vote for because Corridor Maps is still on top of my list and 6 classes second.

I'm not a Kingmaker fan but they released their first cRPG with a million of classes.
KotC 2 has 2 billions of classes and races.
Meanwhile, BG 3 is competing with Solasta to see which one will end up with less classes...

It's in early access... it will feature 12 classes when it gets released as a "complete" game.

Considering how samey most 5e classes are, it shouldn't be hard to shit out a few more base classes.

 

[PapaPetro]

PFK was more like BG than BG3 is.

 

[sys0nar]

I feel that too many people are expecting this to be the same tier as Baldur's Gate I & II,
you can't forget this is an attempt by a different studio to make a sequel to a classic series two decades after,
if your expecting the exact same quality or better I don't know what to say,
I haven't played it because I never buy games in early access, but I am looking at peoples reviews,
all I can say is don't judge a book by it's draft.

 

[Tuco Benedicto Pacifico]

I feel that too many people are expecting this to be the same tier as Baldur's Gate I & II,
you can't forget this is an attempt by a different studio to make a sequel to a classic series two decades after,
if your expecting the exact same quality or better I don't know what to say,
I haven't played it because I never buy games in early access, but I am looking at peoples reviews,
all I can say is don't judge a book by it's draft.

There's nothing about BG2 (and even less about BG1) which is inherently "unachievable" to match. And there would already be the building blocks in place here to get a better game than both.
The problem is that when the baffling design decisions come into play, they hit like a truck.

The shitty control system, the idea to dismiss a night/day cycle as something "superfluous" except then having to come up with a long series of convoluted and stupid design around an instanced "camp" to make up for it, the limit to 4 party members, the questionable re-tuning of some mechanics (let's ignore disengage as a bonus action for a second, did they really need to tie it to the jump as well?) and so on.

 

[Tuco Benedicto Pacifico]

PFK was more like BG than BG3 is.

This is objectively true. The resemblance is far more pronounced.

It doesn't even matter if someone thinks this makes for a better or worse game, that would be a different argument to have.