DnD terminology is moronic and makes this game more confusing than it needs to be
 Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
DnD terminology is retarded and makes this game more confusing than it needs to be
DnD terminology is moronic and makes this game more confusing than it needs to be
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
|
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
like what?
What the hell is concentration? What breaks it?
Press T to expand and hover on text for sub-tool tips, you can even T expand the sub tips for sub sub tips
Concentration breaks when you take damage you roll a con save vs the damage taken or 10 whichever is higher, or fall prone (larian homebrew)
concentration is when a spellcaster is maintaining the effect of a spell. when that spellcaster takes damage they make a Constitution saving throw. the more damage that's dealt, the higher the DC is to pass the check.
if they fail, the spell ends
This is wrong, your characters always fail concentration saves.
they don't but the minimum difficulty class for a concentration save is 10.
>your characters always fail concentration saves
maybe if you're a shitter who can't roll dice good
What??>?
how do i roll gooder
Resilient con for +4 or war caster to roll twice
Sorc already has the first one so they're naturally better at concentration
Get luck traits so you can discard bad rolls.
>your characters always fail concentration saves
war caster feat?
Check out this guy who doesn't give his casters a constitution stat lmao
Raise your AC, raise your saves, raise your con, get con save proficiency all of this protects concentration
>Get a transmutation wizard hireling to level 6
>Transmute the con saves stone
>Kick from party
>Team mate gets +2~4 to con saves free
>You can hire 3 of these
>concentration is when a spellcaster is maintaining the effect of a spell. when that spellcaster takes damage they make a Constitution saving throw
This is also why a lot of pure spellcasters take the Resilient feat for Constitution once they've already gotten their main spellcasting stat to 20. So they can add their proficiency bonus to their Constitution saving throws for Concentration checks.
gotta do a saving throw to keep concentration when taking a hit, and you ALWAYS lose it on getting knocked prone.
Hm, could it be that Concentration is a metaphor for "concentration"? Especially when it seems to be something to do with maintaining spell buffs and is broken by damage?
Maybe you're just not very smart.
Such as?
My dumb ass friend couldn't understand why he was being affected by Faerie Fire he himself cast. So OP is probably like that, not paying attention to the wording.
>drop a glitter bomb at your feet
>you get covered in it
woooooooooooow
Stuff like the Faerie Fire thing probably confuse people who don't play tabletop games, because most video games eschew real-world physics to a much greater degree of abstraction which people are willing to accept for the sake of fun. For example, most video games don't have friendly fire. But in tabletop RPGs, unless you're told you're a master fire doctor who can mold your spells around your allies, why would throwing a ball of fire at them somehow distinguish friends from foes? Most video game players would literally never even consider that, they're not used to playing something which such a degree of real-life simulation (even RPG players, because VRPGs are hardly RPGs at all).
the game truncates spell descriptions but often leaves out very important details
>when does the gas cloud prevent a creature from taking actions - only while they're in it? or does it hit at the start of their turn and remain until their next turn?
>he gets confused by an even MORE easy and accessible version of already very normie-centered 5e dnd
Lobotomite
nice one
They need to normie it up a frick ton more. Some friends tried getting me into it and shit was still way too fricking complicated, taking 3 hours just to do a sheet even with the DM locking out some classes to make it easier for newbies so they aren't info overloaded by the magic system. I noped out and said find someone else when we got to "perma death" talk. Game has a while to go before it is appealing to non-table top nerds
Bad dms always lock out magic classes to new players
>there are people out there that get gatekept even by 5e
Sobering.
all the confusing elements are because larian sucks at game design
Besides dice roll notation, what's so hard to understand that isn't explained in the available descriptions?
I had a very large god fricking damnit moment last night where I double hasted two of my characters last night as a sorc then using that sorc character to run away from combat/left combat planning to return with something, only for concentration to immediately break as soon as I went to camp and the other two characters go immediately lethargic.
Still won the fight but playing against the jank is the real challenge
The rules for what can break a spell are kind of wonky, but concentration is pretty straight forward in that any interruption will break it. Tried giving my berserker the Sword of Justice for the AC boost, but the moment he goes into rage he forgets about it
I hate how rage prevents any magic. I want to be Gul'dan goddamn it.
I never had any issue dropping concentration skills whilst traveling to camp that last until long rest like protec from evil n good, so I thought turn based ones would be honky dory too. Turns out I was wrong.
I agree, I had no clue on what "proficiency" was when I created my character, and I still don't know what it is, apart from some bonus
proficiency
a high degree of competence or skill; expertise
Used in a sentence: "Due to a lack of verbal proficiency, this anon had difficulty understanding basic instructions."
proficiency in a skill means you get a bonus to dice rolls for checks of that type
expertise in a skill means you also gain advantage for those checks, which means you roll 2 dice and take the higher roll
Isn't expertise just doubling your proficiency bonus? At least I think it is in BG3.
yeah, they homebrewed a lot of stuff, in BG3 I didn't even pay attention to skills, you can have one companion be a DEXgay rogue type and just do all the lockpicking and almost any kind of martial class get advantage on intimidation checks most of the time automatically
>expertise in a skill means you also gain advantage for those checks, which means you roll 2 dice and take the higher roll
???????????????????????
> I still don't know what it is, apart from some bonus
Then you do know what it is, because that's literally all it is.
when you roll a check for a skill you add your proficiency bonus if you're proficient in that skill to the roll.
That's all it is, bonuses that apply to skills. In D&D a "skill" isn't an active ability, but something more intrinsic to your character, tied to their class, background, and sometimes race. Each skill is also tied to one of the six ability scores, which determines your underlying modifier for checks against those skills.
For example if you rolled a wizard you'd have a high INT ability score, at least a 17, which gives you a +3 to any skill derived from Intelligence, like History, Religion, Arcana, etc. If you also have proficiency in a specific skill, though, it's an additional +3 to rolls on that particular skill. For example if your wizard has proficiency in Arcana, then on top of his +3 bonus from his INT score, he gets another +3 from proficiency, so his Arcana rolls receive a +6 modifier.
This is the kind of autism I need in games, unironically. Have any more advice?
Just that if you want to meta game, try to pay attention to what skill proficiency is granted by your class / race / background choices. This can ease a lot of skill checks you encounter in the early game, before you get the ability to stack on additional skill bonuses from items, spells, and feats. The character creation menus will always tell you what skills any option grant you proficiency with.
Also knowing what ability score skills are tied to is pretty basic info that I guess is not common knowledge if you don't play D&D, like what skills are tied to DEX rather than STR, or WIS rather than INT. Perception, one of the most crucial and useful skills which allows you to spot hidden things like traps, buried treasure, or notice small details or behavior tics, is tied to Wisdom, not Intelligence, something that some people get tripped up on when they're new. A high WIS score in the party is a HUGE boon just from the ability to spot traps and hidden doors and the like, one reason Clerics are so useful, as Wisdom is their spellcasting stat so they always have a decent WIS score.
there are many ways to "break" the game and make combat even on tactical mode trivial, but the simplest one is to just take tavern brawler, it's completely busted on any strength monk or just a barb or fighter that mainly throws things
Proficiency increases with level. Starts at +2.
As someone who's never played a tabletop rpg I was pretty annoyed when I found out proficiencies don't stack and there was no reason to pick a class/race combination with matching proficiencies. The in-game description is so vague it just says something like "makes you better with certain weapons" so of course a noob like me is gonna assume they stack.
It makes you feel like you should roll a special snowflake for maximum advantages, why roll a githyanki fighter if githyanki already give martial weapon and medium armor proficiency, a githyanki bard, however, has some good extra perks from both parts.
That's what I'm saying, it feels counter-intuitive. In any other RPG it makes sense to pick a race that fits with your class but in this game it almost makes more sense to pick a race that's the opposite of what your class is good at simply so you have a wider variety of proficiencies.
Because Gith get super jumps and teleports so they don't have to walk between targets, and can select a different batch of skill proficiency each day.
Maybe don't be a min-maxing homosexual? Accept some sub-optimal aspects of the character in exchange for other benefits.
No it's not.
No it doesn't.
But...
I do understand this anon. After watching dozens of streams, I had this sudden realization that not everyone playing this game has played 5e before, and I don't think Larian did the best job explaining all the terminologies and rules for the player.
It doesn't help that most people simply don't read. There are a ton of explanations in the game, with pop-up boxes and stuff, but there's also lots of moments where Larian could have arranged things in a clearer way but didn't for some reason. For example, they don't explain proficiencies very well, so I can understand that confusing people. Another one that blows my mind is that they just choose a subclass for you on the Level Up screen, and new players are likely to zero in on only the unfulfilled options (like spells) and assume everything else can be ignored. Why couldn't the subclass ALSO be an empty box that needs to be checked? Then no one would skip it. Or at the very least make the default subclass the vanilla one. Some classes get so many features on Level Up that they don't even notice they got a subclass because the options push it off screen.
Very confusing. I don't think I'm a fricking ace game designer or anything, but this stuff just sounds obvious to me.
Proficiency itself is kind of self-evident and it's also explained in the tooltip. But what the actual categories mean was very confusing for me: What the hell is a "martial weapon?" Aren't all weapons aside from improvised ones inherently martial since they're designed to kill people? And martial weapons don't have any sort of special tag on them, you can only tell from looking at the proficiencies in your character sheet. It seems arbitrary too, why are longswords martial but maces simple?
Martial weapons are just generally better. Maces do less damage and have fewer special actions compared to Flails or Warhammers. They're also separated so you can easily say "X class knows all of Y weapons" without listing each of them.
that's dumb
i'd rather be slashed by a sword or something than have my skull crushed by a mace
Why are brown people so vexed by dice rolls?
I'm amazed how much cool shit DnD has.
The setting, lore etc, really gets that creative juice going.
DnD post WoTC acquisition is a poor gay man's 40k
Well bro, not like the older stuff gets SHOA'd.
WoTC has spent 20 years trying to ruin DnD
They succeeded.
More play board now than they ever did.
Normies ruin everything.
Gatekeeping is good.
40k is a poor mans 40k
40k is the only corporate fantasy product that hasn't compeltely embarrassed itself
40k is the corporate fantasy product that has most completely embarrassed itself
The space rip of dnd owes everything to dnd and one Gary Gygax.
>The space rip of dnd owes everything to dnd and one Gary Gygax.
(and Dave Arneson, as much as Gary tried to shove him out to take all the money)
WotC D&D was perfectly fine, especially during the 4e era where they brought back a lot of OG lore that had remained obscure since the late 80s.
It's 5e that is shit. BG3 walks a fine line between respecting the current edition and referencing 2e, 3e and 4e ideas.
The only exception is Forgotten Realms. FR always accumulates too much shit over time so it was necessary to "break" the world to get rid of some of it. That's why it was riddled with apocalyptic events in both 2e and 4e.
5e fixed that by releasing no content and just reverting to something somewhat acceptable.
5e wasn't so bad the first few years.
The premise with which 5e started was:
>frick balance
>frick gaming
>frick content release
>frick D&D traditions
It was Mike Mearls' terrible OSR project packaged as D&D.
There were some good ideas before release, even genuine improvements over 4e, but since Mearls ultimately does not understand D&D and considers rules "gatekeeping", they were cut out.
Also, we were talking about lore.
>Also, we were talking about lore.
editions have no lore
5e is a ruleset and 4e is a ruleset
neither has set lore
>Creative
>Literally uses the IRL Norse pantheon
>The australian continent is called Osse (Aussie)
Yeah it looks like you can get at least 3 or 4 good playthroughs out of it. I can understand why people dislike save scumming the rolls.
Forgotten Realms is the worst DnD setting
Some places in FR are okay but they're not normie enough for senile wizards to care.
He says while posting the most overrated boring garbage there is
You are just moronic, little bro.
D&D 5E is a shit system
It's fine until about level 7 then things just get out of control.
Kinda bananas to remember I played NWN with fricking level 40. Game already got broken well before level 12, just imagine 20
I'm currently playing through HotU and my cleric is completely busted. Haste breaks everything.
Why?
where to fricking begin?
off the top of my head:
>archaic attribute & attribute modifier system that only gets kept around because it's a sacred cow
>complete oversaturation of magic; three "mage" classes, three "semi-mage" classes, non-magic classes get magic subclasses
>no structural customization of character; you pick a class, then a subclass, and that's it
>balanced to a fault; no real build variety (HUGE issue in the irl tabletop game, okay in the context of a video game)
>complete lack of setting cohesion; more of a kitchen-sink setting than Warcraft
>races are present, but race mechanics are so watered down (or removed entirely) as to be a meaningless distinction
>advantage/disadvantage system is okay in some contexts but turns many situations into "mother-may-I"s
>400 pages of combat rules; 10 pages of non-combat skill resolution mechanics
>D20 is fundamentally a swingy die, results in chance being much more important than your character's actual abilities
I could go on for fricking years
Go on, I like reading people complaining
>it's fricking impossible for a player to die in 5E. Player characters are dressed up to be such special snowflakes that the system has no choice but to give them a hundred different ways to escape death, even when they earned it.
>it takes FOREVER to make a character, but there's no payoff because of how carefully the system is balanced
>NO! FUN! ALLOWED! (oh, you made a dragon trainer? you can summon your dragon for 5 minutes per day. oh, you're a druid? you can't transform into a bird until level 11. oh, you found the Trident of Fish Command? You can command one fish, once per short rest, for 1 hour)
the rest mechanic has been the first thing the discourages me from playing, it doesn't make any sense, same with the action system, it's so abstracted from what could just be a simple meter/resource management
attribute & attribute modifier system
It's okay.
oversaturation of magic
Half the classes are martials and half are casters. Martials can also dabble in magic, just like casters can dabble in weaponry. It's almost perfectly balanced.
>>no structural customization of character; you pick a class, then a subclass, and that's it
That is a structure. I think you meant something else, but you didn't say it.
>>no real build variety (HUGE issue in the irl tabletop game
Builds are for gay homosexuals. It'd be nice if there were more options, but they just get exploited by munchkins and they usually only make the cringiest players happy. Multiclassing shouldn't even exist.
lack of setting cohesion
There is no setting.
are present, but race mechanics are so watered down
Not really. I wouldn't expect a half-orc to have even the features they currently do. They're just big, ugly humanoids. Race should be mostly cosmetic.
>>"mother-may-I"s
Only insufferable c**ts complain about this because they see themselves as pro gamers trying to defeat the DM and so don't want them having any power. A normal player doesn't even know what this term refers to.
>>400 pages of combat rules
I wish.
>>D20 is fundamentally a swingy die
This one's true. 3d6 is better and a +10 shouldn't be something mindblowing.
>>it's fricking impossible for a player to die in 5E
On average, characters die about once a campaign. That's how it should be. No one wants to die.
>>it takes FOREVER to make a character
This contradicts the complaint about a lack of options and is also untrue. I can make an entire party right now in a few minutes.
>there's no payoff because of how carefully the system is balanced
All games should be balanced and mechanics don't make a character.
>>NO! FUN! ALLOWED!
Surprisingly, I agree with this one. Level 20 characters are weaker than low-level anime/superhero characters. You can't even make an Olympic athlete. Weird powerscale.
>Multiclassing shouldn't even exist.
Amen. Frick this cringe type of shit.
Why is multiclassing cringe?
Because it's only used for power gaming since multi classing for roleplay purposes are extremely limited unless you just want to completely gimp your character.
What is the issue with power gaming though? How do you not get bored with just being a fighter or some shit.
New D&D players are critical roll imports who treat D&D like drama club and wish that they could just do away with the whole "game" aspect of roleplaying games. You can safely ignore homosexuals like that.
I suppose you do away with the whole "roleplay" aspect of it.
I fricking hate critical roll spawns, you know how many games we have that get ruined by secondaries thinking dnd is their improv comedy night
>trying to have fun and be silly at the table is bad actually
why?
Because real tabletop players are there for a real story and adventure, not for you to RP as a twitch streamer and ruin every encounter with your LE EPIC FUNNEY MOMENT
>story and adventure doesn't involve any narrative or character development
the frick am I reading
ESL? listen you making a SILLY GNOME BARB and getting up to WACKY hijinks is not character development
>there's no room for levity in my grim dark victorian vampire horror campaign please stop having fun with the town folk
There are always going to be bad players but to claim roleplay has no place in an RPG is the most insane shit possible.
>There are always going to be bad players but to claim roleplay has no place in an RPG is the most insane shit possible.
define roleplay
it used to mean creative solutions to battle encounters
but now to you it means character arcs you play out in the tavern
what you mean under roleplay doesn't belong
You reek of critical role secondary
>There are always going to be bad players but to claim roleplay has no place in an RPG is the most insane shit possible.
So you really are brain-damaged because that's not what's being said, you lobotomite, what we're saying is that morons keep pulling some dumb clown shit and zoomer humor and dare call it roleplay and character progression.
And those are bad players, what's so hard to understand?
Are you asking yourself that? Because that's what we've been saying since the start and you've been disagreeing.
I don't think you understand what you're arguing for, this autist who literally only plays DnD to work a calculator.
Neither of us were talking about dice rolls you absolute mongrel.
Now you're just completely lost.
>Being a moron is the same as character development
What are you, some sort of goofy bard main?
Funny how for having supposedly ruined the entire hobby, I've yet to encounter a real person even mention Critical Role in passing.
are you a legit moron? i assume you know nothing of this hobby beyond video games and your little bubble, people were leaving DnD and playing other games, DnD was dying before youtube shit saved it.
It's just an upmarket D&D podcast that sometimes has celebrities on and shit, isn't it? In what way does that effect how people play/run games?
Listen dummy, it makes people think dnd is meant to be an improv comedy show, so people come into the hobby now trying to be funny all the time and it ruins games.
cant you just tell them not to?
Sure, then they sit there and pout and kill the entire table even more, because people don't like learning their SUPER FUNNY improv is just annoying
Where the hell do some of you chucklefricks play? I've run tables for brand new recent players, and never encountered any of these issues you're complaining about.
Ignore the other anon, they're legitimately moronic and don't have a damn clue what they're talking about. It's just normal Ganker autism.
Stop samegay-responding
Frick off, not samegay. Just tired of 3e newshits like you (if you're even that) trying to pretend they're grognards and being annoying as frick.
silence 5e secondary, try playing a TT game outside of DnD fricking moronic zoomer
Been playing since early 90s, anon. You don't know what the hell you're talking about.
sure you have bud, make sure you donate to your favorite dnd streamer
Sorry you were wrong and feel stupid now, anon. You can sit down now.
2019 isn't "'90s" you goddamn trog.
The funny thing is that despite being a filthy "min-maxer" I am typically better at RP than the critical role spawn as well. Hell the games that I had with more mechanically mindedgays tend to involve better roleplay anyways. That being said I am more of a jank enthusiast than a min-maxer.
People who actually play tabletop games for the challenge and the creative gameplay don't mind minmaxers, people seething about minmaxers are youtube born homosexuals that want to play actor
They are typically the ones that ramble on about all the memes and make dumb meme characters. People who want to play the game and RP tend to not let memes dictate what they play or not, they just try to do something jank but unexpected and potentially powerful or plainly optimal. The theatre kids just want to roleplay a stupid character that they think would be funny.
I never understand these complaints, anyone I know who plays TT always emphasizes that the fun and better part of TT is the RP. Then some of those same people talk shit about people who like CR getting into it because they want to RP. Or maybe you're saying those people are just bad at the RP? I'm not certain
>that the fun and better part of TT is the RP.
absolutely not
if you like the numbers why not just play a crpg alone? or some coop rpg
I like team creative problem solving
He does. No one whobever sat at a (good) table would say the RP part isnt important. You're talking to a moron who probably spend ten years making shit build in some shitty nwn server without ever interacting with anyone.
I play dnd regularly.
The numbers and basically coop wargame aspect is the most fun for our group
I hate you modern critical role homosexuals
you came in and now only the rp matters
>I play RPGs because I like doing sums
psychopath behaviour
>I play DnD because I want to annoy people with my shitty improv
genuine homosexualry
>I play DnD because I want to cast fireball on my friends
Same thing you moron
>mfw the game is called "Dungeons & Dragons" and not "Mathematics & Nofun"
yeah it is not called taverns and drama
you go into dungeons and slay dragons
You argue that you shouldn't do that
You don't like the combat. Well that is what happens in dungeons and when you meet dragons
>you go into dungeons and slay dragons
uuuuh are you RPing with me? fricking zoomer secondary cringe dude
I understand your confusion. I only think you need dice and a board to fight a dragon in a dungeon but for you the words are enough and you think this is roleplay
What is a dragon doing in a dungeon, anyways?
Like, the actual definition of a dungeon.
>dice and a board
based adding two numbers together
>fight a dragon in a dungeon
cringe RP that gets in the way of the mechanics
>cringe RP that gets in the way of the mechanics
dragon is just the name for the statbox. there is no rp here
it's not a dragon, it's a size large monstrosity
but there are many
it large monstrosity number 124 which is called Red Dragon
do any of my abilities interact with the name of the creature?
yes
its a keyword
>monstrosity
Still too descriptive. Makes me use my imagination which is cringe and gay.
>No one whobever sat at a (good) table would say the RP part isnt important.
it's not, i've played dnd for 22 years and outside of you zoomies and millennials no one cared that much about RP, it was just flavor text
I've also been playing tabletop for about 20 years and every campaign I've been involved in spent 80% of its time in dialogue/roleplay encounters (where we used skills and rolled to see if we succeed, you know, kind of like combat) and the combat was something we involved as a last resort. I don't know what else to tell you anon.
sounds like you and your group are a bunch of gays
What do you think all the social skills in your character sheet are for?
Which group? I've played with a bunch. Are you saying you've played with the same guys for 22 years anon?
CaliBlack person or even worse European
and that is cancerous modern dnd
I would leave a group like that immediately
>cancerous modern DND
>autistic losers roleplaying so hard they literally own costumes for their characters are the representative caricature of DND nerds and have been for like literally 50 years now
>"modern"
where do you live anon? have you ever actually played this game in real life? i'm baffled by this conversation.
>Thinks self-inserts have been the normal thing to do for 50 years/
No, just no.
>"self inserts"
do you think roleplaying is literally just self inserting? have you ever actually participated in creative thought once in your life?
My apologies, I misread the comment I replied to, nothing more.
As a dm of way too many years the first character most people create usually is a self-insert
everyone has to get it out of their system I think
Well frick my ass and call me based because my first character will probably be a kobold drakewarden ranger, protecting a dragon hatchling with her life.
And I ain't no mother IRL
your first ever rpg character? you have never played a videogame rpg or tabletop rpg?
Not in the sense of d&d, nothing more than a oneshot, at least.
>first character will probably be a kobold drakewarden ranger, protecting a dragon hatchling with her life
reddit
Read up on kobold lore, homosexual.
Frick off with your scalie fetish shit you reddit tourist
nah, not reddit really. Shit like that happens in every era of D&D, the details just change a little.
Back in the day, there were a lot of drow rangers who had a heart of gold, but with troubled pasts.
Usually sitting in the darkest corners of tavern rooms.
The older equivalent to today's kobold menace were the gnome and kender characters.
jesus dude. calm your fricking breasts, you're being completely fricking insufferable. not even the anon you're being weird at.
We're just talking BG3/D&D.
don't samegay you reddit scalie
Meds, anon, you probably need them.
You didn't forget, did you?
>reddit frog and aislop
you really aren't helping yourself tourist
Frog? what frog? That's just a woman laying down on some grass near some water, your schizo mind playing tricks on you? I told you to take your meds.
>samegay cope
Anon, if multiple people are calling you an autist, you're being a damned autist.
Stop sperging out you weirdo.
>my first character will probably be a kobold
and thus the ouroboros eats its own tail
jesus bro i can hear the fricking cringe FUNNY VOICES AND MOMENTS and shit coming from this poist
Sounds like a NA issue. Never had that many in my games, nor did I ever do a self insert character either. That's now what roleplay is about.
I said most. Not everyone
And really it makes some sense. When discovering a new universe it makes sense to do it as yourself
which is why I am not suprised normal white human male is the most popular in bg3
I think video game are a different case. I'm really only speaking about tabletop.
>As a dm of way too many years the first character most people create usually is a self-insert
My very first character was just a Raistlin from Dragonlance ripoff, because I was a kid and thought the edgy morally gray mage was the coolest
The only people I've seen making self-inserts are people who can't grasp the hobby or to which it was explained poorly. Everyone else immediately figures out the basic idea of "it's best if I make a character that is fun to me, fits the genre and ideally also entertains the other players". Where "fun" and "entertainment" are not necessarily limited to shallow amusement - a good drams is also a fun read, a flawed character that experiences tragic setbacks can also be great entertainment if the player does not go overboard.
yeah no that is dnd podcast thinking
I am talking people with zero tt experience and often no videogame experience
> make a character that is fun to me, fits the genre and ideally also entertains the other players
eugh. You disgust me.
>sit down at a table with other people
>invest hours of your life into it, as have the other people
>frick the other people though
Psychopathic toddler moment.
>>frick the other people though
What do you mean? Nobody said that
well the roleplayer is kinda saying that I guess but I think everyone gets a turn to ruin it for everyone else in the roleplay scenario
>also entertains the other players
secondary
modern only means the last era we are in which is the current one
You are either a newbie larping, or a moron who is part of the problem, i will not waste my time replying to you again either way.
Both the "roleplaying" and "game" of roleplaying game should live in harmony, critical roll gays tend to try to tip the balance towards "roleplay" and get mad when people want to have them balanced (which they see as being a powergamer)
Being a min maxer isnt keeping it even. It's pushing toward the game part more. Gotta love homosexuals complaining about something only to do the exact same shit too.
If you are gonna play a game, you should play it right, that isn't min-maxing, that is just common sense. Building a character who is purposefully useless in combat is just going to make you dead weight when combat inevitably comes.
No one said to build a useless character. Nice goalpost moving, homosexual
People don't make things that are useless in combat they just make things that are suboptimal and then they find solutions anyway. Combat is a completely exhausting minigame anyway, it confuses me that so many tabletop players are focused on it. You know that in a real tabletop campaign if you're going to die to a shitty encounter your DM will probably save you with the grace of god so that your party doesn't wipe and waste all the time he spent preparing the setting and story for you, right? You won't just see a game over screen. You literally do not need to have powerful combat characters, they're just for the power fantasy aspect of RPGs.
I never even heard if critical role. Im not an obese American like you. You, on the other hand, sound like someone projecting really hard with how much you bring them up.
Was meant for
Yeah fair. In their defense it's absolutely horrible to play with someone who is treating the game like a videogame and just playing to see themselves put a large number on the table. I've been in campaigns with these people and they flip the frick out when the DM surprises them with literally anything that can't be solved by their munchkin abomination. Go play fire emblem if you just want to see your little guy running around stabbing other little guys.
The game has always been the catalyst, you literally cannot have a session without some form of narrative.
It is for a lot of people, and it existed long before Critical Role crap.
But you're on Ganker, and you're generally going to bump into very specific types of autists. Hence some of what you're seeing here.
I think the issue is a few classes are heavily frontloaded and mid levels for many classes are essentially blank stat increases until you reach level 8-12. If you take away multiclassing in its current state it's fricking boring but if you had a fighter for example with 2-3 times the "flavor" up until level 12 without the option to multiclass it would fulfill that desire to build an optimized character.
>How do you not get bored with just being a fighter or some shit
Fighters have subclasses and a character's flavor is written by the player.
Multiclassing's lame to me because it makes it sound like every aspect of someone's character must have some mechanical boon to it and it treats the class system as if it doesn't actually exist but is instead just an abstraction. And it is, that's fine, it makes sense that "monks" and "paladins" don't actually exist in the world as is explained to you mechanically, that's just a simplicity for the player's sake (NPCs aren't walking around going, "Oh, you're a Level 4 Barbarian?") but what I like about class systems is they bundle features into a package that makes mechanical and aesthetic sense together so you always end up making a logical, cool character (and hopefully balanced, but let's not kid ourselves). If you like multiclassing so much, why play a class-based game at all? Frick packages. Just play an RPG where you pick each feature one at a time. If you're a 3 Barbarian/2 Fighter/4 Rogue, you don't actually give a shit about the aesthetics of playing a Barbarian, you're just mixing up abilities that go well together for the sake of being stronger.
It's only used to min-max shit. Like getting more action or spell slots. There's no rp value. You also dont use your other class at all. My paladin going for more spellslot isnt going to use them to cast spell. This isnt multiclass, It's just "steal one thing you need from another class" garbage.
Shut up theatre kid.
>there's no RP value
there's plenty of RP value for a Stormsorc/tempest cleric, or a fighter/warcleric, or shadowmonk/assassin. oathbreaker paladin/warlock and so on, you're just not very imaginative
What the frick is a sorcerer cleric?
storm sorc and tempest cleric, specifically. you are born and super talented with lightning magic and decide to put your faith in said lightning, which then amplifies your already innate talent
don't you lose spell progression in one class?
Yes but these two synch up real goddamn well to the point that its worth the tradeoff.
yes, but you really only want tempest cleric for the channel divinity because it maxes out your damage rolls on thunder/lightning damage. so you dip for the channel, then go all in on stormsorc.
In other words you're a storm sorc who just wants the extra lightning/thunder damage from tempest.
mechanically yes, but RP wise I'm a storm sorcerer who considers his lightning magic a blessing from the god of lightning himself
Isn't that what a tempest cleric is?
they get their powers through their divinity, in this scenario I worship the divine because of the innate "blessing" I was born with.
Don't worry anon, he'll just post a basedjak at you and the psychic energy force of the thiel matrix will compel you into compliance. You will be lobotomized, or will you refuse such a fate? Do you reject this false dialectic?
There's none. I would agree if you could pick 2 class at level one and have your background be that. Your paladin gaining a level and deciding he's now a warlock too isnt really good rp value. You're doing it for the CHA powerplay and nothing else anyway.
with the power of imagination you can pretend that you always were multiclassed, you hit level 2 in BG3 basically immediately anyway.
Again that would be true if you put your second level in your multiclass always. That's not how it works either.
yes anon there's this thing called "flubbing it", if the rules of the game don't allow for the RP to work, you simply pretend it does. this is something you have to do when it comes to any CRPG, a digital DM will not bend the rules for the benefit of the players in the campaign, so you keep your specific roleplay to yourself and hope the game has dialogue choices that reflect the roleplay you're going for.
I think it's the idea that all the best stuff is at high class levels, so doubling up on more utilitarian low level benefits is a waste.
>I want less character customization in my game centered on adventuring with customized characters
>Race should be mostly cosmetic
Why would a half-orc have the same base strenght as a halfling? I understand weapon proficiencies and whatnot being tied to culture and background, but this doesn't really make sense
They wouldn't, but while the people in the world are expected to abide by norms, the players aren't because they're individuals and they're probably exceptionally odd individuals since they're player-controlled adventurers. A good game would give mechanical differences to the races, yes, but they would be balanced so they don't have to adhere to race/class norms. Are any actual game developers talented enough to pull that off? No.
Powergaming is just exploiting the game's inherently poor balance. In a video game, it's kind of accepted that's what you'll do, because you want to win. In tabletop, it's moronic, because the GM controls the difficulty, so all you're doing is upstaging your friends and making them feel like they're not allowed to play the game, because if the GM tailors encounters to your power level, then they'll be too weak to contribute; if he tailors them to their level, you'll just solo everything. Why would anyone want to play with you?
It also somewhat spits in the face of what an RPG is supposed to be. It's not the player's fault that they're given a handful of options and the one that makes the most sense for their character happens to be weak. Powergamers ignore even having a character for the sake of making whatever choices are the strongest. That's lame. This isn't Dota, you nerd.
>3d6 is better
I disagree, especially for a TT session. Swings are fun and create memorable moments.
You actually diminish options for RP by giving races significant strengths and weaknesses. Nobody would ever make a Halfling barb if they get a -5 to STR.
Ah yes, how memorable of me to roll crit fails 3 times in a row.
Since you're still talking about it, clearly.
Yes but it's not a good memorable moment.
I'll just remember feeling like shit, causing me to feel like shit again.
>Nobody would roll a halfling barb
Good.
>Nobody would ever make a Halfling barb if they get a -5 to STR.
Yes... that's rather the point my dude. A 3 foot tall dude that weighs 70 lbs soaking wet probably SHOULDN'T be a barbarian.
>get a -5 to STR
How about -1 or -2 then?
>I disagree, especially for a TT session. Swings are fun and create memorable moments.
I legitimately don't mean this as an insult, but I think smarter players just don't feel the same way. A bunch of normalgays drinking and shooting the shit probably love that stuff, though, I'd agree. And we all have to listen to the lowest common denominator, of course.
>someone can't be a barbarian because they're too short or because there's taller people on the other side of the planet
Uh...
They can be a barbarian, but because of their low mass they're gonna be worse at it than, say, an orc, or a dwarf (who have very dense muscle mass)
They can be worse at lifting things and swinging a weapon I guess - in real life, your strength doesn't matter much when you both have pointy sticks, and great swords aren't actually that much more lethal than daggers, but people expect these things to matter but that doesn't mean they have to be a worse character overall mechanically. They can have other advantages, like being harder to hit or recovering health more quickly or being stealthy, etc.
Some people do that, but they probably shouldn't since it renders the stat meaningless.
>but that doesn't mean they have to be a worse character overall mechanically. They can have other advantages, like being harder to hit or recovering health more quickly or being stealthy, etc.
Yeah... those aren't Barbarian traits, Barbarians are full "I'm gonna break your fricking skull", no sneaking around, no swift dodging, barbarians survive by having big healthpools, one barbarian subclass is literally fricking immortal as long as they rage at lvl 20 (well, short of shit like power word kill)
Imagine being so dumb you say shit like a Barbarian isn't dodging.
>someone can't be a barbarian because they're too short or because there's taller people on the other side of the planet
Yes, just like real life manlets are useless and should miss out on things
Not that anon, but my personal problem with 5e is something that BG3 generally fixes, which is that by default 5e is a half finished system that puts the burden of finishing it on the Game master.
D20 is a shit system, 2d10 or better yet 3d6 is kino, less all-over-the-place.
what's the difference? Since you guys are mentioning it.
D20 has high variance (1-20), so it feels more random. I don't think BG3 ever uses it for combat.
>I don't think BG3 ever uses it for combat.
anon...
There is no rolling for the combat. If there was I wouldn't be interested in the game.
Of course there's rolling, what do you think determines your hit chance and amount of damage you deal?
I meant the dice rolls in the combat. I didn't mean hit or miss chance.
This is what happens when the game does the maths for you.
Click combat log, drooling morons.
I guess I just forgot how AC works since it's such a dumb system.
come the frick on moron, at least do a single second of research before you buy a game
I've watched some gameplay. It just seems like an extremely intricate RTS, or Warcraft 3 on steroids. Anyways the game has already piqued my autism and I've been dying to play it.
what the actual frick am I reading?
I meant dice rolling. I knew there was hit or miss chance stop giving me (you)'s
Your hit chance and damage are based on dice rolls you don't see
Oh. I thought it was like your character had a 70% chance to hit based on some stats or whatever. Hmmm so RNG could mean I just never get to attack? That seems fricking gay lol
Are you legit moronic? what the frick do you think 70% to hit is? a roll is just a random number generator. When played on tabletop dice are used. When played on computer a random number is generated. It's the exact same thing.
a percentage based hit chance based on statistics... I'n not moronic I have high functioning autism okay...
and how the frick do you think any game ever made determines if you hit when there is a % chance to hit?
it picks a random number between 0 and 100 and if it's higher than 30 you hit
on the aggregate, this will happen 70% of the time, hence 70% chance to hit
it's exactly the same thing if instead you "roll", aka pick a random number between 1 and 20, add a bonus to attack, and have an AC score to beat
you are too ignorant to participate in this conversation in a meaningful way
I guess you're right. Good bye.
If you click that little combat log on the bottom right you can see what the rolls are and how they were affected by proficiency, any gear you have that's relevant like spell save DC, or advantage/disadvantage. Critical hits/misses are natural 20/1 rolls and always hit/mis.
KEK WTF AM I READING
IS THIS THE PEOPLE PLAYING BG3
1d20 means the minimum you can roll is a 1.
2d20 means the minimum you can roll is a 2.
Using two dice makes rolls more consistent but less 'rng' which is less fun for actual tabletop in my experience.
thanks for explaining, and understandable.
basically can be summed up as
>read everything
I already plan on that. I do want to go in blind as well. I've only watched people play random segments. My first playthrough I want to kill everyone I don't like lol
(me)
>2d20
I meant 2d10, but anyways you can sort of test it yourself in game by grabbing a greataxe and greatsword and smack some enemies around. The axe does 1d12 damage whereas the sword will do 2d6. So the sword will dish out more consistent damage, but the axe will crit for more since it doubles the d12 dice damage instead of the d6 of a sword (I think thats how it works in here)
Using large numbers of smaller dice instead of one big dice makes it much more statistically likely to get average results most of the time, with the extreme high and low being much more unlikely. For example, you will get the highest possible result on a d20 once out of twenty rolls on average, but you only have 1/216 chance of getting 18 on 3d6
Personally, I like critical hits and critical fails being somewhat common because it keeps games unpredictable and is usually fun when it happens at the table, so d20 works fine for me.
2d10 means that you'll throw two 10-sided dice instead of one 20-sided die as in d20, because you roll more dice, with how randomness works and the dice being separate, you're generally more likely to roll numbers somewhere more in the center, not leaning too far towards shit rolls or god rolls.
More dice = more consistency
D20 = 5% chance of each number between 1 and 20 (means your skills matter less)
3d6 = tons of ways to make 10 or 11, only one way to make 3 or 18 (means your skills matter more)
AUTISM
Do you critical fail when you roll a 2 or 3 for 2d10 and 3d6 respectively? If not, yes, those are automatically superior to d20. Critical fails are so fricking moronic.
I don't know, probably up to the more specific system, I don't mind crit fails, but I hate how common they are in d20, you're telling me my lifelong soldier has a 1 in 20 chance of totally fricking up a normal swing with a sword?
DnD rules are designed with the assumption that you'll be fighting someone of similar strength and skill most of the time and not attacking helpless invalids. If two nearly equal experienced combatants are facing off I think it's fair to say that an attack would fail spectacularly pretty often.
Plus, the whole point of the game is to be fun to play, not simulate reality. It's the same thing as Team Fortress 2 crits; they're in the game because they're fun and exciting when they happen, and crit fails are also exciting when they happen.
yeah, if you don't like the idea that you missed just pretend your opponent deflected the blow, or dodged, or the hit connected but it was too shallow so it didn't actually hit their person. it's a critical miss yes but you don't have to characterize the failure as your PC being bad at swinging weapons.
I always liked Shadowrun because it's much easier to find fair 6 sided dice via people who make thing's for casinos.
There's basically 0 fair d20 dies in existence.
Traveller does it a bit better, you only 2 d6s. Some games just use one.
You might be right, but it's the best edition of D&D.
Not even close. DnD got worse with each subsequent edition.
Patently untrue from almost every possible perspective. You don't play D&D.
My only complaint about DnD is how bogged down combat can get just waiting for things to die. Granted, many times that's the fault of inattentive players or a bad GM, but I prefer systems where combat is much more decisive, cutthroat, and quick.
Examples?
At least it doesn't have thac0, that'd really filter people
the game is turn based with silly reddit demons, it's impossible to filter normalgays unless there's tons of bugs
As if most of the previous dnd games weren't turn based.
And? morons are massively filtered by real time because it's too fast for them
>5e, the most braindead system ever created
>simplified even further by larian in baby's first crpg
>zoomers STILL get filtered, confused, cry and scream at the numbers
can you people just go color books or something
>5e, the most braindead system ever created
5e is ridiculously obtuse (though it dumps a lot of effort onto the DM). It being beginner-friendly was a marketing meme more than anything
>build high CHA character
>fails check
>CHA 8 character succeeds
skill issue i guess
Why does everyone talk like someone in 2023? The writing is what ruined it for me.
It's not that the wording is confusing but rather Larian didn't fricking read half the shit they were putting into the game and just did a copy/paste job of most of the shit from DO:S and assumed it'll work under D&D rules/gameplay and it didn't so what you have it properly implemented wording but the gameplay doesn't reflect that
Where does the wording not reflect the gameplay?
>people who have no idea of the most basic, fundamental tabletop concepts have now infiltrated your crpgs
it's over
its a videogame not a weird gay rp thing with your loser friends
Anything that says "ability" means your main attribute stats not your combat abilities
CRPGs should have a mandatory amount of moronic obfuscation and d20 autism like the pathfinder games purely for the sake of driving out people who can't read
I leveled up int for my rogue because I thought lockpicking was tied to int like in morrowind
just go to withers are respec.
By the way, every locked chest in the game also drops its full contents, undamaged, when busted open with a weapon. Even trapped chests. Although if a trapped chest sets off a secondary explosion it can destroy loot. Just thought I'd mention that. You don't even need lockpicking at all in Baldur's Gate 3, you can just unga bunga shit open.
Op has disadvantage.
>braindead easy game aimed at normalgays
>based on braindead easy system aimed at normalgays
>morons at Ganker still somehow manage to get confused
>fricking D&D systems
>aimed at normalgays
do you guys even think before you type
Also the reason the game feels like it's meant to be minmaxed in terms of race/class is because it is supposed to be like that
Larian didn't design an RPG, they designed another generic 'tactical rpg' with 5e paint on it
It was aimed at being the most accesible D&D game ever to sell as much as possible. Imagine it, you can respec any time, redo anything you want. Fought an encouter and lost because your wizard was getting shit on due to all of the enemies being ranged? No fear! Just reload, respec and continue onwards
You were never meant to roleplay or have a build.
>respecs and reloads don't happen in TT
lol
lmao
Shitty GMs allow them
Good GMs don't
You would think that but you've never actually played
You sound like the type of person who throws a fit and spills his soda all over the table because the GM let somebody do something "against the rules"
i actually just flip the table and leave
I leave, bar the door with a piece of metal scrap welded to it, then set the house on fire.
lmfao
A shitty GM is one who cares more about rules than having fun. Rules exist to give the game structure, upholding the rules is not part of the game's objective. If the rules have to be broken for the campaign to work, so be it. If the players would enjoy it more if you let them do something they "shouldn't", then frick the rules.
storyteller first, GM second. A good one knows when to cheat to make for a dramatic or satisfying moment.
if you think even one singular encounter in the entire game is balanced around the respec you're the dumbest person in this thread.
Please be aware that you are moronic if you get filtered by 5e
>there's a skill just for shoving people
>there's a skill just for not getting shoved
This is kind of dumb. Just ditch both these skills and make it an attack roll.
Athletics is used for a bunch of useful things in BG3, not just shove. It also determines how far you can jump, which is an incredibly versatile and convenient movement option. I agree acrobatics is underutilized, though. Acrobatics is probably the second most useless skill in the game, after Survival.
>after Survival.
It helps you find hidden chests (1 healing potion, 12gp and an apple)
I thought Jump was just based on STR.
According to the wiki athletics proficiency should increase jump distance. Personally I think the athlete feat is well worth it as well for strength based characters since all together it makes it as if your barbarian or fighter have a free Misty Step every turn with how far you yeet
>I cast jump for free
Don't even need survival, you can manually shovel the area
>Don't even need survival, you can manually shovel the area
Holy frick, I never would have thought of that, most games wouldn't be coded like that. It makes sense with how other things in the game work though, like being able to hit invisible enemies with projectiles that go through their space and such.
My character said I needed a shovel so i went and bought one
>like being able to hit invisible enemies with projectiles that go through their space and such.
Throw water bottles at/near invisible shits.
Grease bottles, then set them on fire.
Yet I can't swing at invisible enemies.
>he doesn't know
hold shift and you attack whatever you click on regardless if there is a target or not. now whether or not this would actually hit someone invisible, I could not say.
It doesn't hit invisible enemies, that's what I'm saying. I don't think arrows do either, unless it's a fire arrow and you shoot it at their feet or something like that.
The shovel is even added to the item section of your hot bar
>the best dnd game is also most simple mechanically
Weird
the best DnD games have barely anything to do with DnD as a tabletop, BG3 is an actual joke of a game made by peopel who don't understand the genre
it's like if you asked Fromsoft to make a dnd game
>it's like if you asked Fromsoft to make a dnd game
yes please
Fromsoft has been releasing games with a stat page for 15 years just because western games have stat pages and they thought they needed one
them trying to make an actual rpg would be hilarious
Why would a DnD game need to have a stat page or be an "actual RPG"?
the stat page in dark souls is more meaningful and impactful on the game than anything in baldurs gate 3
that's just plain false
prove it
Here's all the relevant information on your DS1 character sheet. I'm not going to make one for BG3 because it would require stitching together several screenshots.
you're a moron, for melee characters simply uograding the weapon contributes more to your damage than stats, making end more important, to wear heavier higher poise armor, and vit for hp, you could ignore your highlighted stats and steamroll the game
yes, your health, stamina and equip load are relevant, which is why they are highlighted rather than the stats that raise them
your strength, dex, int and fth are all relevant to meet requirements
the system is more nuanced than and allows for more variety than you're leading on
>the best DnD games have barely anything to do with DnD as a tabletop, BG3 is an actual joke of a game made by peopel who don't understand the genre
you are completely fricking wrong
BG3, for better or worse, is basically the ideal D&D 5E campaign. It's exactly how 5E is meant to be played at its best.
>is basically the ideal D&D 5E campaign
5E campaigns are that fricking bad?
>5E is that bad
Yes, in a decade maybe we'll get a PF2E game which is better
>PF2E
1e or bust 2e is bad, not nearly has horrible as 5e dnd though
I really hate youtube homosexuals for shilling 5e and flooding the hobby with normalgays that only want to play moron made shit like 5e
well, yes and no.
A proper D&D campaign facilitates the namesake of the system: it gives the party a reason to delve into dangerous places and fight monsters. The entire system exists for the purpose of getting the party to dungeon dive and slay enemies.
And that's what BG3 does, too. That's why, the moment you leave the cephalopod, you stumble onto a crypt with traps and skeletons. And that's good! That's what the system is good at. All the sex and dialogue are just window dressing.
Most people who play 5E irl do it wrong:
>this campaign is going to be a gritty political thriller with blah blah blah
DUNGEONS
DRAGONS
if your game doesn't have these things you're better off playing another system
It just goes to show you how shit 5e is, larian did make the best out of a bad shit system though.
>BG3 is the perfect 5e adaptation made by people who only superficially understand what they're doing
And that's why it's shit
bg3 feels nothing like a campaign, it completely lacks a sense of time scale and duration, everything feels like it happens over a week, it feels video gamey, bioware-y. A real campaign is months even years of in game time, things chance, major events happen, kingdoms fall, important leaders rise and die, weeks- long travel happens, etc
yeah, shit on pathfinder or deadfire all you like but at least they actually had time based travel THAT'S actual DnD
A good GM adpats the story for the players
A shitty GM iisswhat we got with BG3 - it lets you cheat as need to 'progress'
I think Bioware isn't too bad with stories
BG3 just feels like it's an open world like a Bethesda one game but smaller overall
>a digital DM that needs to physically represent the things that are happening with 3D models is worse than a human being with the infinite power of imagination
holy shit dude no way?
Yet NWN, BG 1 and 2 did it just fine...
Everything up to Dragon Age 2 was fine I thought.
Not as good as say, BG 1 or 2 but still better than this pile of trash
>Yet NWN, BG 1 and 2 did it just fine...
no those games also have dogshit DMs, worse than 3 I'd say. 3 at least has some strengths as a sandbox compared to the infinity engine titles and NWN.
>I think Bioware isn't too bad with stories
old Bioware, maybe.
Modern Bioware literally just fired all of their senior writing staff. And Dragon Age: Dread Wolf isn't even finished.
Not very high hopes for that game.
bioware needed to clean house, too many devs are full of hamburglar types
>it completely lacks a sense of time scale and duration
It completely lacks basic sense of scale as well. Look at act 1 map and you'll realize every single point of interest is two steps away from another. Game has negative padding values, for frick's sake.
>every single point of interest is two steps away from another.
Which makes it hilarious how Minthara can't find the grove considering they're neighbours.
unless you use random encounters and hex maps in your tabletop games, it works the same way there too.
>"we go back to town"
>"ok, you go back to the town"
no, a proper dm would say
"after 3 uneventful days on the road, you come accross a roadblock on the morning of the 4th.."
or something
the point is not IRL time spent but IN GAME time spent. Campaigns are over weeks and months and years. Video games of the bioware and Larian style completely skip that in favor of static worlds that only unlock once you progress quests, which results in this constant nebulous "a few days" feeling because they never mention how much time actually passed
The only game that actually did this was Kingmaker, were you have events 6 months from now etc
>Video games of the bioware and Larian style
the games that pioneered the bioware style tracked the ingame campaign time, there was exhaustion when traveling across large swathes of map and random encounters were commonplace when spending that travel time. the later games ditched this, but BG1 and 2 most certainly understood exactly what you're talking about
That's tabletop, you just go back to the town and maybe imagine trekking through some forest to get there per DM's description of unfolding events. In case of BG3, a video game which is an interactive audio-visual medium, you only make few steps to get to the city with no forest in sight because that would totally be a waste of space and player's time.
You can make scene transitions feel like they cover distance even when they just happen over a few second loading screen. Older Monster Hunter games do this quite well.
what BG3 needed was one of these. making the whole game like, 5 big maps in total makes the entire journey feel incredibly small scale.
BG3 needs to simply space out shit and add some filler, no more than that. But that's against their theme-park design philosophy, I heard D:OS2 is exactly like that as well.
yeah map design is basically the same in D:OS2 except that each act is wholly segregated from each other, no backtracking like BG3 sort of lets you do
They can't have high or even low quality filler because of turn based combat which is already sluggish in the railroaded theme park.
I meant more scenery filler. Still, game really lacks regular combat encounters in the wild. There were like what, three or four in the whole game?
That's how DOS1 was as well, you get a map, there's clearly an order to do each section in based on enemy difficulty/terrian etc. then when you finish one map, you move onto the next. BG3 has transitional maps between act 1 and 2 which help pace it out a bit better but we needed one from moonrise to baldur's gate
The transition from act 2 to 3 is extremely jarring. Act 3 almost feels like a new campaign.
Maybe the Hive is supposed to be your transition zone? Like you go there, fight the big boss, meet the other bosses, but then you just go back to the tower and walk the rest of the way
I think fallout style overworld fixes that
the stuff that used DnD rules in that game was all extremely bad. The combat in Torment is complete shit. The game is good despite being DnD, not because of it. In fact, I would go so far as to say that Torment would be a better game if all combat was removed and it was just a visual novel type game like Disco Elysium.
>simple mechanically
Just because you didn't notice all the mechanical interactions doesn't mean they were not there.
Planescape even invented extra uses for attributes compared to other infinite era games.
The long rest shit really slows the game down honestly.
Are you sure it's not the slow as frick combat?
Eh, I like the combat for what it is. I wish I could spam more Crowd Control spells though.
I actually rarely used long rests because of that.
As someone who plays actual roguelikes, the attempt of "hardcore" gamers to gatekeep one another on this issue is hilarious to me
>Pick Lae'zel
>Get to Zorru, go to the Patrol, talk your way out of it.
>Complete act 1 at lvl 2 with the only fight after the crash being the goblins attacking the grove, abouts 2 hours in, including slacking.
yeah i thought the game would be a bit longer. How are people playing this shit for 100 hours?
game takes about 60 hours doing almost everything for a decent crpg player
the 100+ hour runs are the crpg babbies that just started the genre with bg3
Combat can take ages because the turns are just that slow, not to mention all the "miss"es
lucklet spotted. simply roll better
That's because all the CC and high damage options have been gutted in 5e. So all you are left doing is wailing on an enemy until it dies. While previous dnd games had more book-keeping, this was made up for in the 2-3 rounds of typical combat you get where you try to utterly nuke the monsters to death or charge/leapattack/some other bullshit while the wizard casts black tentacles or some shit. People hated this for some reason and now we are stuck with slow as frick combat that we get in 5e where people just go on their phones for. I don't even blame normies for doing it
Ironically the math was tuned so that missing happened much less often, but the combat feels like a drag because all you do is stack advantages/disadvantages instead of actually clearing chaff with save or dies/sucks or exploding them to death with your melee/ranged dudes.
>Barely use Long rests, only when absolutely necessary because story tells me i need to hurry the frick up
Pathfinder WOTR was too obtuse for me, it wanted me to do read an actual book to understand how to play the game
>Oh you're trying to tank and spank? ackshually you're supposed to use mages to buff your melee and have them do all the damage, you didn't know that? lol moron
Is BG3 less gay and autistic?
>>Oh you're trying to tank and spank?
I loathe you mmotards.
Far less autistic. 5e builds are a joke to make literally throw darts at a board and succeed.
The biggest flaw with Pathfinder as a system, and 3.5 which it was based on, is the excessive amount of stacking buffs they expect you to use. There's nothing more tedious and gay than casting twelve different hour long buffs on your whole party every time you rest, but that's the optimal way to play in Pathfinder. Another issue with pathfinder is that multiclassing and dipping is highly optimal, and going "pure" in many classes is just shit.
In DnD 5e (which BG3 uses) you can't really stack buffs because all the strong buffs are "concentration", which means only one at a time, so no tedious buff stacking. Multiclassing can still be strong but the game has mechanics that encourage you to stick to one class.
DnD isn't autistic you're just a moron trying to bash square peg through a round hole because that's what worked for you in the past.
It's reasonable for you to try to apply your mmo logic to a game at first since it's what you know. It's not reasonable to expect every game to be globalhomo'd to play exactly like an mmo.
Pathfinder is always just buff the party to hell or do shit all. BG3 gave martials more to do and more ways to do it so they have more thought than walk and smash, and using a tank works because of threatened
ok since this is the moron zone let me ask a few questions
>red is what it gets the bonus from
>blue is your spell casting ability
>green is what is added from CHA
>it's 13 because the base is ALWAYS 8
>all this means is that an enemy has to roll 13 or above to get the saving throw but the actual spell hit chance is based on the base d20 roll and your bonuses
right? or is the ENTIRE hit chance 13?
also, why is it at 5 and not 3? because he gets +2 from being proficient at casting?
i just youtubed a playthrough and found this first so don't talk about the stats, it's not my character
Blue is for spells with saving throws, like mind control type stuff
Green is for the accuracy of damaging spells
I don't actually know that's just how I understood it
Sort of. Red is the spell casting ability. Blue is the saving throw DC of the spells you cast (eg fireball). (8 + mod + proficiency bonus) and green is your bonus to attack rolls. It should tell you if you hover your mouse over it.
Green is your ability bonus (CHA 17 gets +3) plus your proficiency bonus (for Levels 1-4 it's +2).
Blue is the difficulty for enemies to resist your spells, which is an 8 plus the green number.
Blue is what enemies roll to survive using saving throw from spells like acid splash
Green is what you add to your attack roll their AC from spells like firebolt
To clarify what people are telling you here, some spells require targets to make a "saving throw", meaning they have the chance to resist all or part of the spell's effects when it's cast on them. To do this the game automatically rolls an invisible D20 when the spell hits them, and if it beats the Difficulty Class (DC) for the spell, then they resist some or all of it, depending on the spell. In general higher level spells cannot be fully resisted, and it's common for enemies to still suffer some damage or negative effects even if they pass the DC, but something like a cantrip, for example, can be fully resisted with a saving throw.
The number you've circled in blue is your character's Spell Save DC, meaning every spell he casts will have that as the benchmark that enemies have to beat on their saving throws in order to resist the spell.
Some spells though use attack rolls, similar to attacking with weapons, meaning the game will automatically roll and invisible D20 when you cast the spell and the number has to be higher than the enemy's Armor Class (AC) to hit. As with attack rolls, your attack roll gets modifiers, and that's what the number circled in green is, it's a +5 to attack rolls on spells.
Hows monk in BG3? I kinda wanna make one but friends tell me it's kinda dog shite
They're probably telling you that since monks are by far the most overpowered braindead bullshit in the game and they don't want you to just stroll through the game.
I've already gone through the game as bard. I kinda just wanna slap some shit. What exactly do I need to do to break this shit open, senpai?
>monk can use bonus actions for attacks
>rogue thief subclass gives an extra bonus action
>ATATATATATATATA ok I dealt 90 damage the boss is stunned for an entire turn and I pssh nothing personnel away
You also get the most cringe dialog options imaginable.
>90 damage the boss is stunned for an entire turn and I pssh nothing personnel away
or you could deal upwords of 400+ with a proper paladin warlock build
I don't know I just made up 90 I stopped playing monk long ago because it was so trivial
Paladin raw or paladin multiclass is probably the best class in the game
Also hate to break it to you buddy but the entire game is trivial, BG3 is CRPGs for normalgays and morons that don't play crpgs
Only if you don't mind constant long rests. I know the game allows you to spam them as much as you want but I like to go on for as long as possible.
Oh shit thief gives a bonus action? At what level?
Depending I might go thief into monk. I know I should get the tavern brawler feat as well, correct?
>Oh shit thief gives a bonus action? At what level?
3rd
3 into it for thief bonus action, you can do 3 more monk or go 3 spore druid for +1d6 necrotic to damage while your 12 temp hp is up also spike growth
Neat. So, what? Start as rogue, spec into thief, then get into Monk or spore druid for a few levels if I want?
what Monk subclass is good to use?
open hand monk is best for doing damage. Shadow monk just gives use useless crap to waste your action on instead of attacking. If I want to cast darkness I can use a scroll. Elemental abilities are also mediocre.
Open hand lets you trip opponents, which gives advantage for all your attacks and all our ally attacks, which is a large damage boost, plus gives a passive that just gives a flat damage boost. Open hand is the best if you just want to punch shit to death fast.
Thanks anon. And again Tavern Brawler is the good feat to get, right?
Unless they patch it Tavern Brawler should work with monk attacks, yeah. However, Tavern Brawler only uses your strength stat, not dex, for bonus damage, and normally monks are dex based.
If you want to be maximally autistic power gamer about it, you could run a dex based monk until you find the gloves that set your dex to 18, then respec at withers to make your dex 8 and max out your strength.
Interesting. And what pray tell are those gloves?
a gith merchant in the gith headquarters in the mountain pass sells them. So you can snag them as soon as you finish with the first starting zone.
Neat. If I leave for the mountain pass will I be condemning the tiefling camp and droods to their death?
you'd really be nerfing yourself by doing that I think. there are some really good monk gloves in the game
All the "monk gloves" I've seen just do something like add 1d4 of damage to attacks, which is worse than the consistent +4 from tavern brawler. Maybe when you get to endgame if you find some really overpowered stuff you might want to respec, maybe switch to the strength gloves that Rapheal has, but that's end game
>which is worse than the consistent +4 from tavern brawler
Wear gloves and spec tavern brawler, now what
>maybe switch to the strength gloves that Rapheal has
You can hit 24 str without gloves
That's monk gloves in every d&d game
>bg2 has monk gloves that are just +4 damage or something
>nwn gloves boost acc by 1 and adds some 1d4 ele damage
Devs are very unimaginative with monk gloves in d&d games.
unimaginativeness is part of the dnd setting at this point. Do you understand why the human male fighter meme gets made? Or even it's opposite, the tiefling rogue or whatever? If you're not being an archetype, why are you playing a class based game?
No need to dump dex
Yes but you need to prioritize Strenght once you got the feat.
You can respec as you level to access everything you want at each level
I went 3 thief 2 druid it has 3 attacks with +1d6 necrotic then 5 monk to get extra attack and spend ki for a 5th
Open hand monk with tavern brawler is one of the strongest classes in the game
4 elements monk isn't as OP as open hand but you get some really good spells to make you more versatile
shadow monk is arcane trickster but with better damage output and less skill monkey type stuff, kind of RP-tier but if you're trying to make an all stealth team it's a good frontline option
Quick nitty gritty terms:
Ability Score Modifier- the bonus/penalty to a dice roll according to your ability score (Strength, Intelligence, etc).
Score -- Modifier
8-9 -- (-1)
10-11 -- (+0)
12-13 -- (+1)
14-15 -- (+2)
16-17 -- (+3)
18-19 -- (+4)
20 -- (+5)
Proficiency Bonus- If you are "proficient" in a Skill or a Saving Throw or Weapon, you add your Proficiency Bonus to that d20 check/saving throw/weapon attack. This is listed in your character details somewhere, but it's dependent on level.
Level -- Proficiency Bonus
1-4 -- (+2)
5-8 -- (+3)
9-12 -- (+4)
(BG3 doesn't go higher than level 12)
Expertise- If you have Expertise in a skill you're proficient in, you add double your proficiency bonus to your skill check instead of just x1. Classes like Rogues and Bards get Expertise.
Weapon attacks are made against a target's Armor Class (roll a d20 + proficiency bonus + Ability Score modifier + any special bonuses like if it's a +1 weapon). Armor Class is a static number that should be viewable when you examine an enemy. Your Armor Class works the same way against an enemy's weapon attack roll.
---
Any questions? Barebones basics.
SPELLS
If a Spell description has a shield icon and (Ability Score) Save next to it (for example: DEX Save), then the target makes a saving throw of the Ability Score type against your Spell Save DC.
If a Spell description has a target icon and says Attack Roll, you make a Spell Attack Roll against the target's Armor Class.
Spell Save DC: 8 + Proficiency Bonus + Ability Score Modifier (INT for wizards, WIS for clerics/druids, CHA for bards/sorcerers/warlocks)
Saving Throw: d20 + Ability Score modifier + (if your class is proficient in it, or you have the Resilient feat for it) Proficiency Bonus
Frick whatever moron decided level 12 was a good cap, you reach it early in act 3 and seeing how the ending is just mass effect tier pick your color there is literally no point to bother doing any side shit but maybe companion ones
12 is the cap for a very specific and valid reason, you being ignorant to that reason outs you as never having played DnD before BG3, and as a result your opinion is wholly invalid
I don't give a frick about DnD, i have a gf
>never touched DnD even with a 20 foot pole in my life
>watch a streamer I like play the game, he's an actual DnD player
>get frustrated watching him because he keeps misunderstanding obvious terminology
Yeah it's a larian game first and foremost, not a dnd game
Pathfinder ruleset is so much better. 5e is for literal morons
this is known, if it wasn't for critical roll and their kind ruining tabletop gaming with normalgays dnd 5e would be long dead like it was dying before them
Frick secondaries
>"Damn you, Critical Role! Curse you, secondaries!" cried Anonymous, his player's handbook gathering another layer of dust
Imagine liking Critical Role.
I don't know anything about Critical Role.
First season of Critical Role was mostly great. Second season had Nott and Jester sometimes.
>casters are still stupidly stronger than martials
>casters still complain they're too weak
I work at a game store my guy and we run a shit ton of tabletop games, and my entire group makes fun of you 5e morons behind your backs when you play here
you should have sex instead
>our only-virgin turbo nerd group make fun of all those normies trying 5e with their gfq. Disgusting.
Nice projection and cope, i've been married for 8 years. almost my entire group is, the turbo virgins here are the numales you see in the 5e groups
post your fat wife
Funny enough you're right, she was skinny when we met, but she got fat after our first kid and i had her stay that way because i really like it
>greasy game shop employee who argues like a schoolgirl and is proud of his obese wife
positively enviable, but I'll stick to 5e thanks
>obese
Nice assuming, she weighs 160lb 5'7", she is fat but far from some obese Black person tier whale.
Again, nice projection you 5e incel.
how many words can you get out between breaths fatso?
>Pathfinder ruleset is so much better.
It's just more bloated 3.5
pathfinder is better by virtue of being earlier
>being earlier
How
In the future I want to do a playthrough as a Polearm wielder with Sentinel. Is fighter the best option or could Paladin work?
>Is fighter the best option or could Paladin work
why not both? half and half multiclass fighter/paladin currently has the highest damage output
It doesn't help that half of it is bugged and doesn't do what it says it does
>party size unlocker
>9000 carry weight mod
game is much better like this
>never play DnD but know stuff through Osmosis
>play BG3 because my DnD friends like it and hear great things
>play it
>learn some stuff
>have the most fricking fun i've had with a game in years
>go to Ganker dot org forwardslash vee forwardslash to discuss the game
>instead find nerds and morons pissing and shitting on each others preferred way to play a game for ultra autists
Why does this happen?
I don’t quite understand why Charisma based checks even work the way they do in the game. My Monk says the exact same thing in dialog as my Bard, but for some reason my Bard says it more… theatrically? So it works better? How exactly am I much more persuasive? I feel like persuasion should be incredibly context-based toward the target and not stat-based. Also, curiously, I feel like Insight checks make much more sense for being charismatic in a realistic sense but they don’t help you basically at all. Reading people is a huge part of being persuasive. Having high CHA and low WIS should mean that you are somehow a turbo-autist that can’t read anybody, but for some reason the friendly way you ask a question makes people more likely to believe it.
Maybe it’s too hard to give extra dialog options depending on if you hit stat thresholds, but that seems the better way to do it. There are unique dialog options for Race and Class, but none for backgrounds or stats and lots of RPGs have done that in the past. In Planescape: Torment, there are dialog options that only exist if you hit certain stat thresholds. A good example: If TNO knows the Dabus language, or has 15 intelligence, and asks Dak'kon to translate Fell's speech, he can realize that Dak'kon didn't translate the whole message, and with 15 wisdom, he can tell Dak'kon is lying and call him out on it.
In BG3, it seems like every character has every dialog option, minus class or race-specific options, and those class/race options are never checks or used for persuasion or whatever, as far as I have seen. It seems that every character does everything. Even if you somehow have a 6 in WIS, you can still get lucky and pass the insight check. In other RPGs, having 6 WIS mostly meant you were so unwise you don’t even get a chance to Insight check them.
Imagine you trying to pick up Stacy at a bar vs Chad doing it using the same approach. There, now you understand Charisma checks.
I understand it in that context but I don't understand it where my attractiveness wouldn't matter at all. Like "hey, I don't think you should kill this guy, I think you should let him go" would be predicated on me giving him good reasons, not just because I say it a certain way.
sure but this is not something that is communicated in-game at all by charisma checks, also actually building rapport with somebody has a lot to do with paying attention to someone and reading them, not about how well you deliver a joke
I guess I understand what you mean
>sure but this is not something that is communicated in-game at all by charisma checks
it is 100% communicated to you by making it easier for people with higher CHA to pass speech checks. it's represented by your bonus to these checks
>also actually building rapport with somebody has a lot to do with paying attention to someone and reading them, not about how well you deliver a joke
knowing how to read people is an aspect of being charismatic my guy. knowing your audience and how to interact with them properly is a social skill
right, and reading people is part of Insight, which is part of WIS, not CHA, but it is never used in that way in this game. I'm trying to say that CHA being the only thing that can help persuade or convince people of stuff just feels wrong.
okay, I get what you're saying. All the other people that responded to me made it all about attractiveness. But that being said, it is weird to combine them all together into that one stat. If the big ugly scary guy is good at threatening, it's weird that he's also way better at seducing or persuading people at the same time, to the same exact degree.
>If the big ugly scary guy is good at threatening, it's weird that he's also way better at seducing or persuading people at the same time, to the same exact degree.
Very good point. But a simplification of a person to 6 stat points by necessity brings in weird contradictions like that. That's why skill points were added - more complexity, and therefore more realism.
>I don't understand it where my attractiveness wouldn't matter at all.
This is a common misunderstanding in DnD. Cha is not attractiveness. It has never been attractiveness. It's your ability to communicate, manipulate, charm, or enforce your will through whatever method. A sexy person is charismatic, yes, because they can seduce. But a big ugly scary guy is charismatic because he can threaten. A lich has a high CHA score in DnD. Do you think a dried out floating corpse is sexy?
If you have a low cha character and he tries a cha check, you should assume he says it in the manner, body language, and lack of confidence that would make people ignore him and think he's a moron.
Two people saying the exact same thing but getting wildly different reactions based on how they carry themselves or their body language is pretty accurate to reality.
sounds like you're a charismalet in real life, know exactly HOW to say the words in your head is 99% of making conversations
The way dialogue checks actually work in the game is that your character is simply attempting something and you as the player would work out the context with the GM.
It's the difference between a stuttering homosexual entering a room like a nervous b***h and saying 'ummmm f-f-fire, please um, l-leave'
vs
someone barging into a room screaming 'there's a fire, get the frick out of the building now'
The way it works in game is htat it's a single choice it doesn't explain why one person is better at it than the other
Charisma is force of personality. Someone with low Charisma mumbles, stutters, has their voice crack or uses the wrong facial expression or body language, leaving people with an unintended impression. People with high Charisma don't "know what to say," they say things with the right cadence, energy and conviction, making them more believable.
It's not what you say, it's how you say it. You'd make a poor politician, anon.
The text choices in the game are only giving you the shorthand context of the response. It's presented as dialogue but it isn't actually spoken by your character. "Let her go" (voiced) is shorthand for "Convince him to let her go" (unvoiced). The exact text isn't relevant, only the intent and the difficulty of the check which is based on the target.
that makes sense I guess, the game didn't make me feel that way about it but, yeah. I get it.
but the other points are based on exactly why the second point seems good to me. That system works because of the qualms from the other 2 points, no? Based on the other anons post I understand that it's a lot more extrapolated though, and not as literal as I thought
I really hate it when a really good point (second post) gets overshadowed by the dumb bullshit.
What effectively is the main arguments against Baldur's Gate 3 being bad btw?
It's literally the most in depth RPG on the market, it absolutely brutally mogs Planescape, BG1/BG2 and it's actually wild to me seeing people shit on the game besides it being popular.
It takes a steaming hot dump on literally every RPG ever made and what, the issue is that there's sex in it? Or pozzed shit (when I can larp as a raping white Aryan god who kills every gay I come across)?
>it absolutely brutally mogs Planescape
lmao
As an RPG?
Absolutely. For one, your character isn't a Geralt tier predetermined character. That's why Planememe will always be an Adventure game, not an RPG
>As an RPG?
Yes, as an rpg in which you can talk to your companions about things other than buttsex.
Almost made me puke. Dogshit game in a dogshit setting.
Anon you're entire personality is based off of wanting to be a "midwit" so the only thing you really enjoy is current shit.
I fricking hate meme dialectics, I hate the spectacle.
you haven't played any crpgs how would you know
You haven't actually played any CRPGs, have you?
People like that are so utterly afraid of being called a "midwit" That they would prefer to be called a moron.
>People vehemently attacking anyone who gives this game a thumbs down on Steam
Literal cult mentality.
not a dnd player and i learned by playing the game
>sleep isn't a concentration
>blindness isn't a concentration
>poison isn't a concentration
But I can't put enlarge on someone without the enemy AI flipping shit and immediately running past everything to hit my wizard, who will lose concentration on the first instance of damage even with war caster and resilient
What a shitty fricking mechanic, I completely understand why people still just play 3.5e. Just put three fricking turns of a buff on someone instead of giving me 100 spells and making 98 of them unusable at the same time.
That doesn't seem right. I barely ever lose concentration, except against especially annoying enemies that knock me prone.
You can just be a lazy frick and drink an elixer of enlarged penis
You can't have fun because the culture war vibes is based off of "My ebin soldiermans get to be ebin" and they post chadfaces or wahtever despite the fact they look just as greasy as your average castergay (but they are even more pretentious about it)
>wtf my concentration keeps breaking
2 solutions. 1. stop parking your fricking wizard in melee range of enemies moron or 2. get the warcaster feat so you have advantage on concentration saves
>who will lose concentration on the first instance of damage even with war caster and resilient
Don't reply to my posts when you didn't even bother to read them, freak.
nta, but you're doing something moronic because that shouldn't typically be a common thing.
ok so it's solution number 1 for you then, stop parking your wizard in melee range moron. I pity you for both being an INTlet and a Lucklet
>want to knock this merchant out instead of killing him because he was based
>find out knocked out merchants have all the loot you've sold
well that's a little broken
you can just take their money, anon. you don't need to sell all your shit first
I don't need their money either. I'm headed into act 3 with 30k gold, a backpack of scrolls and pots worth 20k, a moronic amount of vendor trash before I even started the moonrise assault, and the best gear until I get in the city.
>pathfinder gays be like: yo I stucked 6 million buffs on my party auto attacked boss to death, this gameplay is fire
>Casts Dispel Magic on you
>those two mythic glabrezu that spam greater dispel and mirror image with like twelve fricking copies
genuinely the hardest fight in the entire game
Someone buy me this game.
Show me your pussy.
It's weird since the game is as far removed from D&D as possible.
weird take. good or bad, it's the most in-tune with D&D I've seen a video game be.
Yeah when I think D&D I think Hostel level violence and NC-17 levels of sex. I remember that from the cartoon, multiple movies, the multiple MTG sets etc
The cartoons, movies, and fricking Magic the Gathering doesn't feel like D&D, anon.
You're asking for a D&D video game to feel like adjacent media that's related to D&D, not actual D&D.
>D&D was always about violence and sex
If you say so man. Literally no other part of D&D media presents itself this way and WOTC is gonna have a hell of a time trying to get D&D as profitable and cared about by the public if they cannot decide on a tone.
>D&D was always about violence and sex
Point to where I ever said that.
You can't, because I didn't.
I'm talking about the mechanics, the way you can have all the multiple ways of resolving quests/obstacles, the narrator/DM, etc.
Whether there's a lot of violence and sex is 100% dependent on the DM of your table. I personally always have "fade to black" at my table if something like that comes up, but I know there are tables that are more descriptive. I wouldn't want that, but I'm fine with it in a video game.
>D&D isn't about killing shit, getting paid and wooing buxom maidens
if you say so, melvin
>when selecting spells on leveling up, or just creating a new character, the game doesn't distinguish which ones are ritual spells
I THINK THAT WOULD BE QUITE CRUCIAL INFORMATION GAME
yeah some of the tooltips are a bit lacking
ITT: ESL who don't know english
Lae'zel got them gamecube controller eyes
Ignore this thread and answer me: Why does True Strike exist?
To make you mad.
Seriously what in the everything frick is a "spell slot" and why does it seem to be nothing like what the term is describing
The game doesn't explain shit about frick and just throws esoteric DND words at you like you know what the frick any of it means,tutorial was frick all.
You're not wrong, spell slot is a stupid fricking name for what is actually a spell charge.
Back in the day role-playing games came with thick manuals explaining every single thing in detail, in plain text, understandable by anyone who's not an actual moron. What is what, level progression charts for all classes, lore and other good stuff.
But of course, Baldur's Gate 3 came without such a manual.
it's an incredibly archaic term. In older editions of D&D you would learn spells and you literally had like, 5 spell slots at some level, and if you wanted to cast fireball 3 times that day you put fireball into 3 of your spell slots and then whatever else into the remaining 2. They realized this is insane so now it's just "you have 5 uses of any level 1 spell per day" but it's still called spell slots because I guess you still kinda slot them in? Like you pick which ones are active? Idk the whole system is very weird.
>cast fireball once
>rest of the session spent plinking people from the back with a crossbow
Those were the days.
So what is the difference between a wizard and sorcerer now?
Sorcerer learns spells by leveling up, Wizard learns them by uhh finding a piece of paper that says they can and then they pay money?
God I miss 3rd edition. I'll play NWN again after I finish this to wash the taste out of my mouth. (Actually the gameplay in BG3 is pretty fun)
the gold requirement to learn from scrolls was always weird to me.
where does it even go? I vaguely remember it being fluffed away as like, a reagent cost or something, some kind of alchemical equivalent exchange thing, but there are no reagents in this game. It's just a weird penalty. My best guess is that because wizards don't wear armor it's an attempt to balance out their economy vs classes that have to buy stuff to use, but that's the best I got.
"Copying a Spell into the Book. When you find a wizard spell of 1st level or higher, you can add it to your spellbook if it is of a spell level you can prepare and if you can spare the time to decipher and copy it.
Copying a spell into your spellbook involves reproducing the basic form of the spell, then deciphering the unique system of notation used by the wizard who wrote it. You must practice the spell until you understand the sounds or gestures required, then transcribe it into your spellbook using your own notation.
For each level of the spell, the process takes 2 hours and costs 50 gp. The cost represents material components you expend as you experiment with the spell to master it, as well as the fine inks you need to record it. Once you have spent this time and money, you can prepare the spell just like your other spells."
tl;dr Magic in DnD requires components(vocal, material, gestures), when you learn from a scroll because you don't know it yet you auto spend on material components in order learn it.
ah ok that makes sense, looks like they've thrown the time part of the process out the window though
Stop being anti-semitic.
Wizard still has to prepare their spells but they're able to freely use their slots on any spell they have prepared where ass Sorcerers have a set amount they learn from leveling up but also have metamagic.
Wizards are nerds who learn magic through books and hard work
Sorcerers are chads who get magic genetically gifted to them by their genetics
>grandpa was a dragon
Wizards are just the shit version of sorcerers
not a lot. also I still don't understand why wizards have to put gold somewhere to learn magic from a scroll that they're holding in their hands.
sorcerers are naturally talented through a gift/bloodline
wizards are fricking nerds who has to learn magic
Wizards use INT. They know more spells at any given time than other classes by a large margin, but they must prepare which ones they have access to for the day (which is still higher than other classes). They store all these spells in a book. They have a longer list of spells to choose from to learn when they level and they can additionally learn spells from spell scrolls by spending gold on ink and jotting them into their book. Their subclasses refer to the different schools of magic. They can get some spell slots back on a short rest.
Sorcerers use CHA. They know more cantrips. There are a few spells they can learn which Wizards can't, typically of the more "natural disaster" variety. They also get Sorcery Points which they can turn into spell slots and vice versa or spend on Metamagic, allowing them to increase the power, duration, range, and so on of their spells. Their magic is a gift, often through their own bloodline, and their subclass reflects the source.
Wizards use studying and research to do what Sorcerers can do naturally. A sorcerer snaps his fingers and fires a lightning bolt. A Wizard gets a bunch of shit from his bag and speaks the magic words while doing the sacred dance to shoot a lightning bolt
I think DnD mechanics make sense in tabletop with real people but is absolutely dumb as frick in a video game format. At this point, in 2023 I think it's just laziness and the devs are really bad at making games.
Like what mechanics?
Read the society of the spectacle. The terminology and mechanics of DND is basically part of the cultural zeitgeist, something to be worshiped instead of examined. It is basically worship of dnd as an icon in itself.
>Rope has no use
Shit game.
there are like 3 cliffs with trees positioned perfectly at the end of them for you tie a rope and climb down. was very, very sad when it turned out to be completely useless.
I carried that rope for so long, bro... waiting for a chance
why'd they even put the rope in the game if you couldn't actually do anything with it? just because haha D&D staple? people carry rope on them in D&D because of how fricking useful a length of rope can be
I figured out ropes were pretty useless real early. Got to the first dungeon, busted a hole in the ground to gain entry, had my rope ready to climb down...and the idiot just falls straight into the hole and gets ambushed.
Play Knights of the Chalice if you really want to get the tears flowing
I've been playing for 50 hours and I still don't know what a Saving Throw is but the game is easy enough that I don't think I really need to know
You throw the dice to determine if you are safe.
Your the guy communities need to be gate keeping. Frick off elsewhere. Play a game better suited to your IQ. Maybe try cs, or Cod.
Dex and Sleight of Hand bonuses are not applying to pickpocketing rolls despite what the game says. It's fricking gay.
I have +12 from all of my modifier and bonuses and I save scummed a DC 20 for stealing a stack of gold, it took me 31 tries.
What the frick?
is there a mod that fixes the throwing arc of spear weapons? I'm so fricking sick of it registering the roof 18 metres above me as "interrupting the path"
dice rolls are dumb because you dont have a dm that can add dynamics when failing gets too tedious
its okay though i just savescum
Give it to Larian to make a shitty goddes like Shar seem cool.
tabletop rules are moronic for video games
>be me
>have absolutely no experience with DnD mechanics
>learn the mechanics in BG3 just fine by reading tooltips, asking friends about stuff, looking up things for more in-depth shit
it's literally like any other RPG with a complicated ruleset. the fact that the OP is asking what concentration is in here instead of just reading the in-game tooltip or googling it is peak zoomerbrain
>You're either a min-maxer or a funny commedian
How about no, morons? Not being a min maxer doesn't mean you're a zoomer that just want to be funny. I'm not a min maxer, I want to play character with a story, and that story come with flaws in my character sheet. I'll still play seriously, I'll still help in fight with the abilities available to my character. That's what roleplay is. Deal with it or go back playing diablo.
>Be D&D
>Has a whole 20 pages in the rulebook and a whole 371 page book about how to have a murder-mystery type of table
>Still has nerds crying that the name D&D means it's only about fights and social roleplay has no place
Ganker draws a lot of autists. Some of these people complaining about "modern new D&D players" seem like those types you occasionally get in the gaming store that have zero social skills and just moron-whine how people aren't "playing the right way" (a very super specific way they personally like playing they think everyone has to be exactly like) and you eventually have to not allow at your table, so they try to run their own shit that nobody wants to sit at.
It's a dnd game, did you expect it to use Americanism? Of course it uses dnd terminology.
What are you struggling with it?
So a general question, do you guys not act out your games? I'm not an experienced player, only played a few different games (Shadowrun etc) but always with the same group. If you decided to persuade a guard you would have to act it out in character and persuade him with words and the DM would roleplay the guard and try to poke holes in your deception. That way it wasn't super important what your stats were and more about your character and personality but if you did something drastic like pointing behind the guard and yelling "watch out!" you'd have to roll bluff to see if he falls for it. Is that not how most games are played? Do you just walk up to him and roll dice and continue on your way?
You roll and explain the logic. Acting it out is optional.
I see so no theatre. No accents either?
Each player does what they want.
I have a lisp and a shit voice, can't really, wish I could, but can't.
Hey I feel you I have a shitty voice too but since we were all doing it and the standards were low I figured it was okay (and it was). It's too bad I suck at acting
I joined the group through a friend and I just went with the flow since that was their established rule. It did cause some trouble for me since I like playing talky or smart characters but I'm not very talky or smart in real life so improvising a script just like that was really hard to do. Sometimes I wished we could just state our intent and roll instead of acting it out. It's cool to see people do it differently sometimes.
No frick off with your annoying fake accent and your acting, no one fricking cares and making talking to a guard take 20 minutes is moronic
If a person wants to, they can. It isn't required, though. You can just explain what your character does.
Oddly enough, a good example of the really old-school way to play can be seen in that Stephen Colbert D&D game that that Mercer dude ran for him. Mercer is a theater kid acting everything out, but Colbert played in the very original D&D times and solely just describes what his character does, and takes super careful precautions like checking every potential obstacle as potentially deadly, etc.
A good DM doesn't force you to "act out" anything if you don't want to or aren't comfortable with it, but you can if you want to. More about the adventure and the narrative around your characters.
No i just say what i am doing and then roll for it, because guess what RPing and talking in first person as your character isn't required and not that necessary, the real value of DnD is how creative you can get to solve problems the DM makes for your group not pretend to be your character like secondaries would lead you to believe.
I give my players the option to act it out or play in third person
also persuasion checks don't work like they do in bg3 where you pick an option and then roll for persuade
I bet 90% of the people in the thread speaking about how D&D should be played never sat at a table ever and base it all on their video game logic.
For myself, I had a few table that played like you. But most of them we would describe how our character act and say with enough details since it's easier and faster (the DM would play like you describe more often than the players I find).
Cope you fricking moronic zoomer, frick you and your critical role shit that have ruined DnD
In my experience a lot of people are gunshy about actually trying to "roleplay" like, they don't want to put on a silly voice and assume a new identity, but once people get comfortable with things they'll do it a little bit and most encounters end up being like you described to some extent. As a DM I'll let people just be like "uhhh I want to use my charisma to convince him... but I can't think of anything so just assume I said something witty" but if they go above and beyond I'll give them a bonus for it. My favorite way to play is to incentivize creative solutions to problems.
>but if they go above and beyond I'll give them a bonus for it
>for talking in first person with a silly voice
i hate you 5e morons so fricking much
no you stupid Black person I mean if they actually have a compellingly persuasive argument or creative idea beyond "uhhh my charisma is really high so you should feel persuaded right now"
>only rewards players if they play into your improv acting shit
5e has so many shit dms it amazes me
Yes I reward people for being creative. Sorry if you're too bashful to try, I'm sure your munchkin character will be strong enough anyway, just look at your phone for a while and we'll let you know when the combat starts.
stay in 5e bud, you and the other secondaries better not leak into real tabletop games
the real tabletop games that you super-duper really play
You are really seething huh 5e secondary?
Struck a nerve?
5e is not a real TT game, it is made for morons by morons
>Do improv
>Also min-max
do i get anything.
A fun session of DnD?
nah we're playing shadowrun 3e
My condolences.
you may choose one
Yes. Aside from the glowing sense of fulfillment that you've helped entertain your friends with an inventive solution to a problem, you'll probably get a bonus. It's not like I'm biased against munchkins, I'm just biased against shitty and unfun people at my table.
I should add that I don't actually play 5e. The last game I ran was Rogue Trader.
>Rogue Trader.
ahahahahahaha
>I should add that I don't actually play 5e
sure you don't secondary
Wow, that guy was right. You are an absolute shit GM.
Probably typical for 5e though.
>a new player thinks of something outside the box
>"no that's not in the rulebook"
a true chad
There is absolutely nothing in the 5e rulebooks. They standardized nothing. It is why nobody wants to DM for it.
fricking moron, have a nice day zoomie, you have ruined this hobby
>>only rewards players if they play into your improv acting shit
>5e has so many shit dms it amazes me
They existed long before 5e.
I distinctly remember a dude we tried playing D&D with DMing, and he would demand we start every session with 20 minutes of no rolling dice, solely roleplaying in-character. We humored him for a bit because we thought we could whittle him down and loosen up, but eventually we had to just stop playing with him.
This was back in 2e.
He also had a bunch of weird hentai videos with flying penises that he tried to get us to watch because he "thought it was hilarious". Weird dude.
I imagine he has kids now, hopefully he's not so fricking weird now.
true just 5e has opened the flood gates for moronic DMs who think they are making a tv show
theater kid trannies seething at wargaming chad
whats the point of dice roll interactions if you can just save scum them?
its just an artificial time inflation of staring at the loading screen.
you can play for real and not save scum
the point is that for people who have discipline they will roll with bad roll
Is it true a level 10 Monk can use Step of the Wind and spam Jump to move over 500 feet in a turn? Am I reading this incorrectly?
https://old.reddit.com/r/dndmemes/comments/y16q8k/this_was_a_joke_campaign_we_had_a_human_fighter/
human male fighterbros...
>2d10+5
>Dex Saving Throw
You share a board with people who are so young or moronic or both they genuinely can't figure out what this means
I enjoyed MOST of the D&D conversations in this thread honestly. Other than the weird sperg who's pretending he's a grognard and just b***hing about the newer players.
Thread's at bump limit, though. Have a good one anons.