Is DnD rules really suited for a tactical rpg?

[CysteicAcid]

I fell there is so much luck involved in skills, wether it hits or not that its not even tactical on higher difficulty.

[magritte]

While there may be an argument for how much randomness the game should incorporate, most popular tactical strategy games do include some randomness. And in every single one I can think of, (e.g. Solasta, BG3, Gloomhaven) to use a few recent examples, there are posts whining about the RNG.

The argument that a game without any element of chance is more strategic is balderdash. Being prepared for the unexpected is an additional strategic element.

[Ponyeater]

Origineel geplaatst door Xeno Repo:

No, which is why most things outside Attack is different than it is on the tabletop. Many spells are different, abilities like delaying/preparing an action aren't here unless you have a greataxe for some stupid reason, and more.

Yes, but it has to be adapted right.
Temple of Elemental Evil does it justice. It has everything in there that makes the ruleset actually tactical, such as 5-foot step at end turns, attack of opportunities mattering a great deal, many spells altering battle drastically, options to delay turns and such.

I'm sad we will never get a continuation thanks to Troika Studios having gone bust back in the day. They rocked.
Of course it also helped that ToEE only allowed you to level up to 10, so you without mods you couldn't become the ubergod that any level 10+ hero eventually becomes.

Origineel geplaatst door Xiwang:

i mean, pathfinder wotr made the same decision, for example the main enemies in that game are demons, wich are resistant to magic, so mage classes are pretty much useless the entire game and are forced into field manipulation and buffing martials.

the same happens with bg3 "tactical" mode, all of the enemies have a +2 to all saves, wich makes all the spells pretty weak, all the top builds for tactical are martials and the few casters are buffers and only useful to set the field for the martials or buff them.

"i play a warlock/sorcerer/wizard and he is a beast" yeah all the attack rolls target AC but if you target saving throws nothing will work. if you are using a caster just like a martial it will be inferior.

It's hard not to get snarky over this comment.
You should really try buffing and debuffing more. Makes a big difference, especially in DnD.
Now I haven't played BG3 yet so I don't know how much you can customize your classes here. But what I do know is that there is an entire school of spells just for buffing and debuffing and even some of the other schools of magic have it in them, too.
Cleric spells matter, too.
The baseline Bane + Bless combo that every decent group runs with their cleric already gives you +3 value to succeed, namely -1 on the enemy saving throws and Bless gives you +2 to everything.
Additionally, upon leveling your casters up, you can pick Spell Penetration and later it's follow-up Greater Spell Penetration as talents. They permanently straight up boost your chance to hit enemies with spell resistance.
I have never played a DnD game where I did *not* pick these two for my human casters. They're absolute great value for your talent slots and come always handy in any late campaign.

My point is this: Don't take it just at face value. Hurdles are made to overcome. Just attacking directly with magic all the time isn't always the best option. Think outside the box, pick some of the less commonly picked spells. There is many great ones out there.
Often undervalued - Grease, the best Attack of Opportunity generator any low level caster can wield.

[Enigmatory]

Origineel geplaatst door CysteicAcid:

I fell there is so much luck involved in skills, wether it hits or not that its not even tactical on higher difficulty.

Yes they are. You just need need to use your brains to minimize randomness and turn it into your side.
You get advantage - typical examples - Fairy fire, Guiding bolt
You add extra digits to roll - Bless, Guadiance, Bard inspiration.
Increase flat values by any mean avable.
Give opposite to enemies - Bane, Slow, Bestow Curse etc.
Read spells descripton.
After level 5 random values dont really felt as something important, and their importance get lower with each 2 levels above.

[Defective Dopamine Pez Dispenser]

Setting aside the fact that tabletop RPGs started out essentially as an offshoot of the same lineage as tabletop wargames and were largely combat-focused, and that you still see remnants of that mindset in today's rulesets and combat mechanics. And understanding that when many (most?) people say "tactical RPG" in the video game context, that isn't what they're referring to, but rather to other games they've played...

For me it works fine, because I don't think about it in the way I do other tactical RPGs. E.g. I'm not approaching it with the same mentality I would, say, Fire Emblem or something. I'm thinking of it more as a literal DnD module where every action is a roll, and I have to live with the outcome (or reload, of course - but generally I don't.) For me that's the appeal of the game. Everything I do entails risk and chance, and my actions can only hope to improve my odds, not guarantee them.

Of course, there are plenty of "tactical RPGs" with heavily chance-based mechanics too, but it's much more explicit and literally implemented here. If I went into it not knowing that it would be one thing. But for me, here, that's literally the appeal. Every single thing I do is governed that way and, for me, that's very compelling. It makes for a very methodical, careful game and I dig that.

[CysteicAcid]

Its like playing chess where the bishop has 45% chance to be able to attack....Or short castling is 75% but long 85%

[Zoid13]

Origineel geplaatst door CysteicAcid:

Is DnD rules really suited for a tactical rpg?

I fell there is so much luck involved in skills, wether it hits or not that its not even tactical on higher difficulty.

yes and that is EXACTLY how DnD plays when you roll a d20 on a physical board. there is a lot of luck involved.

[SoloQ]

Then don't play them? It's not like DnD turn based rpgs are the only type of games being made.

[Zeel Ara]

I would argue that it's a significantly better system for a tactical video game than it is for a tabletop roleplaying game.

[Nauct]

There's high skill in card games from playing the odds, same thing here

[Kaisha]

The more I play this game the more I feel the answer is a definitive NO from me. In fact this game has so soured my opinion of D&D that I will never touch another D&D game (tabletop or video game).

This game is a disaster IMO.

[GorishiDan]

its barely tactical. combat and dialogue checks are mostly a luck simulator. having bonuses does help prevent fails but you will fail eventually. i was able to enjoy the game by modding it and changing a few things and its far more enjoyable now. naturally to each their own but the whole "dice decides all" thing just didn't work very well for me. its mostly fine for dialogue but in combat its pure ass.

you can still outsmart enemies but the luck factor will always be there to decide where or not your strategy will succeed. doesn't matter how big brain your plan is all can go down the drain after a series of misses or save throws.

goes without saying im not a fan of DnD rules but im glad the devs support modding so ppl can play it as they see fit. it turns a refund/rage quit simulator into a countless hour playtime game and thats big imo.

[alex010300]

Actually it is, it does feel all random until you level up and then it all makes sense.

[CysteicAcid]

Origineel geplaatst door Enigmatory:

Origineel geplaatst door CysteicAcid:

I fell there is so much luck involved in skills, wether it hits or not that its not even tactical on higher difficulty.

Yes they are. You just need need to use your brains to minimize randomness and turn it into your side.
You get advantage - typical examples - Fairy fire, Guiding bolt
You add extra digits to roll - Bless, Guadiance, Bard inspiration.
Increase flat values by any mean avable.
Give opposite to enemies - Bane, Slow, Bestow Curse etc.
Read spells descripton.
After level 5 random values dont really felt as something important, and their importance get lower with each 2 levels above.

Dude, I am not saying the game is too hard or anything, I know DnD. Played Baldurs Gate in the '90s. I am just saying its not good for hard tuned fights in tactical fights. Compare chess to Poker. In poker you can control the odds, but still you can lose, much less in chess,

[Boss]

Origineel geplaatst door CysteicAcid:

I fell there is so much luck involved in skills, wether it hits or not that its not even tactical on higher difficulty.

The answer to your question is:
Yes.

This is the Xcom issue all over again. If you want to play unpopular RTS' like Starcraft, you're welcome to it. Most of us "casuals" enjoy a bit of randomness in your strategy, thanks.

[Husz]

Idk about you guys, but the tactican mode is rather fair and balanced once you know a thing or two about the game, and i don't even mean the boxes cheese x'DD you get a lot of tools to deal with enemies that are even ahead of you. Inspect enemies whenever you can, try to get the best advantages out of a fight, optimize your builds, and you won't need to rely on luck anymore.