I wanted to comment to express what a breath of fresh air it is to have someone speak their opinion about something, even if it's not the popular one. Baldur's Gate is certainly not a series for everyone, and that's totally okay! I really enjoyed the video and I'm glad that you can see how well it's made even if it's not to your tastes. Far too often we feel the need to readily defend our opinions as if they're the only objectively correct ones, so I'm stoked with the way you approached Baldur's Gate. Baldur's Gate falls under the very specific genre of CRPG, or "Computer RPG", which is what I think turns you off. CRPGs are far more methodical and reliant on stats compared to ARPGs (Action RPGs) such as Dark Souls that rely more on mechanical skill. CRPGs are usually turn-based or real time with pause combat. Hopefully having a name for the gameplay structure you aren't enjoying can help you find what you do like!
Not just BG3 isn't for everyone but DnD or turn based games aren't necessarily for everyone, and that's fine. Personally speaking I was never one for these kinds of games and didn't really like them in general until recently due to interacting with a few people that love them and getting introduced to them slowly, they've been turning into an acquired taste for me and I am now starting to enjoy them quite a lot. So, to Sputnik: There is hope! If you really want to get into these games that you just feel like they're not for you, there is a chance that one day you will :)
I don't agree with the idea that a good dm wont allow a party to wipe. Some people ENJOY that tactical challenge. They want to measure that risk vs reward. And even if a DM does fludge dice rolls (which i admit there is a time and place for), it's a massive failure on the DM's part if the players notice it, because once you start thinking the DM will never allow you to fail, suddenly taking risks loses its impact. Your adventuring party should fear death, but should be motivated by what taking on that risk gets them. Ultimately it just comes down to differing playstyles, and not every DM is suited for every player group.
It's why campaigns usually have a session 0, where the DM and players talk about what they actually want from the campaign, what they're ok or not ok with etc, if people are fine with total party wipes being a real possibility then the campaign can allow that, if they're not cool with that then the campaign can accommodate too In the game the equivalent of it is the difficulty selection, it even has custom difficulty so you can fully customize it to your preferences
Agreed. There are definitely people who want the type of power fantasy game where they'll never lose or fail at anything, but that kind of play is absolutely not for everyone. I will not play with a DM who won't let the party die due to the consequences of their own actions. If there is no chance of failure, there is no excitement from overcoming the challenge. I'm a tactical player who loves figuring creative solutions to the challenge put in front of me. If I can succeed regardless of planning or dice rolls, I may as well just be writing fan-fic instead of playing a game. A good DM is one who understands their players and runs the kind of game that everyone at the table will enjoy.
Dayum, you got a whole multi-layered, detailed philosophical reasoning laid out. My reason for not being able to get into the game is like, 2 sentences. The main story is about the MC getting a deadly brain parasite larva. That level of body horror is a hard limit for me. Whatever word you wanna use - squick, phobia, trigger. Any and all of that. It's just a boundary that I have to not cross, I can't engage with it, for my own mental health. That week when everyone was talking about that one politician's interview, one of the Kennedys, that was actually a legit bad time for my mental health, dude. THAT'S why I won't be able to enjoy playing it. Everything else would be secondary.
I kinda feel the opposite regarding tabletop DND vs BG3. I don't like that a Total Party Kill is so severe and just ends the campaign that the DM is forced to carefully balance things and fudge rolls so that you never lose, merely creating an illusion of challenge. I like losing an encounter every now and then, reloading and changing tactics. I also like having to adapt to tough situations because of bad rolls, having to use some powerful consumables that you've saved up. Did my first playthrough on Tactician despite not having played DND in 15 years.
Hey Sputnik, I saw your Lies of P video and I then had a look through the comments, I loved how you dealt with many of the criticisms and it genuinely felt like a breath of fresh air when it comes to the rabid fanboyism that sometimes surrounds the soul series. It was enough to instantly sub, kudos. I look forwaed to seeing more from you.
I have always clashed with the sports-y side of gaming that treats challenge as the meat and everything else like story, setting, art style, atmosphere etc. as fluff. Doesn't hurt when the game shows off your home theater setup nicely and that's it. My example of what I'm talking about would be from Age of Empires. To play effectively, you'd better not treat the basic residential structure as the tent it has for name and graphics, because it effectively is a 2x2 wall that also raises your population limit. And you'd better learn walling yourself with tents instead of building a town square out of them if you want to be considered worth playing against. Better yet, completely disregard what anything looks like and what it's called. They are tokens with thematic pictures for ease of recognition. Connecting them with anything beyond their stat blocks is only going to confuse you as far as your success in the game goes. Actually reaching the Imperial age and having large armies clash in a multiplayer game of AGE OF EMPIRES is considered a failure on everyone's part. The highest form of warfare is starving the enemy for resources with four clubmen before even discovering the wheel. Man, I always wanted to do that ever since I saw the intro...
I always play wizards/magic casters in rpgs, but playing bg3 I felt like spell slots were made to specifically annoy me. its another level of resource management I do NOT need. do I use this spell now or do I save it for later? how do I know there wont be a more challenging fight down the road where I'm laden with regret? and that's not to mention how it feels to bite the bullet and cast a healing spell at a high level that you somehow roll so terribly you should've just stuck to healing potions. i hate it. i know I can always just rest to regain spell slots---but that throttles the pacing. instead I got the infinite spell slots mod and suddenly I was enjoying the game ten time more. sure, it breaks the balance but I had so much more fun with the modded game in tactician than I ever once did in vanilla explorer
i think Larian did the best job possible turning 5e into a game. But as much as i loved BG3 i prefer tabletop. Games have limitations and there has been moments in BG3 where game mechanics got in the way of doing the things i want to do. Also like i said, try Old School Essentials and/or 1st Edition Advanced Dungeons and dragons 8)
20:02 - RIP to my neighbors at 1am when I was listening to this without headphones with the volume up to better hear your chill, soothing voice - perhaps a warning next time?? XD
Im just starting it and long RPG career has made me hesitate because I have to look at EVERYTHING before I decide! I always go for vanilla “good guy but will steal and do some dirty” and focus on dialogue and exploration in my 1st run. So I’m going with a Druid, due to transforming and talking to animals and magic. Explorer difficulty. But I got the deluxe because I LOVE Divinity and the Mask Of Shapeshifting with Fane so my race isn’t an issue. The combat is like Divinity so I’m sure I’ll like it. But all your criticisms are valid. I get your point.
I love Baldur's Gate 3 with all my heart, it is easily in my top 5 games ot all time. However i can also completely understand why someone wouldn't like it, both valid reasons and otherwise
D&D is definitely not a role playing system with a combat game "tacked on" to it. It actually started off as almost the opposite. Early versions of the game were mostly combat with a bit of RP to fill out the bits between dungeon runs. These days there is a far greater balance that allows groups to focus on the parts of the game that interest them most. Some groups focus on RP, some on combat, and some like a healthy mix of the two. You ask in a comment above if we have any suggestions for you regarding BG3. Honestly I don't think there is anything that will suddenly "open your eyes" to its wonders, because it's just not the game for you. Based on what you said about yourself in the beginning and your comparison to XCom, it seems like you're not the kind of person who would ever fall in love with kind of combat BG3 and D&D offers. And you're right, that's ok. I also love XCom, but where you love the simplicity it offers, I'm the kind of player that beats it once and then mods the hell out of it to give myself heaps of new and exciting options to play with. Not every game is going to be for everyone, nor should it be. I'm glad you gave the game a try, even if it just wasn't for you in the end.
Alright so, ofcourse it's totally okay for you to not like BG3. To each their own and all that. But maybe I'm just dumb, but after watching this whole video I'm still not sure what your problem with the game is..? The big thing that I heard is that you dislike the chance of failure for actions in combat. The thing is, if that chance didn't exist then there would be no strategic depth. If action A or action B would always both work then it's literally just an equation of which action is the most effective, deals the most dmg etc. It's this question of "do you take a risk or play it safe?" that makes the combat really fun for me. And then there's the whole aspect of building your character to impact the success chance of certain actions, adding even more to the strategy. But then again, maybe I'm wrong and this isn't what you dislike, because then you mention liking other games with semi-random chances a lot. I mostly connected to the XCOM part, because that's another game I have a lot of experience with. So there, you mention that the problem is that in XCOM there is actually less choice and that makes it less confusing. Totally fair, but then I really don't understand why you started the video with saying that you love games that have a lot of choices. I'm just so confused because at this point I have no clue what you want. You seem to enjoy all of BG3's mechanics, but only when they're in other games. Really not trying to be disrespectful at all. I wish you all the best and hope you have fun with other games, or BG3 if you do end up finding a way to enjoy it. Just wanted to express how this came across to me.
@@Sputnik34 That's alright, and thanks for clarifying! While I still stand behind my comment, I gotta admit that I wrote it in a moment of anxiety. So I may have been a little harsh, sorry about that. I really don't want you to get disheartened - it's a great vid. I just got confused by it, but that's fine. Take care!
man i also hate dnd combat, it feels like being a lawyer, i'm always having to look up what effects mean and remember what spells do and figure out how actions suss out with everyone's active statuses and it just takes foreeevvverrrrr. i like baldur's gate bc it does all that for me honestly! even so, BG3 was great not goty in my book, these big long epics are a lot to keep track of and continue to care about as you go from location to location, at least for me (plus, i'm an irredeemable save scummer). i know a lot of people live for that shit
Man, I wrote an entire long comment and youtube deleted it because I edited it and included the name of another social media, content aggregator website that everyone appends to a google search to find relevant info because it contained relevant info about karmic dice. I hate youtube so much.
The reason you struggle to enjoy BG3's combat is exactly why I love it. Part of the power fantasy for me is knowing that any wrong move (or even a long stretch of bad dice rolls) can end my 80+hour honor mode run. In my brain, this is a story about a ragtag group of simps working together to *beat the odds* and save the world, so having the odds actually be against you (and the inability to load a past save when things go wrong) really immerses me in the narriative. Every decision *actually* matters and (usually) nothing is guarenteed to work. Very engaging! Endlessly frustrating! Fun! I know not everyone looks for such stressful and harsh experiences in their games (which is valid, I am the weird one here), but i think the odd poor dice roll on a skill check your character is proficient in isnt just valuable for the masochistic glory. It adds to the roll playing! It doesnt matter how good of a sweet-talker you are; Some days you're just not going to do a good job trying to talk your way out of a situation, even if you usually can rely on doing so effectively. The reliance on dice rools in D&D and BG3 really captures that aspect of being a *person*, even if some folks dont find such a system enjoyable to interact with.
@@Smalljose6912 parts of me wonder if I'll ever be able to get my brain to think about it this way but so far I've just been unsuccessful :'( thank you for watching!!
Dont want to sound mean, but: If you pursue your combats in such a way so that "one bad dice" roll will result in a party death, you just might be the most incompetent tactician in the world lol. If you are more the narrative-driven kind of player just play on a lower difficulty or individually adjust it to your specific needs. And by the way, yes it is very much possible to beat the game with "role-play-compliant fighting" even on Honor Mode. There is no need for min-maxing on any difficulty.
I did play it on an easier difficulty and still didn't enjoy myself. I may have worded it in the video in a way that sounds like I'm always on the brink of death but that was for the purposes of the video. It was an extreme example that put my issue with the game at the forefront.
The Combat actualy isnt that random. The goal of a good build is to pull the favor of the dice in your direction. If you have good builds you get more good than bad rolls and a few bad rolls wont ruin the battle . You can fully manipulate the system. Right builds even make the highest difficulty ratger easy and on lower difficulties your builds gotta be less perfect to achieve the same effect. Granted You need to engage and Understand the Systems and it can Take a while to get it. But the ability to fully respec makes it easier. You can Literaly make a save and try Out everything
The characters feel chessy, so like that throw me off so much, the only thing i like is the voice that tells what's happening and karlach, dragon age origins characters personalities feel more alive and less, fanfic writen than bg3 companions
I don't know. Your issues with the combat are true in theory, but in practice the combat is easy enough that all these "what ifs" just very rarely happen. And no, "consistently bad dice luck" isn't a thing, especially not with the game already cheating dice rolls in your favour. In our playthrough all kind of weird crap happened in combat, but in most fights this could be mitigated. This was a way bigger problem in the Divinity Sin games where the game would gladly obliterate you in one or two rounds. Now? So what if Astarion botches his crit opener _yet again_. I'll win the fight anyway. And no, you shouldn't savescum. You should turn down the combat difficulty.
Sorry to be the one to say it, but get good. BG3 isn't that hard, and it seems that your die rolling issues are caused by a bad build and a poor understanding of the systems at play. Furthermore, I feel the need to spell it out that this is a ROLE PLAYING GAME. Success in combat is not soley determined by player skill, but by character skill, for which attributes, skills, and the modifiers they provide are abstractions. Sometimes, your paladin just isn't charismatic enough to decieve that guy, sometimes your opponent is too good at defensive tactics for you to hit him, sometimes your party isn't experienced enough (AKA high enough level) to handle that threat. In such a situation, It is your job as the player presiding over the party to identify that, retreat, or come up with a new strategy. If you don't, your party deserves to die. You failed, and this game is supposed to be an abstraction of a realistic fantasy setting, where people will die. Sorry, but why is it unnacceptable for death to be a fail state in BG3, but ok in other games like fallout 3? Now, 5E combat does suck, mostly due to the d20 system, and could be improved through a 3d6 system, or with a level scaling of skills and skill requirements more akin to pathfinder. I also think encounter design in this game is pretty dogshit beyond act one, and that the writing feels like the subplot of a (surprisingly well written) p0rn movie, so 7/10 seems a fair score. I know people will just say that this is your opinion or whatever, but ... well maybe this game isn't for you, and if that's the case, I'm going to have to ask you not to muddy the discussion, because that's how we got shit like fallout 3 turning our actually good game franchises into unrecognisable slop. If you don't like dice rolls and the potential for failure, don't play an RPG like this. Don't demand that our games change to suit your interests.
The problem with BG3 is simply it ISNT Baldur's Gate 3. Its divinity, in the world of BG 3. The lack of connectivity between the two series, like with a certain character whose name starts with a V, makes it feel disconnected. Its a darn good rpg, but it isnt a BG one.
how do YOU feel about Baldur's Gate 3? Do you have any suggestions for ME?
I wanted to comment to express what a breath of fresh air it is to have someone speak their opinion about something, even if it's not the popular one. Baldur's Gate is certainly not a series for everyone, and that's totally okay! I really enjoyed the video and I'm glad that you can see how well it's made even if it's not to your tastes. Far too often we feel the need to readily defend our opinions as if they're the only objectively correct ones, so I'm stoked with the way you approached Baldur's Gate. Baldur's Gate falls under the very specific genre of CRPG, or "Computer RPG", which is what I think turns you off. CRPGs are far more methodical and reliant on stats compared to ARPGs (Action RPGs) such as Dark Souls that rely more on mechanical skill. CRPGs are usually turn-based or real time with pause combat. Hopefully having a name for the gameplay structure you aren't enjoying can help you find what you do like!
Not just BG3 isn't for everyone but DnD or turn based games aren't necessarily for everyone, and that's fine. Personally speaking I was never one for these kinds of games and didn't really like them in general until recently due to interacting with a few people that love them and getting introduced to them slowly, they've been turning into an acquired taste for me and I am now starting to enjoy them quite a lot. So, to Sputnik: There is hope! If you really want to get into these games that you just feel like they're not for you, there is a chance that one day you will :)
I don't agree with the idea that a good dm wont allow a party to wipe. Some people ENJOY that tactical challenge. They want to measure that risk vs reward. And even if a DM does fludge dice rolls (which i admit there is a time and place for), it's a massive failure on the DM's part if the players notice it, because once you start thinking the DM will never allow you to fail, suddenly taking risks loses its impact. Your adventuring party should fear death, but should be motivated by what taking on that risk gets them. Ultimately it just comes down to differing playstyles, and not every DM is suited for every player group.
It's why campaigns usually have a session 0, where the DM and players talk about what they actually want from the campaign, what they're ok or not ok with etc, if people are fine with total party wipes being a real possibility then the campaign can allow that, if they're not cool with that then the campaign can accommodate too
In the game the equivalent of it is the difficulty selection, it even has custom difficulty so you can fully customize it to your preferences
Agreed. There are definitely people who want the type of power fantasy game where they'll never lose or fail at anything, but that kind of play is absolutely not for everyone. I will not play with a DM who won't let the party die due to the consequences of their own actions. If there is no chance of failure, there is no excitement from overcoming the challenge. I'm a tactical player who loves figuring creative solutions to the challenge put in front of me. If I can succeed regardless of planning or dice rolls, I may as well just be writing fan-fic instead of playing a game. A good DM is one who understands their players and runs the kind of game that everyone at the table will enjoy.
Dayum, you got a whole multi-layered, detailed philosophical reasoning laid out. My reason for not being able to get into the game is like, 2 sentences. The main story is about the MC getting a deadly brain parasite larva. That level of body horror is a hard limit for me. Whatever word you wanna use - squick, phobia, trigger. Any and all of that. It's just a boundary that I have to not cross, I can't engage with it, for my own mental health.
That week when everyone was talking about that one politician's interview, one of the Kennedys, that was actually a legit bad time for my mental health, dude.
THAT'S why I won't be able to enjoy playing it. Everything else would be secondary.
I kinda feel the opposite regarding tabletop DND vs BG3. I don't like that a Total Party Kill is so severe and just ends the campaign that the DM is forced to carefully balance things and fudge rolls so that you never lose, merely creating an illusion of challenge. I like losing an encounter every now and then, reloading and changing tactics. I also like having to adapt to tough situations because of bad rolls, having to use some powerful consumables that you've saved up. Did my first playthrough on Tactician despite not having played DND in 15 years.
Hey Sputnik, I saw your Lies of P video and I then had a look through the comments, I loved how you dealt with many of the criticisms and it genuinely felt like a breath of fresh air when it comes to the rabid fanboyism that sometimes surrounds the soul series. It was enough to instantly sub, kudos. I look forwaed to seeing more from you.
I have always clashed with the sports-y side of gaming that treats challenge as the meat and everything else like story, setting, art style, atmosphere etc. as fluff. Doesn't hurt when the game shows off your home theater setup nicely and that's it.
My example of what I'm talking about would be from Age of Empires. To play effectively, you'd better not treat the basic residential structure as the tent it has for name and graphics, because it effectively is a 2x2 wall that also raises your population limit. And you'd better learn walling yourself with tents instead of building a town square out of them if you want to be considered worth playing against. Better yet, completely disregard what anything looks like and what it's called. They are tokens with thematic pictures for ease of recognition. Connecting them with anything beyond their stat blocks is only going to confuse you as far as your success in the game goes.
Actually reaching the Imperial age and having large armies clash in a multiplayer game of AGE OF EMPIRES is considered a failure on everyone's part. The highest form of warfare is starving the enemy for resources with four clubmen before even discovering the wheel. Man, I always wanted to do that ever since I saw the intro...
I always play wizards/magic casters in rpgs, but playing bg3 I felt like spell slots were made to specifically annoy me. its another level of resource management I do NOT need. do I use this spell now or do I save it for later? how do I know there wont be a more challenging fight down the road where I'm laden with regret? and that's not to mention how it feels to bite the bullet and cast a healing spell at a high level that you somehow roll so terribly you should've just stuck to healing potions. i hate it. i know I can always just rest to regain spell slots---but that throttles the pacing.
instead I got the infinite spell slots mod and suddenly I was enjoying the game ten time more. sure, it breaks the balance but I had so much more fun with the modded game in tactician than I ever once did in vanilla explorer
1. Find stroing build.
2. Use savescams.
It will solve every problem you mentioned.
i've never enjoyed save scamming. it feels like i'm not playing a game by that point.
i think Larian did the best job possible turning 5e into a game. But as much as i loved BG3 i prefer tabletop. Games have limitations and there has been moments in BG3 where game mechanics got in the way of doing the things i want to do. Also like i said, try Old School Essentials and/or 1st Edition Advanced Dungeons and dragons 8)
I will be sure to at least try OSE! :')
I just want you to know, I appreciate that board game joke. Phenomenal stuff. 👌
20:02 - RIP to my neighbors at 1am when I was listening to this without headphones with the volume up to better hear your chill, soothing voice - perhaps a warning next time?? XD
@@86fifty sorry LOL
Im just starting it and long RPG career has made me hesitate because I have to look at EVERYTHING before I decide!
I always go for vanilla “good guy but will steal and do some dirty” and focus on dialogue and exploration in my 1st run. So I’m going with a Druid, due to transforming and talking to animals and magic. Explorer difficulty. But I got the deluxe because I LOVE Divinity and the Mask Of Shapeshifting with Fane so my race isn’t an issue.
The combat is like Divinity so I’m sure I’ll like it.
But all your criticisms are valid. I get your point.
I love Baldur's Gate 3 with all my heart, it is easily in my top 5 games ot all time. However i can also completely understand why someone wouldn't like it, both valid reasons and otherwise
D&D is definitely not a role playing system with a combat game "tacked on" to it. It actually started off as almost the opposite. Early versions of the game were mostly combat with a bit of RP to fill out the bits between dungeon runs. These days there is a far greater balance that allows groups to focus on the parts of the game that interest them most. Some groups focus on RP, some on combat, and some like a healthy mix of the two.
You ask in a comment above if we have any suggestions for you regarding BG3. Honestly I don't think there is anything that will suddenly "open your eyes" to its wonders, because it's just not the game for you. Based on what you said about yourself in the beginning and your comparison to XCom, it seems like you're not the kind of person who would ever fall in love with kind of combat BG3 and D&D offers. And you're right, that's ok. I also love XCom, but where you love the simplicity it offers, I'm the kind of player that beats it once and then mods the hell out of it to give myself heaps of new and exciting options to play with. Not every game is going to be for everyone, nor should it be. I'm glad you gave the game a try, even if it just wasn't for you in the end.
Thank you for your insightful comment and for watching! :')
You never mentioned the ability to reincarnate characters in Dnd if a high level druid is around
@@nealbachman2708 I wasn't playing the game with a druid :(
Alright so, ofcourse it's totally okay for you to not like BG3. To each their own and all that. But maybe I'm just dumb, but after watching this whole video I'm still not sure what your problem with the game is..?
The big thing that I heard is that you dislike the chance of failure for actions in combat. The thing is, if that chance didn't exist then there would be no strategic depth. If action A or action B would always both work then it's literally just an equation of which action is the most effective, deals the most dmg etc. It's this question of "do you take a risk or play it safe?" that makes the combat really fun for me. And then there's the whole aspect of building your character to impact the success chance of certain actions, adding even more to the strategy.
But then again, maybe I'm wrong and this isn't what you dislike, because then you mention liking other games with semi-random chances a lot. I mostly connected to the XCOM part, because that's another game I have a lot of experience with. So there, you mention that the problem is that in XCOM there is actually less choice and that makes it less confusing. Totally fair, but then I really don't understand why you started the video with saying that you love games that have a lot of choices.
I'm just so confused because at this point I have no clue what you want. You seem to enjoy all of BG3's mechanics, but only when they're in other games.
Really not trying to be disrespectful at all. I wish you all the best and hope you have fun with other games, or BG3 if you do end up finding a way to enjoy it. Just wanted to express how this came across to me.
When I said I like a lot of choices, I meant narrative choices. I probably should have been more specific :/
@@Sputnik34 That's alright, and thanks for clarifying! While I still stand behind my comment, I gotta admit that I wrote it in a moment of anxiety. So I may have been a little harsh, sorry about that. I really don't want you to get disheartened - it's a great vid. I just got confused by it, but that's fine. Take care!
Let me know when you do end up finishing that quest. I got like a million fetch quests for you!
it never ends, friend
man i also hate dnd combat, it feels like being a lawyer, i'm always having to look up what effects mean and remember what spells do and figure out how actions suss out with everyone's active statuses and it just takes foreeevvverrrrr. i like baldur's gate bc it does all that for me honestly! even so, BG3 was great not goty in my book, these big long epics are a lot to keep track of and continue to care about as you go from location to location, at least for me (plus, i'm an irredeemable save scummer). i know a lot of people live for that shit
It ain’t that hard to love mate, my 120 hour playthrough - as a person that rarely crosses the 50 hour line in most longer games - speaks for itself.
my journey continues
Why not just play on explorer mode, where its nearly impossible to actually fail combat?
I have and I still didn't have fun that way :'(
Man, I wrote an entire long comment and youtube deleted it because I edited it and included the name of another social media, content aggregator website that everyone appends to a google search to find relevant info because it contained relevant info about karmic dice.
I hate youtube so much.
@@Gabrielnfs lame. Sorry to hear :(
@@Sputnik34 No worries, I'll write again eventually, if you're interested in reading
Probably just play Disco Elysium, think it's what you're looking for
The reason you struggle to enjoy BG3's combat is exactly why I love it. Part of the power fantasy for me is knowing that any wrong move (or even a long stretch of bad dice rolls) can end my 80+hour honor mode run. In my brain, this is a story about a ragtag group of simps working together to *beat the odds* and save the world, so having the odds actually be against you (and the inability to load a past save when things go wrong) really immerses me in the narriative. Every decision *actually* matters and (usually) nothing is guarenteed to work. Very engaging! Endlessly frustrating! Fun!
I know not everyone looks for such stressful and harsh experiences in their games (which is valid, I am the weird one here), but i think the odd poor dice roll on a skill check your character is proficient in isnt just valuable for the masochistic glory. It adds to the roll playing! It doesnt matter how good of a sweet-talker you are; Some days you're just not going to do a good job trying to talk your way out of a situation, even if you usually can rely on doing so effectively. The reliance on dice rools in D&D and BG3 really captures that aspect of being a *person*, even if some folks dont find such a system enjoyable to interact with.
@@Smalljose6912 parts of me wonder if I'll ever be able to get my brain to think about it this way but so far I've just been unsuccessful :'( thank you for watching!!
@@Sputnik34 thanks for the great vid! It was super cool to see some well-constructed critiques of this game amidst the sea of breathless praise 🤘
Dont want to sound mean, but: If you pursue your combats in such a way so that "one bad dice" roll will result in a party death, you just might be the most incompetent tactician in the world lol.
If you are more the narrative-driven kind of player just play on a lower difficulty or individually adjust it to your specific needs.
And by the way, yes it is very much possible to beat the game with "role-play-compliant fighting" even on Honor Mode. There is no need for min-maxing on any difficulty.
I did play it on an easier difficulty and still didn't enjoy myself. I may have worded it in the video in a way that sounds like I'm always on the brink of death but that was for the purposes of the video. It was an extreme example that put my issue with the game at the forefront.
The Combat actualy isnt that random. The goal of a good build is to pull the favor of the dice in your direction. If you have good builds you get more good than bad rolls and a few bad rolls wont ruin the battle . You can fully manipulate the system. Right builds even make the highest difficulty ratger easy and on lower difficulties your builds gotta be less perfect to achieve the same effect. Granted You need to engage and Understand the Systems and it can Take a while to get it. But the ability to fully respec makes it easier. You can Literaly make a save and try Out everything
The characters feel chessy, so like that throw me off so much, the only thing i like is the voice that tells what's happening and karlach, dragon age origins characters personalities feel more alive and less, fanfic writen than bg3 companions
BAIT
I don't know. Your issues with the combat are true in theory, but in practice the combat is easy enough that all these "what ifs" just very rarely happen. And no, "consistently bad dice luck" isn't a thing, especially not with the game already cheating dice rolls in your favour.
In our playthrough all kind of weird crap happened in combat, but in most fights this could be mitigated. This was a way bigger problem in the Divinity Sin games where the game would gladly obliterate you in one or two rounds. Now? So what if Astarion botches his crit opener _yet again_. I'll win the fight anyway.
And no, you shouldn't savescum. You should turn down the combat difficulty.
Sorry to be the one to say it, but get good. BG3 isn't that hard, and it seems that your die rolling issues are caused by a bad build and a poor understanding of the systems at play.
Furthermore, I feel the need to spell it out that this is a ROLE PLAYING GAME. Success in combat is not soley determined by player skill, but by character skill, for which attributes, skills, and the modifiers they provide are abstractions. Sometimes, your paladin just isn't charismatic enough to decieve that guy, sometimes your opponent is too good at defensive tactics for you to hit him, sometimes your party isn't experienced enough (AKA high enough level) to handle that threat. In such a situation, It is your job as the player presiding over the party to identify that, retreat, or come up with a new strategy. If you don't, your party deserves to die. You failed, and this game is supposed to be an abstraction of a realistic fantasy setting, where people will die. Sorry, but why is it unnacceptable for death to be a fail state in BG3, but ok in other games like fallout 3?
Now, 5E combat does suck, mostly due to the d20 system, and could be improved through a 3d6 system, or with a level scaling of skills and skill requirements more akin to pathfinder. I also think encounter design in this game is pretty dogshit beyond act one, and that the writing feels like the subplot of a (surprisingly well written) p0rn movie, so 7/10 seems a fair score.
I know people will just say that this is your opinion or whatever, but ... well maybe this game isn't for you, and if that's the case, I'm going to have to ask you not to muddy the discussion, because that's how we got shit like fallout 3 turning our actually good game franchises into unrecognisable slop. If you don't like dice rolls and the potential for failure, don't play an RPG like this. Don't demand that our games change to suit your interests.
The problem with BG3 is simply it ISNT Baldur's Gate 3. Its divinity, in the world of BG 3. The lack of connectivity between the two series, like with a certain character whose name starts with a V, makes it feel disconnected. Its a darn good rpg, but it isnt a BG one.