Baldur's Gate 3 by Larian Games

shabushabu said:

As a 5e player, i was hoping for a CRPG where i can test builds out. multiclasses, etc 1-20. Seems Solasta is also going with a 10 level cap. Pretty weak on both fronts.

Levels 1-5 of DnD are pretty boring from character building perspective, 12+ is where things get interesting.

Click to expand...

The level cap for BG3 was originally announced to be 10, but if memory serves it has been raised to 12 or 13. I doubt it'll get much higher than that, if at all. The meta-data for D&D campaigns shows that the overwhelming bulk of adventures are run in the 7-12 range. Ironically, I think higher level D&D works BETTER on a PC platform than on a tabletop because the near-limitless number of options available to players creates an incredibly fragile game that players can easily break unless they 'buy in' to the narrative. It takes a very talented DM and agreeable players to run interesting game for high-level characters. I've done it a few times, but the necessity of considering every way that even well-meaning players can destroy your game is exhausting. I'm not a railroading DM, but play sessions are far, far less satisfying when players have unknowingly abandoned the sandbox you've created for them to explore.


Now, to your point -- I'm a bit of a purist in that I really dislike multiclassing. I can behind starting as one class and then making a change to another if the player-crafted narrative heavily supports it, but multiclassing for the sake of min/maxing is trash and not something I allow at my table. Also, I think that, mechanically, characters start coming in to their own around level 7-8. Casters have 4th level spells and martials enough feats/class features to make things interesting. That said, 5E combat is inherently boring and I've incorporated a fairly large number of homebrew rules (the Grit and Glory pdf is a great start) to make things feel more tactical and interesting.

I'm perfectly fine with BG3 being capped around 12/13 because the game is already fun and interesting. I hope it does really well and becomes episodic so we can explore much higher level games later. I also hope that it does well enough to inspire other developers to craft more high-quality D&D licensed games. Pillars of Eternity, Wasteland 2/3, Pathfinder: Kingmaker, Divinity Original Sin 1/II and several others have shown there's definitely a market for the genre.

P.S. I played the Solasta demo and I'm looking forward to that game too.

Izo said:

Mmm, I remember wow beta. The horror.

Click to expand...

The only horror in WoW beta was mages used to be able to one shot almost anyone from invis with pyroblast lol. I mean, that wasn't horror for the mages I guess lol. Tarren Mill was such a pain in the ass with that, although I did feel useful as a warlock because I would cast See Invis and then harass them with curse of tongues and fear lol

I'm perfectly fine with BG3 being capped around 12/13 because the game is already fun and interesting.

Click to expand...

Of course, capping it at that lets them make DLC down the line that slowly pushes the level envelope.

Grabbit Allworth said:

The level cap for BG3 was originally announced to be 10, but if memory serves it has been raised to 12 or 13. I doubt it'll get much higher than that, if at all. The meta-data for D&D campaigns shows that the overwhelming bulk of adventures are run in the 7-12 range.

Click to expand...

Latest official word I saw was that, when first announced, they planned on level 10 cap, but now they are evaluating a change in the level cap. They have not confirmed anything above level 10 though.

It looks like they will have 3 giant maps (act one area, the tower/middle area, and Baldur's Gate). You can easily get to level 5, and could maybe get to level 6 if you did everything/maximized xp in act 1. I could see a level 15 cap (that you would be hard pressed to achieve), depending on how much they fit into the other 2 maps.

They are going to release a mod tool that will allow people to make their own modules up to level 25. Hopefully it takes off.

Here the world map, from the EA (you can only access it from one of the "mountain pass" zone points)(all the POIs shown are on the first map):

got triggered by ‘cishet.’ I guess this is a new thing? People who are at the nexus of annoying that is gender-signaling and dumb abbreviations really need a 1 way ticket to the Middle East. If that shit enters our vernacular I am done with English

Grabbit Allworth said:

The level cap for BG3 was originally announced to be 10, but if memory serves it has been raised to 12 or 13. I doubt it'll get much higher than that, if at all. The meta-data for D&D campaigns shows that the overwhelming bulk of adventures are run in the 7-12 range. Ironically, I think higher level D&D works BETTER on a PC platform than on a tabletop because the near-limitless number of options available to players creates an incredibly fragile game that players can easily break unless they 'buy in' to the narrative. It takes a very talented DM and agreeable players to run interesting game for high-level characters. I've done it a few times, but the necessity of considering every way that even well-meaning players can destroy your game is exhausting. I'm not a railroading DM, but play sessions are far, far less satisfying when players have unknowingly abandoned the sandbox you've created for them to explore.


Now, to your point -- I'm a bit of a purist in that I really dislike multiclassing. I can behind starting as one class and then making a change to another if the player-crafted narrative heavily supports it, but multiclassing for the sake of min/maxing is trash and not something I allow at my table. Also, I think that, mechanically, characters start coming in to their own around level 7-8. Casters have 4th level spells and martials enough feats/class features to make things interesting. That said, 5E combat is inherently boring and I've incorporated a fairly large number of homebrew rules (the Grit and Glory pdf is a great start) to make things feel more tactical and interesting.

I'm perfectly fine with BG3 being capped around 12/13 because the game is already fun and interesting. I hope it does really well and becomes episodic so we can explore much higher level games later. I also hope that it does well enough to inspire other developers to craft more high-quality D&D licensed games. Pillars of Eternity, Wasteland 2/3, Pathfinder: Kingmaker, Divinity Original Sin 1/II and several others have shown there's definitely a market for the genre.

P.S. I played the Solasta demo and I'm looking forward to that game too.

Click to expand...

To your point, re: level range, i have played the shit out of 3.5 so many class combos i have tried crpgs make that possible, nwn2, d&d online, pathfinder etc, To me I have played 1-10 so many times I am bored to hell of it, but recently found a pnp, grp where we started at 6, right now we are 9, probably end around 15.

Knowing both of these games are 1-10 has changed my thinking a bit, likely passing for a couple years until mods happen.

Maybe its time developers allow different starting levels.

Back to POE2 for now!

Burns said:

Latest official word I saw was that, when first announced, they planned on level 10 cap, but now they are evaluating a change in the level cap. They have not confirmed anything above level 10 though.

It looks like they will have 3 giant maps (act one area, the tower/middle area, and Baldur's Gate). You can easily get to level 5, and could maybe get to level 6 if you did everything/maximized xp in act 1. I could see a level 15 cap (that you would be hard pressed to achieve), depending on how much they fit into the other 2 maps.

They are going to release a mod tool that will allow people to make their own modules up to level 25. Hopefully it takes off.

Here the world map, from the EA (you can only access it from one of the "mountain pass" zone points)(all the POIs shown are on the first map):

Click to expand...

You're probably right about the locations.

However, only "3" major locations likely doesn't tell the whole story. Even in the first act there are layers within layers at some of the locations. There will be no lack of content. From what I've read (and experienced to an extent in the EA) is that leveling from 1-3 is incredibly fast and then things drop off dramatically; as it should. My guess is that we'll spend the last quarter of the game level capped.

I also suspect there is going to be some plane-hopping in locations that don't appear on the Sword Coast map world map. At levels 8-10, traversing the Planes is dangerous, but very viable. Also, given that Shar is a major element to the story and the deity of one of the companions, I have no doubt the narrative is going to include spending some time in The Shadowfell. It's also very likely that we'll see a lot more Underdark content. So, Shadowfell, Avernus, and Underdark are all likely areas to be visited yet not pictured. The Astral and Elemental planes are very high possibilities, too.

It might be too much to ask, but I'd like to see some quality content at sea. PoE II was on the right path, but ultimately fell a bit short.

shabushabu said:

To your point, re: level range, i have played the shit out of 3.5 so many class combos i have tried crpgs make that possible, nwn2, d&d online, pathfinder etc, To me I have played 1-10 so many times I am bored to hell of it, but recently found a pnp, grp where we started at 6, right now we are 9, probably end around 15.

Knowing both of these games are 1-10 has changed my thinking a bit, likely passing for a couple years until mods happen.

Maybe its time developers allow different starting levels.

Click to expand...

The idea of starting at a higher level is an interesting idea for a PC game, but I struggle with it at the table.

For me, the narrative and character arcs are the most important part of D&D. Consequently, it's very difficult for me to connect with a character picked up 'mid-career.' It almost feels like booting someone else's save game, if you will. I guess I'm too much of a traditionalist because I find one-shots (with characters specifically created for it) to be far less enjoyable than a typical campaign beginning at 1 (maaaaybe 2 for particularly brutal setting).

Grabbit Allworth said:

The idea of starting at a higher level is an interesting idea for a PC game, but I struggle with it at the table.

For me, the narrative and character arcs are the most important part of D&D. Consequently, it's very difficult for me to connect with a character picked up 'mid-career.' It almost feels like booting someone else's save game, if you will. I guess I'm too much of a traditionalist because I find one-shots (with characters specifically created for it) to be far less enjoyable than a typical campaign beginning at 1 (maaaaybe 2 for particularly brutal setting).

Click to expand...

I was a bit worried at first as was my first time not starting at 1, and honestly I love the character progression of RPGs... but starting at 6 it felt like i was level 1 ( story perspective ) but just had more abilities to start with and i kinda forgot i started at 6 after a couple sessions.


Has anyone tried mulitplayer ?

Grabbit Allworth said:

The idea of starting at a higher level is an interesting idea for a PC game, but I struggle with it at the table.

For me, the narrative and character arcs are the most important part of D&D. Consequently, it's very difficult for me to connect with a character picked up 'mid-career.' It almost feels like booting someone else's save game, if you will. I guess I'm too much of a traditionalist because I find one-shots (with characters specifically created for it) to be far less enjoyable than a typical campaign beginning at 1 (maaaaybe 2 for particularly brutal setting).

Click to expand...

for the most part, i agree with you. i think for a "campaign" you should start at lvl 1. one shots are a different beast. my dm regularly does "holiday" one shots, we are currently about to start our Halloween "season." we have about 13 players that are split up into 4 or 5 one shot groups that will play over the next month. i don't know much about what this year is going to be about, but last year the DM weaved in some real life local legends into a murder mystery narrative. we start at lvl 5 and depending on how we do, the DM will give us a minor item or boon that we can transfer over to our main characters, like a single luck type re-roll or something.

anyway, the one shots he does are generally more loose, rule wise (rule of cool will almost ALWAYS win out over rules as written). Things are also much more comedic or silly. one year for christmas one-shot, it was basically santa claus vs black peter and we got to choose who we wanted to assist. the interesting thing is that his one shots still take place within his world and have an impact on what happens afterwards, so even if it's just a goofy night of absurdity, there's still long term effects.

shabushabu said:

Has anyone tried mulitplayer ?

Click to expand...

Yes. Some oddities with the game getting confused about whose turn it is, and you can't see the other players challenge rolls.

We are kind of waiting till the rolls go in, really want to laugh at people for failing rolls.

j00t said:

for the most part, i agree with you. i think for a "campaign" you should start at lvl 1. one shots are a different beast. my dm regularly does "holiday" one shots, we are currently about to start our Halloween "season." we have about 13 players that are split up into 4 or 5 one shot groups that will play over the next month. i don't know much about what this year is going to be about, but last year the DM weaved in some real life local legends into a murder mystery narrative. we start at lvl 5 and depending on how we do, the DM will give us a minor item or boon that we can transfer over to our main characters, like a single luck type re-roll or something.

anyway, the one shots he does are generally more loose, rule wise (rule of cool will almost ALWAYS win out over rules as written). Things are also much more comedic or silly. one year for christmas one-shot, it was basically santa claus vs black peter and we got to choose who we wanted to assist. the interesting thing is that his one shots still take place within his world and have an impact on what happens afterwards, so even if it's just a goofy night of absurdity, there's still long term effects.

Click to expand...

That sounds like a lot of fun. One-shots with loose rules might be a good pressure release from the gritty, high-stakes campaigns I run.

I'm definitely self-aware insofar that I can I be rather inflexible in the style of D&D I like to play/run. I am huge supporter of "the rule of cool," but I don't have a lot of tolerance for 'goofy' shit at the table. Like those little gay-lookin' smurf things (Chwingas) in Rime of the Frostmaiden. They're supposed to provide some comic relief in an isolated environment that fills players with a sense of despair. It's very 30 Days of Night meets The Shining. The homo smurfs have no place there. They distract from the core adventure theme.

I feel like I'm giving the impression that everyone at my table is required to have the demeanor of Tywin Lannister, but far from it. My players and I laugh ALL the time, but that guy that spends the first three rounds of every combat trying to "pin a tail on the Hobgoblin" because that's what his character would do --- well, fuck that guy.

Grabbit Allworth said:

That sounds like a lot of fun. One-shots with loose rules might be a good pressure release from the gritty, high-stakes campaigns I run.

I'm definitely self-aware insofar that I can I be rather inflexible in the style of D&D I like to play/run. I am huge supporter of "the rule of cool," but I don't have a lot of tolerance for 'goofy' shit at the table. Like those little gay-lookin' smurf things (Chwingas) in Rime of the Frostmaiden. They're supposed to provide some comic relief in an isolated environment that fills players with a sense of despair. It's very 30 Days of Night meets The Shining. The homo smurfs have no place there. They distract from the core adventure theme.

I feel like I'm giving the impression that everyone at my table is required to have the demeanor of Tywin Lannister, but far from it. My players and I laugh ALL the time, but that guy that spends the first three rounds of every combat trying to "pin a tail on the Hobgoblin" because that's what your character would do --- well, fuck that guy.

Click to expand...

Actually your table sound like the kind of game I like. I play the game to have fun but I have no tolerance for people doing retarded shit just to troll.

Grabbit Allworth said:

That sounds like a lot of fun. One-shots with loose rules might be a good pressure release from the gritty, high-stakes campaigns I run.

I'm definitely self-aware insofar that I can I be rather inflexible in the style of D&D I like to play/run. I am huge supporter of "the rule of cool," but I don't have a lot of tolerance for 'goofy' shit at the table. Like those little gay-lookin' smurf things (Chwingas) in Rime of the Frostmaiden. They're supposed to provide some comic relief in an isolated environment that fills players with a sense of despair. It's very 30 Days of Night meets The Shining. The homo smurfs have no place there. They distract from the core adventure theme.

I feel like I'm giving the impression that everyone at my table is required to have the demeanor of Tywin Lannister, but far from it. My players and I laugh ALL the time, but that guy that spends the first three rounds of every combat trying to "pin a tail on the Hobgoblin" because that's what your character would do --- well, fuck that guy.

Click to expand...

ya man, you are making me want to join one of your games haha.

Chanur said:

Didn't read a lot of this because I don't want spoilers. Is this worth buying now or should I continue to wait for release?

Click to expand...

Wait. Unless you like to playtest.

Chanur said:

Didn't read a lot of this because I don't want spoilers. Is this worth buying now or should I continue to wait for release?

Click to expand...

I definitely enjoyed the 60 hours I put in to it. There's not quite that much content (probably 30 hours if you're thorough), but I sniffed every single corner and attempted to run through every option for every scenario I found. The variable outcomes for some scenes are genuinely impressive. I honestly don't think I missed anything beyond some flavor variation based on class/race/sex.

If you're a huge fan of D&D and a $60 pre-order doesn't bother you, go for it. The game, despite its early stage of development, is really fun. 30 hours of content is in line (longer in many cases) with many complete games.

I'm normally completely against pre-orders and playing games still in development, but Larian has earned my trust and I was absolutely drooling to try this game.

Harshaw said:

Wait. Unless you like to playtest.

Click to expand...

100% this. the game is unfinished. it's still very good, but it's absolutely a work in progress. if you want to wait for a finished product, then wait

shabushabu said:

ya man, you are making me want to join one of your games haha.

Click to expand...

Maybe it comes off as pretentious, but I run a very solid game.

Players rarely leave my group. When they do leave, it's almost always due to circumstances out of their control (moving, change in work schedule, spouse-aggro, etc) or I kick them (which generally only happens in the first few sessions after I realize they won't mesh with me and/or the group). I had to boot one asshole that was in his mid 60s because he was an old wargamer and the only aspect of D&D he enjoyed was combat. So, he bitched about not having combat every session and he would constantly attack NPCs in the most ridiculous circumstances. I'll never forget how stunned he looked when I told him he was "invited to never come to another one of my sessions." I've also kicked several for full-retard political/social justice bullshit. I won't rehash it here, but my position is pretty simple -- D&D is a game that heavily embraces escapism from real life for a few hours each week. Make your 'stand' elsewhere, fuckwit.

Fortunately, I never have to wait more than a day or two before I have a new player to fill the empty seat. Apparently, the two LGSs in my area have devised a waiting list for the 4 or 5 "really good DMs" in the area and I made the list. It's nice because it allows me to filter through all the shitty and inconsistent players until I find those gems that take the game as seriously as our group does.

One of the MAJOR reasons my game works is because all of us cannot wait for the next session. I spend a lot of time (and a fair amount of money) making sure I don't waste 5 hours of my players lives. 5 hours a week is a lot. For some of them (parents of young kids), it's the bulk of their free time and I feel I have a responsibility to provide them the opportunity to have a genuinely good time.

That said, my players and I have a contract that includes a major, but fundamental rule. You MUST know your character inside and out. If I can constantly juggle a dozen NPCs, maintain a cohesive narrative with numerous plotlines, stay aware of my players capabilities, and prepare the game each week then they have no excuse.

Anyway, my apologies. This post kinda went off the rails.

Grabbit Allworth said:

Maybe it comes off as pretentious, but I run a very solid game.

Players rarely leave my group. When they do leave, it's almost always due to circumstances out of their control (moving, change in work schedule, spouse-aggro, etc) or I kick them (which generally only happens in the first few sessions after I realize they won't mesh with me and/or the group). I had to boot one asshole that was in his mid 60s because he was an old wargamer and the only aspect of D&D he enjoyed was combat. So, he bitched about not having combat every session and he would constantly attack NPCs in the most ridiculous circumstances. I'll never forget how stunned he looked when I told him he was "invited to never come to another one of my sessions." I've also kicked several for full-retard political/social justice bullshit. I won't rehash it here, but my position is pretty simple -- D&D is a game that heavily embraces escapism from real life for a few hours each week. Make your 'stand' elsewhere, fuckwit.

Fortunately, I never have to wait more than a day or two before I have a new player to fill the empty seat. Apparently, the two LGSs in my area have devised a waiting list for the 4 or 5 "really good DMs" in the area and I made the list. It's nice because it allows me to filter through all the shitty and inconsistent players until I find those gems that take the game as seriously as our group does.

One of the MAJOR reasons my game works is because all of us cannot wait for the next session. I spend a lot of time (and a fair amount of money) making sure I don't waste 5 hours of my players lives. 5 hours a week is a lot. For some of them (parents of young kids), it's the bulk of their free time and I feel I have a responsibility to provide them the opportunity to have a genuinely good time.

That said, my players and I have a contract that includes a major, but fundamental rule. You MUST know your character inside and out. If I can constantly juggle a dozen NPCs, maintain a cohesive narrative with numerous plotlines, stay aware of my players capabilities, and prepare the game each week then they have no excuse.

Anyway, my apologies. This post kinda went off the rails.

Click to expand...

You don't have at least a little combat every session? SOLID INDEED SIR, SOLID INDEED.