WotC 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

 

[Derren]

Some of the comments crack me up.

The incredibly successful BG1 and BG2 were both turn based computer games. What in your wildest dreams made you think BG3 wasn’t going to be turn based?

Turn based just means that characters have a finite number of attacks or spells in a six second period, and move a certain speed. It doesn’t mean waiting around.

The differences between 5e and the other d&d rulesets is negligible. Can anyone point out any substantial difference between 5e and 3e or ad&d that would affect gameplay?

It is fundamentally a D&D game. That is what has always marked the BG series as unique. What were you expecting honestly? It bemuses me.

No, not at all. While the sequence of attacks was technically turn based movement and actions all happened simultaneously.
You did not have to wait and watch for goblin #1, goblin #2 and goblin #4 to each take a turn one after the other before you could move one of your 4 characters and then having to watch goblin #3 again.

Turn based combat takes a lot longer than pausable real time and that negatively impacts pacing.

People playing PnP RPGs complain all the time that combat takes too long. Guess what, its no different on a PC.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

No, not at all. While the sequence of attacks was technically turn based movement and actions all happened simultaneously.
You did not have to wait and watch for goblin #1, goblin #2 and goblin #4 to each take a turn one after the other before you could move one of your 4 characters and then having to watch goblin #3 again.

Turn based combat takes a lot longer than pausable real time and that negatively impacts pacing.

People playing PnP RPGs complain all the time that combat takes too long. Guess what, its no different on a PC.

I think you are overblowing this.

 

[Olrox17]

It looks amazing. Real turn based combat was everything I wanted and never got from the old Baldur’s Gate and NWN games, and here it is. I can hardly believe it.

 

[Coroc]

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.

Having played BG 1 / 2 IWD 1/2 and PS-T to the excess I heavily disagree. You had to pause. In difficult fights not even selecting autopause for each option given in the menu would be sufficient.
If you were not an expert scripter, there was no way to use the auto scripts for the characters reasonably, except eventually for trash mob encounters.

If you ever fought the Twisted rune or the demilich using the Protagonist and NPCs (aka not a self created party of six) you know what I am talking about.

And I really like the round based system. There are enough flashy, shiny even faster games out there, if you need on of these play some stupid action shooter or fortnite or similar trash.

I would not be interested in this, despite the very nice graphics, if this would resolve combat automatically without even the option to steer it manually.

 

[Li Shenron]

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".

Mmm... anything specific in your mind that really should be covered by 5e rules but isn't? I cannot think of anything essential for a TTRPG in the general case. The rules do cover practically anything, they just don't differentiate the details, so the "DM rulings" are in most cases just the DM calling for an ability check and setting a DC on the fly, maybe granting (dis)advantage with it.

But we're talking about a CRPG here, and there's no reason why the game designers can't do the same i.e. allow to use abilities on certain elements of the environment with a DC under the hood.

If you are concerned that you won't be able to do something unusual or particularly creative, good luck finding any CRPG that allows you total freedom, it just doesn't exist.

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.

Absolutely! Some people like FPS or shoot'em ups and just don't get how is it possible that other people like turn-based, it's their problem. And just because I do like turn-based it doesn't mean I hate those in real-time, I just think we have plenty of them while we have few precious good turn-based games (BTW I never liked early Final Fantasy games TBH because of the total lack of movement during combat). I want an option for a game that requires MORE thinking and LESS reaction speed, one more real-time game adds nothing to my gaming options.

Turn based combat takes a lot longer than pausable real time and that negatively impacts pacing.

People playing PnP RPGs complain all the time that combat takes too long. Guess what, its no different on a PC.

The complaint in D&D is about combat taking too long compared to the rest of the game, which is supposed to also have a narrative, social interactions, exploration of locales, equipment management (possibly including shopping if you like) and more.

There are some computer games where combat is very fast, and it goes on all the damn time (Diablo III). Oh wait that's no true, not all the time, because every 10 minutes you have to stop and empty your equipment from all the useless treasure by going through the recycling mill...

If your primary interest is in a high-paced game, Diablo III might work for you, but I wonder are you sure you like D&D? Because D&D has always been a slow-pace game after all... For my personal tastes low-pace is preferable. It doesn't mean I want each turn in a RPG to take an hour, it means I want to have time to think. I can't have that in Diablo III (I still play it but I really consider that game a shoot'em up), but I also can't have it in WoW for example, I can prepare for a battle, but then it's all about reacting quickly and mostly going through the motion of an established tactic.

 

[Derren]

I think you are overblowing this.

Sadly I am not. You have seen how long the intellect devourer fight took and that was a generic low level fight.
I have played Divinity 2 and fights got eventually tedious. And the environmental effects soon lost their appeal.

There are some computer games where combat is very fast, and it goes on all the damn time (Diablo III). Oh wait that's no true, not all the time, because every 10 minutes you have to stop and empty your equipment from all the useless treasure by going through the recycling mill...

If your primary interest is in a high-paced game, Diablo III might work for you, but I wonder are you sure you like D&D? Because D&D has always been a slow-pace game after all... For my personal tastes low-pace is preferable. It doesn't mean I want each turn in a RPG to take an hour, it means I want to have time to think. I can't have that in Diablo III (I still play it but I really consider that game a shoot'em up), but I also can't have it in WoW for example, I can prepare for a battle, but then it's all about reacting quickly and mostly going through the motion of an established tactic.

Not sure if you do this kind of framing on purpose to suggest that people not haooy with turn based combat ate not interested in a "real" rpg or if you just don't know it better as you do not even know many rpgs on pc and maybe don't even play them and instead just mention Diablo because you know the name. But the alternative to Divinity style turn based combat would not be Diablo but Kingmaker or Baldurs Gate 2 wiuch the game is supposed to be a sequel of.

 

[Li Shenron]

Not sure if you do this kind of framing on purpose to suggest that people not haooy with turn based combat ate not interested in a "real" rpg or if you just don't know it better, but the alternative to Divinity style turn based combat would not be Diablo but Kingmaker or Baldurs Gate 2 whuch the game is supposed to be a sequel of.

Sorry if you got that impression. And indeed Diablo III was kind of an extreme example of the opposite to turn-based. I did play BG1 and BG2 back then and I am familiar with how they work, but now I am curious to know whether you played them with the "pause" on or real-time, because I remember how I found them unplayable without the "pause"... it was just not possible to adequately manage multiple characters special abilities in real-time.

This is actually a main point for me: to give me a very D&D feel, the game must let me play a whole group of PC, each with her own role. Real-time is impossible to manage multiple PCs (well maybe 2...) so you can only get a proper D&D party by playing in multiplayer with other people. But then I hate how multiplaying online commonly takes the competitive route... it's one reason why I could never enjoy playing WoW with other people. Turn-based is my only chance to playing a game where I can have a party of PCs, and I am controlling all of them.

 

[Iry]

Looks absolutely delightful. My only immediate concern is wanting some of the animations to go faster, like standing up from prone, and hoping the game will be more polished than Act 3 and 4 of DOS2.

 

[Derren]

Sorry if you got that impression. And indeed Diablo III was kind of an extreme example of the opposite to turn-based. I did play BG1 and BG2 back then and I am familiar with how they work, but now I am curious to know whether you played them with the "pause" on or real-time, because I remember how I found them unplayable without the "pause"... it was just not possible to adequately manage multiple characters special abilities in real-time.

This is actually a main point for me: to give me a very D&D feel, the game must let me play a whole group of PC, each with her own role. Real-time is impossible to manage multiple PCs (well maybe 2...) so you can only get a proper D&D party by playing in multiplayer with other people. But then I hate how multiplaying online commonly takes the competitive route... it's one reason why I could never enjoy playing WoW with other people. Turn-based is my only chance to playing a game where I can have a party of PCs, and I am controlling all of them.

And this is what most people expected from BG3. Pausable real time combat. Not Diablo 3.

Based on the expected release date, BG3 will be in competition with Wrath of the Righteous. And the latter one looks and feels a lot more like Baldurs Gate than BG3.

 

[Horwath]

And this is what most people expected from BG3. Pausable real time combat. Not Diablo 3.

Based on the expected release date, BG3 will be in competition with Wrath of the Righteous. And the latter one looks and feels a lot more like Baldurs Gate than BG3.

YES!