In other news, since the article mentioned that they've decided to remove the game mechanics of attack rolls missing their target from the game's combat system, I've decided to register on Larian's forum and petition them to reconsider that decision.
Maybe it's not too late, and if there's a chance my armchair-game-designer input could help make the game a more faithful sequel to BG, I'm willing to write a few strongly opinionated posts. It's what I do best, after all.
It's okay with me if they tweak the "miss" mechanics to provide the best possible experience of combat in a live action game. I realize "best possible experience" is subjective. But if a total "miss" is tweaked to occur very rarely, and otherwise use a percentage of how much force is delivered by the blow, that's fine with me.
No, an small change on "miss" will lead to an chain reaction of changes in feats, on attributes, on ranged weapons, on spells that have SR, spells that allow saves, etc and all game will change.SCL tried to remove dice rolls and failed miserably.
What's with comparing unreleased BG3 with SCL? I'm sure Larian analyzed thoroughly what SCL did wrong and why this game failed miserably. I think you guys should push the panic button off and give Larian a benefit of doubt. We don't know how the game will look like and you already came to definitive conclusions based on few interviews and bits of information. Let's just wait for the first gameplay at least. I don't want BG3 to be DOS3, but there is nothing yet that's known about it that will let me think it *would* be DOS3.
P:K fixed the same problem by implementing more consequences for resting... But looks like SCL2, ops BG3 will solve by cooldowns using another strategy... This mindset "baldur's gate is the best game, butlets fix the combat, the spells, the resting, the leveling(...)" remembers me of Jay Wilson "diablo 2 is an good game, but lets fix everything and end up with wo feat gauntlet legends"
In other news, since the article mentioned that they've decided to remove the game mechanics of attack rolls missing their target from the game's combat system, I've decided to register on Larian's forum and petition them to reconsider that decision.
Maybe it's not too late, and if there's a chance my armchair-game-designer input could help make the game a more faithful sequel to BG, I'm willing to write a few strongly opinionated posts. It's what I do best, after all.
It's okay with me if they tweak the "miss" mechanics to provide the best possible experience of combat in a live action game. I realize "best possible experience" is subjective. But if a total "miss" is tweaked to occur very rarely, and otherwise use a percentage of how much force is delivered by the blow, that's fine with me.
No, an small change on "miss" will lead to an chain reaction of changes in feats, on attributes, on ranged weapons, on spells that have SR, spells that allow saves, etc and all game will change.SCL tried to remove dice rolls and failed miserably.
Well, WotC is partnering with Larian. That makes me hopeful. It need not be the slippery slope that you're envisioning.
A d20 roll could reflect how much of a 'hit' the blow is. Whether it is so poorly aimed and executed that it only glances, capable of doing only negligible harm (1) or is a crit (natural 20). For adventuring classes a total miss should occur less than 5% of the time, no? I mean there are modifiers to the roll and opponent's saves of course, but that would be the general idea.
Also please forgive me if my memory is a bit rusty on some of these mechanics as I've been away from the game for nearly 6 years.
@subtledoctor Yeah, that's a valid concern for sure when you see a statement like that. It's well placed.
The BG games have a substantial fan base of D&D players. But for the general public they just want the combat to feel fun and satisfying. They couldn't care less how faithfully adapted the combat system is from tabletop rules. And the latter will drive the bottom line I'm sure.
Although with WotC partnering as it is, they have an interest in introducing a whole generation of young players to D&D. So that is also a factor that probably should not be overlooked.
"Well, WotC is partnering with Larian. That makes me hopeful. It need not be the slippery slope that you're envisioning."
WotC also decided that those awful BG novels were canon for awhile. They alos greenlighted SCL. So them being involved doesn't really mean much. They miss about as often as they hit.
"Well, WotC is partnering with Larian. That makes me hopeful. It need not be the slippery slope that you're envisioning."
WotC also decided that those awful BG novels were canon for awhile. They alos greenlighted SCL. So them being involved doesn't really mean much. They miss about as often as they hit.
Well you're gonna' love this. Mike Mearls, that know-nothing WotC flunky who's been in all the interview videos says in one interview that D&D 6e could be taking all the rules changes Larian makes in BG3 and making them official.
"Well, WotC is partnering with Larian. That makes me hopeful. It need not be the slippery slope that you're envisioning."
WotC also decided that those awful BG novels were canon for awhile. They alos greenlighted SCL. So them being involved doesn't really mean much. They miss about as often as they hit.
Well you're gonna' love this. Mike Mearls, that know-nothing WotC flunky who's been in all the interview videos says in one interview that D&D 6e could be taking all the rules changes Larian makes in BG3 and making them official.
If you could provide me with a link to this, I would much appreciate it.
"Well, WotC is partnering with Larian. That makes me hopeful. It need not be the slippery slope that you're envisioning."
WotC also decided that those awful BG novels were canon for awhile. They alos greenlighted SCL. So them being involved doesn't really mean much. They miss about as often as they hit.
Well you're gonna' love this. Mike Mearls, that know-nothing WotC flunky who's been in all the interview videos says in one interview that D&D 6e could be taking all the rules changes Larian makes in BG3 and making them official.
If you could provide me with a link to this, I would much appreciate it.
This link is what I could find right now. Note the URL specifically uses the words 6th edition. There was another article I read that had this same info but with more details, but I can't find it now. Maybe WotC had it pulled because they got nervous about Mearls publicly saying anything about a next edition of D&D at this point.
I'm a little bit concerned, given that Larian's stated that WotC's given them leeway to adjust the 5E rules to better suit the needs of a CRPG. This isn't necessarily a BAD thing; for instance, while there are some players who enjoy having to eat rations on rest, in general even in my tabletop games my group just tends to assume that characters will be hunting/gathering when they set up camp or just set aside some gold that will always be used to purchase rations. For a CRPG where players may be resting dozens of times within the span of an hour, having to nitpick about food/water tends to just get tedious after a while.
That said, I think that concepts like "misses" and "resting" are fairly crucial concepts to a D&D game. Part of the thrill about D&D is that there's always a tiny chance of failure (or conversely, a tiny chance of success via critical hits). It keeps the game from just devolving into pure min-maxing, and resting is also a good story/plot driver. Downtime is when people tend to talk, ruminate over the day's events, and thus grow and develop characters.
If Larian thinks they can still maintain the feel of a D&D game without these, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, but I'd still like more information on how exactly they plan to achieve it.
I like the resting in Pathfinder Kingmaker. It makes Barbarians more than just "different kind of fighter" when their skills can actually provide food and other benefits in the wilds. Running out of food is a genuine concern. It gives the world a real feel without being too punishing or too realistic in the context of a game. Skill based classes get to shine a bit brighter and not just the ones that are good in combat.
There's a new PC Gamer article now that focuses on changing PnP rules for video games:
Other times it requires a full-scale redesign. "The fighter has been a big problem for us" says Vincke, "because in the beginning he's very limited. He's a tutorial class in D&D 5e, but if I don't give you anything to do with your fighter in the beginning of a videogame you'll go bananas, especially when you play multiplayer."
I think it will be a real disaster. Now they want to change the concept of warrior too? What does it mean that the warrior at the beginning of the game has nothing to do? It is the class with the most hp and the highest ac and it has always been his task to keep at bay the melee enemies according to Larian what should he do? I'm afraid I will continue to play Kingmaker and I will completely let go of BG3. At this point I hope for some premium NWN: EE module. Apparently we won't be able to see a Kingmaker-like game with the D&D 5e rules set in the Forgotten Realms. Such a pity.
I think it will be a real disaster. Now they want to change the concept of warrior too? What does it mean that the warrior at the beginning of the game has nothing to do? It is the class with the most hp and the highest ac and it has always been his task to keep at bay the melee enemies according to Larian what should he do? I'm afraid I will continue to play Kingmaker and I will completely let go of BG3. At this point I hope for some premium NWN: EE module. Apparently we won't be able to see a Kingmaker-like game with the D&D 5e rules set in the Forgotten Realms. Such a pity.
To be fair, it IS a bit uneventful leveling up and playing a low level Fighter in 5e.
Level 1 - Fighting Style = choice for a passive bonus
Level 2 - Action Surge = one extra action per day
Level 3 - Martial Archetype = another passive bonus
Level 4 - Ability Score improvement = another passive bonus
Your attack (proficiency) bonus isn't improving until level 5 either, so basically only HP increase in addition to the above.
Some active skills would make the class more fun. Any class.
That said, why go with "5e" then if you have to basically change everything. There are other flaws in 5e I could list... like level 1 characters being way too squishy, or Fighter extra attacks being too big of a power jump when you get them.
It can go all kinds of wrong when you pick a game and then fundamentally start changing the rules.
1varangian, what change made an class more fun or interesting? All classes deviations from pnp resulted in useless classes/specializations. Conjurers and Necromancers wiz are useless on nwn1 due the "only one summon bs". Pale masters receive no +caster level, making then useless, arcane archers that can only imbue the most resisted element(Fire)
I hated play nwn2 as a warlock but when installed an pnp mod that fixes warlock, got the best experience on nwn2. If low level is such a bad experience, i have an solution. Start at lv 3/4/5. Like nwn1, nwn2(after tutorial) and bg2 did. You don't need to try something that never worked, again...
Actually, a warrior has a lot of active actions just to implement them. It can disarm, charge, bull rush, trip, sunder, etc. etc. It doesn't have to be all the same as Diablo with skill trees etc. etc. In the original BGs the warrior had no active abilities yet he always played his role decently. Indeed, without a warrior the other characters were doomed. Jahira and Khalid at the beginning are fundamental, unless the main character is a warrior.
Excuse me where did you find the clerics at the beginning of the game? The first cleric you meet is Branwen and is in Nashkel, Viconia who is in the middle of nowhere while the others are much further forward. If you have created a personalized party it is another matter.
It's true that warriors in games like Baldur's Gate don't have a lot to do in combat outside of positioning and attacking, but that's not a problem in a game that's designed for the player to control various class archetypes at the same time. The fact that Larian considers this to be an issue for BG3 might be another indicator that the game will not feature gameplay similar to its predecessors.
I was referring to the quote 1varangian posted from the newer PC Gamer article:
Other times it requires a full-scale redesign. "The fighter has been a big problem for us" says Vincke, "because in the beginning he's very limited. He's a tutorial class in D&D 5e, but if I don't give you anything to do with your fighter in the beginning of a videogame you'll go bananas, especially when you play multiplayer."
It's true that warriors in games like Baldur's Gate don't have a lot to do in combat outside of positioning and attacking, but that's not a problem in a game that's designed for the player to control various class archetypes at the same time. The fact that Larian considers this to be an issue for BG3 might be another indicator that the game will not feature gameplay similar to its predecessors.
This on BG. On core D&D, there are classes for every taste. Why he not create an homebrew class that can do more than warriors instead of an "full-scale redesign"???
Pathfinder did melee classes right IMO. You can be an fighter if you wanna something simpler or if you wanna melee with more stuff to do and care about, you can be an magus. The fact that Larien things that everything needs to be changed shows that this game will be SCL2 with BG3 name.
Comments
No, an small change on "miss" will lead to an chain reaction of changes in feats, on attributes, on ranged weapons, on spells that have SR, spells that allow saves, etc and all game will change.SCL tried to remove dice rolls and failed miserably.
P:K fixed the same problem by implementing more consequences for resting... But looks like SCL2, ops BG3 will solve by cooldowns using another strategy... This mindset "baldur's gate is the best game, butlets fix the combat, the spells, the resting, the leveling(...)" remembers me of Jay Wilson "diablo 2 is an good game, but lets fix everything and end up with wo feat gauntlet legends"
Well, WotC is partnering with Larian. That makes me hopeful. It need not be the slippery slope that you're envisioning.
A d20 roll could reflect how much of a 'hit' the blow is. Whether it is so poorly aimed and executed that it only glances, capable of doing only negligible harm (1) or is a crit (natural 20). For adventuring classes a total miss should occur less than 5% of the time, no? I mean there are modifiers to the roll and opponent's saves of course, but that would be the general idea.
Also please forgive me if my memory is a bit rusty on some of these mechanics as I've been away from the game for nearly 6 years.
The BG games have a substantial fan base of D&D players. But for the general public they just want the combat to feel fun and satisfying. They couldn't care less how faithfully adapted the combat system is from tabletop rules. And the latter will drive the bottom line I'm sure.
Although with WotC partnering as it is, they have an interest in introducing a whole generation of young players to D&D. So that is also a factor that probably should not be overlooked.
Sure, if you are trying to hit a training dummy. Not if you are trying to hit a dex 19 sword master in magical armour buffed with illusion spells.
Yes, another thing that will need to re work if they change the miss chance. The illusion spells.
Now we have melee, ranged, feats, spelsl that allow SR, spells that allow saving trows, summoning spells, enemy health(...) and illusion spells.
WotC also decided that those awful BG novels were canon for awhile. They alos greenlighted SCL. So them being involved doesn't really mean much. They miss about as often as they hit.
Well you're gonna' love this. Mike Mearls, that know-nothing WotC flunky who's been in all the interview videos says in one interview that D&D 6e could be taking all the rules changes Larian makes in BG3 and making them official.
If you could provide me with a link to this, I would much appreciate it.
This link is what I could find right now. Note the URL specifically uses the words 6th edition. There was another article I read that had this same info but with more details, but I can't find it now. Maybe WotC had it pulled because they got nervous about Mearls publicly saying anything about a next edition of D&D at this point.
https://www.pcgamesn.com/baldurs-gate-3/dungeons-and-dragons-6th-edition
That said, I think that concepts like "misses" and "resting" are fairly crucial concepts to a D&D game. Part of the thrill about D&D is that there's always a tiny chance of failure (or conversely, a tiny chance of success via critical hits). It keeps the game from just devolving into pure min-maxing, and resting is also a good story/plot driver. Downtime is when people tend to talk, ruminate over the day's events, and thus grow and develop characters.
If Larian thinks they can still maintain the feel of a D&D game without these, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, but I'd still like more information on how exactly they plan to achieve it.
There's a new PC Gamer article now that focuses on changing PnP rules for video games:
https://www.pcgamer.com/how-baldurs-gate-3-and-bloodlines-2-are-rewriting-the-rules-of-the-tabletop-games-theyre-adapting/
Yes, will be SCL2 instead of BG3.
Level 1 - Fighting Style = choice for a passive bonus
Level 2 - Action Surge = one extra action per day
Level 3 - Martial Archetype = another passive bonus
Level 4 - Ability Score improvement = another passive bonus
Your attack (proficiency) bonus isn't improving until level 5 either, so basically only HP increase in addition to the above.
Some active skills would make the class more fun. Any class.
That said, why go with "5e" then if you have to basically change everything. There are other flaws in 5e I could list... like level 1 characters being way too squishy, or Fighter extra attacks being too big of a power jump when you get them.
It can go all kinds of wrong when you pick a game and then fundamentally start changing the rules.
I hated play nwn2 as a warlock but when installed an pnp mod that fixes warlock, got the best experience on nwn2. If low level is such a bad experience, i have an solution. Start at lv 3/4/5. Like nwn1, nwn2(after tutorial) and bg2 did. You don't need to try something that never worked, again...
I was referring to the quote 1varangian posted from the newer PC Gamer article:
This on BG. On core D&D, there are classes for every taste. Why he not create an homebrew class that can do more than warriors instead of an "full-scale redesign"???
Pathfinder did melee classes right IMO. You can be an fighter if you wanna something simpler or if you wanna melee with more stuff to do and care about, you can be an magus. The fact that Larien things that everything needs to be changed shows that this game will be SCL2 with BG3 name.