Jump to content

Baldur's Gate 3 (from Cyberpunk 2077 (from Starfield), courtesy Threadjacker 3000)


TrustMe

Recommended Posts

Baldur's Gate 3 is more of a hardcore D&D computer game. My advice is to search for 'walkthrough' and 'hints'  off web sites before you try the game. It will save time from figuring it out yourself as there is a hard learning curve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Wait... BG3 is built on D&D 5e.  5e is an incredibly simple system.  Is BG3 just so poorly designed that you have to have a munchkin build to get through it easily?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Skywalkre said:

Wait... BG3 is built on D&D 5e.  5e is an incredibly simple system.  Is BG3 just so poorly designed that you have to have a munchkin build to get through it easily?

It is pretty easy with any build aslong as you understand game and D&D 5e mechanics.

My most "fun" build was Sword college bard 7 and thief 5 (DEX main stat, CHA second, CON third). I literally talked demon to kill himself (Gale reaction was hilarius) and it can do pretty much anything very, very well. With dual weapons 4 attack a round (6 if hasted), very high AC, can pick any lock, disarm all traps and can talk that demon to kill itself, etc :)

 

Edited by MiGG0
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, MiGG0 said:

It is pretty easy with any build aslong as you understand game and D&D 5e mechanics.

So they just do a poor job explaining how everything works?

While I've heard good things about BG3 I'll never play it as I hate 5e with a passion.  I've played the thing in person and it's just... boring as fuck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Skywalkre said:

So they just do a poor job explaining how everything works?

While I've heard good things about BG3 I'll never play it as I hate 5e with a passion.  I've played the thing in person and it's just... boring as fuck.

I haven't really payed attention to it as core D&D 5e rules are familiar to me playing such couple of years (BG3 is not exact copy of core rules... more like "house rules" of them). At the start they explain pretty much everything needed I think (I have just skipped those so really dont know).

IMO in real roleplaying games rules dont matter that much. It is how everything is presented/told (how story/choices unfolds). D&D 5e is just fine int that. Pathfinder, D&D 2e (or Rolemastes where you just search tables after tables) just are too slow in big combats when you need add, remove bonuses from everything. Works in computer environment tough. Best rule set that I have played is RuneQuest -> fast to play and still very detailed (hit locations, aiming etc).

Edited by MiGG0
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5e is a great ruleset to introduce new players to ttrpgs (like in a one-shot done in a single evening).  It is, however, an atrocious ruleset to use for a campaign that goes on for years.  I played in a 5e one-shot a friend ran for his birthday (Rick & Morty themed).  It was a good time because of the theme, the friend running it is just funny already, and it was great to hang out with the gang... but an hour into what would be a 4h evening I was bored beyond belief with 5e.  We were even leveling up every 20-30m and there was still nothing to the system (in comparison to other options out there).

I'm currently searching for a new system because the one my table has used (Pathfinder 1e) has been used for 7 years now, we know it and are painfully aware of its limitations, and trying to houserule away all the issues just leads to more.

Thankfully this might be the best time ever to look for new systems.  After Hasbro screwed the pooch with their OGL drama from last year everyone and their mother is finally making and releasing their own system (or newer editions of older systems).  I've heard a few people call this the Renaissance of ttrpgs and I am definitely excited to see what comes from it all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You definitely should check out RuneQuest rule set. It is pretty hardcore nowdays standards (1 critical hit to stomach, chest or head and you are dead) and combat is usually very small scale. 1 PC can only fight against at most 2 opponents effectively and even very skilled character is very worried if you need to fight against 3 (they can surround you and you cannot block/dodge all their attacks. They only need 1 good hit and you are dead). There are no classes/levels and your character is what ever you use during play (skills increase by using them!).

 

I used to play with these rules during late -80 and early -90 So probably first or second edition rules of RQ. Current RQ Glorantha is something like 7th edition? And probably have major changes that I do remember of it. IMO still best rules :)

Edited by MiGG0
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, different rulesets for different purposes, really. D&D always was a derivative of tabletop combat (and it shows), and it's designed for "heroic, high fantasy". RuneQuest is aimed to be much more realistic/limited while still in a medieval/fantasy setting; Glorantha as a world, however, never appealed to me (killer duck men, really? Maybe go easy on the pot intake, man). But the ruleset is solid; BRP is basically a reduction of RQ, and from that Call of Cthulhu was derived. Which also shows that it's malleable enough to be made to work with modern settings (well, at least in the analog age - Wild West to about 1990s).

HOWEVER, neither CoC, nor BRP or RQ are "heroic" rulesets where common sense does not apply. Every combat has a decidedly non-zero chance to hurt or kill player characters if the game master doesn't tone down the aggro level. To me, this was appealing. I like D100 based systems to begin with, you have an immediate sense of the difficulty of any given task. And the chance of real consequences makes you think twice about your actions. Downside, RQ sessions tend to be 95% planning an ambush/surprise attack, and then 5% dice-rolling action. Not every player's cup of tea. But CoC works well enough for investigative stories with occasional outbursts of violence (though, arguably, Gumshoe is slightly better adapted to that specific task).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Ssnake said:

Well, different rulesets for different purposes, really. D&D always was a derivative of tabletop combat (and it shows), and it's designed for "heroic, high fantasy". RuneQuest is aimed to be much more realistic/limited while still in a medieval/fantasy setting; Glorantha as a world, however, never appealed to me (killer duck men, really? Maybe go easy on the pot intake, man). But the ruleset is solid; BRP is basically a reduction of RQ, and from that Call of Cthulhu was derived. Which also shows that it's malleable enough to be made to work with modern settings (well, at least in the analog age - Wild West to about 1990s).

HOWEVER, neither CoC, nor BRP or RQ are "heroic" rulesets where common sense does not apply. Every combat has a decidedly non-zero chance to hurt or kill player characters if the game master doesn't tone down the aggro level. To me, this was appealing. I like D100 based systems to begin with, you have an immediate sense of the difficulty of any given task. And the chance of real consequences makes you think twice about your actions. Downside, RQ sessions tend to be 95% planning an ambush/surprise attack, and then 5% dice-rolling action. Not every player's cup of tea. But CoC works well enough for investigative stories with occasional outbursts of violence (though, arguably, Gumshoe is slightly better adapted to that specific task).

 

I played mostly setting of "Griffin Island" in RQ that was pretty much standalone and all references to Glorantha removed (I dont remember "killer duck mens" there :D). RQ is more of classical era setting than medieval (Lunar Empire being Romans, Dragon Pass tribes like Gauls and other tribes, bronze is main alloy, etc).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

I finally got my home PC upgraded to make it able to play new-ish games, so I bought Baldur's Gate 3.

I have very fond memories of the earlier iterations of the franchise (I enjoyed all of the Infinity Engine games that came out lo, those 20+ years ago).  I have played D&D since 1981 with various versions, though an old friend and I started a new campaign (as co-DMs, which has kept it manageable and interesting) based on the then new 3rd edition back in 2002. This campaign is still running here, 22 years later (still using 3.0/3.5 edition as base, but with many many house rules implemented).   We currently have three active 5-6 player groups (slight overlap in that some players are in two of the groups, but 12 different people all told) and each group gets 1-2 evenings a month to progress their stories. All in the same in-game world.

I reviewed 4th edition when it came out and rejected it for use in our campaign.  5th edition was a step closer back towards earlier versions, and I see it working well for newcomers, but ultimately we deemed it insufficient for our purpose as well.

So, I think I have a fairly good grasp of the basics of the various D&D iterations, and maybe I am getting old, but it took me a surprisingly long time to get comfortable with the interface. There are a very large number of customization choices available from the beginning and I'll allow that some of the confusion may be due to the flavor differences between 5th ed (which I am only tangentially familiar with) and the overlaps with earlier versions of the same mechanics/spells/feats, but it is far from simple.  

Just to take the engine for a spin, I created a bog simple fighter and started. Character creation is going to be confusing for newcomers, but the basics are manageable enough.  I imagine going for slightly more advanced class choices will quickly increase complexity.

You will definitely need a walkthrough, not because of the rules, but because of the enormous amount of content, just so you will have a chance to complete your quests. And there are so many things you can do that you will quickly lose any chance at remembering what you were supposed to do or where you were supposed to go.

I don't love the way you move around and I actively loathe the map interface, since the minimap rotates as you move and the overall map stays fixed, so trying to figure out where to go is often very confusing. For example I am in a cave and am looking for a particular item. I will as often as not need to check an online WT in order to find the object I am looking for.  

Maybe it is just me getting to be an old fart, and maybe the kids think this is a breeze, but I seem to be back to doing a lot of the pixel hunting we left behind when BG2 came out.   

An impressive game in many respects, but some pretty significant interface issues, at least for me.

 

Soren

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Ultimately it didn't 'stick' for me.  Might be age, might have been the interface or content overload but I just couldn't bring myself to devote the time that it seemed to call for.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Try Robocop Rogue City, then. Captures the mood of the film, and ia an "old people's shooter". You're Robocop. You don't dodge, or dive for cover. Also, the irony, you can't climb bigger steps. But you can jump from rooftops that have no railings. 😜

 

I'd call it a "Cyberpunk 1988" story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Might give it a try some day.  The game that has been doing the most to scratch my gaming itch is Fallout 76.  I run around in power armor and due to the build I use and my vampire .50 cal I am basically immortal.  Plus I can climb stairs 😁 I play a couple hours a week which is way down from the time I spent on games 10 years ago.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tend trying to pick the most useless level-ups to maintain a challenge, or skip them if a game lets me. In my experience games with character leveling tend to be fun in the early and mid game, but if you are a completionist for side quests you become overpowered in the end game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ssnake said:

I tend trying to pick the most useless level-ups to maintain a challenge, or skip them if a game lets me. In my experience games with character leveling tend to be fun in the early and mid game, but if you are a completionist for side quests you become overpowered in the end game.

You can change the characters sub types and weapon proficiencies but not levels of experience. Character creation is quite a challenge to me as I haven't played D&D in decades.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wasn't specifically talking about Baldur's Gate 3, but games with character leveling in general. Like Cyberpunk 2077, Robocop, Fallout, ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ssnake said:

Wasn't specifically talking about Baldur's Gate 3, but games with character leveling in general. Like Cyberpunk 2077, Robocop, Fallout, ...

My bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Have had minimal contact with "real" DnD before, so I thought this might be a good way to start. I did watch a few videos before, and right after, starting, mostly on how game-mechanics, spells, dices and what not work. So far (15 hours?) I enjoy it. As mentioned, perhaps a bit too much content, but I think many side-quests can be ignored if you want to. I also found the spinning minimap annoying, but there is an option to lock it in place, north up. Made it quite easier.

Edited by Stefan Fredriksson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is a good game. Somebody on a forum I go to say that you can get the characters to have sex with each other, I don't know if it's true or not  :)   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently 1/3 of BG3 players boned the bear.

Quote

The most recent round of Baldur’s Gate 3 stats have came out from Larian Studio, and one stat in particular has turned heads: of all the players who got to the romance stage with Halsin, 33 percent of them decided to let him to unleash his wild side.

https://dotesports.com/baldurs-gate/news/quite-a-lot-of-bg3-players-ended-up-having-sex-with-that-bear

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, TrustMe said:

It is a good game. Somebody on a forum I go to say that you can get the characters to have sex with each other, I don't know if it's true or not  :)   

In act 3 you have possibility to have even foursome depending you choices before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...