World Reveal of Baldur's Gate 3

At PAX East today, gameplay footage of Baldur's Gate 3 was revealed for the first time by Larian Studios.

According to PC Gamer, the Early Access version of the game will launch this year with five characters:
  • Wyll, Human Warlock
  • Shadowheart, Half-elf Cleric
  • Lae'zel, Githyanki Fighter
  • Gale, Human Wizard
  • Astarion, Elven Vampire Spawn Rogue
And you'll be able to create characters using these six classes:
  • Fighter (Battle Master, Eldritch Knight)
  • Wizard (Evocation, Abjuration)
  • Rogue (Arcane Trickster, Thief)
  • Ranger (Hunter, Beast Master)
  • Cleric (Life, Light, Trickery)
  • Warlock (Fiend, Great One)
15 races include (amongst others):
  • Elves
  • Dwarves
  • Humans
  • Githyanki
  • Drow
  • Tieflings
  • Vampire Spawn

LLH1BPJ.png


qlR4Bmg.jpg

jEeuWft.jpg


8Gic926.jpg


OLP0YhI.jpg

EsNTlWm.jpg
QzN9a7C.jpg
knMpJyl.jpg
uRbTbmp.jpg
drYBkxb.jpg
PhUpxaP.jpg
PM2ysZc.jpg
2htLlMr.jpg
 
Last edited:
Russ Morrissey

Comments

miggyG777

Explorer
Just watched the PAX announcement and I must say 5e is not a system that is well suited for being utilized in a computer game.

5e is a very simplistic system specifically designed for easiness of use in tabletop RPGs and openess to modification. It does not benefit from being implemented in a computer game. 5e's strength, the simplicity, in an automated environment beomes its weakness, because it restricts what the computer is good at.

When I think of BG2 and AD&D it was different. The AD&D rules were more complex and mostly used to resolve combat in the background. Which added depth to the game and made sense to automate. BG2 greatly benefited from that.

In BG3 it looks like everything is built so the player can clearly see, that D&D 5e is used. I.e. the d20 popping up during dialogs to roll if you convince someone.
This approach effectively cripples any innovative design ideas that could've been utilized in a PC game of that calibre.

So instead of using the D&D rules to enhance the game, the game is now wrapped into a straight jacket to fit the 5e rules, despite its capabilities to be more.

Solidifying my concerns is the moment when Swen Vicke says: "WotC, told us to tone down the alignment system, because it is basically non existant in 5e anymore."

My fears that Mearls is having too much say are coming true and it's bad for BG3.
 
Last edited:

houser2112

Explorer
Simple isn't so bad in and of itself, but 5E is not only simple, a lot of things that there should be rules for, there's just "whatever the DM says". On the other hand, although I haven't read the various threads discussing it, I'd be willing to bet there are a lot of people that DON'T think 5E is simple.
 

Oofta

Title? I don't need no stinkin' title.
Just watched the PAX announcement and I must say 5e is not a system that is well suited for being utilized in a computer game.

5e is a very simplistic system specifically designed for easiness of use in tabletop RPGs and openess to modification. It does not benefit from being implemented in a computer game. 5e's strength, the simplicity, in an automated environment beomes its weakness, because it restricts what the PC is good at.

When I think of BG2 and AD&D it was different. The AD&D rules were more complex and mostly used to resolve combat in the background. Which added depth to the game and made sense to automate. BG2 greatly benefited from that.

In BG3 it looks like everything is built so the player can clearly see, that D&D 5e is used. I.e. the d20 popping up during dialogs to roll if you convince someone.
This approach effectively cripples any innovative design ideas that could've been utilized in a PC game of that calibre.

So instead of using the D&D rules to enhance the game, the game is now wrapped into a straight jacket to fit the 5e rules, despite its capabilities to be more.

Solidifying my concerns is the moment when Swen Vicke says: "WotC, told us to tone down the alignment system, because it is basically non existant in 5e anymore."

My fears that Mearls is having too much say are coming true and it's bad for BG3.
They started with 5E as a base, but like all video games based on D&D they modified it.

Larian has put out some great games, I'm looking forward to playing it.
 

Prakriti

Hi, I'm a Mindflayer, but don't let that worry you
I'm glad they're using 5E, and I think 5E is a good system for a CRPG. What would really irk me is if they radically changed things under the assumption that 5E wouldn't work for a computer game, but still sold it as a 5E/D&D game. No thanks. The fact that they're actually trying to be as faithful as possible to 5E earns a lot of respect from me.

The best part about a faithful 5E game, by the way, is that is will introduce more people to the tabletop game. People will learn 5E from BG3, and if they ever go on to play the tabletop game, they will already know most of the rules.
 
Last edited:

Sword of Spirit

Adventurer
The old Gold Box games mostly followed AD&D. They adapted necessary elements. For example, no action declaration--just act when your turn came up. It may or may not have included speed factors for weapons--if so it was invisible under the hood. After you cast a spell, there actually was a delay (I'm assuming based on the casting time segments) before you got to aim and have it go off. There may or may not have been weapon vs. AC. If there was, it was invisible to the user.

But the point is, that it did use the basic rules of the game as played. It was my introduction to AD&D in fact.

I always prefer D&D games that actually try to stick as close to the rules of the mimicked edition as reasonably possible (and by that I don't mean, "as close as we feel like in our creative artistry"). Even the BG games that looked like they departed from tabletop D&D quite a bit, actually didn't, because they weren't based on 2e. They were based on an edition that was under development at the time, but was eventually scrapped for 3e.

Okay, I take back the always. There is also Planescape: Torment.

But in general, if you don't want to follow the D&D rules, do something else entirely. Don't half-way it.
 

Horwath

Adventurer
I'm hyped that this game will be turn based. Doesn't look like it will follow the past baldur's gate games so much, but I like what they showed
God damn, I'm in complete opposite camp on this.

I hate this hard coded turn based approach.

It is mandatory in tabletops/board games as it would be complete chaos otherwise.
In most PC games it is not necessary.

I hope that they will make both "real time" and "turn based" game modes.
 

Leatherhead

Possibly a Idiot.
In most PC games it is not necessary.
Of course it's not necessary.

It is, however, a totally different genre of play than action games, which people happen to enjoy for it's own merits, such as accessibility and the emphasis on strategy. It is not a downgrade or more primitive combat system for a game.

Personally, I hated how they morphed the Final Fantasy series into action games, leaving the turn based combat games in the ghetto of hand-held devices for so long.
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
I can’t imagine wanting a video game studio to adhere as closely as possible to the details of the rules of a tabletop game.

Nothing about this game has me more worried that it’s going to suck.
 

MarkB

Legend
God damn, I'm in complete opposite camp on this.

I hate this hard coded turn based approach.

It is mandatory in tabletops/board games as it would be complete chaos otherwise.
In most PC games it is not necessary.

I hope that they will make both "real time" and "turn based" game modes.
That seems unlikely at this point. As mentioned during the gameplay, making it purely turn-based allowed them to directly import a lot more D&D mechanics and implement them more faithfully. It doesn't look like what they've implemented leaves much room for a hybrid system.
 

miggyG777

Explorer
God damn, I'm in complete opposite camp on this.

I hate this hard coded turn based approach.

It is mandatory in tabletops/board games as it would be complete chaos otherwise.
In most PC games it is not necessary.

I hope that they will make both "real time" and "turn based" game modes.

Of course it's not necessary.

It is, however, a totally different genre of play than action games, which people happen to enjoy for it's own merits, such as accessibility and the emphasis on strategy. It is not a downgrade or more primitive combat system for a game.

Personally, I hated how they morphed the Final Fantasy series into action games, leaving the turn based combat games in the ghetto of hand-held devices for so long.
You can still allow the pausing of real time combat, so the argument for less strategy does not hold.

It's just another way 5e restricts the capabilites of BG3. When Vicke is asked whether there will be real time combat he says (paraphrased): "No, we use turn based combat because it allows us to implement the 5e rules."

Resolving actions turn-based is an artifact of tabletop games, but unecessary if you have a PC that can calculate simultaneous actions and allow real-time pausing. Heck, Baldurs Gate 2 did this, back in the day.
 

HarbingerX

Rob Of The North
I have to respectfully disagree with the statement that D&D 5e is bad for a CRPG. The user experience between an AD&D 1e, 2e or 5e computer game will be negligible. The computer game just won't have as much stuff to automate under the hood.
 

miggyG777

Explorer
well, guess it's Pillars of Eternity then....

Like Independence Day 2; you had 20 years to prepare and you came up with... this?

Mearls could literally have Larian Studios elevate D&D to the next level, but instead he chooses to enforce them to adhere to the 5e ruleset to the T. When the DMG says "If a rule stands in the way of your game, throw it out."

Just shows that Mearls cares more about his own legacy than collaborating with Vicke & Team. Which is what I feared would happen.

Sadly this fail will mostly affect Vicke who will be held responsible for this shortcoming by many. It was an impossible project to begin with. I know how much Vicke loved Baldurs Gate and I wished he had the creative freedom that he needed to create the true successor, that he envisioned.
 

Horwath

Adventurer
Mearls could literally have Larian Studios elevate D&D to the next level, but instead he chooses to enforce them to adhere to the 5e ruleset to the T. When the DMG says "If a rule stands in the way of your game, throw it out."

Just shows that Mearls cares more about his own legacy than collaborating with Vicke & Team. Which is what I feared would happen.

Sadly this fail will mostly affect Vicke who will be held responsible for this shortcoming by many. It was an impossible project to begin with. I know how much Vicke loved Baldurs Gate and I wished he had the creative freedom that he needed to create the true successor, that he envisioned.
Yeah.

This is like designing a brand new car and then put a Ford model T engine inside.

It all looks great until you press on the gas pedal for the 1st time...
 

Advertisement

Latest threads

In Our Store!

Advertisement

Top