Baldurs Gate 3

[Makabreska]

Probably not (5e rules are quite simple), but it will be a rather complicated party based game like it's predecessors. It's kind of the charm of the genre but it is very niche. They also stated that directly translating the 5e rules from pen and paper to a computer game doesn't really work, so let's see what they come up with.

They can copy a PoE solution for easy access. Just make a pop-up window with explanation when doing a mouse over on any term. It makes even complicated systems easier to understand.

I haven't followed this project as closely lately, do we know if the combat is RTwP or turn-based yet?

We don't, but surely we will learn during that new info dump (they really should gives us gameplay). But even after spending thousand of hours on Black Isle games, I would actually prefer it to be turn-based.

[Cairhiin]

They can copy a PoE solution for easy access. Just make a pop-up window with explanation when doing a mouse over on any term. It makes even complicated systems easier to understand.

I agree that is a pretty good solution, and the 5e rules are quite easy to understand in general. However, the vast lists of spells, and managing multiple characters, is not for everyone. Then again, if you buy BG3, you know what you are getting if you do a little research.

[Makabreska]

I agree that is a pretty good solution, and the 5e rules are quite easy to understand in general. However, the vast lists of spells, and managing multiple characters, is not for everyone. Then again, if you buy BG3, you know what you are getting if you do a little research.

That's why I prefer it to be turned-based, party management is much better. But then again, they can copy PoE script system, also worked nice.

[Cairhiin]

That's why I prefer it to be turned-based. Party management is much better. But then again, they can copy PoE script system, also worked nice.

I also hope it is turn based, and BG3 definitely needs a script system for party members. PoE did this rather well.

[Belize]

Fuckkk. Do I really need to actually go read some weird rules made for pen and paper to understand the game? lol

No, of course not.

They've already said they're adapting the rules to fit the game.

[Wildmoon]

This sentiment makes me think this game is not for you. Baldur's Gate has a very targeted audience. It will be running a digital conversion of D&D 5E (which means it will have some rules from it, and a lot made up for the video game). And it will likely be about party management to make sure you are covering all weaknesses. This is so closely tied to 5E it will take place in the current 5E era of Forgotten Realms. Will you be required to know 5E rules and Forgotten Realms story? No. Will it add to immersion and help tie things together for you? Yes.

Played PoE and Original Sin 2 just fine. It's shit like Kingmaker that's the problem.

[Nerovar]

Played PoE and Original Sin 2 just fine. It's shit like Kingmaker that's the problem.

I have to agree here. Kingmaker probably had the worst combat I've ever experienced in an RPG. Everything just felt so boring, unimaginative and samey. Games like Divinity OS 2 are so much better because they fully utilize all the things that can turn a video game into a great experience. Even games like Tyranny handled combat better than Kingmaker without sacrificing choice or RPG mechanics.

That being said I fully trust Larian to come up with a good solution. Divinity OS 2 had some of the most refreshing gameplay I've experienced in years so they've definitely got the talent.

[Makabreska]

Played PoE and Original Sin 2 just fine. It's shit like Kingmaker that's the problem.

Well, Kingmaker by design was supposed to be as close to the pen-and-paper version as it is possible. It was advertised as such, so I guess it's a one-time thing in the genre.

[Hobb]

Played PoE and Original Sin 2 just fine. It's shit like Kingmaker that's the problem.

Larian stated in an interview that combat will not follow the 5E D&D rules, but will be more like Original Sin 2 style. 5E pen and paper rule set they said doesn't translate well into a video game.

[Endus]

I agree that is a pretty good solution, and the 5e rules are quite easy to understand in general. However, the vast lists of spells, and managing multiple characters, is not for everyone. Then again, if you buy BG3, you know what you are getting if you do a little research.

I mean, the first two games were based on 2e, so it's not surprising that they'd base the new one off the current 5e.

That said, even if you haven't kept up with D&D, like you said, 5e is very streamlined, in terms of mechanics. The main thrust of the design was getting away from 3.X's "I have eleventy billion modifiers, let me do some calculus and I'll get back to you about what my attack roll is", into something that didn't slow down gameplay.

Somewhat obviously, that's less of a factor for a video game, which can handle all that math natively, but I'm interested to see how they capture it.

There's basically two concepts in 5e that might translate into the game; bounded accuracy, and advantage/disadvantage.

Bounded accuracy basically means that attack roll/skill check bonuses don't go up every level; they're tied to a "proficiency bonus" which starts at a +2 at level 1, and scales all the way up to a whopping +6 at level 17+. If you're proficient with a weapon/skill, you get that bonus, in addition to what your ability score gives. It's simple, standardized across all classes, and means even at level 20, enough standard Goblins can still pose a threat. This is generally "good", since it narrows the power scale a bit. You get way better at stuff by higher levels, but it happens because of having better class options rather than just better numbers.

Advantage/disadvantage is what I think won't make it in. In 5e, if something is a positive benefit, you generally gain advantage on the roll rather than a number bonus. Same for penalties; they're usually made with disadvantage. If you're blind, you attack with disadvantage, for instance. If the enemy is vulnerable, you get advantage to hit them. And so on. The system works by getting you to roll that attack roll/skill check twice. If you have advantage, take the better of the two rolls. Disadvantage, take the worse of the two. Having both advantage and disadvantage cancels each other out, and they don't stack; having 4 sources of possible advantage and one source of disadvantage means you make a straight roll, without either. For pen-and-paper, this is all VERY fast and streamlined and works really well. For a video game, I imagine they'll translate this back to straight numbers, since you can provide finer gradations; 5e wanted to get away from that to streamline table gameplay, but the video game's systems streamline it inherently by managing it behind the scenes, rather than asking the player to calculate it themselves.

Beyond those two concepts, 5e is really thematically similar to prior editions, and if you haven't tried it, I definitely recommend it as a system. My group's been using it for a while and we're really happy with it.

[thilicen]

I loved Divinity 1 and 2 but I really hope they make a solid effort at making BG3 look like a BG game. Visually those franchises are on two different planets.

[Cairhiin]

I mean, the first two games were based on 2e, so it's not surprising that they'd base the new one off the current 5e.

That said, even if you haven't kept up with D&D, like you said, 5e is very streamlined, in terms of mechanics. The main thrust of the design was getting away from 3.X's "I have eleventy billion modifiers, let me do some calculus and I'll get back to you about what my attack roll is", into something that didn't slow down gameplay.

Somewhat obviously, that's less of a factor for a video game, which can handle all that math natively, but I'm interested to see how they capture it.

There's basically two concepts in 5e that might translate into the game; bounded accuracy, and advantage/disadvantage.

Bounded accuracy basically means that attack roll/skill check bonuses don't go up every level; they're tied to a "proficiency bonus" which starts at a +2 at level 1, and scales all the way up to a whopping +6 at level 17+. If you're proficient with a weapon/skill, you get that bonus, in addition to what your ability score gives. It's simple, standardized across all classes, and means even at level 20, enough standard Goblins can still pose a threat. This is generally "good", since it narrows the power scale a bit. You get way better at stuff by higher levels, but it happens because of having better class options rather than just better numbers.

Advantage/disadvantage is what I think won't make it in. In 5e, if something is a positive benefit, you generally gain advantage on the roll rather than a number bonus. Same for penalties; they're usually made with disadvantage. If you're blind, you attack with disadvantage, for instance. If the enemy is vulnerable, you get advantage to hit them. And so on. The system works by getting you to roll that attack roll/skill check twice. If you have advantage, take the better of the two rolls. Disadvantage, take the worse of the two. Having both advantage and disadvantage cancels each other out, and they don't stack; having 4 sources of possible advantage and one source of disadvantage means you make a straight roll, without either. For pen-and-paper, this is all VERY fast and streamlined and works really well. For a video game, I imagine they'll translate this back to straight numbers, since you can provide finer gradations; 5e wanted to get away from that to streamline table gameplay, but the video game's systems streamline it inherently by managing it behind the scenes, rather than asking the player to calculate it themselves.

Beyond those two concepts, 5e is really thematically similar to prior editions, and if you haven't tried it, I definitely recommend it as a system. My group's been using it for a while and we're really happy with it.

I agree with what you are saying. I switched from 3e to 5e almost a year ago, and as a DM it's great (it has some of the ease of preparation that 4e had while still maintaining the true feel of D&D which in my opinion 4e lacked). My players also all seem to understand the rules a lot better than before. 3e did a really bad job where modifiers were concerned, and my player's character sheets turned into a mess quickly that were likely to have multiple mistakes.

As you said, the concept of proficiency bonus of 5e is good, you no longer have different attack tables for all classes and prestige classes, and the proficiency bonus is applied to basically everything; saving throws, skills, attacks, etc. I feel that this probably will make it into BG3.

The concept of advantage/disadvantage is a bit more tricky, as this is basically meant to give GMs more leeway when adjudicating specific situations that aren't necessarily covered by the rules. I have a feeling this probably won't make it into BG3. I think penalties/bonuses will just be dealt with numerically.

Another concept of 5e that I am not certain whether it will make it to BG3 is soul binding. It works great in 5e but I'm not sure will players really appreciate they can only equip 3 soul bound items.

I'm really looking forward to hearing more about BG3 as we don't know a lot yet.

[Endus]

Another concept of 5e that I am not certain whether it will make it to BG3 is soul binding. It works great in 5e but I'm not sure will players really appreciate they can only equip 3 soul bound items.

I'm really looking forward to hearing more about BG3 as we don't know a lot yet.

Not all magic items require attunement, FWIW. They may not translate it directly, but the system could drive some good decision points for character building. Which slots are most important to get the best items for your PC? A lot of the "plain" items don't require attunement at all; you can get +3 armor without attunement required. It's Legendary quality level, but no attunement.

[Cairhiin]

I wish the original BG games had something closer to Atari's Temple of Elemental Evil turn-based gameplay (but without the bugs); you felt so much more in control of your party. With such a system you don't even need scripts you just go down the initiative order. Closest to the pen n paper gameplay as well.

I enjoyed that game a lot as well, despite the bugs. I hope they reintroduce the initiative order (visually represented) in BG3 but I have a feeling they won't. I feel it will be more like BG/BG2 but I could obviously be entirely wrong.

[Makabreska]

I wish the original BG games had something closer to Atari's Temple of Elemental Evil turn-based gameplay (but without the bugs); you felt so much more in control of your party. With such a system you don't even need scripts you just go down the initiative order. Closest to the pen n paper gameplay as well.

Eh, never got into that game. I fired it up and was totally lost in all those options and special moves w/o explanations.

[Cairhiin]

Not all magic items require attunement, FWIW. They may not translate it directly, but the system could drive some good decision points for character building. Which slots are most important to get the best items for your PC? A lot of the "plain" items don't require attunement at all; you can get +3 armor without attunement required. It's Legendary quality level, but no attunement.

I agree it could lead to good decision points, and I actually hope it makes it into the game. It was one of the things I liked the most about 5e as DM when we had just switched.

- - - Updated - - -

Truth be told, 3.5 was probably a great system for a BG game since most of the things it does bad are actually GOOD for a CPRG; the math is done for you so you don't have to worry about what modifier you forgot, the christmas tree effect gives you a reason to keep going on side adventures so you can grab items for every single slot.

Yep, this is true. What really bogs it down in P&P is actually no problem in a computer game. All the modifiers that might or might not stack, and it especially confuses your players who keep asking: why doesn't this item increase my AC? Or how come this doesn't affect my Intelligence? Then came the added confusion of prestige classes and new attack/saving throw tables; some that might or might not increase your main class spellcasting abilities, etc.

[endersblade]

I also hope it is turn based, and BG3 definitely needs a script system for party members. PoE did this rather well.

I want the same script system that Dragon Age Origins had, Or even Final fantasy 12's Gambit system, just deeper and more customizable. Being able to basically set up your party characters to function like players would, instead of just mindlessly spamming attacks or spells at the enemies.

[Cairhiin]

I want the same script system that Dragon Age Origins had, Or even Final fantasy 12's Gambit system, just deeper and more customizable. Being able to basically set up your party characters to function like players would, instead of just mindlessly spamming attacks or spells at the enemies.

You can do this more or less in PoE1/PoE2 as well if I remember correctly. Haven't played either in awhile, and 2 definitely has a scripting system. And I agree, this is a necessity in a modern crpg.

[Low Hanging Fruit]

I really loved the first two games. Here is to hoping the long standing tradition of cashing in on people's nostalgia and taking advantage of brand recognition to make a quick easy buck isn't a work here. I know it is me being depressing as all hell but being burned a lot lately. But I do have high hopes.

[endersblade]

You can do this more or less in PoE1/PoE2 as well if I remember correctly. Haven't played either in awhile, and 2 definitely has a scripting system. And I agree, this is a necessity in a modern crpg.

I own but have not played PoE2, but I have played PoE1 and all it really had was selecting generalized roles (that, arguably, they didn't really do all that effectively). I love the systems where you can do things like:

HP < or = 60%: Use HP potion
In Combat: Stay at range
Enemy HP < or = 20%: use execute style attack
Start of Combat: Cast buffs

For the most part, PoE1's system covered stuff like this, except for using potions and stuff. This seems to get overlooked a lot. I love these types of games, I own a ton of them, good and bad, but I just hate the micro-managey parts where one round of combat takes 10 minutes because I have to tell every single character what to do. I want it real-time, where I can set up the 'rules' for each character, and they just go do their thing, with the option of being able to temporarily turn it off and control them if necessary.

- - - Updated - - -

I really loved the first two games. Here is to hoping the long standing tradition of cashing in on people's nostalgia and taking advantage of brand recognition to make a quick easy buck isn't a work here. I know it is me being depressing as all hell but being burned a lot lately. But I do have high hopes.

It's Larian bro, IF they do something like that in BG3, it will be the first time in their history.