Choices replaced by RNG

[Dorok]

Many choices in the game are challenged by rolls so RNG.

For example: You can push a band of adventurer:
1. To stay defend a village but this could end in a vain sacrifice (cannon food for goblins appetite), or perhaps have them killed and save a few other people (some some emotional drama trigger)..
2. To leave and ensure rescue them and meet them later at Baldur's Gate (for the pleasure to have rescue them from a massacre, or at reverse have one of them leaving their band to help the village and get killed, and so on).

That's a choice even if done a bit blinded. In this case i remind that if you want make the 1st choice you need succeed a roll. You can fail and the RNG did the choice for you, option 1 or option 2, you wanted option 1, nope RNG said it's option 2.

The problems I see in such design:
- You can be an expert in the competency tested, and have a roll goal at 4, and still fail the roll with a 2.
- When you replay you could want to be sure to play different choices, but the RNG could break such plan.

You can argue that this is D&D so be it. But it's a video game and there's no human master, so for me it's a weak argument. But also, the point remain, it's a RNG game.

In combats RNG is different because there's plenty RNG events and it tends leads to approximate average reflecting skills levels. For events and small dialog challenge the result is based on one roll and it's pure RNG only tempered by a chance level from you skills, you can be great at a skill and still failed the roll.

Do I prefer dialogs choices without any RNG? In fact not really when dialog are used as mini challenge. For me dialog are crap challenge tools, they are much better to offer choices and roleplay. And this is achieved by ensuring that tall choices of a dialog problem give more or less equivalent rewards and penalties from the perspective of player's greed.

[.O.]

Failing a roll simply means you get to enjoy alternative content. It's fine as it is.

[TheBlueFox]

None of the choices that I have encountered have had a massive Pass/Fail consequence. An NPC dies and you don't get a small extra reward, or a character doesn't offer you a small bit of information you don't NEED but could be helpful.

None of the skill based dialogue options lock you out of content, they simply offer you small tidbits, either lore, small rewards, or hints at alternate ways of solving issues.

[Dorok]

It's not fine when at replay you fail again (or win the roll again) and the RNG force you do the same choice.

Most choices in RPG have no major consequences changing the main story or changing the fate of your play making it seriously tougher or easier. So the argument of importance changes nothing, it's not because of RNG involved that the dev design most choices with non major consequences, it's because RPG are like that otherwise it's unmanageable.

[Streeja]

Originally posted by Dorok:

It's not fine when at replay you fail again (or win the roll again) and the RNG force you do the same choice.

Most choices in RPG have no major consequences changing the main story or changing the fate of your play making it seriously tougher or easier. So the argument of importance changes nothing, it's not because of RNG involved that the dev design most choices with non major consequences, it's because RPG are like that otherwise it's unmanageable.

The first couple of playtroughs in BG3 the RNG dialog is fine. But after a few playthroughs you want to explore different dialog and choices to force a different play.

The idea solution for me is to have a tick box in the settings that allows me to pick dialog or roll for them.

That way when I get to the point of wanting to force a different outcome I can.

[Young Souls]

Being an expert in something, doesn't mean one can't fail miserably. This is life basically.
It's annoying tho, in this we can agree.

[dolby]

Yep you can say it's DNd but in Dnd you and DM can adapt on the fly, here in the game you can't...big difference so i agree.

Most choices boil down to to kill or not kill anyway so there is that aspect of a problem as well.
Lack of side and alternative content for quests. There are missed opportunities all over EA. Especially for a evil playthough people complained about that one even more. In bg 3 right now it comes down to RNg and it will decideid if you are a Murderes Hobo or not

[Sogreth]

Originally posted by Dorok:

You can argue that this is D&D so be it. But it's a video game and there's no human master, so for me it's a weak argument. But also, the point remain, it's a RNG game.

Yes there is. Larian is. Larian is the DM.

They already added a way to make RNG not as harsh to the player. What more do you want now? Just to remove all elements of D&D completely and allow you to make any choice you'd like? Give me a break.

Originally posted by Streeja:

The idea solution for me is to have a tick box in the settings that allows me to pick dialog or roll for them.

That way when I get to the point of wanting to force a different outcome I can.

That's not D&D then. That's a different game entirely. Sooooo

[Jack Hawklight]

This would be one of the reasons why I think they should make companions more active in dialogue. If one of them has a better chance at beating the check you should be presented with the option of having them step in and take over the conversation briefly. Would make companions feel more alive and give you a better chance at beating the check. But that is just my opinion. I mean, it would keep the RNG factor in play, but hopefully make it feel a bit less frustrating if you want to force a certain outcome. I realise it isn't a perfect solution, especially if the check is innately difficult to pass.

[Streeja]

Originally posted by Sogreth:

Originally posted by Streeja:

The idea solution for me is to have a tick box in the settings that allows me to pick dialog or roll for them.

That way when I get to the point of wanting to force a different outcome I can.

That's not D&D then. That's a different game entirely. Sooooo

I would say it is absolutely still D&D. If you were on your third or fourth time to do the same module with the same DM. The DM would insure that you don't have the exact same playthrough by putting in some different reactions or choices or something. Or it would be boring.

Look at this from the perspective that many people will play this game over and over back to back. You have to keep it from getting stale by insuring it is at least a little different from every other playthrough.

[guard65]

Yah, where is my version where the goblins are the good guys and those druid just want to push everyone out and take their land?

[Ex.01-MkIII]

How do you know you send them safely to Baldur's Gate? How do you know which choice is positive or negative? How do you know your failing a roll doesn't alter the path they take down the road? We won't know until the game is released - the presented options for this particular case are deadfalls in EA. Where you see two options, I see Rolan as the party leader with a clear objective and two of his friends as party members. On the other hand, if you walk up to a goblin war party unannounced (no prior interactions) and fail a check, can you really expect anything other than combat?

[Ex.01-MkIII]

Originally posted by guard65:

Yah, where is my version where the goblins are the good guys and those druid just want to push everyone out and take their land?

The version is definitely there - depends on your alignment in game and the actions you take. Explaining would enter spoilers territory.

[Ex.01-MkIII]

Originally posted by Dorok:

The problems I see in such design:
- You can be an expert in the competency tested, and have a roll goal at 4, and still fail the roll with a 2.
- When you replay you could want to be sure to play different choices, but the RNG could break such plan.

The real problem is you want to remove RNG from an RNG based game.

[Qiox]

Originally posted by Dorok:

It's not fine when at replay you fail again (or win the roll again) and the RNG force you do the same choice.

Most choices in RPG have no major consequences changing the main story or changing the fate of your play making it seriously tougher or easier. So the argument of importance changes nothing, it's not because of RNG involved that the dev design most choices with non major consequences, it's because RPG are like that otherwise it's unmanageable.

Then save often and reload until you get the outcome you want.

Instead asking for the game to be changed, which would affect everyone is a pretty ♥♥♥♥ move.

[Dorok]

It's fine if you like RNG choices, I explained the point, and don't like it much, but I also don't like dialogue challenges.

There's still an annoying problem at replay. And load a save is so long that it's hardly a good solution. And I doubt it improved much, with DOS2 it's always been very long with the benefit of no leading time after.