Wrath of the Righteous was a superior RPG

[Stranger]

So many options to tailor the experience you wanted to have in the game. From custom difficulty where you could have a ton of enemies but also have them at low health with combat debuffs so that you could have some wuxia power fantasy or really few enemies with overpowering abilities if case you wanted that Elder Scrolls-esque feel.

At character creation you got a complete breakdown of every race, every class, every archtype so you could spend as much time as you wanted really pouring over the, what, like thirty options it offered and figure out what you wanted to play. Want to be a rogue who was more of a military scout than a pick pocket? You can do that. How about an inner city ranger with a faithful hound? That's an option. Want to be a wizard who has a passion for sword duels? That is there too. How about a front line fighter who knows how to read a battlefield and make tactical decisions which will see his squad through to victory? Absolutely. No matter what you had ever seen in a film or read in a book, whatever manga or fantasy art had captured your imagination, you could find a way to make something really close to it.

The story was structured with a hell of a lot greater cohesion without being heavy handed about it. At no point was there any confusion about what you needed to do and at no point did any of the NPCs or companions try to push you out of the driver's seat by trying to dictate what you needed to next. At most NPCs would give you a general goal or direction and leave it to you to figure out how to resolve it, It was a bit linear really and that is one area where this title might have a slight advantage, but it was also much more solid and grounded.

Also, the only random individuals jumping out of bushes to shank you were actual enemies and didn't expect to treat you with total disdain and then be taken in as a friend.

I preferred the companions and story of Kingmaker, but Wrath of the Righteous was such an overhaul of the interface and general polish that I just can't enjoy the actual gameplay ever again and will probably never touch it in the future. Not too worried about that really, I don't have the time to play games like this more than once or twice a year.

It wasn't a perfect game (I could have done without the Crusade battles altogether honestly) but the more I play this the more annoyed I become with some of the design/direction taken in this title which seemed to have totally ignored everything that game got right. Even the UI. In Kingmaker one of your companions Lizzi decides to write a book about you and your exploits after you save her life and so every interface, every panel looks like a book or the sort of charcoal sketch you would see in a book with faded and yellowed parchment to match the period. In WoTR they continue that but with greater subtlety, paying homage to where everything started but also going their own direction. It was perfect. Going back a long long time ago there was game called Arcanum which was a mix of steampunk and fantasy and the UI reflected both of those aesthetics with little gears and rough hewn wood panels and stone inlay. . .What do we get here? Some gold filigree, a black background, some drab browns to make text easier to read but no theme, no artistry, no real thought or reflection on the game itself. It isn't even pleasing to look at it, it is almost as though the only thought it was made with was making sure you didn't look at it long enough to even really notice it.

I don't want to get into anything specific and ruin the experience for anyone playing this or who might play the other, but I think I have made my point without needing to. This really isn't a bad game and I am not trying to suggest it is. . .I just don't understand why it isn't better than it is. I hear GOTY and GOAT tossed around here and honestly I just don't see it. Its good but its not great. . .And it really could have been.

[Army of Optimists]

Originally posted by Hobocop:

Originally posted by Army of Optimists:

And that's without going into their reworks of class features, like how Berserker Barbarian gets a much better Frenzy than the tabletop version or WIldheart is a homebrew buffed version of the Totem Warrior.

So please, let's not pretend that the PHB was in any way balanced, nor is a straight 1:1 port necessarily the best fit for a video game. See: Jeremy Crawford endorsing the Wild Shape changes with the patch the introduced the druid into Early Access.

Regardless of the opinion on the changes, BG3 is not accurate to the tabletop rules and anyone claiming such is just wrong.

I'd agree that the changes to Frenzy are good (though I don't understand why Totem Warrior had to be buffed. It's already a strong subclass in the PHB). However, I think the changes to Haste, the healing potion AOE interaction with Throw, and the Shove/Jump bonus actions are bad changes. I also think falling damage is far greater than it is in the tabletop (1d6 per every 10ft). You push an enemy off a house and they take far more than the expected 5-10 damage. Either that or every building in Faerun has super-vaulted 30ft high stories.

[Helios]

Originally posted by Naked Granny:

Originally posted by Helios:

The big problem with wotr for me is that your protagonist gets promoted so fast from some noname hobo to commander of crusade army with his entire fortress and subordinates. wtf ? This is super unrealistic, not logical, and immersion breaking

If you played the game, you'd know that Queen Galfrey is using the protagonist as a pawn in her political shennanigans. She appointed the protagonist to lead the crusade because, publicly, they were the "hero of Kenabres" who saved the city. Which is partly true.

But another important fact about the protagonist is that they're an outsider unknown to the court dramas happening in the capital, and potentially much more easily manipulated. By, for example, appointing them with a fancy meaningless title. Her spies and agents surround you all throughout that phase of the story, and you can definitely conflict with them as they give you suggestions or even outright orders from the queen with an obvious agenda.

This is why at a certain point in the plot, she is very likely to summarily remove the protagonist as leader of the crusade, because she didn't expect / want them to actually become popular or effective in that role.

You should try reading conversations in that game.

If you did, you might realize that there's a lot of immersive logic going on...

I walked through the half of the game, this looks like super fairy tale narrative (the game is fantasy of course). Why would an existing military chain of command subordinate to some guy who didn't have any strategic experience, even if he was appointed by Queen herself. It would be more logical if our protagonist were appointed as a counselor. It's also vstupid that you have to manage the strategic operations and also go adventure with your small party at the same time

[Hobocop]

Originally posted by Army of Optimists:

Originally posted by Hobocop:

So please, let's not pretend that the PHB was in any way balanced, nor is a straight 1:1 port necessarily the best fit for a video game. See: Jeremy Crawford endorsing the Wild Shape changes with the patch the introduced the druid into Early Access.

Regardless of the opinion on the changes, BG3 is not accurate to the tabletop rules and anyone claiming such is just wrong.

I'd agree that the changes to Frenzy are good. However, I think the changes to Haste, the healing potion AOE interaction with Throw, and the Shove/Jump bonus actions are bad changes. I also think falling damage is far greater than it is in the tabletop (1d6 per every 10ft). You push an enemy off a house and they take far more than the expected 5-10 damage. Either that or every building in Faerun has super-vaulted 30ft high stories.

Falling damage is actually greatly reduced compared to TT, or at least flattened and tending towards the lower end. Even off of say, top of the goblin camp, you'll take at most 8 or so damage, while TT you're rolling 3d6 minimum.

Jump being a bonus action means nothing, and is actually far more restrictive than TT where it requires no action at all. I also greatly prefer it not being capped by your total movement allowance because the TT interaction where you stop dead in midair and drop straight down if you run out of movement is even sillier, tbh.

[Army of Optimists]

Originally posted by Helios:

I walked through the half of the game, this looks like super fairy tale narrative (the game is fantasy of course). Why would an existing military chain of command subordinate to some guy who didn't have any strategic experience, even if he was appointed by Queen herself. It would be more logical if our protagonist were appointed as a counselor. It's also vstupid that you have to manage the strategic operations and also go adventure with your small party at the same time

Why would you appoint someone who, as you put it, "didn't have any strategic experience" as a counselor? That'd be putting them in the worst position for their skillset.

They see the player character as a big, mysterious weapon that demonstrated its effectiveness as a beatstick. So they give you a ceremonial title and put you at the head of the charge to see how much ground you can cover. It's somewhat implied that they didn't expect you to actually be successful and your string of continued victories is a total shock, which later becomes an issue because people start to rally at your banner instead of the Queen's.

[Methariorn]

Role playing wise BG3 is far superior to both pathfinder games. Combat wise it's a matter of personal taste, with WoTR mayby giving a better taste of the core rule of the board game.

[Tobias Solem]

Both are great games in their own right.

But they are very different.

[ChalkStorm]

no

[echoes222]

both are pretty good in their own right. Although I can't buy DLC's from a russian company, thus not replayed WOTR with new content. Maybe in the future.

[RACHMANOVSKI]

Originally posted by Methariorn:

Role playing wise BG3 is far superior to both pathfinder games. Combat wise it's a matter of personal taste, with WoTR mayby giving a better taste of the core rule of the board game.

Combat wise Pillars of Eternity 2 RTwP solos WOTR but BG3/WOTR TB better than PoE2 TB.

[RACHMANOVSKI]

Originally posted by echoes222:

both are pretty good in their own right. Although I can't buy DLC's from a russian company, thus not replayed WOTR with new content. Maybe in the future.

There has been 0 good DLC from WOTR lmao. All reviews are mixed.

[Helios]

Originally posted by Army of Optimists:

Originally posted by Helios:

I walked through the half of the game, this looks like super fairy tale narrative (the game is fantasy of course). Why would an existing military chain of command subordinate to some guy who didn't have any strategic experience, even if he was appointed by Queen herself. It would be more logical if our protagonist were appointed as a counselor. It's also vstupid that you have to manage the strategic operations and also go adventure with your small party at the same time

Why would you appoint someone who, as you put it, "didn't have any strategic experience" as a counselor? That'd be putting them in the worst position for their skillset.

They see the player character as a big, mysterious weapon that demonstrated its effectiveness as a beatstick. So they give you a ceremonial title and put you at the head of the charge to see how much ground you can cover. It's somewhat implied that they didn't expect you to actually be successful and your string of continued victories is a total shock, which later becomes an issue because people start to rally at your banner instead of the Queen's.

It's not actually a ceremonial title if you have to manage strategic operations and command armies on highest level. Maybe not counselor but an honorable title will be enough for protagonist while receiving spy tasks from the Queen.

[Army of Optimists]

Originally posted by Hobocop:

Falling damage is actually greatly reduced compared to TT, or at least flattened and tending towards the lower end. Even off of say, top of the goblin camp, you'll take at most 8 or so damage, while TT you're rolling 3d6 minimum.

Jump being a bonus action means nothing, and is actually far more restrictive than TT where it requires no action at all. I also greatly prefer it not being capped by your total movement allowance because the TT interaction where you stop dead in midair and drop straight down if you run out of movement is even sillier, tbh.

I'd need to test the falling damage more. Knocking a spider off a ledge and having it fall 50-60ft caused it to take about 40-50 damage. That's far more than the tabletop rules say.

Jump being a bonus action, especially on high strength characters or anyone with a Potion of Vaulting, gives everyone a ton of extra movement they shouldn't have. Particularly because the game doesn't model the rules for height either (RAW you're only allowed to jump a low obstacle like a fence with a long jump, not leap 20ft onto a cliff).

What I've found it does is make traditionally good low level spells like Grease and Web almost useless because everything just jumps over them. That's partially an issue of the crazy open combat arenas in Act 1, though.

[echoes222]

Originally posted by RACHMANOVSKI:

Originally posted by Methariorn:

Role playing wise BG3 is far superior to both pathfinder games. Combat wise it's a matter of personal taste, with WoTR mayby giving a better taste of the core rule of the board game.

Combat wise Pillars of Eternity 2 RTwP solos WOTR but BG3/WOTR TB better than PoE2 TB.

we are talking about story and narrative here, so staple of rpgs. Combat is irrelevant,

[Steefy_92]

Originally posted by John Rando:

...

Did you even play BG3 or just wrote lengthy essay based on probably watching content creators?

BG 3 has a lot of going on and one is modernized approch to a medium of story telling which is why it's so much more approachable and easier to enjoy.

Pathfinder tried too hard to be digital tabletop. (both games).

And getting lost and not sure what to, is so Tabletop actually thar I am just going to sit here and slowly clap.

You know what is funny? It's so easy in this game get out of loop, don't know what to do, and do one of dozen things to get to that point. We all get tastes, so I guess a lot people prefer to be lead by a hand.

Also Wraith was a big miss for me- mostly because of expectations I had , that I still enjoyed playing but for entirely different reasons than BG3.

Actually I very glad BG3 is not overload convoluted spread sheet both Pathfinder games are, that try to introduce simulation systems overlays and cumbersome mechanics that don't belong to digital adaption.

Edit: At the end it's alright you feel Wraith is superior game, that's great but for you and handful. It just doesn't change anything that is happening right now. Why bother, writing such a long rant post, such a waste of time

[Army of Optimists]

Originally posted by Helios:

Originally posted by Army of Optimists:

Why would you appoint someone who, as you put it, "didn't have any strategic experience" as a counselor? That'd be putting them in the worst position for their skillset.

They see the player character as a big, mysterious weapon that demonstrated its effectiveness as a beatstick. So they give you a ceremonial title and put you at the head of the charge to see how much ground you can cover. It's somewhat implied that they didn't expect you to actually be successful and your string of continued victories is a total shock, which later becomes an issue because people start to rally at your banner instead of the Queen's.

It's not actually a ceremonial title if you have to manage strategic operations and command armies on highest level. Maybe not counselor but an honorable title will be enough for protagonist while receiving spy tasks from the Queen.

You don't actually get full control of the Crusade until Act 3 though, which is after you retake Drezen. That's the turning point I was talking about, where it goes from "This guy is good at fighting demons so lets give him a title and some troops and see how far he gets before dying." to "Holy crap, maybe he really is our savior!"