Baldur's Gate 3 - the 2nd thread

[ShadySands]

I'm playing as a warlock and every time I have to use my eldritch blast I try not to pay too much attention. It's not super horrible but for an ability that I have to spam it's too jazzy.

 

Edited October 7, 2020 by ShadySands

[uuuhhii]

7 hours ago, KaineParker said:

In 5e they tried to design around bounded accuracy, so even high level enemies have an AC of like 19 and can be hit by a level 1 scrub. The meta of this makes very difficult monsters something possible for a comparitively low-level party to take care of, and hordes of low level monsters a death sentence for groups without aoe damage. If Larian does have stat rolls instead of point buy that can hilariously unbalance the game by potentially having characters hit the soft attribute cap at level 1 and pick up a number of feats they normally wouldn't get.

There's a lot I don't like about 5e, and I ended up going to Pathfinder 2e which I've found plays easier once you parse the rules, so someone who currently plays 5e could tell you more.

go back to read old rule after reading some of pathfinder 2e stuff are very painful experience

hope pathfinder 2e are more popular maybe there will be some video game use the rule in a few years

[Hawke64]

After trying to play D:OS2, the most important question is are animations skippable (including those fancy dice rolls)? Or it is as painfully slow as D:OS2 was?

[Oner]

13 hours ago, Gromnir said:

however, the githyanki comment is, if true, valid. why have a githyanki companion? or rather, why have all the companions open hostile. 

If there's a story heavily involving mind flayers, throwing in a gith makes sense to me. Arguably they're underrepresented in DnD tie-in stories?

As for hostility, I don't know the in-story context, but considering there's romances in the game, they all have to mellow out at some point.

[Gromnir]

4 minutes ago, Oner said:

If there's a story heavily involving mind flayers, throwing in a gith makes sense to me. Arguably they're underrepresented in DnD tie-in stories?

As for hostility, I don't know the in-story context, but considering there's romances in the game, they all have to mellow out at some point.

we already addressed this. full quote on subject:

"however, the githyanki comment is, if true, valid. why have a githyanki companion? or rather, why have all the companions open hostile. am thinking it is likely each companion introduced early in the game may have a legit reason for being hostile or general unpleasant.  get three companions early and they is all backstabbing grumble monkeys? didn't need make the companion a githyanki, and even if for the story larian were trying to tell they genuine wanted a githyanki companion, that don't mean all the early companions need be so unlikable... though have not played bg2 ea so am taking the author's concerns as legit. didn't need be a githyanki, or rather, didn't need all have the same antisocial issues as the githyanki unless the authors wanted such."

identify that the writers wanted a gith companion is both illustrative and missing the point. coulda' been githzerai. coulda been an atypical jolly pirate o' gith, or even an outcast githyanki. coulda' been whatever the writers chose 'cause, y'know, imagination.

regardless, a githyanki companion (while hardly necessary) who is hostile is indeed reasonable, but that were missing the forest for the trees. author o' the article used a specific example to illustrate a personality quirk (set o' quirks) common to all the initial companions. weren't so much that a priestess o' an evil god or an undead rogue would individual be untrustworthy or unpleasant companions. rather is no reason you need start with a priestess o' shar, an undead rogue and a githyanki who is all curiously homicidal unless that were your intent. author of article asks obvious question: "why?" perhaps going for comical grimdark by making your companions as unpleasant as possible, 'cause, y'know, that's drama. 

oh, and as you mention romance, am gonna suggest the more valid criticism is that your companions who a few hours past were trying to kill you become devoted and even amorous is stretching credulity far more than is having a githyanki companion act other than murderous, but somehow such eye-roll fodder is not only considered reasonable but is expected in crpgs. baffling.

HA! Good Fun!

[bringingyouthefuture]

What are you all griping about now?  I spent an hour playing, I threw a Mindflayer barrel in a fire and killed my party of two when it exploded ... it was pretty awesome.  Graphics a little rough around the edges still, but all in all feels good to play.  It reminds me of the Ultima games with the controls of DOS2, super excited.  Glad they brought things back to RPG games like jump the chasm, it is really about time, and throw the candlestick ... though I guess that was more adventure games back in the day, but it allows more freedom.

Combat feels pretty good, but I thought DOS2 combat was some of the most innovative in the last 5 years.  Not quite as nuanced as POE2 combat but pretty darn good, not saying DOS2 combat is better than POE2, but DOS2 is good, really good.  This promises even to be better with a larger envelope of rules based on D&D, so am excited to see how it stacks up to POE2, and I rate POE2 combat as some of the best around.  Also, just a quick comparison, where Pathfinders combat never really clicked for me until it became turn-based, and even then still a little clunky, this doesn't fall into any of those problems at all!!

Writing so far is good and the cinematics are really good, maybe the best in an RPG I could argue.  Can't comment on the story yet, but I would be somewhat surprised if it is as large as BG2, but you never know keeping my fingers crossed.  I mean the opening and the start of the game kept me on the edge of my seat so like I said so far so good.  I don't have the same issues that a lot of you all have with Larian's writing.  I went back and played the Definitive Edition of DOS2, and had no negative quips about it, so am guessing will enjoy BG3.

I really am shedding tears for all the fans of BG2 who didn't get another game exactly like BG2 ... actually I'm not just messing with you all, I know how many fans of BG2 are on this site ; ).

I will add that I am hell of disappointed about Avowed, that it is first person ... such a bummer, fingers crossed they finish the Pillars series as three games.  But in the meantime sitting tight with many great games ahead.  Good year for RPGs, and I hope many more to come.

[Sarex]

I haven't realized, until I watched the gameplay for BG3, how much I miss the chanting of spells from the IE games.

And I really liked that you could interrupt the casting of mages, I wonder if BG3 has some spells cast that last multiple turns, or for that matter if you can fail a spell cast?

Other than that I really don't like how the camera clips the terrain, I don't understand why they can't just cut it in the middle (vertically). Then again Imagine it's because it's not a real top down game... Still think it could have been done for certain camera positions.

Edited October 8, 2020 by Sarex

[213374U]

1 hour ago, Sarex said:

And I really liked that you could interrupt the casting of mages, I wonder if BG3 has some spells cast that last multiple turns, or for that matter if you can fail a spell cast?

My understanding is that that's supposed to be handled by the reactions system. If you are in melee range, a wizard starts casting, and you've checked the attack of opportunity reaction from the list, you'll automatically attack and if they fail a concentration check as a result, the spell will be interrupted.

Same for counterspells, defensive casting, etc. This is all from what I read before EA dropped so perhaps someone who has played it can explain how it actually works in the game currently.

[IndiraLightfoot]

I nearly always pick a ranger when I start a D&D game, and I did that this time too. And I recall that one of the specializations (it was called something else) you could pick from level 1 was in fact a ranger that disrupted spellcasting in some shape or form. I haven't tried it out yet, so this is very preliminary info on my part.

[Oner]

18 minutes ago, 213374U said:

My understanding is that that's supposed to be handled by the reactions system. If you are in melee range, a wizard starts casting, and you've checked the attack of opportunity reaction from the list, you'll automatically attack and if they fail a concentration check as a result, the spell will be interrupted.

If you have the Mage Slayer feat you can make Attacks of Opportunity against people casting near you, which theoretically may interrupt the casting even for 1 action spells (wording is a bit ambiguous). Normally you can only interrupt spells that require multiple turns of casting or need to be maintained with Concentration.

[MrBrown]

4 hours ago, Sarex said:

And I really liked that you could interrupt the casting of mages, I wonder if BG3 has some spells cast that last multiple turns, or for that matter if you can fail a spell cast?

5e has a lot of spells that require concentration (most spells that have a duration), and you can interrupt those by attacking the caster. This is a pretty important part on how casting multiple spells with durations is limited, so this probably exists in BG3.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

How is alignment handled in the game?

[Sarex]

1 minute ago, KaineParker said:

How is alignment handled in the game?

With jokes?

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

3 hours ago, Sarex said:

With jokes?

That sounds good.

[ShadySands]

What is this alignment that you speak of?

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

9 minutes ago, ShadySands said:

What is this alignment that you speak of?

Occasionally you have to adjust your vehicle's suspension so it handles well.

[Tale]

18 hours ago, Oner said:

If there's a story heavily involving mind flayers, throwing in a gith makes sense to me. Arguably they're underrepresented in DnD tie-in stories?

As for hostility, I don't know the in-story context, but considering there's romances in the game, they all have to mellow out at some point.

The general impression I have for why most of the companions are jerks is that they're focusing on evil and evil-adjacent companions for EA period. This seems a strange choice. I like the Gith, though. She's the only one who I don't want to stab.

[LadyCrimson]

9 minutes ago, Tale said:

The general impression I have for why most of the companions are jerks is that they're focusing on evil and evil-adjacent companions for EA period. This seems a strange choice. I like the Gith, though. She's the only one who I don't want to stab.

So maybe this would work for my desire to be evieeeeeeeeeeaalllll? 
I think my general impression is that overall it's going to be a pretty good cRPG, even if it doesn't "seem like a Baldurs Gate" in the end ... just not a rpg for me personally.  I really am impressed with some of the visuals in it tho, for the game type.

Last time I played a game at all like this one was probably Pillars of Eternity and iirc, even tho I did like it quite a lot, I was near insane with irritation of the micro-management of combat by the end. And that was RTwP not turn-based. I think my patience for that kind of management rpg combat are sadly over. 

Edited October 8, 2020 by LadyCrimson

[Tale]

I'm not sure it'll satisfy a desire to play evil. The "evil" option in quests so far has been to just turn down quests to help people. This may change as I come across meatier quests or it gets more development. But early impressions don't lead me to expect it.

[Theonlygarby]

I'm not a big fan so far.  Feels a lot like DOS2 but prettier(which was never my issue with the game). Although the dialog parts where it shows your character "speaking" or thinking make me laugh...  It reminds me of fallout 4 with the voiceless protagonist mods....  Just an awkward pause with a close up on your characters face, then back to the other character talking.

[LadyCrimson]

I still find the frequent/constant face/shoulder close-ups overly distracting. I guess I'm too visually oriented (or something) and especially on a larger TV it makes me want to take a step backwards, as if I'm standing almost toe to toe when they're talking. Seems rude!   
 

51 minutes ago, Theonlygarby said:

 Although the dialog parts where it shows your character "speaking" or thinking make me laugh...  It reminds me of fallout 4 with the voiceless protagonist mods....  Just an awkward pause with a close up on your characters face, then back to the other character talking.

Those are definitely comical moments most of the time.

[ShadySands]

D&D:OS

I'm having a hard time continuing on. I may put this down until the full release where I'll probably make it a little further before dropping it an never picking it up again. It's just too much D:OS and not enough BG for me to stay interested. 

That reminds me, I've been wanted to do another run of Siege of Dragonspear.

 

[Oner]

6 hours ago, Tale said:

The general impression I have for why most of the companions are jerks is that they're focusing on evil and evil-adjacent companions for EA period. This seems a strange choice. I like the Gith, though. She's the only one who I don't want to stab.

So you think there's going to be more companions?

[uuuhhii]

7 hours ago, Tale said:

The general impression I have for why most of the companions are jerks is that they're focusing on evil and evil-adjacent companions for EA period. This seems a strange choice. I like the Gith, though. She's the only one who I don't want to stab.

half of companion in dos2 are pretty jerky

and they seems to be the more popular half

guess developer noticed

[bugarup]

1 hour ago, uuuhhii said:

half of companion in dos2 are pretty jerky

and they seems to be the more popular half

guess developer noticed

Methinks it's just what passes for character development in Larian's brand of "storytelling". The character is a jerk and then suddenly they're not (and possibly you can bang). Yay.