About lore and the level cap and Underdark monsters, I think it's ok for a game to have some (not many) enemies in it that you are not supposed to take on and instead are supposed to flee from them. They just should not be in encounters that you absolutely must get through to advance the story or a quest, but instead are purely optional elements that can be completely avoided/skipped. From PoE to P:Km to Dragon Age and Witcher, all games have them.
And maybe I'm wrong, but judging from the way you can enter the Underdark I *think* it's purely optional location. What I'm more concerned is that Sven fought toe to toe with Hook Horror with just one 3rd level character. I don't remember hook horrors being that week, but maybe these have been nerfed in 5ed. What I fear, though, is Larian buffed party skills and abilities or nerfed the ones from enemies just to show more exciting, normally high level locations. That would be very bad.
@kanisatha do you have any interest in the upcoming Dark Alliance game? It doesn’t appear to be related to the previous Dark Alliance games in any way and it might fit your interest? Only a suggestion as I don’t have much info other than it appears that you play as Drizzt and his friends. But it’s set in the Icewind Dale area I believe which is forgotten realms after all
Btw @byrne20, funny that you brought up this game here. There's an interesting article just out on this game:
@Cahir "Please provide a quote that Sven said it is a *direct* sequel to BG2. As in that it will involve the same protagonists, characters, timeline etc. I watched many interviews and failed to notice such statement."
Check the AMA from awhile back. I asked him if he considers BG3 a direct sequel and why. He asnwered that yes, it IS a direct sequel. But wouldn't say why. The questions and answers have their own thread here IIRC.
No, you didn't ask him that, and he didn't reply that.
Q: Without using the words ‘Dungeon and Dragons,’ or ‘Forgotten Realms,’ what, in your opinion, makes BG3 a sequel to the first two BG games? What was the reasoning behind the title choice?
A: You can’t see this from anything we’ve shown so far because we don’t want to spoil it but we do touch upon the story of BG 1 & 2 in deeply meaningful ways and there are returning characters. The city plays a massive part and like in the originals, you’ll play an adventure in which the party is the heart and soul with protagonists who will be afflicted by the Gods against their will.
That said, you can’t separate Baldur’s Gate from Dungeons and Dragons. The goal of Bioware was to make a great Dungeons and Dragons game and that’s also our goal. We want to make a great Dungeons and Dragons game with lots of player agency, great depth, lots of iconic creatures, npcs and locations and which you can play in both single- and in multiplayer. We want to make a pretty dark game where you have to deal deal with lots of choice and consequence. We’re letting you do pretty terrible things (or god things). If I wouldn’t have died during the Pax Presentation I would’ve been able to show some of that so I think we’ll probably upload a video of what was supposed to be shown, and you’ll certainly see more the closer we get to Early Access.
I read that big PC Gamer article on the history of Baldur’s Gate and as I was reading through it, I was surprised by how much of what the original creators wanted to do with BG 1 & 2 matched what we are doing. The biggest difference in my opinion is the way combat is implemented and that we are using DnD 5e and they were 2e.
So you rather smartly put a part of the question which you're now trying to use "if he considers BG3 a direct sequel and why" here, while the actual question was: "makes BG3 a sequel to the first two BG games" - without the word "direct". And of course, the reply doesn't use that word as well, and actually, the reply is rather mild and far from "He answered that yes, it IS a direct sequel."
@JuliusBorisov thanks for posting that. I was in the process of looking for that question as I couldn’t remember Sven using those exact words thacobell claimed he had used.
Nice to see my memory wasn’t playing tricks on me.
@JuliusBorisov "So you rather smartly put a part of the question which you're now trying to use "if he considers BG3 a direct sequel and why" here, while the actual question was: "makes BG3 a sequel to the first two BG games" - without the word "direct". And of course, the reply doesn't use that word as well, and actually, the reply is rather mild and far from "He answered that yes, it IS a direct sequel.""
That looks like claims of a direct sequel to me. I don't recall Larian ever calling it a "loose" or "spiritual" sequeal. What they did was slap a big old "3" on the end of Baldur's Gate. That's a claim of a direct sequel. Anything else is justification after the fact.
@JuliusBorisov "So you rather smartly put a part of the question which you're now trying to use "if he considers BG3 a direct sequel and why" here, while the actual question was: "makes BG3 a sequel to the first two BG games" - without the word "direct". And of course, the reply doesn't use that word as well, and actually, the reply is rather mild and far from "He answered that yes, it IS a direct sequel.""
That looks like claims of a direct sequel to me. I don't recall Larian ever calling it a "loose" or "spiritual" sequeal. What they did was slap a big old "3" on the end of Baldur's Gate. That's a claim of a direct sequel. Anything else is justification after the fact.
@ThacoBell so you have read between some imaginary lines and that is the interpretation that you have come up with. It’s not a fact. Just your own interpretation.
@JuliusBorisov "So you rather smartly put a part of the question which you're now trying to use "if he considers BG3 a direct sequel and why" here, while the actual question was: "makes BG3 a sequel to the first two BG games" - without the word "direct". And of course, the reply doesn't use that word as well, and actually, the reply is rather mild and far from "He answered that yes, it IS a direct sequel.""
That looks like claims of a direct sequel to me. I don't recall Larian ever calling it a "loose" or "spiritual" sequeal. What they did was slap a big old "3" on the end of Baldur's Gate. That's a claim of a direct sequel. Anything else is justification after the fact.
This is only your interpretation, not a fact.
Heh, yeah I see I would rather change @kanisatha's mind than @ThacoBell's (good luck with that Cahir, I know, but there were promising signs, I dare to say )
@kanisatha thanks for the link. It’s an interesting read. I like the art style and will definitely keep an eye on that game as more info gets released
Yes, even though I have serious concerns about the playability of the game single-player, I'm also keeping it on my list for now. If it works out as a game that can be played SP in a reasonable way, even if by lowering the difficulty setting all the way down, then yeah I would be very excited about it despite it being an action RPG, because going by this Polygon article it does have a real story and characters to it.
@kanisatha thanks for the link. It’s an interesting read. I like the art style and will definitely keep an eye on that game as more info gets released
Yes, even though I have serious concerns about the playability of the game single-player, I'm also keeping it on my list for now. If it works out as a game that can be played SP in a reasonable way, even if by lowering the difficulty setting all the way down, then yeah I would be very excited about it despite it being an action RPG, because going by this Polygon article it does have a real story and characters to it.
But come on, Drizzt and co.? They freaking jump out from the fridge. You open it and you see a dark elfs mug and his two scimitars But... it may be fun to play a good arpg once in a while. Just need to have completely different set uf expectations.
The dialogue narrative changed from past tense to present tense. Most likely this is why they had to scrap the VO for the main character for this recent demo.
On a side note, think about this: the developer might have moved the already paid VO (and the VO is usually pretty expensive) to a bin based on the feedback from the community to past tense. They had to find someone to record new lines, and turned to Amelia (with whom they had already worked in the past).
@kanisatha thanks for the link. It’s an interesting read. I like the art style and will definitely keep an eye on that game as more info gets released
Yes, even though I have serious concerns about the playability of the game single-player, I'm also keeping it on my list for now. If it works out as a game that can be played SP in a reasonable way, even if by lowering the difficulty setting all the way down, then yeah I would be very excited about it despite it being an action RPG, because going by this Polygon article it does have a real story and characters to it.
But come on, Drizzt and co.? They freaking jump out from the fridge. You open it and you see a dark elfs mug and his two scimitars But... it may be fun to play a good arpg once in a while. Just need to have completely different set uf expectations.
But you have to keep in mind this is very early Drizzt and co., at the beginnings of when they come together as friends and are all low level. Not today's uber-Drizzt and co.
@kanisatha thanks for the link. It’s an interesting read. I like the art style and will definitely keep an eye on that game as more info gets released
Yes, even though I have serious concerns about the playability of the game single-player, I'm also keeping it on my list for now. If it works out as a game that can be played SP in a reasonable way, even if by lowering the difficulty setting all the way down, then yeah I would be very excited about it despite it being an action RPG, because going by this Polygon article it does have a real story and characters to it.
But come on, Drizzt and co.? They freaking jump out from the fridge. You open it and you see a dark elfs mug and his two scimitars But... it may be fun to play a good arpg once in a while. Just need to have completely different set uf expectations.
But you have to keep in mind this is very early Drizzt and co., at the beginnings of when they come together as friends and are all low level. Not today's uber-Drizzt and co.
Yeah, I'm familiar with his story. I've read quite a lot of books describing his adventures, but eventually got bored and tires with him and his gang around the time
he teamed up with Jarlaxle and fought with Many Arrows and his horde.
@kanisatha thanks for the link. It’s an interesting read. I like the art style and will definitely keep an eye on that game as more info gets released
Yes, even though I have serious concerns about the playability of the game single-player, I'm also keeping it on my list for now. If it works out as a game that can be played SP in a reasonable way, even if by lowering the difficulty setting all the way down, then yeah I would be very excited about it despite it being an action RPG, because going by this Polygon article it does have a real story and characters to it.
But come on, Drizzt and co.? They freaking jump out from the fridge. You open it and you see a dark elfs mug and his two scimitars But... it may be fun to play a good arpg once in a while. Just need to have completely different set uf expectations.
But you have to keep in mind this is very early Drizzt and co., at the beginnings of when they come together as friends and are all low level. Not today's uber-Drizzt and co.
Yeah, I'm familiar with his story. I've read quite a lot of books describing his adventures, but eventually got bored and tires with him and his gang around the time
he teamed up with Jarlaxle and fought with Many Arrows and his horde.
He! Exactly the same as me! The Dark Elf trilogy was what introduced me to everything D&D. I read that first, loved it, and only then did I start playing PnP D&D.
But come on! How can you say no to playing a goody-two-shoes drow with platinum hair and purple eyes and wielding twin scimitars named Twinkle and IcingDeath?!! I mean, sure, it may be a guilty pleasure that you don't ever bring up in polite company, but still, you know you want to do it!!
I think Shadow Heart is also my favourite NPC so far. She will definitely be part of my party for my first play I also like the Githyanki fighter Lae’Zel. I think if I am honest the only NPC I flat out do not like so far it would be Astarion.
The companions are a huge question mark for me still. I will not play anything but my own custom character as the PC. But at the same time, I will also not use any generic or "mercenary" characters as my party companions, and want only fully fleshed-out companions. Thus far only Lae'Zel is a cool companion. The others are all lame/silly and, like you, I also flat-out hate the vampire. The vampire I would actually be inclined to kill right on meeting him. So will there be enough "origin" companions that I like to fill out my party AND provide a balanced party? At this point, no. So that's a huge issue.
Lame/silly is subjective and there is no cure if you find the available companions bad. If, in the same time, you're against using your own mercenaries, then there is nothing the game can do for you. Mind you, we won't know the final number of companions till the full game release (and not the Early Access).
In Pathfinder: Kingmaker, I found companions bland and generic from the first look. Yet I still keep using them, and not mercenaries, because I give everything a chance. And that game is far from providing "enough" companions for certain roles: only 1 tank, only 1 wizard, only 1 rogue if you don't like this or that companion.
It's unrealistic to expect you will have 20 companions fully fleshed out.
Yes this I also agree. If the companions are lame to me, but that's what's available to me, then I have no choice but to use them anyway. This was just a question I am raising about the range of companions we will have, not some demand that they give me 20 companions I will love.
I share similar concerns about what companion options will available. It's not that the current crop is terrible or bad by any means, they seem to be on par with your usual DnD video game squad from what little we've seen, but that they are mostly "safe" choices. I admit this is very much a personal gripe of mine, but when you have all the racial diversity of DnD at your disposal, why do you go with two humans, one elf and one half-elf for your showcase?
There's obviously more to a character than what race they are, and the original games were definitely no better at this, but it's still an eyesore for me. Of course, there'll be more companions not shown yet, and I fully expect shorties and the rest to be represented, but I just find disappointing. I'm sure the characters will be well-written and interesting and I really hope they take the opportunity to do play with stereotypes, kinda like NWN did. Two of the NPCs already strike me as a bit trope-heavy however, which makes me a bit weary, but any proper analysis will have to wait until we have something to actually analyze.
As for the gameplay, I'm warming up to it. The combat looks really tactical which is nice, but I hope not every battle will feel like a scripted event. Turn-based is time-consuming as it is and adding cutscenes to battles pads the time playing even more. Hopefully, Larian finds a nice balance, since I no longer have the same free time as I did when I was a kid (oh, the joys of adulthood...).
@kanisatha thanks for the link. It’s an interesting read. I like the art style and will definitely keep an eye on that game as more info gets released
Yes, even though I have serious concerns about the playability of the game single-player, I'm also keeping it on my list for now. If it works out as a game that can be played SP in a reasonable way, even if by lowering the difficulty setting all the way down, then yeah I would be very excited about it despite it being an action RPG, because going by this Polygon article it does have a real story and characters to it.
But come on, Drizzt and co.? They freaking jump out from the fridge. You open it and you see a dark elfs mug and his two scimitars But... it may be fun to play a good arpg once in a while. Just need to have completely different set uf expectations.
But you have to keep in mind this is very early Drizzt and co., at the beginnings of when they come together as friends and are all low level. Not today's uber-Drizzt and co.
Yeah, I'm familiar with his story. I've read quite a lot of books describing his adventures, but eventually got bored and tires with him and his gang around the time
he teamed up with Jarlaxle and fought with Many Arrows and his horde.
He! Exactly the same as me! The Dark Elf trilogy was what introduced me to everything D&D. I read that first, loved it, and only then did I start playing PnP D&D.
But come on! How can you say no to playing a goody-two-shoes drow with platinum hair and purple eyes and wielding twin scimitars named Twinkle and IcingDeath?!! I mean, sure, it may be a guilty pleasure that you don't ever bring up in polite company, but still, you know you want to do it!!
I think Shadow Heart is also my favourite NPC so far. She will definitely be part of my party for my first play I also like the Githyanki fighter Lae’Zel. I think if I am honest the only NPC I flat out do not like so far it would be Astarion.
The companions are a huge question mark for me still. I will not play anything but my own custom character as the PC. But at the same time, I will also not use any generic or "mercenary" characters as my party companions, and want only fully fleshed-out companions. Thus far only Lae'Zel is a cool companion. The others are all lame/silly and, like you, I also flat-out hate the vampire. The vampire I would actually be inclined to kill right on meeting him. So will there be enough "origin" companions that I like to fill out my party AND provide a balanced party? At this point, no. So that's a huge issue.
Lame/silly is subjective and there is no cure if you find the available companions bad. If, in the same time, you're against using your own mercenaries, then there is nothing the game can do for you. Mind you, we won't know the final number of companions till the full game release (and not the Early Access).
In Pathfinder: Kingmaker, I found companions bland and generic from the first look. Yet I still keep using them, and not mercenaries, because I give everything a chance. And that game is far from providing "enough" companions for certain roles: only 1 tank, only 1 wizard, only 1 rogue if you don't like this or that companion.
It's unrealistic to expect you will have 20 companions fully fleshed out.
Yes this I also agree. If the companions are lame to me, but that's what's available to me, then I have no choice but to use them anyway. This was just a question I am raising about the range of companions we will have, not some demand that they give me 20 companions I will love.
I share similar concerns about what companion options will available. It's not that the current crop is terrible or bad by any means, they seem to be on par with your usual DnD video game squad from what little we've seen, but that they are mostly "safe" choices. I admit this is very much a personal gripe of mine, but when you have all the racial diversity of DnD at your disposal, why do you go with two humans, one elf and one half-elf for your showcase?
There's obviously more to a character than what race they are, and the original games were definitely no better at this, but it's still an eyesore for me. Of course, there'll be more companions not shown yet, and I fully expect shorties and the rest to be represented, but I just find disappointing. I'm sure the characters will be well-written and interesting and I really hope they take the opportunity to do play with stereotypes, kinda like NWN did. Two of the NPCs already strike me as a bit trope-heavy however, which makes me a bit weary, but any proper analysis will have to wait until we have something to actually analyze.
As for the gameplay, I'm warming up to it. The combat looks really tactical which is nice, but I hope not every battle will feel like a scripted event. Turn-based is time-consuming as it is and adding cutscenes to battles pads the time playing even more. Hopefully, Larian finds a nice balance, since I no longer have the same free time as I did when I was a kid (oh, the joys of adulthood...).
What I understood from the last interview with Swen, the deep gnome he saved from goblin hands will be recruitable. There was no svirfneblin NPC in any DnD game IIRC. I'd say diversity is there.
I think Shadow Heart is also my favourite NPC so far. She will definitely be part of my party for my first play I also like the Githyanki fighter Lae’Zel. I think if I am honest the only NPC I flat out do not like so far it would be Astarion.
The companions are a huge question mark for me still. I will not play anything but my own custom character as the PC. But at the same time, I will also not use any generic or "mercenary" characters as my party companions, and want only fully fleshed-out companions. Thus far only Lae'Zel is a cool companion. The others are all lame/silly and, like you, I also flat-out hate the vampire. The vampire I would actually be inclined to kill right on meeting him. So will there be enough "origin" companions that I like to fill out my party AND provide a balanced party? At this point, no. So that's a huge issue.
Lame/silly is subjective and there is no cure if you find the available companions bad. If, in the same time, you're against using your own mercenaries, then there is nothing the game can do for you. Mind you, we won't know the final number of companions till the full game release (and not the Early Access).
In Pathfinder: Kingmaker, I found companions bland and generic from the first look. Yet I still keep using them, and not mercenaries, because I give everything a chance. And that game is far from providing "enough" companions for certain roles: only 1 tank, only 1 wizard, only 1 rogue if you don't like this or that companion.
It's unrealistic to expect you will have 20 companions fully fleshed out.
Yes this I also agree. If the companions are lame to me, but that's what's available to me, then I have no choice but to use them anyway. This was just a question I am raising about the range of companions we will have, not some demand that they give me 20 companions I will love.
I share similar concerns about what companion options will available. It's not that the current crop is terrible or bad by any means, they seem to be on par with your usual DnD video game squad from what little we've seen, but that they are mostly "safe" choices. I admit this is very much a personal gripe of mine, but when you have all the racial diversity of DnD at your disposal, why do you go with two humans, one elf and one half-elf for your showcase?
There's obviously more to a character than what race they are, and the original games were definitely no better at this, but it's still an eyesore for me. Of course, there'll be more companions not shown yet, and I fully expect shorties and the rest to be represented, but I just find disappointing. I'm sure the characters will be well-written and interesting and I really hope they take the opportunity to do play with stereotypes, kinda like NWN did. Two of the NPCs already strike me as a bit trope-heavy however, which makes me a bit weary, but any proper analysis will have to wait until we have something to actually analyze.
As for the gameplay, I'm warming up to it. The combat looks really tactical which is nice, but I hope not every battle will feel like a scripted event. Turn-based is time-consuming as it is and adding cutscenes to battles pads the time playing even more. Hopefully, Larian finds a nice balance, since I no longer have the same free time as I did when I was a kid (oh, the joys of adulthood...).
What I understood from the last interview with Swen, the deep gnome he saved from goblin hands will be recruitable. There was no svirfneblin NPC in any DnD game IIRC. I'd say diversity is there.
Oh, I thought he said he would become a camp follower (I forget the exact term he used), similar to Volo? If he's an NPC, that's great, and I certainly expect some sort of diversity, but my point was more that the companions we have seen so far, we've seen before.
It's not that I expect every companion to be a special snowflake Dragonborn demi-lich with a summertime vacation spot in Sigil, but more that when you make a smarmy mage with deep-seated confidence issues, maybe make him a half-orc or a gnome instead of your typical white dude.
Because you and others keep ignoring what I have repeatedly said, which is how much I love FR, that FR is my favorite RPG setting of all, and I very badly miss playing games in FR and want to play FR games. Exactly how many FR games do I have available to play (old games don't count)? How many FR games can I reasonably expect to have available to play in the coming years?
As I said to you initially: You have very particular tastes in games, obviously. It's like you want to play something with the gameplay of Torment Tides of Numenara but set in the D&D Forgotten Realms world. And are mad at the world for not giving this to you.
At some point, you should recognize who is responsible for this issue.
@kanisatha thanks for the link. It’s an interesting read. I like the art style and will definitely keep an eye on that game as more info gets released
Yes, even though I have serious concerns about the playability of the game single-player, I'm also keeping it on my list for now. If it works out as a game that can be played SP in a reasonable way, even if by lowering the difficulty setting all the way down, then yeah I would be very excited about it despite it being an action RPG, because going by this Polygon article it does have a real story and characters to it.
But come on, Drizzt and co.? They freaking jump out from the fridge. You open it and you see a dark elfs mug and his two scimitars But... it may be fun to play a good arpg once in a while. Just need to have completely different set uf expectations.
But you have to keep in mind this is very early Drizzt and co., at the beginnings of when they come together as friends and are all low level. Not today's uber-Drizzt and co.
Yeah, I'm familiar with his story. I've read quite a lot of books describing his adventures, but eventually got bored and tires with him and his gang around the time
he teamed up with Jarlaxle and fought with Many Arrows and his horde.
He! Exactly the same as me! The Dark Elf trilogy was what introduced me to everything D&D. I read that first, loved it, and only then did I start playing PnP D&D.
But come on! How can you say no to playing a goody-two-shoes drow with platinum hair and purple eyes and wielding twin scimitars named Twinkle and IcingDeath?!! I mean, sure, it may be a guilty pleasure that you don't ever bring up in polite company, but still, you know you want to do it!!
I always kill the dude in BG1, just saying ?
Tsk, Tsk!!
Honestly though, this is one of the few things in BG1 that I've long hated - that killing Drizzt was allowed. If choices and consequences were real and meaningful, every good-aligned super-powerful paragon character in the Realms, from Elminster to the Blackstaff to all the Seven Sisters should have hunted you down and wiped you out for doing that. In FR lore, they have all hunted down and killed off people for far lesser offenses than murdering someone like Drizzt. Just sayin'
@kanisatha thanks for the link. It’s an interesting read. I like the art style and will definitely keep an eye on that game as more info gets released
Yes, even though I have serious concerns about the playability of the game single-player, I'm also keeping it on my list for now. If it works out as a game that can be played SP in a reasonable way, even if by lowering the difficulty setting all the way down, then yeah I would be very excited about it despite it being an action RPG, because going by this Polygon article it does have a real story and characters to it.
But come on, Drizzt and co.? They freaking jump out from the fridge. You open it and you see a dark elfs mug and his two scimitars But... it may be fun to play a good arpg once in a while. Just need to have completely different set uf expectations.
But you have to keep in mind this is very early Drizzt and co., at the beginnings of when they come together as friends and are all low level. Not today's uber-Drizzt and co.
Yeah, I'm familiar with his story. I've read quite a lot of books describing his adventures, but eventually got bored and tires with him and his gang around the time
he teamed up with Jarlaxle and fought with Many Arrows and his horde.
He! Exactly the same as me! The Dark Elf trilogy was what introduced me to everything D&D. I read that first, loved it, and only then did I start playing PnP D&D.
But come on! How can you say no to playing a goody-two-shoes drow with platinum hair and purple eyes and wielding twin scimitars named Twinkle and IcingDeath?!! I mean, sure, it may be a guilty pleasure that you don't ever bring up in polite company, but still, you know you want to do it!!
I always kill the dude in BG1, just saying ?
Tsk, Tsk!!
Honestly though, this is one of the few things in BG1 that I've long hated - that killing Drizzt was allowed. If choices and consequences were real and meaningful, every good-aligned super-powerful paragon character in the Realms, from Elminster to the Blackstaff to all the Seven Sisters should have hunted you down and wiped you out for doing that. In FR lore, they have all hunted down and killed off people for far lesser offenses than murdering someone like Drizzt. Just sayin'
Hmm I don't think Drizzt was that much famous over the Sword Coast. He was known up north, closer to Neverwinter or Waterdeep, and especially in the Icewind Dale on the Frozen North, but I think the Sword Coast is too far south for him to be widely recognized there. And from what I remember from the books (at least the ones I read) he was not a close friend to Elminster, Khelben or any of the Seven Sisters. They all probably heard of him, maybe even met him, but I they were hardly friends. I'd say Alustriel may be the one who was close to him, since she ruled the Silver Marches. They definitely crossed paths and wouldn't be surprised if they were friends. Also you can kill Drizzit basically in the middle of nowhere, having only gnolls as witnesses, so I suppose there will be noone there to finger point you as Drizzt's killer.
Besides, I don't think original devs consider that players would actually be able to kill this guy. He's a monster that can only be killed using cheesy tactics.
He may not have been well-known to regular people but the super-powerful magic-users would have their ways of knowing what happened and who did it.
Also, yeah Alustriel didn't just know him but actively protected him including by declaring Silverymoon to be an open city to him. I realize we're going off-topic here, but I love shooting the breeze with people on FR lore.
He may not have been well-known to regular people but the super-powerful magic-users would have their ways of knowing what happened and who did it.
Also, yeah Alustriel didn't just know him but actively protected him including by declaring Silverymoon to be an open city to him. I realize we're going off-topic here, but I love shooting the breeze with people on FR lore.
Yeah, we went way off-topic with this I actually miss a proper FR Lore topic here on these forums. Everybody is so focused to game mechanics, SCS tactics and all that stuff and there is so little lore based topics.
But going back on topic a bit, I wouldn't be surprised if there would be at least Drizzt's cameo in BG3. He's basically a long-lived elf, so 100 years would be just a breeze for him. I wonder how many characters and places from 5ed FR source books will be present in this game. How many familiar places from BG1 and BG2 we will have opportunity to visit (i.e how much of an old BG city was left over the century). I wonder if we have an opportunity to learn something about Spellplague, the Sundering or any other great events that have shaken the Realms since original saga.
He may not have been well-known to regular people but the super-powerful magic-users would have their ways of knowing what happened and who did it.
Also, yeah Alustriel didn't just know him but actively protected him including by declaring Silverymoon to be an open city to him. I realize we're going off-topic here, but I love shooting the breeze with people on FR lore.
Yeah, we went way off-topic with this I actually miss a proper FR Lore topic here on these forums. Everybody is so focused to game mechanics, SCS tactics and all that stuff and there is so little lore based topics.
But going back on topic a bit, I wouldn't be surprised if there would be at least Drizzt's cameo in BG3. He's basically a long-lived elf, so 100 years would be just a breeze for him. I wonder how many characters and places from 5ed FR source books will be present in this game. How many familiar places from BG1 and BG2 we will have opportunity to visit (i.e how much of an old BG city was left over the century). I wonder if we have an opportunity to learn something about Spellplague, the Sundering or any other great events that have shaken the Realms since original saga.
It's entirely possible. He's still very much alive and well and still kicking ass in the current timeline. I know a lot of people have already commented on who they might like to see in a cameo in the game (typically NPCs from the old games), but for me as an FR lore junkie it would be famous characters from longstanding FR lore. Talking to the ghost of Balduran would be super-cool, for example.
I share similar concerns about what companion options will available. It's not that the current crop is terrible or bad by any means, they seem to be on par with your usual DnD video game squad from what little we've seen, but that they are mostly "safe" choices. I admit this is very much a personal gripe of mine, but when you have all the racial diversity of DnD at your disposal, why do you go with two humans, one elf and one half-elf for your showcase?
There's obviously more to a character than what race they are, and the original games were definitely no better at this, but it's still an eyesore for me. Of course, there'll be more companions not shown yet, and I fully expect shorties and the rest to be represented, but I just find disappointing. I'm sure the characters will be well-written and interesting and I really hope they take the opportunity to do play with stereotypes, kinda like NWN did. Two of the NPCs already strike me as a bit trope-heavy however, which makes me a bit weary, but any proper analysis will have to wait until we have something to actually analyze.
As for the gameplay, I'm warming up to it. The combat looks really tactical which is nice, but I hope not every battle will feel like a scripted event. Turn-based is time-consuming as it is and adding cutscenes to battles pads the time playing even more. Hopefully, Larian finds a nice balance, since I no longer have the same free time as I did when I was a kid (oh, the joys of adulthood...).
This is really interesting to me, because I think we have the same concerns, but for completely different reasons. For me, character and story are absolutely top of my priority list, and I'm also a bit worried about the companion options. My problem is the opposite, where I hate when all my characters are really strange, different and special. It makes my party seem like the start of a joke ("A tiefling, a gith and a vampire walk into a bar") and kind of takes me out of the story a little. Here my PC is, walking through a normal human city with their menagerie, and I'm supposed to believe people wouldn't stop and stare?
Of course, more "normal" companions stride a fine line between relatable (Anomen, Jaheira, etc.) and boring and a bit wet (Bethany from Dragon Age 2, for example, I can only describe as "overwhelmingly fine" or "about as flavourful as flour").
I'm absolutely looking through rose-coloured classes, but BG1 and 2 were perfect for me because there was huge cast of NPCs, ranging from quite down-to-earth and compelling, to wacky and zany. The sheer number meant I could/can play replay with different combinations again, and again (and again...) and I like that Player A might meet Ajantis, who becomes a vital part of their character's story, while Player B never meets him.
It's one of the things that made Dragon Age: Origins and similar games less replayable for me. because it felt wrong not to recruit the whole gang every time. It is even more concerning in BG3, with the idea of origin characters. I hated the similar feature in DOS2 and I hope it will be nothing like that.
I know expecting an army of fully fleshed-out NPCs would be ridiculous though. I understand there are limitations (damn reality, getting in the way of my dreams)
(Also, side comment: does anyone else get anxious reading this thread because of the heightened tensions? It's exhausting to read, but I love that there are so many people passionate about BG after all these years!)
I share similar concerns about what companion options will available. It's not that the current crop is terrible or bad by any means, they seem to be on par with your usual DnD video game squad from what little we've seen, but that they are mostly "safe" choices. I admit this is very much a personal gripe of mine, but when you have all the racial diversity of DnD at your disposal, why do you go with two humans, one elf and one half-elf for your showcase?
There's obviously more to a character than what race they are, and the original games were definitely no better at this, but it's still an eyesore for me. Of course, there'll be more companions not shown yet, and I fully expect shorties and the rest to be represented, but I just find disappointing. I'm sure the characters will be well-written and interesting and I really hope they take the opportunity to do play with stereotypes, kinda like NWN did. Two of the NPCs already strike me as a bit trope-heavy however, which makes me a bit weary, but any proper analysis will have to wait until we have something to actually analyze.
As for the gameplay, I'm warming up to it. The combat looks really tactical which is nice, but I hope not every battle will feel like a scripted event. Turn-based is time-consuming as it is and adding cutscenes to battles pads the time playing even more. Hopefully, Larian finds a nice balance, since I no longer have the same free time as I did when I was a kid (oh, the joys of adulthood...).
This is really interesting to me, because I think we have the same concerns, but for completely different reasons. For me, character and story are absolutely top of my priority list, and I'm also a bit worried about the companion options. My problem is the opposite, where I hate when all my characters are really strange, different and special. It makes my party seem like the start of a joke ("A tiefling, a gith and a vampire walk into a bar") and kind of takes me out of the story a little. Here my PC is, walking through a normal human city with their menagerie, and I'm supposed to believe people wouldn't stop and stare?
Of course, more "normal" companions stride a fine line between relatable (Anomen, Jaheira, etc.) and boring and a bit wet (Bethany from Dragon Age 2, for example, I can only describe as "overwhelmingly fine" or "about as flavourful as flour").
I'm absolutely looking through rose-coloured classes, but BG1 and 2 were perfect for me because there was huge cast of NPCs, ranging from quite down-to-earth and compelling, to wacky and zany. The sheer number meant I could/can play replay with different combinations again, and again (and again...) and I like that Player A might meet Ajantis, who becomes a vital part of their character's story, while Player B never meets him.
It's one of the things that made Dragon Age: Origins and similar games less replayable for me. because it felt wrong not to recruit the whole gang every time. It is even more concerning in BG3, with the idea of origin characters. I hated the similar feature in DOS2 and I hope it will be nothing like that.
I know expecting an army of fully fleshed-out NPCs would be ridiculous though. I understand there are limitations (damn reality, getting in the way of my dreams)
(Also, side comment: does anyone else get anxious reading this thread because of the heightened tensions? It's exhausting to read, but I love that there are so many people passionate about BG after all these years!)
I actually think we're sort of the same mind here! Like I said in my other post, I don't want super special snowflakes, I just think most human and elves characters would be more interesting if they were shorter/had fangs or something similar. I mean, halflings are supposed to be everywhere in the Realms while elves tend to be more secluded, but somehow we usually end up with a lot more elves in our parties.
(Also, side comment: does anyone else get anxious reading this thread because of the heightened tensions? It's exhausting to read, but I love that there are so many people passionate about BG after all these years!)
I just skip the posts of one or two very vocal forumites and the thread is just peachy for me.
I share similar concerns about what companion options will available. It's not that the current crop is terrible or bad by any means, they seem to be on par with your usual DnD video game squad from what little we've seen, but that they are mostly "safe" choices. I admit this is very much a personal gripe of mine, but when you have all the racial diversity of DnD at your disposal, why do you go with two humans, one elf and one half-elf for your showcase?
There's obviously more to a character than what race they are, and the original games were definitely no better at this, but it's still an eyesore for me. Of course, there'll be more companions not shown yet, and I fully expect shorties and the rest to be represented, but I just find disappointing. I'm sure the characters will be well-written and interesting and I really hope they take the opportunity to do play with stereotypes, kinda like NWN did. Two of the NPCs already strike me as a bit trope-heavy however, which makes me a bit weary, but any proper analysis will have to wait until we have something to actually analyze.
As for the gameplay, I'm warming up to it. The combat looks really tactical which is nice, but I hope not every battle will feel like a scripted event. Turn-based is time-consuming as it is and adding cutscenes to battles pads the time playing even more. Hopefully, Larian finds a nice balance, since I no longer have the same free time as I did when I was a kid (oh, the joys of adulthood...).
This is really interesting to me, because I think we have the same concerns, but for completely different reasons. For me, character and story are absolutely top of my priority list, and I'm also a bit worried about the companion options. My problem is the opposite, where I hate when all my characters are really strange, different and special. It makes my party seem like the start of a joke ("A tiefling, a gith and a vampire walk into a bar") and kind of takes me out of the story a little. Here my PC is, walking through a normal human city with their menagerie, and I'm supposed to believe people wouldn't stop and stare?
Of course, more "normal" companions stride a fine line between relatable (Anomen, Jaheira, etc.) and boring and a bit wet (Bethany from Dragon Age 2, for example, I can only describe as "overwhelmingly fine" or "about as flavourful as flour").
I'm absolutely looking through rose-coloured classes, but BG1 and 2 were perfect for me because there was huge cast of NPCs, ranging from quite down-to-earth and compelling, to wacky and zany. The sheer number meant I could/can play replay with different combinations again, and again (and again...) and I like that Player A might meet Ajantis, who becomes a vital part of their character's story, while Player B never meets him.
Not really my cup of tea, but If they do the same as in previous games you can recruit mercenaries with the setup you see fit, personalized looks and voices, give them a backstory and create a different party every time.
Since dialogues react to race, etc and there are exploration banters (as shown in the gameplay) they will have an amount of dialogues ingame similar to some of the bg1 characters.
Honestly, fully voiced MC and low level underdark are two big concerns...
I still prefer the underdark than killing goblins and kobolds for 50h ... but in the gameplay the hook horror just wiped out a 3rd level character, as expected, so that gave me hope that the enemies will live up to their name (until my party kills them he he)
still prefer the underdark than killing goblins and kobolds for 50h ... but in the gameplay the hook horror just wiped out a 3rd level character, as expected, so that gave me hope that the enemies will live up to their name (until my party kills them he he)
Me too, but entering on underdark at chapter 1 of a low level campaing...
- 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?
I have nearly a complete collection of 5th Edition hardcovers I recently started acquiring. Even epic, 400-500 page campaigns usually cap out at the 11th or 12th level. The only one I own that goes higher than that is the Dungeon of the Mad Mage, which takes you through ALL of Undermountain. 5th Edition basically caps out at 20, and it would take a year of play-time to get to that level. Nothing like the levels seen in Throne of Bhaal are even remotely possible in anything that's been released. Point being, you are fighting the likes of Frost and Fire Giants, Strahd and Acereak around levels 10-12. Phase spiders at level 3 doesn't seem out of place in that frame. 5th Edition's level ranges are much more condensed in regards to encounters. There really isn't any such thing as a "low-level" campaign. There are only low level parts.
Comments
Fully agree.
Btw @byrne20, funny that you brought up this game here. There's an interesting article just out on this game:
https://www.polygon.com/2020/6/18/21294867/dark-alliance-action-rpg-r-a-salvatore-dungeons-and-dragons
If those images are from in-game, the artwork and graphics at least look incredibly good.
No, you didn't ask him that, and he didn't reply that.
Q: Without using the words ‘Dungeon and Dragons,’ or ‘Forgotten Realms,’ what, in your opinion, makes BG3 a sequel to the first two BG games? What was the reasoning behind the title choice?
A: You can’t see this from anything we’ve shown so far because we don’t want to spoil it but we do touch upon the story of BG 1 & 2 in deeply meaningful ways and there are returning characters. The city plays a massive part and like in the originals, you’ll play an adventure in which the party is the heart and soul with protagonists who will be afflicted by the Gods against their will.
That said, you can’t separate Baldur’s Gate from Dungeons and Dragons. The goal of Bioware was to make a great Dungeons and Dragons game and that’s also our goal. We want to make a great Dungeons and Dragons game with lots of player agency, great depth, lots of iconic creatures, npcs and locations and which you can play in both single- and in multiplayer. We want to make a pretty dark game where you have to deal deal with lots of choice and consequence. We’re letting you do pretty terrible things (or god things). If I wouldn’t have died during the Pax Presentation I would’ve been able to show some of that so I think we’ll probably upload a video of what was supposed to be shown, and you’ll certainly see more the closer we get to Early Access.
I read that big PC Gamer article on the history of Baldur’s Gate and as I was reading through it, I was surprised by how much of what the original creators wanted to do with BG 1 & 2 matched what we are doing. The biggest difference in my opinion is the way combat is implemented and that we are using DnD 5e and they were 2e.
So you rather smartly put a part of the question which you're now trying to use "if he considers BG3 a direct sequel and why" here, while the actual question was: "makes BG3 a sequel to the first two BG games" - without the word "direct". And of course, the reply doesn't use that word as well, and actually, the reply is rather mild and far from "He answered that yes, it IS a direct sequel."
Nice to see my memory wasn’t playing tricks on me.
That looks like claims of a direct sequel to me. I don't recall Larian ever calling it a "loose" or "spiritual" sequeal. What they did was slap a big old "3" on the end of Baldur's Gate. That's a claim of a direct sequel. Anything else is justification after the fact.
This is only your interpretation, not a fact.
Yes, even though I have serious concerns about the playability of the game single-player, I'm also keeping it on my list for now. If it works out as a game that can be played SP in a reasonable way, even if by lowering the difficulty setting all the way down, then yeah I would be very excited about it despite it being an action RPG, because going by this Polygon article it does have a real story and characters to it.
But come on, Drizzt and co.? They freaking jump out from the fridge. You open it and you see a dark elfs mug and his two scimitars
I've noticed that in the February demo the main character (the origin at that time) voiced everything tadpole-related (1.20 in the video):
But now in the June demo tadpole lines are voiced by Amelia Tyler (Malady in D:OS 2) - 37.30 in the video:
The dialogue narrative changed from past tense to present tense. Most likely this is why they had to scrap the VO for the main character for this recent demo.
On a side note, think about this: the developer might have moved the already paid VO (and the VO is usually pretty expensive) to a bin based on the feedback from the community to past tense. They had to find someone to record new lines, and turned to Amelia (with whom they had already worked in the past).
Btw, I'm absolutely digging this voice.
But you have to keep in mind this is very early Drizzt and co., at the beginnings of when they come together as friends and are all low level. Not today's uber-Drizzt and co.
Yeah, I'm familiar with his story. I've read quite a lot of books describing his adventures, but eventually got bored and tires with him and his gang around the time
He! Exactly the same as me! The Dark Elf trilogy was what introduced me to everything D&D. I read that first, loved it, and only then did I start playing PnP D&D.
But come on! How can you say no to playing a goody-two-shoes drow with platinum hair and purple eyes and wielding twin scimitars named Twinkle and IcingDeath?!! I mean, sure, it may be a guilty pleasure that you don't ever bring up in polite company, but still, you know you want to do it!!
I share similar concerns about what companion options will available. It's not that the current crop is terrible or bad by any means, they seem to be on par with your usual DnD video game squad from what little we've seen, but that they are mostly "safe" choices. I admit this is very much a personal gripe of mine, but when you have all the racial diversity of DnD at your disposal, why do you go with two humans, one elf and one half-elf for your showcase?
There's obviously more to a character than what race they are, and the original games were definitely no better at this, but it's still an eyesore for me. Of course, there'll be more companions not shown yet, and I fully expect shorties and the rest to be represented, but I just find disappointing. I'm sure the characters will be well-written and interesting and I really hope they take the opportunity to do play with stereotypes, kinda like NWN did. Two of the NPCs already strike me as a bit trope-heavy however, which makes me a bit weary, but any proper analysis will have to wait until we have something to actually analyze.
As for the gameplay, I'm warming up to it. The combat looks really tactical which is nice, but I hope not every battle will feel like a scripted event. Turn-based is time-consuming as it is and adding cutscenes to battles pads the time playing even more. Hopefully, Larian finds a nice balance, since I no longer have the same free time as I did when I was a kid (oh, the joys of adulthood...).
I always kill the dude in BG1, just saying ?
What I understood from the last interview with Swen, the deep gnome he saved from goblin hands will be recruitable. There was no svirfneblin NPC in any DnD game IIRC. I'd say diversity is there.
Oh, I thought he said he would become a camp follower (I forget the exact term he used), similar to Volo? If he's an NPC, that's great, and I certainly expect some sort of diversity, but my point was more that the companions we have seen so far, we've seen before.
It's not that I expect every companion to be a special snowflake Dragonborn demi-lich with a summertime vacation spot in Sigil, but more that when you make a smarmy mage with deep-seated confidence issues, maybe make him a half-orc or a gnome instead of your typical white dude.
As I said to you initially: You have very particular tastes in games, obviously. It's like you want to play something with the gameplay of Torment Tides of Numenara but set in the D&D Forgotten Realms world. And are mad at the world for not giving this to you.
At some point, you should recognize who is responsible for this issue.
Tsk, Tsk!!
Honestly though, this is one of the few things in BG1 that I've long hated - that killing Drizzt was allowed. If choices and consequences were real and meaningful, every good-aligned super-powerful paragon character in the Realms, from Elminster to the Blackstaff to all the Seven Sisters should have hunted you down and wiped you out for doing that. In FR lore, they have all hunted down and killed off people for far lesser offenses than murdering someone like Drizzt. Just sayin'
Hmm I don't think Drizzt was that much famous over the Sword Coast. He was known up north, closer to Neverwinter or Waterdeep, and especially in the Icewind Dale on the Frozen North, but I think the Sword Coast is too far south for him to be widely recognized there. And from what I remember from the books (at least the ones I read) he was not a close friend to Elminster, Khelben or any of the Seven Sisters. They all probably heard of him, maybe even met him, but I they were hardly friends. I'd say Alustriel may be the one who was close to him, since she ruled the Silver Marches. They definitely crossed paths and wouldn't be surprised if they were friends. Also you can kill Drizzit basically in the middle of nowhere, having only gnolls as witnesses, so I suppose there will be noone there to finger point you as Drizzt's killer.
Besides, I don't think original devs consider that players would actually be able to kill this guy. He's a monster that can only be killed using cheesy tactics.
Also, yeah Alustriel didn't just know him but actively protected him including by declaring Silverymoon to be an open city to him. I realize we're going off-topic here, but I love shooting the breeze with people on FR lore.
Yeah, we went way off-topic with this
But going back on topic a bit, I wouldn't be surprised if there would be at least Drizzt's cameo in BG3. He's basically a long-lived elf, so 100 years would be just a breeze for him. I wonder how many characters and places from 5ed FR source books will be present in this game. How many familiar places from BG1 and BG2 we will have opportunity to visit (i.e how much of an old BG city was left over the century). I wonder if we have an opportunity to learn something about Spellplague, the Sundering or any other great events that have shaken the Realms since original saga.
It's entirely possible. He's still very much alive and well and still kicking ass in the current timeline. I know a lot of people have already commented on who they might like to see in a cameo in the game (typically NPCs from the old games), but for me as an FR lore junkie it would be famous characters from longstanding FR lore. Talking to the ghost of Balduran would be super-cool, for example.
This is really interesting to me, because I think we have the same concerns, but for completely different reasons. For me, character and story are absolutely top of my priority list, and I'm also a bit worried about the companion options. My problem is the opposite, where I hate when all my characters are really strange, different and special. It makes my party seem like the start of a joke ("A tiefling, a gith and a vampire walk into a bar") and kind of takes me out of the story a little. Here my PC is, walking through a normal human city with their menagerie, and I'm supposed to believe people wouldn't stop and stare?
Of course, more "normal" companions stride a fine line between relatable (Anomen, Jaheira, etc.) and boring and a bit wet (Bethany from Dragon Age 2, for example, I can only describe as "overwhelmingly fine" or "about as flavourful as flour").
I'm absolutely looking through rose-coloured classes, but BG1 and 2 were perfect for me because there was huge cast of NPCs, ranging from quite down-to-earth and compelling, to wacky and zany. The sheer number meant I could/can play replay with different combinations again, and again (and again...) and I like that Player A might meet Ajantis, who becomes a vital part of their character's story, while Player B never meets him.
It's one of the things that made Dragon Age: Origins and similar games less replayable for me. because it felt wrong not to recruit the whole gang every time. It is even more concerning in BG3, with the idea of origin characters. I hated the similar feature in DOS2 and I hope it will be nothing like that.
I know expecting an army of fully fleshed-out NPCs would be ridiculous though. I understand there are limitations (damn reality, getting in the way of my dreams)
(Also, side comment: does anyone else get anxious reading this thread because of the heightened tensions? It's exhausting to read, but I love that there are so many people passionate about BG after all these years!)
I actually think we're sort of the same mind here! Like I said in my other post, I don't want super special snowflakes, I just think most human and elves characters would be more interesting if they were shorter/had fangs or something similar. I mean, halflings are supposed to be everywhere in the Realms while elves tend to be more secluded, but somehow we usually end up with a lot more elves in our parties.
Not really my cup of tea, but If they do the same as in previous games you can recruit mercenaries with the setup you see fit, personalized looks and voices, give them a backstory and create a different party every time.
Since dialogues react to race, etc and there are exploration banters (as shown in the gameplay) they will have an amount of dialogues ingame similar to some of the bg1 characters.
I still prefer the underdark than killing goblins and kobolds for 50h ... but in the gameplay the hook horror just wiped out a 3rd level character, as expected, so that gave me hope that the enemies will live up to their name (until my party kills them he he)
Me too, but entering on underdark at chapter 1 of a low level campaing...
I have nearly a complete collection of 5th Edition hardcovers I recently started acquiring. Even epic, 400-500 page campaigns usually cap out at the 11th or 12th level. The only one I own that goes higher than that is the Dungeon of the Mad Mage, which takes you through ALL of Undermountain. 5th Edition basically caps out at 20, and it would take a year of play-time to get to that level. Nothing like the levels seen in Throne of Bhaal are even remotely possible in anything that's been released. Point being, you are fighting the likes of Frost and Fire Giants, Strahd and Acereak around levels 10-12. Phase spiders at level 3 doesn't seem out of place in that frame. 5th Edition's level ranges are much more condensed in regards to encounters. There really isn't any such thing as a "low-level" campaign. There are only low level parts.