Baldurs Gate 3

[FlubberPuddy]

I just want to punch faces with monk. That's all I need.

All PHB classes and their subclasses will be available on release (only certain ones will be available during early access). They've said their base is PHB/MM/DMG but with Githyanki showing it means they can pull from other sources as needed.

- - - Updated - - -

After reading all the Q&A I don't know how any BG1/2 fans can still be fearful, unless it's already been decided in their minds they'll dislike the game.

[Makabreska]

After reading all the Q&A I don't know how any BG1/2 fans can still be fearful, unless it's already been decided in their minds they'll dislike the game.

You know they did.

[Endus]

All PHB classes and their subclasses will be available on release (only certain ones will be available during early access). They've said their base is PHB/MM/DMG but with Githyanki showing it means they can pull from other sources as needed.

- - - Updated - - -

After reading all the Q&A I don't know how any BG1/2 fans can still be fearful, unless it's already been decided in their minds they'll dislike the game.

As an example, since it came up in this thread, the announcement screenshots that showed Volo had a placeholder face. He's gonna have the beard. So all that bitching was over absolutely nothing.

[FlubberPuddy]

all that bitching was over absolutely nothing.

Slogan for this whole website.

[Khaza-R]

Slogan for this whole website.

IMO, its a problem with the entire age of the internet. Players getting to peak at every part of development isn't necessarily constructive. Imagine an artist trying to paint a picture with people constantly ridiculing why he put this brushstruck here or why he used extra pigment in this area.

[FlubberPuddy]

IMO, its a problem with the entire age of the internet. Players getting to peak at every part of development isn't necessarily constructive. Imagine an artist trying to paint a picture with people constantly ridiculing why he put this brushstruck here or why he used extra pigment in this area.

That's the most apt depiction of these negative nancies here.

It was good to see Larian handle all the "how's it gonna be like BG 1/2" "why's it called BG3" type questions head on. The answers that included their descriptions of BG 1/2 were very insightful too, like Swen going back recently to play it as well as his memories of it from playing it back then.

I bet it's a wake-up call for some.

[DreamSlaveOne]

It is a wonderful and reassuring AMA. The small details like latin chants for spells is really appreciated from an old fan. My apologies to Larian; seems like franchise is in good hands after all.

[Wildmoon]

How are Larian's writers? Can they write an interesting story? Are their characters well written? Can they or will they do interesting interactions between party members?

Those are the main things I want to know.

Never got into the divinity games so I am generally curious.

Their world and characters are very boring and forgetable. Not really because it's not written well enough but the whole thing just feels off. It feels more like a toy box more than a world. DOS2 is the game that I find really fun and incredible on its turn-based combat minus the armor system but I haven't felt like starting a second playthrough.

[KrayZ33]

In my opinion their world building is really good.
I didn't play the D:OS1 but in D:OS2 even side quests have likable characters (good and bad) and background stories that are enjoyable. I remember a whole lot of them even though I only played it once and that was several months ago - not necessarily how the are named (because I'm bad with names), but how they looked, who they were and why they were like that and what they did.

It's one of the few games that felt rewarding to explore and read the random books and letters throughout the levels and areas not because of loot, but because of background information you could use and decide your actions upon.
Lohse and Fane are well written in my opinion and Beast too, because everyone likes dwarves.

[Makabreska]

Subclasses being there and custom created character having greater lore ties/interactions were the highlights of the interview for me. But only 10 levels progression?

[Endus]

Subclasses being there and custom created character having greater lore ties/interactions were the highlights of the interview for me. But only 10 levels progression?

Similar to the original Baldur's Gate. In 5e parlance, BG3 is going to take you through Tier 1 and 2.

I would imagine that, like with BG1, they're planning on a sequel as long as this one sells well, and that'll take us from 10-20. As BGII did.

[Makabreska]

Similar to the original Baldur's Gate. In 5e parlance, BG3 is going to take you through Tier 1 and 2.

I would imagine that, like with BG1, they're planning on a sequel as long as this one sells well, and that'll take us from 10-20. As BGII did.

Vanilla BG had like 1-7 levels, and I'm perfectly fine with sequels also make us start from scratch. Level 10 being max indicates, that we won't be getting many new skills along the way. Unless they will shower us with perks and stats each time we level, of course.

[Endus]

Vanilla BG had like 1-7 levels, and I'm perfectly fine with sequels also make us start from scratch. Level 10 being max indicates, that we won't be getting many new skills along the way. Unless they will shower us with perks and stats each time we level, of course.

Most of 5e's important class development is in the first 10 levels, anyway. Beyond that, you generally keep "getting better", but you're not developing class-defining new tricks, unless you count a new spell level as such.

A lot of the published adventures only run from 1-10 or 1-15 or so, anyway;
Curse of Strahd is 1-10.
Hoard of the Dragon Queen is 1-8
Princes of the Apocalypse is 3-13 (with an optional bit for 1-2)
Storm King's Thunder is 1-10
Tomb of Annihilation is 1-9ish

There's some published adventures that span longer, but most don't, or they're broken into two parts (like Hoard of the Dragon Queen and Rise of Tiamat).

So if they're plotting BG3 to be similar to a published adventure, in terms of length, this all seems pretty normal.

[FlubberPuddy]

So if they're plotting BG3 to be similar to a published adventure, in terms of length, this all seems pretty normal.

Yeah, I also read that WoTC did some poll of users and the vast majority of D&D players play Tier 1/Tier 2 range (1-10). This will probably be most familiar to them.

Plus I feel like it's okay because from the little D&D I've experienced, each level often feels meaningful. I also agree that it feels like the "meat of the classes" happens by lvl 10.

[Northern Goblin]

An expansion/DLC may take us to 12-15 but not all adventures are designed to reach cap.

Level 20 combat is, frankly, ridiculous. Few games exist right now to encapsulate it, my concern is the range of available class archtypes and races available, I expect a lot of QQ when people can't faithfully recreate their favourite characters.

[Tenjen]

Larian really do think DnD is what really makes Baldur's Gate the game series. So, they think trying to replicate DnD rules make it Baldur's Gate. The loyal fans have the game series itself in mind as a whole rather than DnD.

no that would be Wizards of the Coast who think that and only gave BG to Larian when they proved they could do it.

I'd put my faith in Wizards of the Coast more than the "fans"

[Northern Goblin]

no that would be Wizards of the Coast who think that and only gave BG to Larian when they proved they could do it.

I'd put my faith in Wizards of the Coast more than the "fans"

And this is the thing people are missing. WotC are very protective of their IP, especially after a few errors the last few years (the last being that awful Waterdeep mobile game) so to take something as beloved as the BG series, you need to prove you are more than capable at handling your shit.

Also you know people like Mearls and co have a hand in this themselves with regards to direction.

[Tenjen]

And this is the thing people are missing. WotC are very protective of their IP, especially after a few errors the last few years (the last being that awful Waterdeep mobile game) so to take something as beloved as the BG series, you need to prove you are more than capable at handling your shit.

Also you know people like Mearls and co have a hand in this themselves with regards to direction.

yeah Larian had contacted them ages back about making BG3 but WOTC took one look at dark alliance and said "Sorry no." It was only after both Divinity OS 1 and 2 that they agreed Larian were the only ones who could handle BG3 with a DnD system. This time they approached them.

All this talk about "its a BG skin on divinity" and "they're doing a fallout 3 and using BG purely for marketing purposes" is bulshit born of ignorance which falls apart the moment we look at the situation and circumstances.

[Wildmoon]

And this is the thing people are missing. WotC are very protective of their IP, especially after a few errors the last few years (the last being that awful Waterdeep mobile game) so to take something as beloved as the BG series, you need to prove you are more than capable at handling your shit.

Also you know people like Mearls and co have a hand in this themselves with regards to direction.

Why are they protective? Their games mostly suck.

- - - Updated - - -

yeah Larian had contacted them ages back about making BG3 but WOTC took one look at dark alliance and said "Sorry no." It was only after both Divinity OS 1 and 2 that they agreed Larian were the only ones who could handle BG3 with a DnD system. This time they approached them.

All this talk about "its a BG skin on divinity" and "they're doing a fallout 3 and using BG purely for marketing purposes" is bulshit born of ignorance which falls apart the moment we look at the situation and circumstances.

It is DOS3.

[Makabreska]

Why are they protective? Their games mostly suck.

So the future games wont suck? It's not hard to figure.

It is DOS3.

Opinion noted.