Baldur's Gate 3 - Wolfheart's Thoughts on Patch 6
- Thread starter Redglyph
- Start date
On a side note, the update for macOS is rolling out today.
Avantre
Sentinel
- Joined
- March 23, 2012
- Messages
- 363
Still no actual city in sight.
You don't get to walk around the city until the later part of Baldur's Gate 1, either.
I wouldn't expect that we'll be seeing the city (not counting that vision at the end of the currently released content) until the full release of the game, as they've never said anything about releasing more than Act 1 of the game into Early Access.
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2012
- Messages
- 363
Yeah, it's not that I want this to be a mostly city game. But without a living city it won't be a BG game for me. ( It doen't necessarily have to be the city of Baldurs Gate itself).
Well, my fear is that we won't see a living city at all. Cities in the D:OS games haven't been a strong point at all. I'm a little reluctant to see if they can pull it off. And tbh without a day/night cycle it'll feel incomplete anyway.
It's been a while since I played BG3. That's right, it didn't have a day/night cycle, night suddenly appears when camping. There wasn't any notion of time at all. At least the camp is made at the current location now, I believe, instead of this "camp in the cloud". There's still hope for time and day/night.
Has Larian ever confirmed any known city name? All I know is Baldur's Gate is mentioned by several NPCs as their destination. I'd love to see a city but I'm not sure Larian's style and engine are compatible with a larged-sized city. I've never seen fake buildings in their maps, it would require a tremendous design effort to populate each house of a city. And the engine is struggling enough as it is, with the framerate dropping significantly.
To me, Baldur's Gate is only a name on a map, so I don't have any expectation or need to identify this game with any fond memory, fortunately. I would just find it poorly chosen and "marketing-tainted" if the name was only in the title for the sake of popularity, but it wouldn't have an impact on the appreciation of the game itself.
There's still hope for time and day/night.Has Larian ever confirmed any known city name? All I know is Baldur's Gate is mentioned by several NPCs as their destination. I'd love to see a city but I'm not sure Larian's style and engine are compatible with a larged-sized city. I've never seen fake buildings in their maps, it would require a tremendous design effort to populate each house of a city. And the engine is struggling enough as it is, with the framerate dropping significantly.
To me, Baldur's Gate is only a name on a map, so I don't have any expectation or need to identify this game with any fond memory, fortunately. I would just find it poorly chosen and "marketing-tainted" if the name was only in the title for the sake of popularity, but it wouldn't have an impact on the appreciation of the game itself.
Correct me if I'm wrong your nowhere near Baldur's Gate but Avernus in Act one. So unless you find a way back to Abeir-Toril in a later act it's just Baldur's Gate in name.
N
Nereida
Guest
For those who followed the lore, they have mentioned a couple of times that the story of Baldur's Gate 3 follows chronologically the events of the Descent Into Avernus campaign. So, I don't want to spoil anyone, as I've fully completed the adventure with some of my DnD buddies, but that being the case, it makes complete sense for BG3 to begin and probably almost exclusively play out in Avernus.
In the same vein, I am quite positive that the players will begin finding story queues that link the events in Avernus to Baldur's Gate, and possibly travel there at some point, although this is mere speculation based on some plot points and queues that you can pick up during the Descent Into Avernus campaign.
In the same vein, I am quite positive that the players will begin finding story queues that link the events in Avernus to Baldur's Gate, and possibly travel there at some point, although this is mere speculation based on some plot points and queues that you can pick up during the Descent Into Avernus campaign.
Thanks, that helps to lower my expectations.
Doesn't mean that it won't be a good game, but I really liked the change of general environments (nature, city, dungeons) in the BG trilogy.
Pathfinder doesn't shine here as well.
many characters do mention going to/meeting in baldur's gate, and a few ongoing quests seem to be linked to it (or at least imply they they are). I'm pretty sure it will appear - but no idea how central it will be.
On the patch itself - did play, since they had new region. But the level 4 cap kind of kills my interest. I should be level 6 by now I reckon. I'm in the new region, which is OK so far despite characters been +1 level to my party (I wonder if they have weakened them artificially…)
On the patch changes
- height advantage change - good (!) 5E advantage was too strong. Of coure, if you now get advantage from another source, you have an extra attack bonus that didn't exist before. But maybe that is fair since they don't implement cover. Enemies (and my party!) still dash for the high ground +2 is not to be sneered it in 5E with its low ACs
- graphics overhaul - hit and miss. Some parts seems more dynamically lit, others too muted and others too dark. The camera has a lot of trouble navigating the new area…driving me crazy.
- mud & blood - way overdone right now (and not on your clothes, which remain pristine
- weapon actions, I guess I'm OK with these, although some are quite powerful. I tend to forget about them, but the enemy AI uses them relentlessly and they can be pretty bad, like being unable to move at all after being "hamstrung" (stronger than most abilities that just impede motion).
On a side note: how I hate the badly organized action bar ! I have actually forgotten I had some spells to use because they were added at the back. They should have an auto-arrange feature that groups like items (spells, potions etc) in sequence.
And this BS with people throwing potions to heal their allies…seriously. That is so D:OS.
On the patch itself - did play, since they had new region. But the level 4 cap kind of kills my interest. I should be level 6 by now I reckon. I'm in the new region, which is OK so far despite characters been +1 level to my party (I wonder if they have weakened them artificially…)
On the patch changes
- height advantage change - good (!) 5E advantage was too strong. Of coure, if you now get advantage from another source, you have an extra attack bonus that didn't exist before. But maybe that is fair since they don't implement cover. Enemies (and my party!) still dash for the high ground +2 is not to be sneered it in 5E with its low ACs
- graphics overhaul - hit and miss. Some parts seems more dynamically lit, others too muted and others too dark. The camera has a lot of trouble navigating the new area…driving me crazy.
- mud & blood - way overdone right now (and not on your clothes, which remain pristine
- weapon actions, I guess I'm OK with these, although some are quite powerful. I tend to forget about them, but the enemy AI uses them relentlessly and they can be pretty bad, like being unable to move at all after being "hamstrung" (stronger than most abilities that just impede motion).
On a side note: how I hate the badly organized action bar ! I have actually forgotten I had some spells to use because they were added at the back. They should have an auto-arrange feature that groups like items (spells, potions etc) in sequence.
And this BS with people throwing potions to heal their allies…seriously. That is so D:OS.
What are weapon actions?
Equipping a specific weapon gives you extra "special" actions (see the video at 6:15 - "pommel strike", "lacerate", "cleave" for ex). That's the equivalent of the abilities given by some gear in other RPGs.
Thanks. Never heard about anything like that in D&D 5ed. So I guess it's a Larian invention?
At least it seams that these actions are somewhat profane.
One thing I didn't like about the D:OS mechanics where the special actions that profane fighters where able to do which clearly were somehow magical (like doing a ranged strike with a melee weapon) without these abilities being backed up by lore.
I hope they don't do that with BG3.
N
Nereida
Guest
From what I've read at least some of those weapon actions don't require a specific weapon to be used, and reflect existing DnD mechanics. IE, <Backbreaker> provokes a contested skill roll to make the target Prone, which is something you can do in DnD. <Pommel Strike> allows you to hit an enemy with the back of your weapon to deal non-lethal bludgeon damage (instead of lethal piercing/slashing damage). Again something that you can do in DnD. <Cleave> has been mentioned too, that's an actual optional rule in DnD where you can use a full attack action to forego all your round attacks to do a single sweeping attack in a cone in front of you.
I don't know about other such abilities because I just don't want to research and get spoiled before the game is fully released, but I quite like the idea of having a variety of strategies available to use in combat. In DnD rarely ever you solve any combat just by walking up to enemies and rolling attacks against their AC, that would be incredibly boring. You do things like using terrain, being ingenious, and thinking outside of the box to create advantages, and at the DM's discretion, who will often at least consider what you want to do and tell you what kind of roll you need to pass to make it happen. In a video game, not having a living person to judge every situation and allow your creative thinking to take advantage of combat situations, I feel that the more preset options you have in combat, the better.
I don't know about other such abilities because I just don't want to research and get spoiled before the game is fully released, but I quite like the idea of having a variety of strategies available to use in combat. In DnD rarely ever you solve any combat just by walking up to enemies and rolling attacks against their AC, that would be incredibly boring. You do things like using terrain, being ingenious, and thinking outside of the box to create advantages, and at the DM's discretion, who will often at least consider what you want to do and tell you what kind of roll you need to pass to make it happen. In a video game, not having a living person to judge every situation and allow your creative thinking to take advantage of combat situations, I feel that the more preset options you have in combat, the better.
Yeah, absolutely. That's what I love about D20 combat, or any other good combat, especially TB.
So adding options in general is fine. I'm just sceptical when something is added. It's just too easy to break immersion or balance.
Spellcasters (or characters with a lot of spell-like abilities) inherently have more options in combat than non-casters. Imho it's unwise to add options to these classes with the sole purpose to get them as many options. Additionally to the aforementioned potential issues there's the problem that you take a more streamlined playstyle away from gamers who want combat to be more simple.
Personally I'll just cheat my way to victory so yeah, I could less about rules and abilities. I'll have infinite hp, money, and not have to worry about dice rolls failing every-time.
Maybe inf movement and one hit kill as well.
Maybe inf movement and one hit kill as well.
I'm not playing BG3 anymore so it's just speculation:
I'd say it will depend on what they choose to add. It's possible to have buffs and debuffs attached to items, crafting magic items is part of D&D 5E but I believe it's costly, so maybe less frequent than in Pathfinder? Hopefully they won't abuse it and offer interesting alternatives with some rare items.
Some of it seems home-made, a quick search shows that "lacerate" is a 3rd-publisher spell, and I doubt it does exactly what Larian's version does since they're free spirits, but I honestly don't know.
"Cleave" is a standard feat, so maybe it's not part of the weapon but part of the character (perhaps the character doesn't "gain" this feat by equipping the weapon like shown on the UI, but it allows the character to use it just because the feat requires a melee weapon) - the problem with BG3 is that their UI is very confusing and mixes everything up so it's hard to tell without playing and dissecting what they did.
D&D gives a lot of freedom, so it's not shocking, but when it's home-made we have to hope it's balanced enough.
FurtiveNyctophile
Sentinel
Hmm...
Kind of... I've been running D&D since first edition and I'm one of "those" people who likes these games because of adhering to the rulesets I know. And they are *plenty* detailed and complicated without Larian doing... Larian things. Like adding tons of exploding containers that create environmental effects everywhere. But I digress.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/combat
That's pretty meaty and that's all they really need to do to make a good 5E game. Solasta did a pretty good job with the combat system and I hope Larian doesn't muck that up. It's clean, it works well, and there are plenty of options contained even in the "basic rules" section of the free D&D ruleset to make any computer game combat fairly compelling. I mean, Dungeon Encounters just came out and people are praising it for having a combat system simplicity of "Attack vs. Physical or Magical Damage and that's it" - but in design, as Da Vinci said, "Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication."
Kind of... I've been running D&D since first edition and I'm one of "those" people who likes these games because of adhering to the rulesets I know. And they are *plenty* detailed and complicated without Larian doing... Larian things. Like adding tons of exploding containers that create environmental effects everywhere. But I digress.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/combat
That's pretty meaty and that's all they really need to do to make a good 5E game. Solasta did a pretty good job with the combat system and I hope Larian doesn't muck that up. It's clean, it works well, and there are plenty of options contained even in the "basic rules" section of the free D&D ruleset to make any computer game combat fairly compelling. I mean, Dungeon Encounters just came out and people are praising it for having a combat system simplicity of "Attack vs. Physical or Magical Damage and that's it" - but in design, as Da Vinci said, "Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication."
FurtiveNyctophile
Sentinel
Personally I'll just cheat my way to victory so yeah, I could less about rules and abilities. I'll have infinite hp, money, and not have to worry about dice rolls failing every-time.
Maybe inf movement and one hit kill as well.
If this is honestly how you enjoy playing games more power to ya. I find that when I enable cheats etc I lose all willpower to even continue playing the game. I need at least the chance of failure to make success worthwhile.
Gah... I can't even imagine playing BG3, a sprawling story game based on tactics and tabletop combat rules, with a cheat. It would be like playing D&D with loaded dice. Defeats the point