@Zaxares team initiative would just mean that turns are taken by team right? So you would get your whole teams turn finished then it would be the AI’s turn?
Many people that dislike Turn-based games are very into "Team initiative", or even better "Side initiative" (that´s how it´s called this variant rule in the 5e DM book) because they see this option as more dynamic and faster than the alternative.
Side Initiative
Recording initiative for each PC and monster, arrangin everyone in the correct order, and remembering where you are in the list can bog the game down. If you want quicker combats, at the risk of those combats becoming unbalanced, try using the side initiative rule.
Under this variant, the players roll a d20 for their initiative as a group, or side. You also roll a d20. Neither roll receives any modifiers. Whoever rolls highest wins initiative. In case of a tie, keep rerolling until the tie is broken.
When it’s a side’s turn, the members of that side can act in any order they choose. Once everyone on the side has taken a turn, the other side goes. A round ends when both sides have completed their turns.
If more than two sides take part in a battle, each side rolls for initiative. Sides act from the highest roll to lowest. Combat continues in the initiative order until the battle is complete.
This variant encourages teamwork and makes your life as a DM easier, since you can more easily coordinate monsters. On the downside, the side that wins initiative can gang up on enemies and take them out before they have a chance to act.
I suppose It could make multiplayer combat faster indeed, but it has its problems: the possibility of mob-mauling the same creature with all your soldiers in the same turn, like in XCom games, for example.
@scriver@PsicoVic thanks for the clarification both of you. Much appreciated. I did presume that was the case but I sometimes get mixed up with all the correct terms.
I personally am not to fussed either way on this one then. Whatever way they go with it I will accept
So, overall, I am now more cautiously hopeful about the game. But it all rests on whether team initiative remains in the game.
Out of curiosity, why do you want team initiative to be used over individual initiative? Genuinely curious here.
Already been answered, but yeah team initiative significantly improves the tedium and aggravation of TB combat, not only by moving things along faster but also giving me - the player - control over the sequence in which my party will act to include party members being able to act in coordination with one another or to even delay their action.
A VERY detailed interview (but short) with new gameplay footage.
All PHB classes confirmed (albeit not all subclasses) is good news. I like the way he refers to the existence of different choices, but all rpg games´ developers usually say that.
Yeah, I can see where Team Initiative would definitely speed up combats (especially in tabletop games, where combats can take over an hour, particularly at higher levels), although as PsicoVic mentions at the bottom of his post, my concern with TI is that it would inherently skew the game's balance towards certain team builds. For example, if TI is a thing, then you definitely want to ensure that you have an Init Monkey (i.e. a high Dex, Improved Initiative etc.) on your team to more or less guarantee that your team will always go first. As veterans of D&D will know, being able to ensure that your spellcasters go first often makes the difference between a difficult fight or an easy one. Team Initiative also means that focus fire on critical enemies becomes a much more potent strategy, as the way D&D tends to be built compared to other RPGs, characters (both allies and enemies) tend not to have the kind of HP totals to tank massive amounts of damage. This tends to skew players towards certain party compositions (especially if Larian falls into the trap of designing tougher encounters intended to challenge these kinds of "optimal parties", resulting in a kind of arms race between players and developers/DMs, creating a self-reinforcing cycle that eventually alienates players that aren't into min-maxing or who have a favourite class or archetype that they like to stick to), which I feel detracts from part of the appeal of D&D, where that can be many paths to success.
Individual initiative, I feel, opens up the battlefield to much more nuanced and strategic combat. For example, say that your party is up against a small group of goblins led by a shaman. Your Fighter goes first, and I could send him charging in to attack the shaman directly (and possibly take him out in that first round). However, the normal goblins go second, and doing that would mean leaving your own Wizard vulnerable to attack. Since your Wizard goes third, and the Shaman fourth, the better tactical decision is to move the Fighter instead to block the doorway so the enemy goblins can't get through, and leave your Wizard to handle the goblins AND the shaman with a Sleep spell. Speaking for me personally, this kind of "weigh the pros and cons" analysis for each combat is a big part of the appeal if I'm playing TB-games, that you always have to plan and strategize and not simply stick to one tried-and-true tactic.
A VERY detailed interview (but short) with new gameplay footage.
All PHB classes confirmed (albeit not all subclasses) is good news. I like the way he refers to the existence of different choices, but all rpg games´ developers usually say that.
Was there anything else new or interesting in that interview? There is no CC on that recording so I cannot follow any of what's being said.
The stream was excellent. To me personally, it showed how much the game is different from D:OS II. Yes, it's not a flat isometric game, like BG I & II or P:K, but if for a moment I drop the thought that only what looks like BG I & II is perfect, I start imagining: how I would break a wall with a hammer, how I would teleport around, how I would flame the spider webs to drop spiders to the ground.
The feeling of adventure and exploration, - that is what that stream fulled me with. Can't wait to try it.
Just watched some of it - and it looks pretty great. I love the Initiative system. Not team based, but allows people who are next to each other in initiative to essentially go at the same time (like a mini team). Feels like a smooth compromise.
Loved seeing some of the magic. Very cool to see some of the Battlemaster stuff as well. Loved the action economy. Liked the bit about the use of various skills and unintended consequences (blowing up the ladder because he set off a trap in the chest next to the ladder). It's all very environmentally immersive.
It just keeps looking better and better - and ytou can see they are taking fan feedback pretty seriously and making some significant looking changes. I'm sure we'll see even more of that with EA.
I guess we saw very different streams. I thought it looked utterly horrible. Worse than before, so much so that I was shocked. The environment looks terrible. The characters look terrible. But the combat was absolutely the worst part. It was so painful just to watch someone else play it, I can't imagine suffering through the tedium and aggravation of playing myself. And taking away team initiative and not even having it as an option is a pure cussed move to pander to the TB fanatics who whined about team initiative while giving the middle finger to those of us who had gained some hope for the game from team initiative. Every time I make any effort to try and find a silver lining somewhere in this game, they stick a finger in my eye. It's now abundantly clear to me that this game is being made only for the D:OS fans, and anyone who is not a D:OS fan can drop dead.
Well, I'm about to shift my feelings from in different to optimistic. Just look at the location design of goblin camp and compare it with location design from Pathfinder Kingmaker. Just saying.
And I really love multiple ways of doing things. Also voice acting is very well done. Motion capture could look better but I'm positive Larian will work on it more and it will be smoother even in early access build.
All and all, well done Larian, this looks way better than before!
Well, I'm about to shift my feelings from in different to ootimistic. Just look at the location design of goblin camp and compare it with location design from Pathfinder Kingmaker. Just saying.
And I really love multiple ways of doing things. Also voice acting is very well done. Motion capture could look better but I'm positive Larian will work on it more and it will be smoother even in early access build.
All and all, well done Larian, this looks way better than before!
I agree. There seems to be steady progress too. Most of the effects/animations/environments seem to look more and more crisp in each video or reveal. Between this and the constant taking in of user feedback, my expectations are rising and rising.
Well, I'm about to shift my feelings from in different to ootimistic. Just look at the location design of goblin camp and compare it with location design from Pathfinder Kingmaker. Just saying.
And I really love multiple ways of doing things. Also voice acting is very well done. Motion capture could look better but I'm positive Larian will work on it more and it will be smoother even in early access build.
All and all, well done Larian, this looks way better than before!
I agree. There seems to be steady progress too. Most of the effects/animations/environments seem to look more and more crisp in each video or reveal. Between this and the constant taking in of user feedback, my expectations are rising and rising.
And I can see now it's completely different than DoS2. There is some resemblance, of course, mostly when it comes to influencing the environment, but overall I get more of a DAO vibe here than DoS2 (which is great, cause I love DAO). Also the battles here looks much more interesting than in DoS2. Yeah, it really picked my interest now. Didn't see that coming.
I guess we saw very different streams. I thought it looked utterly horrible. Worse than before, so much so that I was shocked. The environment looks terrible. The characters look terrible. But the combat was absolutely the worst part. It was so painful just to watch someone else play it, I can't imagine suffering through the tedium and aggravation of playing myself. And taking away team initiative and not even having it as an option is a pure cussed move to pander to the TB fanatics who whined about team initiative while giving the middle finger to those of us who had gained some hope for the game from team initiative. Every time I make any effort to try and find a silver lining somewhere in this game, they stick a finger in my eye. It's now abundantly clear to me that this game is being made only for the D:OS fans, and anyone who is not a D:OS fan can drop dead.
Well, I'm not necessarily a DoS fan but I still enjoyed this gameplay quite a bit. I guess there is nothing Larian could do except to do the game with RTwP to change the way you feel about it
Not really. My attitude towards the game was slowly improving until now. But doing away with the side initiative aspect just to placate one group of whining fans at the expense of others rubs me very raw. If you claim to care about community feedback, you should care about the feedback of the whole community and not play favorites with some parts of that community over others.
In any case, the main point of my comment about today's gameplay being awful was from the combat. And yes, for me, there was nothing there that redeems the combat. It was just plain awful all around. However, the story and the characters are what matter the most, though at present I find all the companions very boring and very dislikeable with the sole exception of the gith fighter. So if:
1) The story and characters of the game end up being awesome (not there yet), and
2) The vast majority of the hours spent in-game are outside of combat, and
3) There are reasonably accessible (meaning the check DCs are not ridiculous) options available for avoiding combat, and
4) Avoiding combat does not result in you getting cheated in terms of XPs and loot relative to engaging in combat, and
5) The difficulty can be freely lowered to something like 'Story Mode' whenever you go into combat,
THEN (and this may be very surprising to some of you) I can see myself being ok with the game. I still won't accept on principle paying full price for the game, but would be willing to try it when it goes on minimum 50% off sale.
I really don't think Larian should make a game that caters to what is clearly a very very specific set of demands. I would rather they focus on making a game that is as finely tuned as possible for the great majority of playthroughs as opposed to making a set of options that try to draw in certain fans with extremely particular tastes (options that most won't engage in a playthrough).
I especially think the suggestion that a D&D, Baldur's Gate game have "the vast majority of the hours spent in-game outside of combat" is terrible. And it's exactly the design decision some would have criticized as being "a betrayal of the series". Look if the game isn't for you, fine. IMO, get on with your life in that case. Plenty of games out there, I say.
Also going to add that I think it's a huge mistake to assume the combat is going to resemble OS2 merely because it's turn-based and has individual initiative. The action point system in OS does not exist in D&D. And this makes combat tactics fundamentally different in the two games. In OS, a strong combat tactic involved saving action points and then taking a mega turn where a character was buffed. D&D essentially has a use-it-or-lose-it turn-based system. This makes the tactics quite distinct in the two games.
I really don't think Larian should make a game that caters to what is clearly a very very specific set of demands. I would rather they focus on making a game that is as finely tuned as possible for the great majority of playthroughs as opposed to making a set of options that try to draw in certain fans with extremely particular tastes (options that most won't engage in a playthrough).
It's not a set of demands; it's one thing. One. Wanting to avoid combat as much as possible. I don't see anything "extremely particular" about that in what is supposed to be a roleplaying game. But I suppose as long as your wants are met all's well.
Wanting to avoid combat as much as possible. I don't see anything "extremely particular" about that in what is supposed to be a roleplaying game.
Combat is the central challenge of the original two games. It's been the central challenge of overwhelming majority of D&D CRPG's. If you want to play a game where that isn't the case, fine. This is not your game. And frankly, stop insisting that it has to bend this way. IMO, it's absurd to suggest that designers somehow find a way to neuter their central gameplay system.
Man, I really want this game. The part of the goblin village and the Underdark was amazing.
Good to know you have a lot of RP dialogue options and dialogues with your party members and NPCs.
The use of the environment is going to be really fun ( burning spiderwebs, throwing enemies off the cliffs, blowing up walls, using cages to make stairs... etc)
Honestly, I`m not interested too much in the graphics/sound part of the game but I think they improved a lot.
Ed: No pure team-initiative, we have reactions at least and the change in the way they word the dialogue,... for me, good news.
1) The story and characters of the game end up being awesome (not there yet)
This is in fact *the most* important point for me. Since I'm more of an RP oriented player, for me battle mechanics is something that should not get in the way of the rest of the game. True, we are not yet, there has been still too little of the story and companions revealed, *but* those NPC are starting to grow on me. What's a bit jarring is the silence of the PC when all NPC lines are voiced. But it has always been the case, it's not strictly limited to BG3.
2) The vast majority of the hours spent in-game are outside of combat)
This. That's why I like the games like PST, Disco Elysium, Tides of Numenera the most. On the other hand I think original BG1 and BG2 found a perfect middle ground. I'm still a bit concerned if fights in BG3 would end up being too long, but even if it comes to that, from what I saw during the gameplay battles are interesting enough that I can live with that.
3) There are reasonably accessible (meaning the check DCs are not ridiculous) options available for avoiding combat
That's a good point. Don't know how high of a Charisma and persuasion skills Sven's character had, but apart from the tadpole options all Charisma-based checks that Sven chose, usually had a rather high DC (around 13-14 IIRC). And he failed those checks quite often. It would not be a problem for me if high Charisma end/or persuasion skill could decrease those DC significantly.
4) Avoiding combat does not result in you getting cheated in terms of XPs and loot relative to engaging in combat
I also agree with this, but I don't think we have sufficient information at this point to judge how it's done by Larian. I think that the amount of xp gained from a peaceful solution should roughly equal the sum of xp gained by killing enemies that can be defeated in this specific encounter.
5) The difficulty can be freely lowered to something like 'Story Mode' whenever you go into combat
I think we can safely assume there will be something of a "Story Mode", the only question is if it can be switched on and off whenever you want, or if it can be set once at the beginning of a game. I vote for the former, of course.
I still won't accept on principle paying full price for the game, but would be willing to try it when it goes on minimum 50% off sale.
Yeah, this is becoming a standard for me in general. I think the new Pathfinder game is the first game I backed before release since like 2-3 years. And based from my experience from playing P:K, I'm starting to regret this.
This was in fact a quite reasonable post @kanisatha which surprisingly I ended up to agree in most of the time. Thank you
My observation from everything I've seen online is the following:
People who have been very negative regarding BG3 just got confirmation that the game wouldn't be what they envisioned as their "perfect" BG3. People who have been positive regarding BG3 saw a lot of new neat options to make them even more enthusiastic. People who have been having big concerns based on the info since May 2018 ("no miss", custom characters for the main char being not so interesting as origin stories, "dumbling down" on DnD spells, not enough role-play options, too-much D:OS-like in style and colour, not enough seriousness if compared to BG2) now feel more reassured.
My personal opinion is that the game seems to be much more DnD than even I envisioned. It might not be a 100% continuation of the BG gaming series, but it seems like a genuine continuation of how DnD can be realized in a video-game, and party interaction & exploration reminds of BG.
On its own merits I think its looking interesting. I feel my concern more now is will it have a high graphics card requirement, how well optimised is it likely to be etc.
I guess I could upgrade but it'd be nice if I didn't have to. Then again, if I want to play Cyberpunk 2077 (which I may or may not, I really don't know yet) I'd certainly have to upgrade for that.
Ok some random thoughts after watching the stream second time:
- They freaking changed the dialogues style! Thank god. Sven, mate, you do listen to your fans.
- Too (?) high level monsters. Help me out guys here, because know nothing about 5ed. Does it seem off to fight hook horrors and phase spiders on level 3? I get the goblins camp, these are perfectly fit for 3rd level party. But Underdark? Something's not right here, or am I missing something?
- Loved goblins design and voice-acting. They sound rough but not too dumb. A bit sneaky but not too smart. And they talk dirty. And goblin kids? Perfect.
- I'm really intrigued by this Raphael dude, seems very interesting. I didn't like the teleporting trick, but I do like a set up, with all those meals, paintings etc.
- I'm still not yet fully convinced with NPCs, but they do seem developed and changing the way dialogues are presented makes interaction a lot more interesting. I think Shadowheart is my favorite so far.
- I wish Sven did not choose goblin camp route. The site seems spectacular. I'm very interested about this mind reading ritual that hobgoblin leader planned to use on this dead mind flayer.
- I love that there are a couple of alternative routes to Underdark and at least one of those routes is neatly concealed. This means exploration will highly pay out.
- The Feather Fell trick, neat. I would not think you can jump into this pit. I think there will be many many situations like this, where trying even the most unthinkable things will actually give interesting results. They even provide a cool cinematics.
- Inventory design seems very straightforward, nothing fancy at this point. But I do like item descriptions. Way better than in DoS2, but still not so neat as in BG1/2.
- Having found boots that provide web immunity in the place full of webs is way too convenient. Unless it was put there by devs strictly for the purpose of this stream (I get the feeling this was exactly the case).
- I love what Sven said during the interview with Cohh that playing evil guy will be rewarding. I miss it dearly in BG1 and BG2, where you had fantastic evil NPCs to choose from, but playing bad guy was inferior to playing good guy.
- Loved the look of the deep gnome, way better than the gnome/halfling guy from the previous gameplay that looked like a gnome from Harry Potter movie. I'm dying to see some duergars.
- Absulutely love the camping mechanics that reminds me of Dragon Age Origins. I've got exactly the same vibe.
- I would love to see a codex similar to the one in DAO, which I think was the best designed in any RPG game I have ever played.
- I feel there are a bit to many "teleport-like" abilities. Sven used a couple of different methods to quickly move towards his goal and it's all on 3rd level.
- I absolutely love you can throw an enemy from the roof which practically means instant kill.
- It's great that darkvision actually matters in this game (infravision in BG1/2 was completely useless). It boosts your perception checks and actually allows you to see things in dark places. Giving you the way to ignite the torches and use them to light up the place is also fun. It doesn't seem spectacular, but it has its use.
- I don't like stacking up crates/barrels animation. They should work on it more. I remember it seemed a bit unrealistic in DoS series too.
- Motion capture is something that needs to be improved. It's the weakest part of visuals. But I guess it's the main reason of "Maybe" when it comes to Early Access date. I think this is the part of the game development that was hit hard by the COVID-19 situation.
- Volo!! Having him seen after fast forwarding the timeline by 100 years is far-fetched, but I absolutely adore the way they depicted him. He has a freaking the same hat as he had in BG1! Can you guys tell me how 5ed lore explains he didn't age a squat after all those years?
- Apparently there will be several ways to get rid of this tadpool or don't remove it at all. I hope there will be no "Game Over" screen when you choose not to remove it.
- I think it's a bit too many situations when you can use a tadpool and DC checks are a bit too low. It seems almost cheesy to use it.
- God, I hate there will be level 10 cap.
- I want to see Baldur's Gate. I need to see Baldur's Gate.
Damn, it seems I'm way more optimistic now than I thought. Way to go, Larian!
The optimistic and positive feedback on the gameplay stream has me very curious. With it going into early access I don't really want to check out too much in case they completely change or overhaul something I love from these early versions.
Comments
Out of curiosity, why do you want team initiative to be used over individual initiative? Genuinely curious here.
As opposed to in real DnD where each character (player characters and npcs) move at their own initiative.
Recording initiative for each PC and monster, arrangin everyone in the correct order, and remembering where you are in the list can bog the game down. If you want quicker combats, at the risk of those combats becoming unbalanced, try using the side initiative rule.
Under this variant, the players roll a d20 for their initiative as a group, or side. You also roll a d20. Neither roll receives any modifiers. Whoever rolls highest wins initiative. In case of a tie, keep rerolling until the tie is broken.
When it’s a side’s turn, the members of that side can act in any order they choose. Once everyone on the side has taken a turn, the other side goes. A round ends when both sides have completed their turns.
If more than two sides take part in a battle, each side rolls for initiative. Sides act from the highest roll to lowest. Combat continues in the initiative order until the battle is complete.
This variant encourages teamwork and makes your life as a DM easier, since you can more easily coordinate monsters. On the downside, the side that wins initiative can gang up on enemies and take them out before they have a chance to act.
I personally am not to fussed either way on this one then. Whatever way they go with it I will accept
Team/side initiative IS real D&D. It is in the 5e DMG as an option for how to run one's D&D game.
A VERY detailed interview (but short) with new gameplay footage.
All PHB classes confirmed (albeit not all subclasses) is good news. I like the way he refers to the existence of different choices, but all rpg games´ developers usually say that.
Yeah, I can see where Team Initiative would definitely speed up combats (especially in tabletop games, where combats can take over an hour, particularly at higher levels), although as PsicoVic mentions at the bottom of his post, my concern with TI is that it would inherently skew the game's balance towards certain team builds. For example, if TI is a thing, then you definitely want to ensure that you have an Init Monkey (i.e. a high Dex, Improved Initiative etc.) on your team to more or less guarantee that your team will always go first. As veterans of D&D will know, being able to ensure that your spellcasters go first often makes the difference between a difficult fight or an easy one. Team Initiative also means that focus fire on critical enemies becomes a much more potent strategy, as the way D&D tends to be built compared to other RPGs, characters (both allies and enemies) tend not to have the kind of HP totals to tank massive amounts of damage. This tends to skew players towards certain party compositions (especially if Larian falls into the trap of designing tougher encounters intended to challenge these kinds of "optimal parties", resulting in a kind of arms race between players and developers/DMs, creating a self-reinforcing cycle that eventually alienates players that aren't into min-maxing or who have a favourite class or archetype that they like to stick to), which I feel detracts from part of the appeal of D&D, where that can be many paths to success.
Individual initiative, I feel, opens up the battlefield to much more nuanced and strategic combat. For example, say that your party is up against a small group of goblins led by a shaman. Your Fighter goes first, and I could send him charging in to attack the shaman directly (and possibly take him out in that first round). However, the normal goblins go second, and doing that would mean leaving your own Wizard vulnerable to attack. Since your Wizard goes third, and the Shaman fourth, the better tactical decision is to move the Fighter instead to block the doorway so the enemy goblins can't get through, and leave your Wizard to handle the goblins AND the shaman with a Sleep spell. Speaking for me personally, this kind of "weigh the pros and cons" analysis for each combat is a big part of the appeal if I'm playing TB-games, that you always have to plan and strategize and not simply stick to one tried-and-true tactic.
Was there anything else new or interesting in that interview? There is no CC on that recording so I cannot follow any of what's being said.
The feeling of adventure and exploration, - that is what that stream fulled me with. Can't wait to try it.
Loved seeing some of the magic. Very cool to see some of the Battlemaster stuff as well. Loved the action economy. Liked the bit about the use of various skills and unintended consequences (blowing up the ladder because he set off a trap in the chest next to the ladder). It's all very environmentally immersive.
It just keeps looking better and better - and ytou can see they are taking fan feedback pretty seriously and making some significant looking changes. I'm sure we'll see even more of that with EA.
And I really love multiple ways of doing things. Also voice acting is very well done. Motion capture could look better but I'm positive Larian will work on it more and it will be smoother even in early access build.
All and all, well done Larian, this looks way better than before!
I agree. There seems to be steady progress too. Most of the effects/animations/environments seem to look more and more crisp in each video or reveal. Between this and the constant taking in of user feedback, my expectations are rising and rising.
And I can see now it's completely different than DoS2. There is some resemblance, of course, mostly when it comes to influencing the environment, but overall I get more of a DAO vibe here than DoS2 (which is great, cause I love DAO). Also the battles here looks much more interesting than in DoS2. Yeah, it really picked my interest now. Didn't see that coming.
Well, I'm not necessarily a DoS fan but I still enjoyed this gameplay quite a bit. I guess there is nothing Larian could do except to do the game with RTwP to change the way you feel about it
In any case, the main point of my comment about today's gameplay being awful was from the combat. And yes, for me, there was nothing there that redeems the combat. It was just plain awful all around. However, the story and the characters are what matter the most, though at present I find all the companions very boring and very dislikeable with the sole exception of the gith fighter. So if:
1) The story and characters of the game end up being awesome (not there yet), and
2) The vast majority of the hours spent in-game are outside of combat, and
3) There are reasonably accessible (meaning the check DCs are not ridiculous) options available for avoiding combat, and
4) Avoiding combat does not result in you getting cheated in terms of XPs and loot relative to engaging in combat, and
5) The difficulty can be freely lowered to something like 'Story Mode' whenever you go into combat,
THEN (and this may be very surprising to some of you) I can see myself being ok with the game. I still won't accept on principle paying full price for the game, but would be willing to try it when it goes on minimum 50% off sale.
I especially think the suggestion that a D&D, Baldur's Gate game have "the vast majority of the hours spent in-game outside of combat" is terrible. And it's exactly the design decision some would have criticized as being "a betrayal of the series". Look if the game isn't for you, fine. IMO, get on with your life in that case. Plenty of games out there, I say.
Also going to add that I think it's a huge mistake to assume the combat is going to resemble OS2 merely because it's turn-based and has individual initiative. The action point system in OS does not exist in D&D. And this makes combat tactics fundamentally different in the two games. In OS, a strong combat tactic involved saving action points and then taking a mega turn where a character was buffed. D&D essentially has a use-it-or-lose-it turn-based system. This makes the tactics quite distinct in the two games.
It's not a set of demands; it's one thing. One. Wanting to avoid combat as much as possible. I don't see anything "extremely particular" about that in what is supposed to be a roleplaying game. But I suppose as long as your wants are met all's well.
And I don't say.
Combat is the central challenge of the original two games. It's been the central challenge of overwhelming majority of D&D CRPG's. If you want to play a game where that isn't the case, fine. This is not your game. And frankly, stop insisting that it has to bend this way. IMO, it's absurd to suggest that designers somehow find a way to neuter their central gameplay system.
Good to know you have a lot of RP dialogue options and dialogues with your party members and NPCs.
The use of the environment is going to be really fun ( burning spiderwebs, throwing enemies off the cliffs, blowing up walls, using cages to make stairs... etc)
Honestly, I`m not interested too much in the graphics/sound part of the game but I think they improved a lot.
Ed: No pure team-initiative, we have reactions at least and the change in the way they word the dialogue,... for me, good news.
This is in fact *the most* important point for me. Since I'm more of an RP oriented player, for me battle mechanics is something that should not get in the way of the rest of the game. True, we are not yet, there has been still too little of the story and companions revealed, *but* those NPC are starting to grow on me. What's a bit jarring is the silence of the PC when all NPC lines are voiced. But it has always been the case, it's not strictly limited to BG3.
This. That's why I like the games like PST, Disco Elysium, Tides of Numenera the most. On the other hand I think original BG1 and BG2 found a perfect middle ground. I'm still a bit concerned if fights in BG3 would end up being too long, but even if it comes to that, from what I saw during the gameplay battles are interesting enough that I can live with that.
That's a good point. Don't know how high of a Charisma and persuasion skills Sven's character had, but apart from the tadpole options all Charisma-based checks that Sven chose, usually had a rather high DC (around 13-14 IIRC). And he failed those checks quite often. It would not be a problem for me if high Charisma end/or persuasion skill could decrease those DC significantly.
I also agree with this, but I don't think we have sufficient information at this point to judge how it's done by Larian. I think that the amount of xp gained from a peaceful solution should roughly equal the sum of xp gained by killing enemies that can be defeated in this specific encounter.
I think we can safely assume there will be something of a "Story Mode", the only question is if it can be switched on and off whenever you want, or if it can be set once at the beginning of a game. I vote for the former, of course.
Count me as one of those that would be very surprised
Yeah, this is becoming a standard for me in general. I think the new Pathfinder game is the first game I backed before release since like 2-3 years. And based from my experience from playing P:K, I'm starting to regret this.
This was in fact a quite reasonable post @kanisatha which surprisingly I ended up to agree in most of the time. Thank you
People who have been very negative regarding BG3 just got confirmation that the game wouldn't be what they envisioned as their "perfect" BG3. People who have been positive regarding BG3 saw a lot of new neat options to make them even more enthusiastic. People who have been having big concerns based on the info since May 2018 ("no miss", custom characters for the main char being not so interesting as origin stories, "dumbling down" on DnD spells, not enough role-play options, too-much D:OS-like in style and colour, not enough seriousness if compared to BG2) now feel more reassured.
My personal opinion is that the game seems to be much more DnD than even I envisioned. It might not be a 100% continuation of the BG gaming series, but it seems like a genuine continuation of how DnD can be realized in a video-game, and party interaction & exploration reminds of BG.
I guess I could upgrade but it'd be nice if I didn't have to. Then again, if I want to play Cyberpunk 2077 (which I may or may not, I really don't know yet) I'd certainly have to upgrade for that.
- They freaking changed the dialogues style! Thank god. Sven, mate, you do listen to your fans.
- Too (?) high level monsters. Help me out guys here, because know nothing about 5ed. Does it seem off to fight hook horrors and phase spiders on level 3? I get the goblins camp, these are perfectly fit for 3rd level party. But Underdark? Something's not right here, or am I missing something?
- Loved goblins design and voice-acting. They sound rough but not too dumb. A bit sneaky but not too smart. And they talk dirty. And goblin kids? Perfect.
- I'm really intrigued by this Raphael dude, seems very interesting. I didn't like the teleporting trick, but I do like a set up, with all those meals, paintings etc.
- I'm still not yet fully convinced with NPCs, but they do seem developed and changing the way dialogues are presented makes interaction a lot more interesting. I think Shadowheart is my favorite so far.
- I wish Sven did not choose goblin camp route. The site seems spectacular. I'm very interested about this mind reading ritual that hobgoblin leader planned to use on this dead mind flayer.
- I love that there are a couple of alternative routes to Underdark and at least one of those routes is neatly concealed. This means exploration will highly pay out.
- The Feather Fell trick, neat. I would not think you can jump into this pit. I think there will be many many situations like this, where trying even the most unthinkable things will actually give interesting results. They even provide a cool cinematics.
- Inventory design seems very straightforward, nothing fancy at this point. But I do like item descriptions. Way better than in DoS2, but still not so neat as in BG1/2.
- Having found boots that provide web immunity in the place full of webs is way too convenient. Unless it was put there by devs strictly for the purpose of this stream (I get the feeling this was exactly the case).
- I love what Sven said during the interview with Cohh that playing evil guy will be rewarding. I miss it dearly in BG1 and BG2, where you had fantastic evil NPCs to choose from, but playing bad guy was inferior to playing good guy.
- Loved the look of the deep gnome, way better than the gnome/halfling guy from the previous gameplay that looked like a gnome from Harry Potter movie. I'm dying to see some duergars.
- Absulutely love the camping mechanics that reminds me of Dragon Age Origins. I've got exactly the same vibe.
- I would love to see a codex similar to the one in DAO, which I think was the best designed in any RPG game I have ever played.
- I feel there are a bit to many "teleport-like" abilities. Sven used a couple of different methods to quickly move towards his goal and it's all on 3rd level.
- I absolutely love you can throw an enemy from the roof which practically means instant kill.
- It's great that darkvision actually matters in this game (infravision in BG1/2 was completely useless). It boosts your perception checks and actually allows you to see things in dark places. Giving you the way to ignite the torches and use them to light up the place is also fun. It doesn't seem spectacular, but it has its use.
- I don't like stacking up crates/barrels animation. They should work on it more. I remember it seemed a bit unrealistic in DoS series too.
- Motion capture is something that needs to be improved. It's the weakest part of visuals. But I guess it's the main reason of "Maybe" when it comes to Early Access date. I think this is the part of the game development that was hit hard by the COVID-19 situation.
- Volo!! Having him seen after fast forwarding the timeline by 100 years is far-fetched, but I absolutely adore the way they depicted him. He has a freaking the same hat as he had in BG1! Can you guys tell me how 5ed lore explains he didn't age a squat after all those years?
- Apparently there will be several ways to get rid of this tadpool or don't remove it at all. I hope there will be no "Game Over" screen when you choose not to remove it.
- I think it's a bit too many situations when you can use a tadpool and DC checks are a bit too low. It seems almost cheesy to use it.
- God, I hate there will be level 10 cap.
- I want to see Baldur's Gate. I need to see Baldur's Gate.
Damn, it seems I'm way more optimistic now than I thought. Way to go, Larian!