Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="miggyG777" data-source="post: 7929177" data-attributes="member: 6987582">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.</blockquote>