Who'd have thunk picking vampire as "race" for your rogue would actually be a hindrance..
Vampirism at least on 3.5e is a huge BUFF to sorcerers...
I think the class that would benefit the most from vampirism would be monks, actually. Nearly every single stat boost is useful to the Monk in some way, and I believe there is a feat from one of the supplements (Libris Mortis, perhaps?) that allows the Monk to use their Unarmed attacks AND apply the vampire's Energy Drain attacks with each strike. The vampire's special transformations and skill boosts also synergize very well with a Monk's speed and evasive abilities.
Who'd have thunk picking vampire as "race" for your rogue would actually be a hindrance..
Vampirism at least on 3.5e is a huge BUFF to sorcerers...
I think the class that would benefit the most from vampirism would be monks, actually. Nearly every single stat boost is useful to the Monk in some way, and I believe there is a feat from one of the supplements (Libris Mortis, perhaps?) that allows the Monk to use their Unarmed attacks AND apply the vampire's Energy Drain attacks with each strike. The vampire's special transformations and skill boosts also synergize very well with a Monk's speed and evasive abilities.
Actually, sorcerer would benefit a lot too. Sorcs has high CHA, being a vampire makes him with no CON score and CHA to bonus his hit points. A sorc with 12 CON and 18 CHA, would have 22 CHA and instead of +1 per hit dice, +6. Sorcs also has low fortitude save, and his low fortitude save becomes immunity to fortitude saves.
Dealing with vampire weakness for a mid to high level sorcerer(low level characters can't become vampires, only vampire spawns), being able to control the weather for eg, negates the sunlight weakness. Monks would be great, but monks needs to be lawful. And being a vampire and lawful unless you own your own demiplane is hard.
Nick Pechenin said that you can have several "Inspiration points" in BG3, so Inspiration would work differently, something like the "fate points" in Arcanum, I assume.
Level cap 10 is not set in stone... That would be great. Only one level will get you 5th level spells and lots of class features for rangers, rogues, bards, barbarians, the extra attack for a fighter... and Lvl 12 gives you one ASI/feat more for single-class characters. I understand that would add a lot of work for features that you could only use in the endgame (I assume) but It would be amazing to have them.
Good thing they´re going to take into account "utility" spells (usually not combat-related) like "friends"
They tweaked some range and area of some spells because they are "working with a specific top-down camera". We´ll have to see about that.
They´re working in more and more reactions, like spells or the protection fighting style. Cool.
Dealing with vampire weakness for a mid to high level sorcerer(low level characters can't become vampires, only vampire spawns), being able to control the weather for eg, negates the sunlight weakness. Monks would be great, but monks needs to be lawful. And being a vampire and lawful unless you own your own demiplane is hard.
IIRC vampires have to be evil, but they could be lawful evil. Is there any other circumstances that could be problematic for a vampire to stay lawful? Genuinely curious here.
Dealing with vampire weakness for a mid to high level sorcerer(low level characters can't become vampires, only vampire spawns), being able to control the weather for eg, negates the sunlight weakness. Monks would be great, but monks needs to be lawful. And being a vampire and lawful unless you own your own demiplane is hard.
IIRC vampires have to be evil, but they could be lawful evil. Is there any other circumstances that could be problematic for a vampire to stay lawful? Genuinely curious here.
Simple, lawful follow the laws. So, how to lawfully feed upon mortals? Except by Thay, which the monarch is a epic level lich, i don't think that many lawful societies would be ok with vampires feeding on people. Mainly on sword coast. On Thay, i can see a lawful evil vampire feeding upon his slaves lawfully. but the same thing can't happen in neverwinter.
An interview with one of the devs of Larian. Rock, paper, shotgun interview (7jul)
...
This interview is impressive I have to say. You can really tell that the designer being interviewed knows his stuff, comes off as very intelligent to me, very open minded too. The analysis of why they went from team initiative to individual initiative is great, and amazing how in depth they go into it.
I haven't watched the interview, does this mean they haven't switched to individual initiative after all?
Dealing with vampire weakness for a mid to high level sorcerer(low level characters can't become vampires, only vampire spawns), being able to control the weather for eg, negates the sunlight weakness. Monks would be great, but monks needs to be lawful. And being a vampire and lawful unless you own your own demiplane is hard.
IIRC vampires have to be evil, but they could be lawful evil. Is there any other circumstances that could be problematic for a vampire to stay lawful? Genuinely curious here.
Simple, lawful follow the laws.
No, that is not what Lawful means. Especially not Lawful Evil. LE generally means a person who exploit societal systems for their own gain and to the detriment of other people. The greedy merchant who rip people off, the banker who sends thugs to break bones when people can't pay, the corrupt politician leaching money to himelf, the disdainful noble making his living off of other people's backs while not caring about his own duties. LE is somebody who abuses the letter of the law to gain control and power and hurt other people. They only care for laws when the laws protect themselves. They wield the laws and customs of society as armour to shield themselves and weapons to strike at others.
An example of an LE vampire would be the vampire who lives in a city, preying on those around him. Maybe he is wealthy and part of the social elite, openly making appearances after dark (always fashionably late, of course), using his contacts and wealth to get away with his crimes. People know shit ends badly for the young men and women who catches his eye, but everyone is too afraid of his social power to say anything aloud or stand up against him. Anyone who's tried has had their businesses ruined, has been beaten up by his bravos, has had the law harass and lever ridiculous accusations at them, has had their peers shun and ostracise them, until they give up. He has turned society into a net and he is the great bloodsucking spider at the heart of it.
Of course, there's also the "Honourable Evil" and the "Cosa Nostra" mafia boss LE archetypes, but the first one isn't as appropriate for for a vampire and the latter one is pretty much what I wrote above except with a greater weight on following the laws of their own criminal society and not the laws of the society they live in.
Actually, sorcerer would benefit a lot too. Sorcs has high CHA, being a vampire makes him with no CON score and CHA to bonus his hit points. A sorc with 12 CON and 18 CHA, would have 22 CHA and instead of +1 per hit dice, +6. Sorcs also has low fortitude save, and his low fortitude save becomes immunity to fortitude saves.
Dealing with vampire weakness for a mid to high level sorcerer(low level characters can't become vampires, only vampire spawns), being able to control the weather for eg, negates the sunlight weakness. Monks would be great, but monks needs to be lawful. And being a vampire and lawful unless you own your own demiplane is hard.
Oh yes, Vampirism would benefit just about every single class out there, don't get me wrong. I just think that a Monk gets the greatest synergy out of the vampire's different abilities and stat boosts, although naturally any class with a Charisma primary stat would also feed back into the vampire's other abilities like Dominate.
In 3.X, vampires no longer need to be Chaotic Evil anymore. Heck, even the MM itself comes with a sample high level Vampire Monk. XD And as others have said, being Lawful doesn't necessarily mean that you "obey laws". Rather, it means that you like rules, structure, and favour an approach to life that is orderly and methodical, bringing order out of chaos, so to speak. As a result, Lawful characters TEND to follow the laws of the land, but if you strictly followed that interpretation it would mean that paladins would also be compelled to obey even tyrannical or evil laws ("By decree of the Dragon Overlord, every household must offer up their firstborn daughter for sacrifice!")
An interview with one of the devs of Larian. Rock, paper, shotgun interview (7jul)
...
This interview is impressive I have to say. You can really tell that the designer being interviewed knows his stuff, comes off as very intelligent to me, very open minded too. The analysis of why they went from team initiative to individual initiative is great, and amazing how in depth they go into it.
I haven't watched the interview, does this mean they haven't switched to individual initiative after all?
Yes, they are, but you also have the option to act at the same time if your characters are grouped together (and they want to do the same with the enemies if it´s feasible)
Neat. Might be a good... shit I forget the word. You know. Middle way deal.
I can also agree with enemies moving at the same time or as simultaneously as possible, for pacing reasons, if they're right next to each other in the initiative list. Nothing more boring in TB combat than than the long wait for enemies to move if the game format speed it up enough.
Neat. Might be a good... shit I forget the word. You know. Middle way deal.
I can also agree with enemies moving at the same time or as simultaneously as possible, for pacing reasons, if they're right next to each other in the initiative list. Nothing more boring in TB combat than than the long wait for enemies to move if the game format speed it up enough.
Yeah. I actually think the system technically works the same way in 5e. I suspect most people dont use it the same way, but you could conceivably hold actions based on what the person right after you does in your initiative order.
So I was controlling two characters. I could move one, hold action until the second one moves - then make two attacks in a row, one from each character.
Agree with @PsicoVic with respect to Lawful alignment. It's not about obeying individual laws within a given society - it's about believing in the concept of order within society in general. The particularity of the order will change based upon the circumstances.
In the case of a Vampire, they probably believe non vampires are cattle/food (much the way most humans would view a cow or chicken). They see a natural order in place, in which they must feed and others must be fed upon. As an example, anyways.
I must say with each new info, interview, gameplay, I'm more and more convinced it will be great game. It resembles DoS2 very little now, it may share some graphics stiles similarities, but the gameplay feels completely different and surprisingly I really like the UI. I'm interested how item description would look like, but from what I see it looks much more solid that it was in DoS series. This is something that was unparalleled in BG1 and BG2. Looking forward for this game. It is a rare case when my initial feelings shifts that much from disappointment to (still moderate) excitement.
@Cahir "I must say with each new info, interview, gameplay, I'm more and more convinced it will be great game."
Man, I am having the exact opposite experience.
But your experience was not exactly enthusiastic from the beginning, IIRC. I believe just after you realized there is a "3" in the name and that Larian will be the studio behind it
I must say with each new info, interview, gameplay, I'm more and more convinced it will be great game. It resembles DoS2 very little now, it may share some graphics stiles similarities, but the gameplay feels completely different and surprisingly I really like the UI. I'm interested how item description would look like, but from what I see it looks much more solid that it was in DoS series. This is something that was unparalleled in BG1 and BG2. Looking forward for this game. It is a rare case when my initial feelings shifts that much from disappointment to (still moderate) excitement.
I don't think saying gameplay is completely different from D:OS2 is accurate. It's not exactly the same, obviously, but it is far from completely different and in fact is much more similar than different.
I must say with each new info, interview, gameplay, I'm more and more convinced it will be great game. It resembles DoS2 very little now, it may share some graphics stiles similarities, but the gameplay feels completely different and surprisingly I really like the UI. I'm interested how item description would look like, but from what I see it looks much more solid that it was in DoS series. This is something that was unparalleled in BG1 and BG2. Looking forward for this game. It is a rare case when my initial feelings shifts that much from disappointment to (still moderate) excitement.
I don't think saying gameplay is completely different from D:OS2 is accurate. It's not exactly the same, obviously, but it is far from completely different and in fact is much more similar than different.
It's a matter of perception, I guess. Let me put it this way. There are similarities, that's for sure, BG3 is running on an enhanced DoS2 engine, but there are much less of them to be found in recent gameplay than in the one presented in February. It's highly individual matter, but I feel more of a BG vibe than before. Cannot pinpoint what exactly made me feel that way, but it's probably many small different things. Not sure how it would feel, but from what I see, fights are more situational and less repetitive than in DoS2, where you always needed to put off enemy's physical or magic protection. Here, you can eliminate enemies in more interesting, not always obvious ways.
I must say with each new info, interview, gameplay, I'm more and more convinced it will be great game. It resembles DoS2 very little now, it may share some graphics stiles similarities, but the gameplay feels completely different and surprisingly I really like the UI. I'm interested how item description would look like, but from what I see it looks much more solid that it was in DoS series. This is something that was unparalleled in BG1 and BG2. Looking forward for this game. It is a rare case when my initial feelings shifts that much from disappointment to (still moderate) excitement.
I'm definitely somewhat impressed with the item UI. It's a little thing to be sure, but it seems like that space has lots of potential for the long descriptions, complex mods and interesting artwork.
I must say with each new info, interview, gameplay, I'm more and more convinced it will be great game. It resembles DoS2 very little now, it may share some graphics stiles similarities, but the gameplay feels completely different and surprisingly I really like the UI. I'm interested how item description would look like, but from what I see it looks much more solid that it was in DoS series. This is something that was unparalleled in BG1 and BG2. Looking forward for this game. It is a rare case when my initial feelings shifts that much from disappointment to (still moderate) excitement.
I'm definitely somewhat impressed with the item UI. It's a little thing to be sure, but it seems like that space has lots of potential for the long descriptions, complex mods and interesting artwork.
This, maybe it's u common, but in BG(2) I sometimes kept items in my backpack not for their stats, but for the lore. It's like an internal path of the party, not just a bunch of numbers behind it. Somehow most of the games made after BG Trilogy lost that feeling for me. It's very intantible feeling, you know, cause there were games with quite long and detailed item descriptions, but it never spark my interest to read them through with interest. I always read BG(2) item descriptions even if I did it many times already. It appears is one of those little details that adds up to the general FR vibe, if you know what I mean.
Neat. Might be a good... shit I forget the word. You know. Middle way deal.
I can also agree with enemies moving at the same time or as simultaneously as possible, for pacing reasons, if they're right next to each other in the initiative list. Nothing more boring in TB combat than than the long wait for enemies to move if the game format speed it up enough.
Compromise? But yeah, I agree. I think that this system of allowing players to choose between individual or group initiative for their game is the best of both worlds. Group initiative has the benefit of greatly speeding up fights, but individual initiative means that combat will be a lot more open-ended and a great deal more variable from encounter to encounter. No two battles are likely to go the same way, assuming that initiative order is random each time, and I think that will help make improve BG3's longevity by a long way.
@Cahir "I must say with each new info, interview, gameplay, I'm more and more convinced it will be great game."
Man, I am having the exact opposite experience.
But your experience was not exactly enthusiastic from the beginning, IIRC. I believe just after you realized there is a "3" in the name and that Larian will be the studio behind it
I was excited when I saw the first teaser announcement.
I was confused when "Larian" was first mentioned.
I was annoyed when Larian refused to commment on how exactly its supposed to be a sequel. (Still haven't. BTW)
I was angry when Sven kept saying that BG's gameplay doesn't work for RPGs. (Oh but he totally loves the series guys, see? He likes Minsc!) ugh
They lost me when turn based was confirmed.
*edit* Some stuff at the AMA had me a little bit more hopeful. But I don't think Larian can overcome the turn based hurdle for me, or the bad comments towards the classic BG games.
Neat. Might be a good... shit I forget the word. You know. Middle way deal.
I can also agree with enemies moving at the same time or as simultaneously as possible, for pacing reasons, if they're right next to each other in the initiative list. Nothing more boring in TB combat than than the long wait for enemies to move if the game format speed it up enough.
Compromise? But yeah, I agree. I think that this system of allowing players to choose between individual or group initiative for their game is the best of both worlds. Group initiative has the benefit of greatly speeding up fights, but individual initiative means that combat will be a lot more open-ended and a great deal more variable from encounter to encounter. No two battles are likely to go the same way, assuming that initiative order is random each time, and I think that will help make improve BG3's longevity by a long way.
They will also keep the "battle zone" mechanics (Well, the game has MP too). If a player/character is in combat the others could move and do not enter combat until they reach a place close to where the fight is going on.
I don't think saying gameplay is completely different from D:OS2 is accurate. It's not exactly the same, obviously, but it is far from completely different and in fact is much more similar than different.
It's a matter of perception, I guess. Let me put it this way. There are similarities, that's for sure, BG3 is running on an enhanced DoS2 engine, but there are much less of them to be found in recent gameplay than in the one presented in February. It's highly individual matter, but I feel more of a BG vibe than before. Cannot pinpoint what exactly made me feel that way, but it's probably many small different things. Not sure how it would feel, but from what I see, fights are more situational and less repetitive than in DoS2, where you always needed to put off enemy's physical or magic protection. Here, you can eliminate enemies in more interesting, not always obvious ways.
Just to add more clarity to my comment, I was speaking about combat gameplay and not gameplay overall. Combat gameplay still looks very D:OS to me.
Neat. Might be a good... shit I forget the word. You know. Middle way deal.
I can also agree with enemies moving at the same time or as simultaneously as possible, for pacing reasons, if they're right next to each other in the initiative list. Nothing more boring in TB combat than than the long wait for enemies to move if the game format speed it up enough.
Compromise? But yeah, I agree. I think that this system of allowing players to choose between individual or group initiative for their game is the best of both worlds.
Players cannot *choose* this. It is a matter of luck, which is to say, if your initiative rolls come out to be such that two or more of your characters' initiatives are next to each other, you can do group actions. This is not at all the same as being able to choose this option, like a toggle or something.
Neat. Might be a good... shit I forget the word. You know. Middle way deal.
I can also agree with enemies moving at the same time or as simultaneously as possible, for pacing reasons, if they're right next to each other in the initiative list. Nothing more boring in TB combat than than the long wait for enemies to move if the game format speed it up enough.
Compromise? But yeah, I agree. I think that this system of allowing players to choose between individual or group initiative for their game is the best of both worlds. Group initiative has the benefit of greatly speeding up fights, but individual initiative means that combat will be a lot more open-ended and a great deal more variable from encounter to encounter. No two battles are likely to go the same way, assuming that initiative order is random each time, and I think that will help make improve BG3's longevity by a long way.
I actually don't think group initiative speeds up fights. In fact, I think it slows it down. This is one excellent point that the designer from Larian brought up in the interview that's posted above. Group initiative presents the player with a lot more options (and lot more ability to flip back and forth between characters). Players trying to optimize are going to have to calculate through a much larger possible list of strategies with group initiative.
But your own turns taking longer is not as much a negative as the computer's turns taking longer. It's less downspeedy because it's less boring. When you act you are busy, when the computer acts you wait.
Not if the game has "Faster enemy turns" "Enemy instant turns" or a speedbar..., like almost any game of the same category in existence.
I always found puzzling that so many people talk about long enemy turns... What games do you play , guys? =D the only games I know do not have that option in this decade are the turn-based mode of POE2 and DoS games. Even the 2000s "Arcanum" game had that option.
Well, regardless, the main point is that there is no compromise of any kind here. Team initiative itself was at most a very tiny compromise, and that's now been taken away. This is a traditional TB combat system, but with some (minimal imo) efforts being made to speed things up. But as far as I can tell, the only thing that can meaningfully "speed" things up in a TB system is for the combat to last only a few rounds in the first place (ideally no more than three rounds for me because after that I start feeling aggravated).
Not if the game has "Faster enemy turns" "Enemy instant turns" or a speedbar..., like almost any game of the same category in existence.
I always found puzzling that so many people talk about long enemy turns... What games do you play , guys? =D the only games I know do not have that option in this decade are the turn-based mode of POE2 and DoS games. Even the 2000s "Arcanum" game had that option.
Any total war game, for starters. And lots of games are still awfully slow even with "faster" turns enabled.
It is more than a little disappointing to see studios like Owlcat and Obsidian offer TB for those who prefer that type of play while others like Larian and inXile won't do the same for RTwP fans. I'd add that there are many, many reasons besides "enemy turns take too long" to prefer RTwP.
Not if the game has "Faster enemy turns" "Enemy instant turns" or a speedbar..., like almost any game of the same category in existence.
I always found puzzling that so many people talk about long enemy turns... What games do you play , guys? =D the only games I know do not have that option in this decade are the turn-based mode of POE2 and DoS games. Even the 2000s "Arcanum" game had that option.
Any total war game, for starters. And lots of games are still awfully slow even with "faster" turns enabled.
Those are strategy games, man.
ED: And Total war games have a "FastForward" option, FYI.
Still takes time because in strategy games, unlike in RPGs, all enemy civilizations move every time you finish your turn (build, train, use diplomacy, move armies, fight,...) even if you cannot see them or you´re not nearby.
Turns in total war last that long in low-end computers because they have to make a lot of calculus off-screen and that could take a lot of time for your PC.
That´s not applicable to RPGs.
Comments
I think the class that would benefit the most from vampirism would be monks, actually. Nearly every single stat boost is useful to the Monk in some way, and I believe there is a feat from one of the supplements (Libris Mortis, perhaps?) that allows the Monk to use their Unarmed attacks AND apply the vampire's Energy Drain attacks with each strike. The vampire's special transformations and skill boosts also synergize very well with a Monk's speed and evasive abilities.
Actually, sorcerer would benefit a lot too. Sorcs has high CHA, being a vampire makes him with no CON score and CHA to bonus his hit points. A sorc with 12 CON and 18 CHA, would have 22 CHA and instead of +1 per hit dice, +6. Sorcs also has low fortitude save, and his low fortitude save becomes immunity to fortitude saves.
Dealing with vampire weakness for a mid to high level sorcerer(low level characters can't become vampires, only vampire spawns), being able to control the weather for eg, negates the sunlight weakness. Monks would be great, but monks needs to be lawful. And being a vampire and lawful unless you own your own demiplane is hard.
Thoughts about the video
- Nick Pechenin said that you can have several "Inspiration points" in BG3, so Inspiration would work differently, something like the "fate points" in Arcanum, I assume.
- Level cap 10 is not set in stone... That would be great. Only one level will get you 5th level spells and lots of class features for rangers, rogues, bards, barbarians, the extra attack for a fighter... and Lvl 12 gives you one ASI/feat more for single-class characters. I understand that would add a lot of work for features that you could only use in the endgame (I assume) but It would be amazing to have them.
- Good thing they´re going to take into account "utility" spells (usually not combat-related) like "friends"
- They tweaked some range and area of some spells because they are "working with a specific top-down camera". We´ll have to see about that.
- They´re working in more and more reactions, like spells or the protection fighting style. Cool.
IIRC vampires have to be evil, but they could be lawful evil. Is there any other circumstances that could be problematic for a vampire to stay lawful? Genuinely curious here.Simple, lawful follow the laws. So, how to lawfully feed upon mortals? Except by Thay, which the monarch is a epic level lich, i don't think that many lawful societies would be ok with vampires feeding on people. Mainly on sword coast. On Thay, i can see a lawful evil vampire feeding upon his slaves lawfully. but the same thing can't happen in neverwinter.
I haven't watched the interview, does this mean they haven't switched to individual initiative after all?
No, that is not what Lawful means. Especially not Lawful Evil. LE generally means a person who exploit societal systems for their own gain and to the detriment of other people. The greedy merchant who rip people off, the banker who sends thugs to break bones when people can't pay, the corrupt politician leaching money to himelf, the disdainful noble making his living off of other people's backs while not caring about his own duties. LE is somebody who abuses the letter of the law to gain control and power and hurt other people. They only care for laws when the laws protect themselves. They wield the laws and customs of society as armour to shield themselves and weapons to strike at others.
An example of an LE vampire would be the vampire who lives in a city, preying on those around him. Maybe he is wealthy and part of the social elite, openly making appearances after dark (always fashionably late, of course), using his contacts and wealth to get away with his crimes. People know shit ends badly for the young men and women who catches his eye, but everyone is too afraid of his social power to say anything aloud or stand up against him. Anyone who's tried has had their businesses ruined, has been beaten up by his bravos, has had the law harass and lever ridiculous accusations at them, has had their peers shun and ostracise them, until they give up. He has turned society into a net and he is the great bloodsucking spider at the heart of it.
Of course, there's also the "Honourable Evil" and the "Cosa Nostra" mafia boss LE archetypes, but the first one isn't as appropriate for for a vampire and the latter one is pretty much what I wrote above except with a greater weight on following the laws of their own criminal society and not the laws of the society they live in.
Oh yes, Vampirism would benefit just about every single class out there, don't get me wrong.
In 3.X, vampires no longer need to be Chaotic Evil anymore. Heck, even the MM itself comes with a sample high level Vampire Monk. XD And as others have said, being Lawful doesn't necessarily mean that you "obey laws". Rather, it means that you like rules, structure, and favour an approach to life that is orderly and methodical, bringing order out of chaos, so to speak. As a result, Lawful characters TEND to follow the laws of the land, but if you strictly followed that interpretation it would mean that paladins would also be compelled to obey even tyrannical or evil laws ("By decree of the Dragon Overlord, every household must offer up their firstborn daughter for sacrifice!")
I can also agree with enemies moving at the same time or as simultaneously as possible, for pacing reasons, if they're right next to each other in the initiative list. Nothing more boring in TB combat than than the long wait for enemies to move if the game format speed it up enough.
Yeah. I actually think the system technically works the same way in 5e. I suspect most people dont use it the same way, but you could conceivably hold actions based on what the person right after you does in your initiative order.
So I was controlling two characters. I could move one, hold action until the second one moves - then make two attacks in a row, one from each character.
Agree with @PsicoVic with respect to Lawful alignment. It's not about obeying individual laws within a given society - it's about believing in the concept of order within society in general. The particularity of the order will change based upon the circumstances.
In the case of a Vampire, they probably believe non vampires are cattle/food (much the way most humans would view a cow or chicken). They see a natural order in place, in which they must feed and others must be fed upon. As an example, anyways.
Man, I am having the exact opposite experience.
But your experience was not exactly enthusiastic from the beginning, IIRC. I believe just after you realized there is a "3" in the name and that Larian will be the studio behind it
I don't think saying gameplay is completely different from D:OS2 is accurate. It's not exactly the same, obviously, but it is far from completely different and in fact is much more similar than different.
It's a matter of perception, I guess. Let me put it this way. There are similarities, that's for sure, BG3 is running on an enhanced DoS2 engine, but there are much less of them to be found in recent gameplay than in the one presented in February. It's highly individual matter, but I feel more of a BG vibe than before. Cannot pinpoint what exactly made me feel that way, but it's probably many small different things. Not sure how it would feel, but from what I see, fights are more situational and less repetitive than in DoS2, where you always needed to put off enemy's physical or magic protection. Here, you can eliminate enemies in more interesting, not always obvious ways.
I'm definitely somewhat impressed with the item UI. It's a little thing to be sure, but it seems like that space has lots of potential for the long descriptions, complex mods and interesting artwork.
This, maybe it's u common, but in BG(2) I sometimes kept items in my backpack not for their stats, but for the lore. It's like an internal path of the party, not just a bunch of numbers behind it. Somehow most of the games made after BG Trilogy lost that feeling for me. It's very intantible feeling, you know, cause there were games with quite long and detailed item descriptions, but it never spark my interest to read them through with interest. I always read BG(2) item descriptions even if I did it many times already. It appears is one of those little details that adds up to the general FR vibe, if you know what I mean.
Compromise?
I was excited when I saw the first teaser announcement.
I was confused when "Larian" was first mentioned.
I was annoyed when Larian refused to commment on how exactly its supposed to be a sequel. (Still haven't. BTW)
I was angry when Sven kept saying that BG's gameplay doesn't work for RPGs. (Oh but he totally loves the series guys, see? He likes Minsc!) ugh
They lost me when turn based was confirmed.
*edit* Some stuff at the AMA had me a little bit more hopeful. But I don't think Larian can overcome the turn based hurdle for me, or the bad comments towards the classic BG games.
They will also keep the "battle zone" mechanics (Well, the game has MP too). If a player/character is in combat the others could move and do not enter combat until they reach a place close to where the fight is going on.
Just to add more clarity to my comment, I was speaking about combat gameplay and not gameplay overall. Combat gameplay still looks very D:OS to me. Players cannot *choose* this. It is a matter of luck, which is to say, if your initiative rolls come out to be such that two or more of your characters' initiatives are next to each other, you can do group actions. This is not at all the same as being able to choose this option, like a toggle or something.
I actually don't think group initiative speeds up fights. In fact, I think it slows it down. This is one excellent point that the designer from Larian brought up in the interview that's posted above. Group initiative presents the player with a lot more options (and lot more ability to flip back and forth between characters). Players trying to optimize are going to have to calculate through a much larger possible list of strategies with group initiative.
I always found puzzling that so many people talk about long enemy turns... What games do you play , guys? =D the only games I know do not have that option in this decade are the turn-based mode of POE2 and DoS games. Even the 2000s "Arcanum" game had that option.
Any total war game, for starters. And lots of games are still awfully slow even with "faster" turns enabled.
Someone should tell Larian.
Those are strategy games, man.
ED: And Total war games have a "FastForward" option, FYI.
Still takes time because in strategy games, unlike in RPGs, all enemy civilizations move every time you finish your turn (build, train, use diplomacy, move armies, fight,...) even if you cannot see them or you´re not nearby.
Turns in total war last that long in low-end computers because they have to make a lot of calculus off-screen and that could take a lot of time for your PC.
That´s not applicable to RPGs.