Lack of proper "fail-forward" mechanic is hurting the game

[Alleluja2000]

Very long post. I'm sorry for that.
I care about the game and I'm having a blast so I hope this critique won't be taken as "hating the game" - Again, I love it but there are some big flaws (IMO) with the systems in place.

Fail-forward - As in proper mechanic that takes under consideration failing a dice roll while at the same time providing SATISFYING outcome anyway.

The best examples of this are, IMO, Disco Elysium and Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire
I know I'm about to see bunch of folks saying "Noooo I never save scum in BG3! I always just go with the flow!" and I guess... Good for you?
It doesn't change the fact that dice roll is very unbalanced right now and it's not in a good place.
(https://www.pcgamer.com/baldurs-gate-3-save-scumming/ - just one of the many examples)

Now - I don't know if WotC forced Larian to put so much of DnD dice rolling into the game (bare in mind - in EA you could turn off dice rolls;)) but it's not well implemented.

Comparison to DE is unfair of course - That game has one of the best writing ever and the amount of choices you have is insane. So even when you fail while making a decision, outcomes are so good you almost never reroll or load save. It's briliant.
But comparision to PoE2:D is fair IMO. In a way, PoE is much closer to BG1/2 than BG3 is and in PoE2 you do have dice rolls.

They work differently (there's no widget with actuall dice like in BG3) but most importantly - Dice rolls in PoE2 are NOT connected to major choices. Those are done by stat check.
So let's say you want to persuade someone - Game checks if you have a proper stat and if you don't, you can still boost yourself by using proper items/spells etc.
But once you do pass the check - You don't have to roll dice ON TOP of that. It's your stats that determine success - Not RNG like in BG3

Why it's terrible in BG3 IMO? Because the idea is that you build up your character, you roleplay as silver tongue bard, you boost yourself with spell and... You can still fail a MAJOR plotpoint because RNG decided to kick you in the nuts.
And then, what's even worse, you're stuck. That's what I mean by lack of fail-forward. The outcomes of your failure are just not fun and they stand in oposition to what you wanted to achive.

And before you say "welcome to d'n'd"
- Firstly: It's a video game. If you want to use that argument you'd better used ALL the way through because I could say - In dnd a good DM usually provides outcome that allows you to recover by using different stat to achive the same result. BG3 doesn't do that.

- Secondly - Stats are loosing a lot of value. PoE system is inspired by DnD and but again - They made sure that the most important choices are based around stats and not dice rolls.

- And finally - The fact that we already have a mod that allows infinite re-rolls and it's in top 3 most download mods since launch says a lot about this system.

[Alleluja2000]

Originally posted by Kyutaru:

Originally posted by Clonedpickle:

Imagine having to use a infinite roll mod cause you can't accept losing on rolls. I only save scum if party gets wiped out, everything else I let it ride. Failing rolls is part of D&D, making so you get every check right just makes the game really boring.

Yeah, it's like complaining that you missed a shot in XCOM and one of your troops died. That's... the point... you're supposed to fail sometimes and suffer setbacks. You recover from them all the same. There's tons of Revivify scrolls in this game but these guys are too cheap to use any because failing means reloading to them.

If you failed the major plot point, then it's not because your silver tongued bard sucks at his job. It's because being a silver tongued bard doesn't guarantee that every person you meet will fall under your vocal hypnotism. You can reload the game if that sits poorly with you or accept the result for what it is like an adult. Even in reality, you can be a master of your craft and still make a mistake that a novice would have noticed.

And even when you DO fail, you can use inspiration to try again. The game has built in cheats to give you rerolls.

vvvvv

Originally posted by dulany67:

The nature of RL is that even those who are very good at something still fail. Complaints of this nature come off as seeking an escape from the chaotic reality of life.

It's a fantasy game, but it works because of the attempt to structure it with realism.

You don't understand a word I wrote.

I had entire paragraph saying I LIKE fail-forward system in DE/PoE etc. but BG3 so far (I'm at the end of ACT 2) has very poor system in place as in - The result of failure is simply brute forcing the outcome that was previously in place instead of offering alternative way like in DE.

So please. Point out where did I say I don't like failing and I want to "win every time".

[Douchebag Extraordinaire]

Man, a lot of people really failed to understand your point here.

I agree, a lot of failed rolls don't really achieve anything aside from shutting down an option but a game that writes "fail forward" needs to be much more focused (like Disco Elysium) and Larian games are the opposite of that, there would be too many branches of possibility.

[Veg]

TBH, the whole dice rolling thing doesnt work too well in Video games where there is no permanence. In a real game of D&D you cant just quick load. I think the devs do a good job of off setting this with advantage and party support and such that really doesnt appear at real D&D tables. But its def a translation issue from TTRPG to Video games.

[Kyutaru]

Originally posted by Alleluja2000:

You don't understand a word I wrote.

I had entire paragraph saying I LIKE fail-forward system in DE/PoE etc. but BG3 so far (I'm at the end of ACT 2) has very poor system in place as in - The result of failure is simply brute forcing the outcome that was previously in place instead of offering alternative way like in DE.

So please. Point out where did I say I don't like failing and I want to "win every time".

Oh I read them all. It's you that's forgetting your own words. Not AGREEING with what you wrote is not the same as not UNDERSTANDING it.

Originally posted by Alleluja2000:

Why it's terrible in BG3 IMO? Because the idea is that you build up your character, you roleplay as silver tongue bard, you boost yourself with spell and... You can still fail a MAJOR plotpoint because RNG decided to kick you in the nuts.
And then, what's even worse, you're stuck. That's what I mean by lack of fail-forward. The outcomes of your failure are just not fun and they stand in oposition to what you wanted to achive.

You want to win even if it means you lost. Your weird definition of fail-forward is that the outcome still happens just in a different way because you don't want to take no for an answer.

Originally posted by Alleluja2000:

In dnd a good DM usually provides outcome that allows you to recover by using different stat to achive the same result. BG3 doesn't do that.

You expect the game, or the DM, to cheat in your favor to gain the SAME RESULT you wanted or were after. Because again, taking no for an answer doesn't sit well with you despite this being an RPG. The plot doesn't magically change itself to always suit you like some Mass Effect game where no matter what you answer the result is still going to be the same.


It's almost like this game is based on the original Baldur's Gate games where your options were always try to talk your way out of something and failing that kill everyone in your way.

[Alleluja2000]

Originally posted by Douchebag Extraordinaire:

Man, a lot of people really failed to understand your point here.

I agree, a lot of failed rolls don't really achieve anything aside from shutting down an option but a game that writes "fail forward" needs to be much more focused (like Disco Elysium) and Larian games are the opposite of that, there would be too many branches of possibility.

Yes!! Thank you!

And your point about "focus" - Sure, 100%. DE could do that because it's much smaller in scope while at the same having a massive script. There's just no way BG3 could be as flexible as DE because of that...
...that being said, IMO, they should limit dice rolls to combat and leave dialogue options to stat checks.
But that's just my opinion. I don't know why folks don't read my OP and just put words in my mouth or think I want to "change the game".
I like BG3 but it doesn't mean I'm gonna love all design decisions.

[ULTRA]

Considering the fact that like 4 things actually happen in the entirety of Disco Elysium which aren't just block text, it's not as though it did it a whole lot better. But yes, this is yet another example of how the people going on about the AMAZING SCOPE AND DETAIL of the game are deluded.

[Loquitran]

It seems to me that the OP is just seeking validation and not an actual discussion, since he dismissed every opinion that is contrary to what he thinks the game should be.

[RoboSauce]

Larian house ruled so much they could have used roll under for skill checks I suppose, its a lot harder to fail what you have invested in. Thankfully you can gain inspiration to reroll, and some rolls have advantage. The lucky feat exists as well. There are also times when you can switch party members and try again. I'm not saying OP is wrong, I'm saying skill checks have a lot of issues and possible solutions.

[Loquitran]

Originally posted by ULTRA:

Considering the fact that like 4 things actually happen in the entirety of Disco Elysium which aren't just block text, it's not as though it did it a whole lot better. But yes, this is yet another example of how the people going on about the AMAZING SCOPE AND DETAIL of the game are deluded.

Not even mentioning that the game tried to be a detective rpg game, and you the player naturally tries to find the culprit from all the npcs that you met throughout the game but turns out that the culprit is just a random dude that the game revealed in its last minutes. 10/10 storytelling game of the year.

[Alleluja2000]

Originally posted by Loquitran:

Originally posted by ULTRA:

Considering the fact that like 4 things actually happen in the entirety of Disco Elysium which aren't just block text, it's not as though it did it a whole lot better. But yes, this is yet another example of how the people going on about the AMAZING SCOPE AND DETAIL of the game are deluded.

Not even mentioning that the game tried to be a detective rpg game, and you the player naturally tries to find the culprit from all the npcs that you met throughout the game but turns out that the culprit is just a random dude that the game revealed in its last minutes. 10/10 storytelling game of the year.

Seems like you completly missed the point of DE.
Oh and it's kinda ironic that you're bashing a game that's widely considered as one of the best written games of all time and yet you're trying to "explain" how wrong I am becasue I think BG3 has a lot of broken systems :]

[Zogtar]

Gotta play where the dice land, if you can't handle it, mod the game.

[Loquitran]

Originally posted by Alleluja2000:

Originally posted by Loquitran:

Not even mentioning that the game tried to be a detective rpg game, and you the player naturally tries to find the culprit from all the npcs that you met throughout the game but turns out that the culprit is just a random dude that the game revealed in its last minutes. 10/10 storytelling game of the year.

Seems like you completly missed the point of DE.
Oh and it's kinda ironic that you're bashing a game that's widely considered as one of the best written games of all time and yet you're trying to "explain" how wrong I am becasue I think BG3 has a lot of broken systems :]

The people who vote for the "best" this or that nowadays, don't have the same taste for games as I do. Not saying that I'm right, but this argument means nothing to me.

[Sigvuld]

Originally posted by Kyutaru:

Originally posted by Alleluja2000:

And before you say "welcome to d'n'd"
- Firstly: It's a video game. If you want to use that argument you'd better used ALL the way through because I could say - In dnd a good DM usually provides outcome that allows you to recover by using different stat to achive the same result. BG3 doesn't do that.

That's a myth brought on by the newcomers to the hobby that arrived with 3rd edition, where broken character builds were possible and players grew comfortable with being overpowered while their DMs didn't know how to properly challenge them without going overboard.

2nd edition D&D was a meat grinder of dead character after dead character and some nights, which were water cooler stories to be remembered for the rest of your life, the entire party wiped in a fantastic way. It was like playing Project Zomboid and the opening words are "This is how you died..." then you proceed to try to survive as long as possible before you get taken by traps, eaten by dragons, smashed by trolls, or fall off your flying horse mid flight.

Have you never actually played D&D???

Proper DMs back in the day were rules referees and the game was designed to be BRUTAL and GOREY as it originated from a tabletop wargame where mass melee and carnage were the norm. A level 1 wizard in the old days had 4 hp. Just 4. A dagger did 1d4 damage. You could ONE SHOT a wizard with one of the weakest weapons in the game. Constitution didn't give HP past a certain point for non-Warriors and EVERYONE stopped getting Hit Dice after level 9. Wizards past level 9 only got 1 extra hp per level, which allowed spells like Power Word Kill (which killed anyone with 60 or less HP instantly without a saving throw) to ONE SHOT lvl 20 maxed out Wizards.

D&D has always been lethal and your character just a story to be told, about his triumphs, his romances, but also his death. Characters die. You make new ones. Welcome to D&D.

D&D is about giving your players options and people at the table agreeing to what makes everyone happy, not arbitrarily making the game play a certain way. It's literally in the official DM's guide - advice given by the developers themselves in a book you can purchase RIGHT NOW isn't a 'myth' lmfao

[Alleluja2000]

Originally posted by Loquitran:

Originally posted by Alleluja2000:

Seems like you completly missed the point of DE.
Oh and it's kinda ironic that you're bashing a game that's widely considered as one of the best written games of all time and yet you're trying to "explain" how wrong I am becasue I think BG3 has a lot of broken systems :]

The people who vote for the "best" this or that nowadays, don't have the same taste for games as I do. Not saying that I'm right, but this argument means nothing to me.

Again. Ironic when you're so defensive about BG3. Hard for find more mainstream game right now.
But at the same time I went through your posts and it seems like you like to be an apoligist for companies even if you're simply spreading bs. (like saying Last Epoch devs being "indie")

[Kyutaru]

Originally posted by Sigvuld:

D&D is about giving your players options and people at the table agreeing to what makes everyone happy, not arbitrarily making the game play a certain way. It's literally in the official DM's guide - advice given by the developers themselves in a book you can purchase RIGHT NOW isn't a 'myth' lmfao

The same official DM's guide that advises how to balance encounters and spend XP for an appropriate encounter, an encounter that would wreck players looking to play superheroes? Yeah, it's play your way, but ignoring the charts and tables and appropriate levels to stack 6 party members against mildly threatening encounters isn't playing the game as suggested, it's taking the variant option of playing it your way in defiance of the codified ruleset.

It's written both ways. That you can do whatever you want but also that this is how the game is played. Ignoring that in favor of sunshine, rainbows, unicorns, and plot armor is the myth perpetuated.