Here’s how it’s gonna go down:
- Hasbro sells Wizards of the Coast to Microsoft
- Microsoft uses the new IP from WoC and forces Obsidian to make BG4
- Sidenote: Blizzard will take over MtG mobile
- Microsoft forces Obsidian to imbue BG4 with AI generated slop throughout and make it a live service game somehow
- BG4 flops hard
- Microsoft shuts down Obsidian
Also. Somehow… Loot boxes. After a call from EA.
Microsoft would have to buy hasbro in it’s entirety because wotc is the only piece worth anything, they’d never drop it. Other than that, disgustingly plausible. Could imagine microsoft buying hasbro just for wotc and shutting everything else down
You could insert so many different companies they’ve acquired into that… so sad.
This is hilarious. I doubt Microsoft buys anymore IP at this point. Seems like they are failing hard but who knows they make the craziest decisions.
Either way it’ll end in layoffs.
I wish that happened… Because it would be karma. You should check the employment history of hasbro’s execs. Chris Cocks? Ex-microsoft. Before him? Cynthia Williams? Ex-msft.
And whatever you do, do not read this interview unless you want to be super pissed. https://www.theverge.com/podcast/890703/hasbro-toys-games-magic-exodus-ai-tariffs
depressingly plausible. I’ve long wondered if microslop was hoarding studios, or just gobbling up IP…
All this after they pack on debt and extract all the money from it.
I enjoyed bg3, but DND 5e is not a system I enjoy nor want more of. It’s surprisingly shallow.
This is how I feel. And honestly how the developers of BG3 seemed to feel. Additional context for other readers if not necessarily for you, but 3.5 and Pathfinder have a lot of what they call the “magical Christmas Tree effect” where someone using Detect Magic on a player character would see a magical aura around every single one of your body parts. Barring specific character build decisions there was usually a best-in-slot magical item for every place you could have one, and the difficulty curve of the game assumed that you would.
5e, especially early 5e, attempted to curb this. Magic items were rare and powerful, but more importantly interesting. Strict numerical bonuses were powerful but boring so they were mostly eliminated. Flash or nothing was the name of the game, and indeed some magical items literally do nothing but enhance looks.
BG3 said no to this. Many possible character builds can only be done, or are strongly encouraged, with sets of magic items. It was an attempt to add depth and choice back in while restricted by a system that had little of it.
BG3’s Devs didn’t feel like 5E was too shallow, iirc they said that their next game wouldn’t be 5E because it was too complex and they felt it didn’t correctly fit what they wanted in a game. Have you checked the divinity games? Their systems are much, much simpler than 5E is.
I’m hyped beyond belief for the next divinity game, Divinity, but I warn you, the game system will be much simpler.
Either way it’s a system designed for pen and paper, which inevitably imposes some limits compared to something custom tailored for a video game format from the get go.
Yeah, but unfortunately they kept 5e’s design principle of “you barely get any feats”. I want my characters to be interesting because of who they are, not because of what glowing doodads they looted from more interesting dead people.
Also class + level is so coarse. I’d rather be able to, like, buy individual things I want. Get XP for doing a quest, buy more sneak attack. Or a spell slot. Maybe hit dice. Really let me mix and match.
But DND 5e is designed to have a small decision space in builds. They want the half paying attention guy’s character to perform about as well as the optimizer, instead of the huge gap between those archetypes that 3e had.
i really liked the… I think it was the Oracle class in pathfinder. that would be fun.
I always thought it was the most interesting class because each power comes with a weakness, and they grow in power as you level up. Very X-Men like. Here’s some curse examples for people who don’t know what the class is about:
Clouded Vision - Your eyes are obscured, making it difficult for you to see. You cannot see anything beyond 30 feet, but you can see as if you had darkvision
Wrecker - The destructive power of the Abyss and its teeming hordes of demons seeps from your very pores and into your belongings and surroundings. Held objects gain the broken condition when you use or equip them but regain their actual condition if employed by anyone else. Disable Device becomes a class skill for you and you can make checks to destroy non-magical traps as a move action without the need to use tools or take any action beyond simply touching it.
It’s one of the reasons I love Pathfinder more than DnD. So much variety and creativity in the classes. More reading
Clouded vision was the curse/perk I wanted to pick! It looks so fun to play. And my vision sucks so I could lean into that aspect of my self for the character rather than something more annoying
It’s by design. It’s just meant for more casual play, that’s all. I play Shadowrun (pre Anarchy) so I’m no stranger to crunchy systems, but 5e is nice for just getting together with friends, drinking some alcohol, and having fun role playing without having to pay too close attention or needing a group that’s really dedicated to learning the game deeply. More tilted towards friend groups and less towards gaming groups, if you will.
I’ll say as a GM, the low bar needed for learning and playing 5e is much easier to get people on board with and even then that bar isn’t always reached… I’ve had to kick people for just refusing the learn what dice to roll after months of sessions. 5e is a great gateway drug to get people into TTRPGs though, and then when you start finding out who is really getting into the hobby, you can spin that group off into crunchier systems and keep 5e around for the more casual role play enjoyers.
It’s by design.
This is true. However,
It’s just meant for more casual play, that’s all.
It’s kind of bad at that goal. It’s really fiddly and full of friction points. What bonus do you get for 16 strength? Why do they insist on keeping that mapping.
I’ve had to kick people for just refusing the learn what dice to roll after months of sessions.
Further evidence of it not actually being great at casual play.
Which leads me to
5e is a great gateway drug to get people into TTRPGs
Counter argument: it’s actually really bad at that. It’s so specific and idiosyncratic it pushes people away. Uncountable players just bounce off the whole genre because their first impression is fiddly “what does 15 strength mean again?” and “sorry, you can’t fit your cool idea into this class/level system”
Fate Core or Accelerated would be much more in line with how people think about this sort of stuff.
Just hasn’t been my experience, man, and I’ve introduced maybe 2 dozen people through that system to ttrpgs. 2 bounced off. That’s a pretty good success rate imo.
I think it feels fiddly to people who already know a thing or two about mechanics, but most of the fiddliness can easily be ignored or barely paid attention to and you can still manage to play and have fun. It’s a lot easier to just hit straight brick walls in games like pathfinder or shadow run where the player is so lost they just can’t play. I’ve started 5e games impromptu at parties for people who’ve never played and been up and running in 30 minutes with drunk people and had a blast lol. That’s hard to pull off in a lot of systems imo.
The ones I referenced that wouldn’t learn to roll dice weren’t confused by the system… they just honestly didn’t really like to play as much as they liked the idea of playing through popular media. The hobby just wasn’t for them, I can’t really see them engaging with any system.
I’m not saying there may not be other systems out there technically better suited… but 5e is pretty damn good at it while also being popular enough that people have heard of it and are interested in trying. That last part is just as important as being technically good on paper.
I think it feels fiddly to people who already know a thing or two about mechanics, but most of the fiddliness can easily be ignored or barely paid attention to and you can still manage to play and have fun.
I mean, this is true, but if you ignore enough rules you’re essentially playing a different game. I talked to someone once who “played DND” but didn’t use skills or spell slots, and I think they just let casters interpret spells based on the names. That’s so different it’s arguably a different game. Or at least as different as a Chihuahua and a husky.
. It’s a lot easier to just hit straight brick walls in games like pathfinder or shadow run where the player is so lost they just can’t play.
I agree with this, but note those systems are far more crunchy than DND. Something like Fate goes in the other direction, and I think is why it’s better for fast games.
Though as an aside, a downside of Fate is it’s so open it can cause a tyranny of the blank page effect. DND puts you in a pretty small box, and that can be helpful for people. The small decision space is a positive for some kinds of players. Though if you were doing Fate, you could just tell people to pick from some core ideas similar to character classes.
but 5e is pretty damn good at it while also being popular enough that people have heard of it and are interested in trying. That last part is just as important as being technically good on paper.
This is also undeniable. Someone who’s going to half-ass it will drag down a game in any system.
I think we agree more than we disagree for what it’s worth. Check out Fate though. It’s free ( https://fate-srd.com/ )
I mean, this is true, but if you ignore enough rules you’re essentially playing a different game.
But some systems are easier than others to wing or remove pieces. 5e already, for better and for worse, hand waives a lot stuff as up to the judgment of the GM, rather than having explicit rules on how to handle something. I think this is a bad thing for long term groups because it puts a lot more work on the GM (this might, ironically, make it good for new players but less good for new GMs), and for people who know their way around ttrpgs it’s a little annoying that so much of the experience, even more than usual, relies on each given GM with less reliable and predictable outcomes.
But what rules 5e does have are usually pretty simplified… looking at 3.5, something like grappling has very explicit rules on how to resolve things in what feels like a pretty satisfying way, but it is very verbose… 5e just says “eh, contested Strength check and call it a day”. It’s just a very, very simple system at its heart. And again, a lot of stuff is just straight up written as “leave it up to your GM”. This is frustrating for more veteran players that might want to try optimizing or pushing the bounds of a system and need a structure to push against, but for a newbie just having fun and who isn’t too hung up on outcomes, this is a feature not a bug imo.
My fear with more open systems is like you said above, it can give especially new GMs and players a bit of paralysis in not really knowing where to go… I think 5e strikes a good balance of giving newbies a structure to work with while telling them not to sweat details too much. I could see with the right group though that isn’t too timid or afraid to explore how this might be a benefit more than a hindrance…
All that said, I haven’t tried Fate itself, so I’m speaking generally here. I’m sure I’ll get around to checking it out at some point, though I’m mostly moving genres these days into stuff like the new Shadowrun and Cyberpunk RED so might be awhile… appreciate the rec though, we have a sub group that runs new systems all the time so I’m sure we’ll get around to it lol. Again, appreciate the discussion! :)
The dnd 5e-ness of BG3 was among the worst parts of it.
It’s among my favorites, and I’m nervous for whatever Divinity’s got in its place.
That’s a controversial opinion but I agree with you. Going by the Original Sin games I prefer 5e over the rules Larian made for Divinity.
The surfaces system was superior in Divinity OS2 but I felt the physical/magical armor system was kind of awkward.
Functionally it kind of just removes the curtain and reveals how effective health points (EHP) vs total health points actually works. But God it felt really shit to actually play. It goes against gaming convention.
While BG3 was a better game, the combat in Divinity was more fun. Not only was cheese encouraged, it was almost required at higher difficulty levels. Summoning a lava worm to shoot a laser beam at some tossed out fire traps to cause a million damage? Sure, why not?
While BG3 was a better game, the combat in Divinity was more fun. Not only was cheese encouraged, it was almost required at higher difficulty levels.
Its so interesting how differently people view things, that sounds horrible to me (and matches my short experience with d:os). I want a game that has hard difficulty that I can beat by making smart decisions, not figuring out how to break the underlying system.
I like ridiculous things to happen. I also hate misses in any game. That’s too realistic for me.
Given how much more likely one is to have played 5e than any other system, it’s probably not all that controversial.
5e is a great system for a “Rule of Cool” style of DMing. That’s amazing for a decent DM and inexperienced/less technical players.
But it is not a good CRPG system or a good system for experienced and technical players. There’s a lot of “can I…” and “I want to…” that slows down combat even when you know the rules.
Plus, there’s stuff like “can a centaur ride a horse?” where 5e is inconsistent. Or the infamous peasant rail gun.
I disagree. It’s a poorly designed system that fails at accomplishing anything better than alternatives. The thing it has going for it is the name/marketing. There are lighter systems that are easier and cooler, there are heavier systems that are more tactical, and there are equivalent systems that are less jank. The fact that there’s things like the bonus action, that was added so late in development it was never playtested, in 5e makes it pretty awful to play. There are so many exceptions you have to learn to even start too. It’s not a good system for noobs and it’s not a good system for experienced players.
5e is a great system for a “Rule of Cool” style of DMing. That’s amazing for a decent DM and inexperienced/less technical players.
It’s not even that good at that. Fate, for example, is a much lighter and better system for that. Aspects are a very simple system for setting expectations and letting players do wacky things based on them.
If I was going to run a game for new players I would absolutely not reach for 5e. It provides too much fertilizer for “can I move that far?” and “if he’s flying 30’ up can I still shoot him?” minutia.
Yeah to me 5e is in a weird place right now. Not quite narrative focused and not quite crunchy numbers focused either. It’s like a middle ground where some parts are highly specific but others are left to interpretation. I’ve found people mostly get confused by this ambiguity.
I probably had fewer “can I…?” questions in BG3 than any other CRPG, if for no other reason than that all of the enemy attributes are exposed at all times, and your spells tell you which attributes they interact with. It’s that same quality that allows the technical design of Larian’s engine to shine, and it made large swaths of the genre feel dated immediately. Either in the video game or the tabletop, my combats don’t have many questions to bog them down.
D&D was optimized for pencil-and-paper-and-dice play. I mean, it has to keep the math simple to keep the game going.
I think that a ruleset optimized for computer RPGs would probably look somewhat different.
It’s funny because while 5e has simpler math than the predecessors, it’s still kind of clunky. 1d20 + proficiency + modifier isn’t that bad, but I’ve seen a lot of players who can’t correctly add 16 + 7.
I really liked the nWoD system where you roll a bunch of d10s and just count how many came up >= 8. No addition or subtraction.
Also 1d20+stuff is flat probability, which feels bad.
I think that a ruleset optimized for computer RPGs would probably look somewhat different.
But also 100 times this. You could do so many things that would be painful to do by hand at the table.
1d20 + proficiency + modifier isn’t that bad, but I’ve seen a lot of players who can’t correctly add 16 + 7.
https://old.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1jphv4b/favorite_calculator_for_the_table/
Having done a lot of digital GMing recently, I had the sudden realization that a physical calculator with buttons has sped up my play immensely.
One can grab an inexpensive calculator if it’s a matter of being able to do it at all, I suppose. Or use a phone calculator app. But…even with a calculator, there are just going to be some limitations on how many modifiers one can reasonably have and how they can interact. Like, if you have, say, four or five inputs for a check that all have percentile modifiers from various equipment or spells or statuses or whatever, it just starts to become a pain to deal with. A computer won’t notice that, and there, it’s fine. But for TTRPGs, one doesn’t want to turn a play session into a bunch of people just playing Sim Spreadsheet. Kinda bogs down the game, kills the flavor.
I bet that there are some people who won’t even play D&D in its present form because of the math.
searches
https://old.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/177rybf/have_a_friend_who_struggles_at_math_what_can_i_do/
I have a friend of mine who’s very interested in playing DND, and TTRPGs in general. However, he’s admitted to me, and I have genuine proof, that he struggles with even the simplest concepts of math (such as addition or subtraction). Does any other DMs or players (or, hell, anyone really) have any advice to lessen the amount of math that needs to be done, or even make it a no-math sort of deal? Much appreciated!
The variance on a single d20 is miserable after playing games with better probability curves.
I love the three d6 curve from Hero System
I like Fudge dice, but understand if people want higher variance than that. I do like that characters tend to succeed at things they are good at (but not always) and fail at things they are bad at (but not always). Some people liken this to diceless, but my experience is that it’s just enough variance to keep you on your toes and add drama.
Iron Kingdoms uses a nice system too, where the better your are the less variance your roll get.
Yep I moved to gurps it was a game changer
I think I’d rather see more 4e than 5e at this point. Its so one-dimensional
Id rather see NWN 3, or even better yet,
hear me out
something new.
Give me Dark Sun!
NWN 3: The Winter
I have it on mostly dead authority that it’s coming!
Dungeons and Dragons: Birthright.
Let’s do it! Bring us back to Aebrynis!
I’m probably the only person out there who wants this. Some pen pusher would compare it to kingmaker which is just not the same at all.
Aebrynis
Is that Elvish for “Ay! Bronies!” ?
Given the success of BG3 it would be very hard to do BG4 successfully, and another studio will get raked over the coals for anything not as good, which is a very high bar. It’ll be first dismissed as Hasbro continuing to ruin D&D, then the studio will get called crappy and hit their reputation.
Hasbro/Wizards could instead have a few other studios build out some smaller standalone campaigns for half or a third the target price and see what sticks.
Imagine a Phandelver or Ice Spire Peak, or a Waterdeep series of campaigns with a smaller world and more linear story progression (you still need player choices to matter) — get the core mechanics right, build up some tight stories that players respond to, THEN take it open world with many characters and after that build out BG4.
BG2 to BG3 was a long ass time. I think fans would prefer BG4 done well even if it takes longer than having to pretend there is no BG4 in Ba Sing Se
That is kinda funny. My advice on how to save Halo was very similar. Smaller more focused campaigns. One big multiplayer every one can play.
Even if they really want to use an existing series for the brand recognition, they could do Neverwinter Nights or Icewind Dale or something.
IMO Don’t try to make a sequel, just make another story in the world. Call it Baldur’s Gate: GameTitleGoesHere
I’d take IWD though, I loved those games and own physical box copies I picked up at compUSA, and i’d even take it as a combat heavy spinoff with light story, just like the first one. Getting bogged down with dialogue in every city is a turnoff for me as much as I adore BG2/3. Was so nice bringing my own party and exploring the world, one dead beetle, lizardman or undead at a time.
Ooh, another Icewind Dale would be amazing. It’s been 26 years.
While we’re at other properties, when’s the last time Drizz’t made an appearance? We should do a Drizz’t game.
I am half concerned WoTC forgot the lore in the intervening 13 years since the last book, but they did release the Magic card a little while ago so perhaps they will do something interesting with him again.
and he’ll be double wielding… i don’t know, nunchucks this time. because WoTC
To be fair, bg3 is more Divinity Souls 3 than BG3…
They just slapped some BG paint on top of it.
Trying to find a studio that can make a sequel to that isn’t going to work out well. They need to make the tough call of finding another studio that will take the franchise and make a good game how they know how to make a good game.
I suspect Hasbro went ahead and continued offering BG4 to studios until one of them took the bait.
Classic Hasbro trying to brute force success when they have no clue what they‘re working with. One can only hope nobody takes on the project when Hasbro approaches them. Best thing that could happen is that nobody really cares and the game is forgotten quickly since it would be nothing like any of the other BG games. Worst case it tarnishes the franchise forever.
It’s only insanity if you don’t have ideas and can’t think logically about how the player could do any given thing in the game.
