Solasta - Preview @ GiN

HiddenX

The Elder Spy
Staff Member
Original Sin Donor
Original Sin 2 Donor
Joined
October 18, 2006
Messages
19,818
Location
Germany
GiN checked out the Early Access title Solasta: Crown of the Magister:

An RPG Gem Shines in Solasta Crown of the Magister

Back in November, I took a look at Baldur's Gate 3, which for me was one of the most anticipated games of the year. Having played through the entire classic series and all of the DLCs, I was really excited to see what the new game could offer. Developer Larian Studios released the game into Steam's Early Access program, giving everyone a good look at the first chapter of the new title.

About the same time, I became aware of another game that used the Dungeon and Dragons fifth edition ruleset called Solasta: Crown of the Magister. Developed by Tactical Adventures, it promised a true to life conversion of a real D&D pen and paper type of game, at a time when meeting in person around the table was ill-advised. So they had good timing, but because they didn't have the Baldur's Gate name, it kind of languished in my to-do pile for a while.

[...]

Even though Solasta: Crown of the Magister is still in early access, it's worth playing. Especially if you are really craving an authentic round-the-table type of D&D adventure, but one that can be played by yourself, you won't get any closer than what Solasta offers. I'm sure it will get even better as it develops, but am pretty happy with how it plays right now, and look forward to many long caffeine-fueled dungeon delving adventures with the game into the wee hours of the night.
More information.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
19,818
Location
Germany
I just experienced my first Solasta run. I liked it but it feels a bit barebones at times, which is to be expected.

I'm very tempted to buy Baldur's Gate III right now...

Has anyone played both games? How do they compare? Is BG III worth trying aswell in it's current state?

Michael
 
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
203
Location
Belgium
I just experienced my first Solasta run. I liked it but it feels a bit barebones at times, which is to be expected.

I'm very tempted to buy Baldur's Gate III right now...

Has anyone played both games? How do they compare? Is BG III worth trying aswell in it's current state?

Michael
I feel bg3 will be a better game overall, but the combat is somewhat more satisfying in solasta.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk
 
Joined
Nov 13, 2006
Messages
9,177
Location
Manchester, United Kingdom
Has anyone played both games? How do they compare? Is BG III worth trying aswell in it's current state?

BG III is absolutely worth trying. I did most of the first area, and it was a lot of fun. That said, I'm going to resist playing any more of the EA to avoid spoilers.

Both games are really good imo, and they're different enough that anyone who likes 5E D&D will want to play both.
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
39,138
Location
Florida, US
I have over 100 hours in BG3 early access so clearly I like it :)

That being said Solasta also looks good. I am already in three EA/Alpha games (WotR, BG3, Waylanders) so don't really need a 4th right now. I plan on getting Solasta if it gets fleshed out a bit more so keeping an eye on it. But I have heard good things about it from most here ... enough so that I most likely will get it later.
 
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
3,959
Location
NH
Nice review! I mostly agree on the different points, but I really wish reviewers stopped comparing Solasta and BG3, which are quite different games, and of completely different budgets.

I also find it amusing when they say that Baldur's Gate 3 "feels more like a Divinity game than a D&D game". Their comparison is often based on the fact Larian has used the same graphics engine and given the same level of interaction with the environment, which of course has nothing related to being D&D or not. I'm not sure this particular author meant it too, but the phrasing suggests as much.

But yes, the rules are not completely D&D-compliant in BG3. For the rest, I'd rather respect the developer's interpretation and implementation.

I just experienced my first Solasta run. I liked it but it feels a bit barebones at times, which is to be expected.

I'm very tempted to buy Baldur's Gate III right now…

Has anyone played both games? How do they compare? Is BG III worth trying aswell in it's current state?

Michael
Baldur's Gate 3 is definitely worth trying.

They don't compare. Solasta is very well made, it brings new ideas like the Scavengers, and I love the game, but as you said it's less fleshed out. The atmosphere is completely different.

BG3 has a gorgeous world, no travel between areas, very detailed character models, professional voice acting (I'm tempted to say, less natural voice acting), pre-made companions with their personal history, and if you have played D:OS2, you'll find the same level of freedom and interaction (including the terrible AoE). It doesn't have the same tabletop feeling, it never gets out of character like Solasta does so well, the adventure is more continuous and immersive. And for now, the ratio of dialogs and quests that don't involve combat is higher in BG3. Finally, choices have more consequences in BG3.

The D&D rules are somewhat adapted, but if you can ignore it and pretend it's just another Larian ruleset, it's fine. Combat is fun, but has a very different feeling than Solasta, you don't just play according to the rules, but with other tricks.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2020
Messages
10,159
Location
Good old Europe
Unfortunately I found Solasta being a microscopic font-fest. I doubt even on a 27" monitor the fonts will look readable, its so small..
 
Joined
Mar 21, 2013
Messages
3,453
I just experienced my first Solasta run. I liked it but it feels a bit barebones at times, which is to be expected.

I'm very tempted to buy Baldur's Gate III right now…

Has anyone played both games? How do they compare? Is BG III worth trying aswell in it's current state?

Michael
I played both BG 3 and Solasta. Although they came out at the same time, they are completely different. As are the studios that developed them, Larian Studios and Tactical Adventures, respectively. The worlds are different - BG3 is set in Faerun; Solasta is not. Combat environment is different - BG3 combat interacts more with the environment (oil catches fire, add water and you get steam, etc); Solasta's combat is more tabletop like. Coming from a bigger studio, BG3 has the cinematics and polish of a big box game; Solasta's studio is independent and a lot smaller and therefore the game is focused more on what they can deliver.

Deep down, I prefer Solasta. It feels more original than BG3. Don't get me wrong, I like BG3… a lot! Solasta just feels more of what a tabletop should be.

Lue.
 
Joined
Nov 15, 2012
Messages
114
Location
Austin, TX
I just experienced my first Solasta run. I liked it but it feels a bit barebones at times, which is to be expected.

I'm very tempted to buy Baldur's Gate III right now…

Has anyone played both games? How do they compare? Is BG III worth trying aswell in it's current state?

Michael

I believe it depends on what kind of tastes you have. I am one of those who hate spoilers and playing unfinished products, so to me it's never worth playing an Early Access. Just the thought of getting to cutscenes that don't play with a "Placeholder" watermark, glitchy areas with an "Alpha Testing" disclaimer or finding a point in the story where it all stops for no reason simply because no more content has been released is something I can't deal with.

Yes, I'm the kind of person that didn't watch Game of Thrones every week, and waited for each season to be fully released before binge-watching them in one sweep!

With that said, both are going to be very good games. Solasta seems more focused towards bringing a very loyal DnD implementation, while BG3 will be more focused on the story and world building. Depends on what you like most, but definitely both are worth playing. Whether you do it now, or when they are released, is again, up to how you deal with those things I can't. :)
 
The D&D rules are somewhat adapted, but if you can ignore it and pretend it's just another Larian ruleset, it's fine. Combat is fun, but has a very different feeling than Solasta, you don't just play according to the rules, but with other tricks.
Oh, is it that bad? I really don't like what they had done in DOS1&2...
 
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
4,968
Location
Germany
Oh, is it that bad? I really don't like what they had done in DOS1&2…

Question of personal preference I guess. I wouldn't say bad, just don't expect 100% compliance, for example bonus action / actions / interactions categories are not always respected, sneak attacks have slightly different rules, … As for the "trick" part, it's mainly more freedom and interaction with the world, you can throw items, flee or lure isolated opponents with your party waiting farther away, that sort of things.

What part didn't you like in D:OS games?
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2020
Messages
10,159
Location
Good old Europe
Question of personal preference I guess. I wouldn't say bad, just don't expect 100% compliance, for example bonus action / actions / interactions categories are not always respected, sneak attacks have slightly different rules, …
Ah, ok. While I'm an old D&D guy (mostly 3.5) I don't know 5ed that well. So I guess I won't even notice changes like these.

As for the "trick" part, it's mainly more freedom and interaction with the world, you can throw items, flee or lure isolated opponents with your party waiting farther away, that sort of things.
Yep, sounds like the usual.

What part didn't you like in D:OS games?
Well, first of course they overdid it with their AoE effects. That has already been discussed a lot.
I also hate that even non-magic classes have supernatural spell-like abilities without any backing in lore.
In D:OS2 I hated the strange armor rules seperating between physical and magical damage, where actual damage is only done when one of the armors is 0.
These rules are gamey and an immersion breaker for me.

D&D also has lore gaps here (e.g. how does a 3.5ed Shadowdancer's or a Ranger's Hide-in-plan-sight ability actually work?), but all in all the rules are really well backed by lore (at least in the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting). I like that.
 
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
4,968
Location
Germany
Well, first of course they overdid it with their AoE effects. That has already been discussed a lot.
I also don't all classes have spell-like abilities without any backing in lore.
In D:OS2 I hated the strange armor rules seperating between physical and magical damage, where actual damage is only done when one of the armors is 0.
These rules are gamey and an immersion breaker for me.

D&D also has lore gaps here (e.g. how does a 3.5ed Shadowdancer's or a Ranger's Hide in plan sight ability actually work?), but all in all the rules are really well backed by lore (at least in the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting). I like that.
The deviations shouldn't bother you, then. Those annoying armours they introduced in D:OS2 are not there, and the implemented classes mostly follow the D&D pattern too. So races, classes, rules, spells, armour, weapons are mostly D&D and you should recognize them.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2020
Messages
10,159
Location
Good old Europe
Great, thanks.
 
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
4,968
Location
Germany
\begin{rant}
I should say that I enjoyed DOS1/2 immensely - but then the ubiquitous elemental effects and later things like armour/equipment scaling just started to irritate me. While BG3 is EA (as is Solasta) Larian have taken many liberties with the 5E rules so far, in ways that are super exploitable and break the fundamental design philosophy of 5ed. Many of these changes seem more like the result of a minimal programming effort to take their DOS rules and beat them into a semblance D&D. Sure, some of this is EA initial testing and feedback (although they are awfully quiet outside of patch updates), and they have made some small concessions (like removing some elemental effects from 2 spells). But as someone who was expecting a 5Ed D&D game, I have found that part to be quite lacking and have uninstalled the game to wait (I hope) for a better interpretation of the 5E system at some future point. In my opinion BG3 EA was released too early - with too few classes and class abilities, and super low level cap. I have played (thanks to purple) in the alpha of PF:WotR and that is miles ahead in EA and felt like a D&D game. BG3 somehow doesn't - yes, it's turn-based, but mechanically that's the biggest advantage it has.

Now, Solasta, is nothing more than it claimed to be in the KS - a (pretty) accurate, (but limited in scope) 5Ed game. Actual D&D - well SRD (since they don't have WotC behind them). Not as glitzy and polished as BG3, but feels like a 5Ed tabletop experience and I can honestly say even with bugs I enjoyed the game more than BG3. BG3 has the potential to be epic and this *is* EA - so I am hoping they will be responsive to feedback about the 5E aspects (as I said they have made some small concessions). But I am not 100% sure this will materialize - there are lots of people who have played DOS but not D&D, and want to play something more akin to DOS - and are already bitterly complaining about RNG and cooking up schemes to basically remove some of the D&D 5E aspects which they find to stifling.

Larian have not helped by making statements about using "player analytics" as their way of determining what players want in the game . . . design by algorithm!? (I couldn't believe that at first - but then someone linked an interview on the larian forums). Supposedly, because people don't use the bless spell to buff party members (according to their analytics), it may not really be worthwhile to have or something along those lines. Which is simply wrong - bless is very useful for your party of 4 and commonly used by clerics to give a combat benefit to everyone. But someone coming from DOS only wouldn't necessarily understand that or see that's it's necessary - so they won't use it. So it's not important. According to the numbers. :-/
\end{rant}
PS I have played both through completely, and these are just my observations - everyone will of course have their own take.
 
Joined
Aug 23, 2007
Messages
2,139
Location
Cape Town, South Africa
Larian have not helped by making statements about using "player analytics" as their way of determining what players want in the game . . . design by algorithm!? (I couldn't believe that at first - but then someone linked an interview on the larian forums). Supposedly, because people don't use the bless spell to buff party members (according to their analytics), it may not really be worthwhile to have or something along those lines. Which is simply wrong - bless is very useful for your party of 4 and commonly used by clerics to give a combat benefit to everyone. But someone coming from DOS only wouldn't necessarily understand that or see that's it's necessary - so they won't use it. So it's not important. According to the numbers. :-/
*sigh* That's disappointing. Pre-buffing is a key element of D&D games, both in tabletop and in video games.
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
4,968
Location
Germany
I have played (thanks to purple) in the alpha of PF:WotR and that is miles ahead in EA and felt like a D&D game. BG3 somehow doesn't - yes, it's turn-based, but mechanically that's the biggest advantage it has.
I've played WotR alpha a little bit and it's already awesome, but then Kingmaker is great and they could reuse a lot. So it's hard to compare.

Also, it's not that bad, they fixed some deviations in the last updates.
there are lots of people who have played DOS but not D&D, and want to play something more akin to DOS - and are already bitterly complaining about RNG and cooking up schemes to basically remove some of the D&D 5E aspects which they find to stifling.
That's the beauty of it. By trying to bring them together in this game, they've actually upset two "opposite" clans: D:OS fans who prefer the adventure side of gameplay, and the D&D fans who are attached to the mechanics.

I think you've got to let go and appreciate Baldur's Gate 3 for what it's offering, or pass on this one. I'm still hoping they decide to commit to the D&D 5E rules, but I don't think they will. Time will tell.

Larian have not helped by making statements about using "player analytics" as their way of determining what players want in the game
Yes, it's a bit unsettling, to put it mildly. It looks like either they don't have a clear vision of what they want to make, or they're afraid to upset us even more and are ready to make concessions. They've always been talking about analytics, usually to balance the game... but with important spells? That sounds wrong.

If they want to balance the game, IMO it's easy: trust what WotC came up with after so many years of experience, don't modify their system, and get rid of the excessive AoE. But that would be too different than D:OS and would scare past fans away, I suppose.

I'm glad we have Solasta, and I hope they can stay as close as 5E as possible without the full licence. With a bit of luck, if they succeed with this game, they'll be able to continue and add other classes, feats, races and multiclassing in the next one.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2020
Messages
10,159
Location
Good old Europe
I for one welcome the lack of pre-buffing in videogames. In tabletop, adventures go in chapters, and each combat section is solved in a single encounter, or a succession of a few short encounters. Then buffing makes sense, because it allows the player to make crucial choices as to when to use that power spike that ushers them towards victory, to stack the odds in their favour in the moment they need it most.

The issue is that videogames do not offer that setup. In videogames combat is continuous and incessant as part of the design of what a videogame is, and these combat buffs are not designed as a temporary boost to a certain encounter, they become baseline and mandatory to the point that developers already designed every encounter presuming the player will have those buffs available and running. At that point, pre-buffing every battle, be it with Bless, Bull's Strength, Haste, or the other dozen of available buffs to a party of 4-6 becomes an unending tedium, moreso when you enjoy playing in more challenging difficulties that will punish you if you don't want to live a slave of the buffing roulette and spend 2 minutes buffing before every encounter. Under that design, I rather my characters had the power inbuilt in their kit to start with, and enjoy the actual game, skipping the two-minute pause requirement before every combat situation.

I do think Larian did not make the right choice on being so open to feedback and changing the game to cater to the masses. A big successful company must have their own ideas, make their own choices, and offer them to the public as they feel is best. I would love to play a RPG with features designed by a professional studio, not with features designed by whatever is what most random people agree with.
 
Back
Top Bottom