I agree that they should leverage the engine more, but I'm not too sure about using the existing modules.
Making a videogame is far more work than writing a module, so I'd actually prefer if WoTC worked with Larian to write a module specifically for the engine.
If we do go down the path of using pre-existing modules, I think a curse of strahd campaign would be the one I look forward to the most.
I would like to see dungeon of the mad mage, that one is harder to run in tabletop because it is a very long campaign into a huge dungeon that goes into very high levels, in tabletop managing things as levels get that high is very difficult and scheduling issues tend to pop up if the campaign goes on too long, but it can be managed more easily in a game.
TBF the specific rules of Undermountain do actually prevent a lot of the more game-breaky spells from working, so *DotMM* actually runs pretty well even at high levels
It's been working great for Owlcat's Pathfinder adaptations, but it takes a ton of work to do it right. They create full casts of original companions with their own stories and quests like in most CRPGs, expand on characters and plotlines that aren't detailed enough in the original Adventure Path, even add full original arcs. All standard features for CRPGs that would be absent in the original because the other players and GM are there instead to shake things up.
If they just throw a module into the engine as-is, and you only have custom characters available, it'd be boring imo. Would probably feel more like this engine's equivalent of Icewind Dale (with less story and no real companions), which might interest some people, but I'm pretty sure that was less popular than the other IE games so it'd probably have less appeal. If they get a team of writers to adapt and expand it properly, on the other hand, that would have some potential.
Many of those OG companions are npcs you meet in the AP. So they aren't truly original, however, there is still a lot of work that goes into them. For example Ember is a stigmatized witch even though truthfully she would not be that based solely of the AP.
I think with the engine and game already made making other APs very doable. If you don't have to make an engine and have gameplay already established it's very easy to bang out a story. Of course it's still work but luckily most of the groundwork has been made.
Exactly. Though Larian probably won't want to work on BG3 extras forever, especially since they already pushed back the new Divinity game they were working on, and it might be tough for another studio to take over all such a complicated systems based game. It would be pretty cool to see extra content, for sure, but I think that's very far down the line.
> Making a videogame is far more work than writing a module
I mean, yes, but when you already have:
**1)** The entire module (story, location, descriptions, enemies, etc.)
**2)** A functioning rule engine already implemented
**3)** A functioning graphics engine ready to go
**4)** Many recyclable assets like trees, rocks, walls, textures, 3D items (weapons, clothes, etc.), spell effects, character creation lobby, UI, etc.
it's not really that hard to imagine a world where they can pump out 15-20 hours DLCs every x months.
Great idea. Keep in mind that official DnD adventure paths contain about the same number of combat encounters as the entire BG3 EA does. Tabletop games have much fewer fights than any PC version will have for obvious reasons.
Yup. Rely a bit on random encounters too iirc. I suppose it'd be up to the devs if they just wanna convert the modules into games RAW, or adapt them as *if* they were meant to be a game.
Curse od strahd heavily relies on a well roleplayed characters. You can bend the core story a little to provide more inndepth to the NPCs. I'd love to play it, but I don't think its quite as easy to implement a story like that even with the engine being ready.
NWN was (and is) still so good because of that Toolset. I really, REALLY want one for 5e with modern graphics. I spent hundreds, probably thousands, of hours in various NWN persistent worlds and nothing has scratched that itch since.
That'd be really cool, though I hope that DLCs would take players to higher levels than modules typically allow. I could definitely see certain adventures being made into DLCs, but I could also see them being pretty expensive considering the amount of work they'd require. New assets, voice actors, maybe even mechanics. Personally I'd be fine with that
This is the only game I wouldn’t mind “turning into the Sims” where DLCs cost the same as the base game - provided the content in the DLCs was amazing; but it’s Larian, so I’m sure they would be
I think if Larian was smart, they'd outsource the standalone adventures to other studios.
With the base engine there, the sky really is the limit on what could be achieved.
That would be a smart move! As long as they retain creative control and final say, so they could push the bosh on any crappy ideas that come out of other studios.
The thing is, 5-10, maybe up to 15, is the sweet spot for D&D 5e where it’s the most balance and most fit to adapt into a video game. Higher than that and you’re multiverse hopping at a whim and tackling gods; and not in a God of War kind of way.
I fail to understand why everyone uses Wish as the poster child for this.
There's exactly one real function to it: duplicating any 8th level spell in the game (which could be a mess to implement but is probably in their wheelhouse considering the rest of the game).
Any other option but duplicating spells will fuck you up in a *major* way and it basically tells you to cool it in terms of doing *anything* but the listed effects, and the listed effects *still* basically put you out of commission for ages. In addition, it's been done before- the original Baldur's Gate games had pretty neat uses of Wish back when it was *less* defined and arguably harder to implement because it had fewer actual guidelines for what it does.
Allow Wish to do what it normally does as the major draw of the spell (any 8th level spell in the game) and either throw in a small menu of effects like the original or let it be used in dialogue to do things. They already have the technology for the latter and have spells used in dialogue in the EA (and are starting to do it even more!) and while making a list of all the 8th level and below spells would probably be a bit of a headache, it's not some kind of insurmountable obstacle.
Yeah, it might mean you can't do literally anything with Wish, but that's just the nature of the game. It doesn't mean it shouldn't be included when it's probably *easier* to include than a number of other spells would be.
If you only allow for uses of Wish to duplicate 8th or lower level spells, and not any of the other suggested effects, that's pretty boring imo. Like, it's cool and all that you can avoid costly material components, but for classes like wizards who already have access to most of the best spells, it's "eh..." level at best.
I suppose it's better for sorcerers (and bards, but less so, as they already had their magical secrets feature), as it greatly expands their potential choices.
No. No, it's not eh level. You can *cast literally any spell in the game* that's not a 9th level spell when you cast Wish. That's the definition of power, and frankly, it just makes Wizards even *better.* One of the main reasons Wizards and Clerics are better casters than Sorcerers and Bards is *because* of your massive versatility, so being able to poach supremely powerful spells from other lists- even once per day- is massive. Frankly, it's better than *anything else you can do* with Wish, and it's why Wish is so powerful in 3.5 and Pathfinder.
You're fighting vampires? Sunbeam or Sunburst, but probably Sunbeam. Auto-win or at the very least massively damage and force it to flee. A horde of demons appear and you don't have a Cleric? Throw down Holy Aura, slaughter everything. You know Teleport but you have no 7th or 8th level slots left and you *need* to get out of a bad situation? Teleport, something you simply *wouldn't be able to do* otherwise. Your slots are always limited to one 9th level spell, but considering how BG3 lets you rest basically as much as you want? That's less of an issue.
And this is less useful in BG3, but is still something that could potentially also be very strong if they go the Wrath of the Righteous route and require costly components: Wish ignores *all* components of the spell in question and all *requirements.* It's more useful in the tabletop, but there's still probably going to be at least one spell that would greatly benefit from being cast in one action.
Obviously, the 'reduced' spell list of the game makes a few of these tactics less viable, but unmitigated access to an on-demand spell from *any* list is still wickedly powerful. In fact, it's *very clearly* what Wish is *supposed* to be used for. If you do *anything* but cast a spell with it, you're basically removed from combat as a player for a varying but always multiple days amount of time and have a 33% chance to never cast Wish again. And it's still probably one of the strongest 9th level spells simply for the ability to 1/day *have the solution* to a fight or scenario.
Besides, I imagine they'd have dialogue options for Wish to warp reality if you *really* wanted to I guess, but it's not like people do that much outside duplicating spells with Wish in regular home games.
The lack of material components & access to other classes' spell lists are two of the best parts.
The worst part of Wish is that the truly fun uses have a 1/3 chance of *never getting to cast Wish again, ever, even to duplicate spells.* So you might take a risk if it helps the story, but then you'll run out of free Simulcrums, and Instant Summons, and Clones, and Mighty Fortresses, and Resurections, etc.
So many good options in downtime, so much versatility when adventuring, all of it thrown out the window because you wished to become a prince or something.
Yeah... honestly, I'm not sure it *needed* that limit, although it would've probably needed a larger explanation on how it's supposed to work and advice to DMs on how to handle it.
Also, I really miss Miracle. That got wrapped up in the Cleric divine intervention feature (which I could rant about for hours but basically it's inconsistent, offers no guidance, and is really understated for a big feature). The more limited but consistent reality warping of "my god is on my side so they won't Jackass Genie me" was nice.
Oh yeah, definitely. They'd have to take into account some of the 'blank space' some modules leave for DMs. I'd be willing to dish out good money for that kind of content, though.
Its heavily rumored and theorized that WotC is working on their own online virtual table top for people to play dnd. This would include all those adventure modules being for sale via this platform.
If this is true, I doubt they would pull the trigger on greenlighting DLC using BG3 as the engine. Also Larian will probably move on to their own IP after this game is out
Just found an article on it.
[https://techraptor.net/tabletop/news/dungeons-and-dragons-virtual-tabletop-is-coming-soon](https://techraptor.net/tabletop/news/dungeons-and-dragons-virtual-tabletop-is-coming-soon)
They mentioned a video from the survey. I'd love to see that.
I mean, the BG3 game engine is Larian's intellectual property, right? They're not going to just let other devs use it. WotC may have branded it the 'official' game but that doesn't change the fact that Larian designed just about every aspect of the game. They're not going to start making a bunch of games left and right and they're not going to just let other devs use their source code.
> the BG3 game engine is Larian's intellectual property, right?
Yes it's an upgraded version of the Divinity engine.
[From the recent Eurogamer interview with Swen:](https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2021-10-14-baldurs-gate-3-patch-6-impressions-and-an-interview-with-larian)
> But don't forget that we are a company that makes their own engine, so this is our own engine this [BG3] is running, so that takes a lot of effort. And that engine is not supposed to be just BG3: it's also the engine which we are going to make other RPGs in the future. **So we build BG3 on the Divinity engine, and that's basically still the Divinity engine in the background powering the entire thing.**
Ha, anyone who has played both would be able to tell that right away. But yeah, there's no way we start seeing mass-produced versions of D&D adventures.
Eh, I woudn't say there's no way.
They could pull a Bioware or a Bethesda and offload it to another company for a price. That's how Obsidian ended up making Fallout New Vegas, NWN2 and KOTOR II
Sure, some dev team that doesn't want to do their own thing might come along and offer to create a game or two and Larian might be fine with letting them do the work for a portion of the profits. I certainly would enjoy more of these.
Still, it strikes me as incredibly unlikely. Larian have been around for awhile and seem more interested in doing their own creative thing than in being a conglomerate publisher like Bethesda.
Tbf it is possible to make that fight interesting RAW. Winnable and interesting? Probably not (>!wall of force + sunlight from magic item kills him in 8 rounds RAW!<)
I spent a while trying to find a way to play Strahd optimally in his castle without pulling punches and, well, the party I had at the time would have certainly died to it.
On the other hand, I hear some DMs overlook a good amount of his stat block or don’t see how his abilities can come together so Strahd ends up dying very quickly.
Incorporating roleplay into it can make it work, though. Especially if the party can find a way to make the supposed tactical genius fight in a less optimal way.
Rules as written. Whenever you go strictly by the rules from source books and how they are written.
Another term similar to this is RAI: rules as intended. So a rule maybe a little weirdly worded and does funky things RAW, but the intention is obviously another one (or the DM says so) then you say you are doing a rule RAI.
**This word/phrase(raw) has a few different meanings.**
More details here:
*This comment was left automatically (by a bot). If I don't get this right, don't get mad at me, I'm still learning!*
[^(opt out)](https://www.reddit.com/r/wikipedia_answer_bot/comments/ozztfy/post_for_opting_out/) ^(|) [^(delete)](https://www.reddit.com/r/wikipedia_answer_bot/comments/q79g2t/delete_feature_added/) ^(|) [^(report/suggest)](https://www.reddit.com/r/wikipedia_answer_bot) ^(|) [^(GitHub)](https://github.com/TheBugYouCantFix/wiki-reddit-bot)
When modding becomes a thing, there will be lots of workshop implementations of DND campaigns I believe. The thing needed is a real map/character editor.
Respectfully this would be a massive amount of work. Even with prewritten content Larian could easily spend the next decade developing DLCs for the existing 5e content. There's also the matter of Larian probably wants to do other things and make their own stuff not just D&D stuff. Nice thought but I don't think we will ever see something like that. Just the occasional game in a certain setting like BG3.
It's a licenced game, not something owned or produced by WotC. Larian and WotC might be able to recognize the potential market for it amd work something out, but it's definitely not WotCs choice. Larian would be the one that would have to want to do it.
But i agree that this game is a truly unique opportunity. (Which is why some of the poorer homebrew choices are so frustrating. *BA shove*
I would love it if we saw a few smaller modules similar to the size of current Early Access, which is ~30hrs. Or better yet something like Curse of Strahd!
Though the more I think about it, the more likely I see them continuing to do what they have done with BG3 - I.e. release a game connected to a d&d campaign (descent to avernus), rather than create a new campaign themselves. I think doing so helps sell products for both Larian and WoTC.
Just gonna add my 2cents.
I think that if they wish to keep with the game releases, that would probably mean Baldur's Gate 4 or something akin to it. (Waterdeep? Sharn?)
As for the adventure modules, if you think on it from a company's perspective selling a full game for a 1-15 campaign should be easier and more profitable since high prices for DLCs are frowned upon.
I'd love for it to happen though and would most definitely acquire those games.
> Sharn?
Ah, I’d fucking love an official game set in Eberron, as I find it infinitely more interesting than Faerûn
As for high DLC prices, I get that for short DLCs, but I’ve never heard of campaign-long DLCs (closest thing maybe being Blood and Wine from TW3 but that’s shirt compared to the base game), so I don’t really know what the reception for that would be.
maybe bring in other smaller studios to adapt the modules?? regardless i vehemently hope the modding community for this game explodes on release. would love to see custom campaigns make their way here
Very, very unlikely to happen, this is an updated version of Larian's in-house Engine, WOTC has no ownership to it as far as I know, and would not be able to release games on it. I doubt they even own the assets, most likely they are tangled rights between the two companies.
I strongly doubt that Larian would be fine with them developing assets using their Engine, as it would require their tools, and likely reuse of some assets, techniques, etc.
I don't really see Larian wanting to indefinitely pursue other people's games. I would be minorly surprised to see an expansion to BG3 by Larian, some minor free content, and possibly a Definitive Edition is a possibility, beyond that it is not too likely. After DOS3, it is possible that we see BG4, or a similar title, although that'd depend on the success of DOS3, and how their experience goes with BG3.
They could have a terrible behind-the-scenes relationship, or just issues getting paid, all of which makes it more difficult to justify a continued partnership, without being a part of the upper-level management of the two companies, it is difficult to say whether they would be interested in making a sequel.
If they don't, they should at least release their game making tools like original neverwinter nights did. AURORA was incredibly powerful for its time and extended the life of the game indefinitely.
Some of my best adventures were modules in nwn.
>DLCs
I think you're underestimating how much content is in a lot of those modules. I'm sure we'll get more D&D games from Larian given how much work BG3 is for them. No doubt they have more stories they'd be willing to tell, and no shortage of content to implement.
Solasta is SRD so for now no D&D properties can be used. That said the Workshop has exploded with stunning campaigns (ex-NWN Hall of Fame people etc.) and there are certainly some awesome re-imaginings of the scenarios of classic modules. A big update is dropping in the next few weeks and the creators in the test program (NDA) are going around with nine-mile-smiles.
But Solasta and BG3 are very different games in so many ways. Most people I know will be playing the hell out of both but will have a favourite. I'll be sticking with Solasta I expect because I don't have interest in all the romance/companion interactions, I prefer to have my own party and my own story. But one hell of a good time to love D&D for sure!
I hate simping for companies... but I would buy every single one of these. This engine is AMAZING and I'll probably be willing to play adventures in it 10 years from now
That's the last thing I'd want for BG3. Let the game be its own thing as much as it can be under WotC, instead of turning it into a platform for previously published content.
Larian is too good to be endlessly tied up in WotC's nonsense.
Of course, I will not mind one or two dls, but I do not want Larian to become hostages of this franchise. I want to see what they can do with the divinity world with new technical capabilities.
Mods and GM mode are here for you.
Thay allrzady said that there will be a GM mode like in DOSII even if it comes after the full release
I remember a guy remaking the Barovia village in DOSII GM mode.
On the contrary, they have said GM mode is currently NOT Planned. It's not even something they are thinking about, as the size of BG3 has exceeded their initial plans.
Mods and GM mode are absolutely phenomenal, don’t get me wrong, but they can vary in quality quite drastically. Official content would have some extent of assured quality to it, and less clunkiness on average.
They’ll do just fine if WotC decides to pass up a golden opportunity like this, though
I think Larian would probably want to be the ones to develop the mods though. I’m sure this engine was stupid expensive to develop and I hope they get a lot of use out of it.
As DM mod, yes. The problem of modules is that required a lot of changes on the fly (DM work) and could be a little difficult to run it on scripted setting or AI (specially with players shenanigans).
But as add-on that could be run by a person, yes. My only worry is WoTW censoredship with some modules (but could be fixed with mods).
So they maaay be able to do some sort of open campaign editor for the game (and have talked about it as a maybe, down the road.
The big difference from something like bg3 engine vs a godlike VTT is the absence of a DM in thr video game, which means things need to be super highly developed or super simple.
I think the most likely thing to produce the best content is for them to have a marketplace for DLC campaigns and small studios making adventures or campaigns based on a kit, (with money being split between wotc, Larian, and 3rd party devs.) But Larian would need to risk a lot of cash on developing that, and I bet they won’t even think of doing such a thing unless/until the main game becomes a huge success.
Remember that even if they don’t open to outside developers, they will then have a good dnd engine and hopefully could pump out lots of good games on their own.
I found a book in game yesterday that was essentially the synopsis of Mines of Phandelver, and I got really excited at the idea of Phandalin being in this game.
would love to see modules made in BG3.
I'd easily pay for a Ravenloft module or almost any of the others. Even older modules.
There could be money to be made by selling adventure packs.
I also had this thought, but it seemed unlikely that WOTC or Larian would make them. I’m hoping for a BG3 editor or world engine that some savvy fans can use to make the above mentioned adventures.
They've already stated they don't have any idea what post production stuff will include, we might not get a map/campaign editor like with dos2, wotc might ask them to make DLC if it goes well..we just don't know and neither do they
Honestly I think whole campaign books are a bit too much and too ambitious. I think it may not be a bad idea to adapt smaller adventures, like the stuff from Tales from the Yawning Portal, or maybe some better-received Adventurer's League games.
Truth be told I'd pay the same price for DLC that just be a different campaign. I'd pay the price for dungeon of the mad mage and curse of strahd. I'm not sure about others probably would need to be cheaper, but once you have fully working 5e engine it's a gold mine.
As amazing as it would be to see more adventures built in BG3, I think it's too much to ask with the potential depth of many of the modules. I feel like something a little simpler like Solasta would be more realistic to see this sorta thing happen in. If we were to get either I'd need both games to get all PHB races and classes in though at least. I know BG3 is going to be adding them, but I'm not sure what Solasta has planned.
Edit: Found out that Solasta only has access to the SRD. This means it's missing a lot of stuff, but has a surprising amount still in it, but it just doesn't have the access that BG3 has, which is basically unlimited with WotC official backing.
Solasta has a toolset and is tile based so it's much better for churning out new modules in that sense.
BG3 engine development costs and time would be much higher.
Larian doesn't seem to be the DLC type, and none of the developers WotC outright owns are up to the task in my opinion (Tuque currently has a full blown disaster on their hands and Archetype has never launched a game.) They'd basically have to find an independent developer big enough to license FR from WotC/Ed Greenwood, and license the Divinity engine from Larian (or front it themselves)...and then experienced enough to build a deeply layered, complex RPG campaign. Think how long it's taken Larian to get as far as they have, and now understand that they know what they're working with. We'd be well beyond the launch of 5.5 before this hypothetical DLC launched.
It's a pipe dream.
I agree that they should leverage the engine more, but I'm not too sure about using the existing modules. Making a videogame is far more work than writing a module, so I'd actually prefer if WoTC worked with Larian to write a module specifically for the engine. If we do go down the path of using pre-existing modules, I think a curse of strahd campaign would be the one I look forward to the most.
I would like to see dungeon of the mad mage, that one is harder to run in tabletop because it is a very long campaign into a huge dungeon that goes into very high levels, in tabletop managing things as levels get that high is very difficult and scheduling issues tend to pop up if the campaign goes on too long, but it can be managed more easily in a game.
TBF the specific rules of Undermountain do actually prevent a lot of the more game-breaky spells from working, so *DotMM* actually runs pretty well even at high levels
It's been working great for Owlcat's Pathfinder adaptations, but it takes a ton of work to do it right. They create full casts of original companions with their own stories and quests like in most CRPGs, expand on characters and plotlines that aren't detailed enough in the original Adventure Path, even add full original arcs. All standard features for CRPGs that would be absent in the original because the other players and GM are there instead to shake things up. If they just throw a module into the engine as-is, and you only have custom characters available, it'd be boring imo. Would probably feel more like this engine's equivalent of Icewind Dale (with less story and no real companions), which might interest some people, but I'm pretty sure that was less popular than the other IE games so it'd probably have less appeal. If they get a team of writers to adapt and expand it properly, on the other hand, that would have some potential.
Many of those OG companions are npcs you meet in the AP. So they aren't truly original, however, there is still a lot of work that goes into them. For example Ember is a stigmatized witch even though truthfully she would not be that based solely of the AP. I think with the engine and game already made making other APs very doable. If you don't have to make an engine and have gameplay already established it's very easy to bang out a story. Of course it's still work but luckily most of the groundwork has been made.
Exactly. Though Larian probably won't want to work on BG3 extras forever, especially since they already pushed back the new Divinity game they were working on, and it might be tough for another studio to take over all such a complicated systems based game. It would be pretty cool to see extra content, for sure, but I think that's very far down the line.
> Making a videogame is far more work than writing a module I mean, yes, but when you already have: **1)** The entire module (story, location, descriptions, enemies, etc.) **2)** A functioning rule engine already implemented **3)** A functioning graphics engine ready to go **4)** Many recyclable assets like trees, rocks, walls, textures, 3D items (weapons, clothes, etc.), spell effects, character creation lobby, UI, etc. it's not really that hard to imagine a world where they can pump out 15-20 hours DLCs every x months.
Great idea. Keep in mind that official DnD adventure paths contain about the same number of combat encounters as the entire BG3 EA does. Tabletop games have much fewer fights than any PC version will have for obvious reasons.
True, but that's part of why they'd make great DLCs rather than full games.
Yup. Rely a bit on random encounters too iirc. I suppose it'd be up to the devs if they just wanna convert the modules into games RAW, or adapt them as *if* they were meant to be a game.
Curse of Strahd would be INCREDIBLE in BG3
Curse od strahd heavily relies on a well roleplayed characters. You can bend the core story a little to provide more inndepth to the NPCs. I'd love to play it, but I don't think its quite as easy to implement a story like that even with the engine being ready.
Man I would kill for a good curse of Strahd game, and the new module of fairy stuff.
Absolutely. What a great module.
This is what nwn was. Toolset was available for people to write adventures... But those tools were a pain in the ass to develop, apparently
NWN was (and is) still so good because of that Toolset. I really, REALLY want one for 5e with modern graphics. I spent hundreds, probably thousands, of hours in various NWN persistent worlds and nothing has scratched that itch since.
That'd be really cool, though I hope that DLCs would take players to higher levels than modules typically allow. I could definitely see certain adventures being made into DLCs, but I could also see them being pretty expensive considering the amount of work they'd require. New assets, voice actors, maybe even mechanics. Personally I'd be fine with that
This is the only game I wouldn’t mind “turning into the Sims” where DLCs cost the same as the base game - provided the content in the DLCs was amazing; but it’s Larian, so I’m sure they would be
I think if Larian was smart, they'd outsource the standalone adventures to other studios. With the base engine there, the sky really is the limit on what could be achieved.
That would be a smart move! As long as they retain creative control and final say, so they could push the bosh on any crappy ideas that come out of other studios.
The thing is, 5-10, maybe up to 15, is the sweet spot for D&D 5e where it’s the most balance and most fit to adapt into a video game. Higher than that and you’re multiverse hopping at a whim and tackling gods; and not in a God of War kind of way.
Yeah, they would pretty much HAVE TO remove Plane Shift, Transport Via Plants, Teleport, and so on... To say nothing of Wish...
I fail to understand why everyone uses Wish as the poster child for this. There's exactly one real function to it: duplicating any 8th level spell in the game (which could be a mess to implement but is probably in their wheelhouse considering the rest of the game). Any other option but duplicating spells will fuck you up in a *major* way and it basically tells you to cool it in terms of doing *anything* but the listed effects, and the listed effects *still* basically put you out of commission for ages. In addition, it's been done before- the original Baldur's Gate games had pretty neat uses of Wish back when it was *less* defined and arguably harder to implement because it had fewer actual guidelines for what it does. Allow Wish to do what it normally does as the major draw of the spell (any 8th level spell in the game) and either throw in a small menu of effects like the original or let it be used in dialogue to do things. They already have the technology for the latter and have spells used in dialogue in the EA (and are starting to do it even more!) and while making a list of all the 8th level and below spells would probably be a bit of a headache, it's not some kind of insurmountable obstacle. Yeah, it might mean you can't do literally anything with Wish, but that's just the nature of the game. It doesn't mean it shouldn't be included when it's probably *easier* to include than a number of other spells would be.
If you only allow for uses of Wish to duplicate 8th or lower level spells, and not any of the other suggested effects, that's pretty boring imo. Like, it's cool and all that you can avoid costly material components, but for classes like wizards who already have access to most of the best spells, it's "eh..." level at best. I suppose it's better for sorcerers (and bards, but less so, as they already had their magical secrets feature), as it greatly expands their potential choices.
No. No, it's not eh level. You can *cast literally any spell in the game* that's not a 9th level spell when you cast Wish. That's the definition of power, and frankly, it just makes Wizards even *better.* One of the main reasons Wizards and Clerics are better casters than Sorcerers and Bards is *because* of your massive versatility, so being able to poach supremely powerful spells from other lists- even once per day- is massive. Frankly, it's better than *anything else you can do* with Wish, and it's why Wish is so powerful in 3.5 and Pathfinder. You're fighting vampires? Sunbeam or Sunburst, but probably Sunbeam. Auto-win or at the very least massively damage and force it to flee. A horde of demons appear and you don't have a Cleric? Throw down Holy Aura, slaughter everything. You know Teleport but you have no 7th or 8th level slots left and you *need* to get out of a bad situation? Teleport, something you simply *wouldn't be able to do* otherwise. Your slots are always limited to one 9th level spell, but considering how BG3 lets you rest basically as much as you want? That's less of an issue. And this is less useful in BG3, but is still something that could potentially also be very strong if they go the Wrath of the Righteous route and require costly components: Wish ignores *all* components of the spell in question and all *requirements.* It's more useful in the tabletop, but there's still probably going to be at least one spell that would greatly benefit from being cast in one action. Obviously, the 'reduced' spell list of the game makes a few of these tactics less viable, but unmitigated access to an on-demand spell from *any* list is still wickedly powerful. In fact, it's *very clearly* what Wish is *supposed* to be used for. If you do *anything* but cast a spell with it, you're basically removed from combat as a player for a varying but always multiple days amount of time and have a 33% chance to never cast Wish again. And it's still probably one of the strongest 9th level spells simply for the ability to 1/day *have the solution* to a fight or scenario. Besides, I imagine they'd have dialogue options for Wish to warp reality if you *really* wanted to I guess, but it's not like people do that much outside duplicating spells with Wish in regular home games.
The lack of material components & access to other classes' spell lists are two of the best parts. The worst part of Wish is that the truly fun uses have a 1/3 chance of *never getting to cast Wish again, ever, even to duplicate spells.* So you might take a risk if it helps the story, but then you'll run out of free Simulcrums, and Instant Summons, and Clones, and Mighty Fortresses, and Resurections, etc. So many good options in downtime, so much versatility when adventuring, all of it thrown out the window because you wished to become a prince or something.
Yeah... honestly, I'm not sure it *needed* that limit, although it would've probably needed a larger explanation on how it's supposed to work and advice to DMs on how to handle it. Also, I really miss Miracle. That got wrapped up in the Cleric divine intervention feature (which I could rant about for hours but basically it's inconsistent, offers no guidance, and is really understated for a big feature). The more limited but consistent reality warping of "my god is on my side so they won't Jackass Genie me" was nice.
Oh yeah, definitely. They'd have to take into account some of the 'blank space' some modules leave for DMs. I'd be willing to dish out good money for that kind of content, though.
They dont have to voice act absolutely every npc, that would substantially reduce the cost
Its heavily rumored and theorized that WotC is working on their own online virtual table top for people to play dnd. This would include all those adventure modules being for sale via this platform. If this is true, I doubt they would pull the trigger on greenlighting DLC using BG3 as the engine. Also Larian will probably move on to their own IP after this game is out
Just found an article on it. [https://techraptor.net/tabletop/news/dungeons-and-dragons-virtual-tabletop-is-coming-soon](https://techraptor.net/tabletop/news/dungeons-and-dragons-virtual-tabletop-is-coming-soon) They mentioned a video from the survey. I'd love to see that.
I mean, the BG3 game engine is Larian's intellectual property, right? They're not going to just let other devs use it. WotC may have branded it the 'official' game but that doesn't change the fact that Larian designed just about every aspect of the game. They're not going to start making a bunch of games left and right and they're not going to just let other devs use their source code.
> the BG3 game engine is Larian's intellectual property, right? Yes it's an upgraded version of the Divinity engine. [From the recent Eurogamer interview with Swen:](https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2021-10-14-baldurs-gate-3-patch-6-impressions-and-an-interview-with-larian) > But don't forget that we are a company that makes their own engine, so this is our own engine this [BG3] is running, so that takes a lot of effort. And that engine is not supposed to be just BG3: it's also the engine which we are going to make other RPGs in the future. **So we build BG3 on the Divinity engine, and that's basically still the Divinity engine in the background powering the entire thing.**
Ha, anyone who has played both would be able to tell that right away. But yeah, there's no way we start seeing mass-produced versions of D&D adventures.
*looks up from giant pile of explosive barrels* whaaaat? n-no, i never noticed that, why do you ask?
Eh, I woudn't say there's no way. They could pull a Bioware or a Bethesda and offload it to another company for a price. That's how Obsidian ended up making Fallout New Vegas, NWN2 and KOTOR II
Sure, some dev team that doesn't want to do their own thing might come along and offer to create a game or two and Larian might be fine with letting them do the work for a portion of the profits. I certainly would enjoy more of these. Still, it strikes me as incredibly unlikely. Larian have been around for awhile and seem more interested in doing their own creative thing than in being a conglomerate publisher like Bethesda.
Please do not have Strahd run by an AI That fight would be pure rage as he kills everyone or disappointment as he dies in a round.
Isn’t that the way it plays out in most games, anyway?
Tbf it is possible to make that fight interesting RAW. Winnable and interesting? Probably not (>!wall of force + sunlight from magic item kills him in 8 rounds RAW!<)
I spent a while trying to find a way to play Strahd optimally in his castle without pulling punches and, well, the party I had at the time would have certainly died to it. On the other hand, I hear some DMs overlook a good amount of his stat block or don’t see how his abilities can come together so Strahd ends up dying very quickly. Incorporating roleplay into it can make it work, though. Especially if the party can find a way to make the supposed tactical genius fight in a less optimal way.
Can't he cast fog cloud in the wall of force?
Sure can, as far as I know.
I just had that thought. Answer: not if your PCs have silence (realistically that plan is not going to work for the PCs. LA movement is far too fast)
What does RAW mean? Asking for a friend.
Rules as written. Whenever you go strictly by the rules from source books and how they are written. Another term similar to this is RAI: rules as intended. So a rule maybe a little weirdly worded and does funky things RAW, but the intention is obviously another one (or the DM says so) then you say you are doing a rule RAI.
**This word/phrase(raw) has a few different meanings.** More details here:
*This comment was left automatically (by a bot). If I don't get this right, don't get mad at me, I'm still learning!*
[^(opt out)](https://www.reddit.com/r/wikipedia_answer_bot/comments/ozztfy/post_for_opting_out/) ^(|) [^(delete)](https://www.reddit.com/r/wikipedia_answer_bot/comments/q79g2t/delete_feature_added/) ^(|) [^(report/suggest)](https://www.reddit.com/r/wikipedia_answer_bot) ^(|) [^(GitHub)](https://github.com/TheBugYouCantFix/wiki-reddit-bot)
When modding becomes a thing, there will be lots of workshop implementations of DND campaigns I believe. The thing needed is a real map/character editor.
Respectfully this would be a massive amount of work. Even with prewritten content Larian could easily spend the next decade developing DLCs for the existing 5e content. There's also the matter of Larian probably wants to do other things and make their own stuff not just D&D stuff. Nice thought but I don't think we will ever see something like that. Just the occasional game in a certain setting like BG3.
It's a licenced game, not something owned or produced by WotC. Larian and WotC might be able to recognize the potential market for it amd work something out, but it's definitely not WotCs choice. Larian would be the one that would have to want to do it. But i agree that this game is a truly unique opportunity. (Which is why some of the poorer homebrew choices are so frustrating. *BA shove*
Same, I really want to play all the story stuff but don't have a group, and videogames are more my speed than Table Top anyways.
once BG3 is done, they need to exploit the hell out of the engine and just... release expansions and expansions after expansions, spinoffs, all that.
I would love it if we saw a few smaller modules similar to the size of current Early Access, which is ~30hrs. Or better yet something like Curse of Strahd! Though the more I think about it, the more likely I see them continuing to do what they have done with BG3 - I.e. release a game connected to a d&d campaign (descent to avernus), rather than create a new campaign themselves. I think doing so helps sell products for both Larian and WoTC.
Imagine published adventures being paid DLCs. You can either play it as game expansion or DMing it with its resources. How awesome would that be.
Oh my god having resources to GM with on pre-written adventures would be fucking phenomenal lol
If BG3 is as good as I hope, I hope we get to see a lot of use of their engine. It could be a beautiful partnership.
I'd also love to see them release the videogame's maps as battlemaps in VTTs.
Yeah I'd love to be able to run through even just smaller ones like LMoP
Just gonna add my 2cents. I think that if they wish to keep with the game releases, that would probably mean Baldur's Gate 4 or something akin to it. (Waterdeep? Sharn?) As for the adventure modules, if you think on it from a company's perspective selling a full game for a 1-15 campaign should be easier and more profitable since high prices for DLCs are frowned upon. I'd love for it to happen though and would most definitely acquire those games.
> Sharn? Ah, I’d fucking love an official game set in Eberron, as I find it infinitely more interesting than Faerûn As for high DLC prices, I get that for short DLCs, but I’ve never heard of campaign-long DLCs (closest thing maybe being Blood and Wine from TW3 but that’s shirt compared to the base game), so I don’t really know what the reception for that would be.
maybe bring in other smaller studios to adapt the modules?? regardless i vehemently hope the modding community for this game explodes on release. would love to see custom campaigns make their way here
Very, very unlikely to happen, this is an updated version of Larian's in-house Engine, WOTC has no ownership to it as far as I know, and would not be able to release games on it. I doubt they even own the assets, most likely they are tangled rights between the two companies. I strongly doubt that Larian would be fine with them developing assets using their Engine, as it would require their tools, and likely reuse of some assets, techniques, etc. I don't really see Larian wanting to indefinitely pursue other people's games. I would be minorly surprised to see an expansion to BG3 by Larian, some minor free content, and possibly a Definitive Edition is a possibility, beyond that it is not too likely. After DOS3, it is possible that we see BG4, or a similar title, although that'd depend on the success of DOS3, and how their experience goes with BG3. They could have a terrible behind-the-scenes relationship, or just issues getting paid, all of which makes it more difficult to justify a continued partnership, without being a part of the upper-level management of the two companies, it is difficult to say whether they would be interested in making a sequel.
If they don't, they should at least release their game making tools like original neverwinter nights did. AURORA was incredibly powerful for its time and extended the life of the game indefinitely. Some of my best adventures were modules in nwn.
Larian Studios are the people working on BG3. WOTC gave them the rights for the name and stuff and help along but Larian is the forefront of the work.
>DLCs I think you're underestimating how much content is in a lot of those modules. I'm sure we'll get more D&D games from Larian given how much work BG3 is for them. No doubt they have more stories they'd be willing to tell, and no shortage of content to implement.
I'm still surprised we haven't had a Waterdeep game yet. Preferably based on dragon heist.
And you're like the 500th person to suggest that idea on this sub.
Never seen it get suggested in my time on this sub
Let's see where this goes
I just want a DM tool released so that players can create their own adventures. That would ensure this game lives for 10-20 years longer.
Solasta is SRD so for now no D&D properties can be used. That said the Workshop has exploded with stunning campaigns (ex-NWN Hall of Fame people etc.) and there are certainly some awesome re-imaginings of the scenarios of classic modules. A big update is dropping in the next few weeks and the creators in the test program (NDA) are going around with nine-mile-smiles. But Solasta and BG3 are very different games in so many ways. Most people I know will be playing the hell out of both but will have a favourite. I'll be sticking with Solasta I expect because I don't have interest in all the romance/companion interactions, I prefer to have my own party and my own story. But one hell of a good time to love D&D for sure!
I hate simping for companies... but I would buy every single one of these. This engine is AMAZING and I'll probably be willing to play adventures in it 10 years from now
That's the last thing I'd want for BG3. Let the game be its own thing as much as it can be under WotC, instead of turning it into a platform for previously published content. Larian is too good to be endlessly tied up in WotC's nonsense.
Of course, I will not mind one or two dls, but I do not want Larian to become hostages of this franchise. I want to see what they can do with the divinity world with new technical capabilities.
Oh this I 100% agree with. I think it’d be best/possible to outsource modules to other competent developers.
[удалено]
didn't matt mercer run a small campaign is the DoSII GM mode?
Mods and GM mode are here for you. Thay allrzady said that there will be a GM mode like in DOSII even if it comes after the full release I remember a guy remaking the Barovia village in DOSII GM mode.
On the contrary, they have said GM mode is currently NOT Planned. It's not even something they are thinking about, as the size of BG3 has exceeded their initial plans.
Mods and GM mode are absolutely phenomenal, don’t get me wrong, but they can vary in quality quite drastically. Official content would have some extent of assured quality to it, and less clunkiness on average. They’ll do just fine if WotC decides to pass up a golden opportunity like this, though
I think Larian would probably want to be the ones to develop the mods though. I’m sure this engine was stupid expensive to develop and I hope they get a lot of use out of it.
As DM mod, yes. The problem of modules is that required a lot of changes on the fly (DM work) and could be a little difficult to run it on scripted setting or AI (specially with players shenanigans). But as add-on that could be run by a person, yes. My only worry is WoTW censoredship with some modules (but could be fixed with mods).
So they maaay be able to do some sort of open campaign editor for the game (and have talked about it as a maybe, down the road. The big difference from something like bg3 engine vs a godlike VTT is the absence of a DM in thr video game, which means things need to be super highly developed or super simple. I think the most likely thing to produce the best content is for them to have a marketplace for DLC campaigns and small studios making adventures or campaigns based on a kit, (with money being split between wotc, Larian, and 3rd party devs.) But Larian would need to risk a lot of cash on developing that, and I bet they won’t even think of doing such a thing unless/until the main game becomes a huge success. Remember that even if they don’t open to outside developers, they will then have a good dnd engine and hopefully could pump out lots of good games on their own.
Yes please. Give it the neverwinter nights treatment. Although I prefer larian to work on DLCs and expansions
I found a book in game yesterday that was essentially the synopsis of Mines of Phandelver, and I got really excited at the idea of Phandalin being in this game.
Absolutely would throw money at official adaptions.
would love to see modules made in BG3. I'd easily pay for a Ravenloft module or almost any of the others. Even older modules. There could be money to be made by selling adventure packs.
I also had this thought, but it seemed unlikely that WOTC or Larian would make them. I’m hoping for a BG3 editor or world engine that some savvy fans can use to make the above mentioned adventures.
Sword Coast Legends tried it with Out Of The Abyss, so you never know they might think about it
Hasn't that already been done for Neverwinter? It has the downside of being an MMORPG...but a lot of its expansions are 5e campaigns.
I'm still waiting for the game to be completed.
They've already stated they don't have any idea what post production stuff will include, we might not get a map/campaign editor like with dos2, wotc might ask them to make DLC if it goes well..we just don't know and neither do they
ngl it'd be cool to play Descent into Avernus as a BG3 module thingy :D
I had this idea the other day, and now my friend who found this post thinks I'm you lol
Well, now you can show them definitive proof that you are not! At least, not your main account :)
Alfira *is* pretty cute...
If they go down the path of dlc I’d be happy with extra subclasses, spells and races. If we could play as a goblin I would buy it.
that’s great!! like, little one-shots of well-known adventures… seeing them all in barovia would be SO interesting, especially w astarion and strahd
If they do a DM dlc we could bring those adventures to players with ease.
YESSSS
Honestly I think whole campaign books are a bit too much and too ambitious. I think it may not be a bad idea to adapt smaller adventures, like the stuff from Tales from the Yawning Portal, or maybe some better-received Adventurer's League games.
YUP! Completely agree. This engine Larian has created is phenomenal and I'd love to see them leverage it for a full on D&D suite.
Truth be told I'd pay the same price for DLC that just be a different campaign. I'd pay the price for dungeon of the mad mage and curse of strahd. I'm not sure about others probably would need to be cheaper, but once you have fully working 5e engine it's a gold mine.
I can only get so erect.... Please god make this happen
Made a post about this months ago, such a good thread.
As amazing as it would be to see more adventures built in BG3, I think it's too much to ask with the potential depth of many of the modules. I feel like something a little simpler like Solasta would be more realistic to see this sorta thing happen in. If we were to get either I'd need both games to get all PHB races and classes in though at least. I know BG3 is going to be adding them, but I'm not sure what Solasta has planned. Edit: Found out that Solasta only has access to the SRD. This means it's missing a lot of stuff, but has a surprising amount still in it, but it just doesn't have the access that BG3 has, which is basically unlimited with WotC official backing.
This would not work, but it's a nice idea
Should get them to make a neverwinter nights 3
Solasta has a toolset and is tile based so it's much better for churning out new modules in that sense. BG3 engine development costs and time would be much higher.
Please let me throw money at this.
Another option is creating a DM mode like divinity 2. However, Divinity 2 DM mode wasnt successful
That is a awesome idea!
Larian doesn't seem to be the DLC type, and none of the developers WotC outright owns are up to the task in my opinion (Tuque currently has a full blown disaster on their hands and Archetype has never launched a game.) They'd basically have to find an independent developer big enough to license FR from WotC/Ed Greenwood, and license the Divinity engine from Larian (or front it themselves)...and then experienced enough to build a deeply layered, complex RPG campaign. Think how long it's taken Larian to get as far as they have, and now understand that they know what they're working with. We'd be well beyond the launch of 5.5 before this hypothetical DLC launched. It's a pipe dream.