BG3 Isn't A D&D Game

[Pan Darius Cassandra]

It's a video game, yes, maybe even a Baldur's Gate game (idk), but it doesn't feel like D&D to me.

I started playing in D&D in '86, at the age of 9, and I've taken long breaks from it (quitting during 2nd edition, and then trying various online and digital versions such as NWN or DDO), but I have played a lot of it, and every time I boot up a game of BG3, it just doesn't feel like D&D to me.

There's probably more than one component to why this is, which is why I'm not trying to list all of them in detail - it's probably many things.

Do you think BG3 is a D&D game?

[stun]

Originally posted by Wan Yao:

So what I think you're actually saying is that 5e isn't D&D.

But BG3 isn't 5e, which is why BG3 isn't D&D (he also never suggested that 5e isn't D&D)
5e is D&D, if mediocre, the only edition which isn't really representative of D&D is 4th ed

[Ruffio]

Originally posted by stun:

Originally posted by Wan Yao:

So what I think you're actually saying is that 5e isn't D&D.

But BG3 isn't 5e, which is why BG3 isn't D&D (he also never suggested that 5e isn't D&D)
5e is D&D, if mediocre, the only edition which isn't really representative of D&D is 4th ed

WoTC says its D&D... so your opinion means diddly really. Until you buy WoTC and can decide such yourself -)

[Zant]

I mean... if you want to play Dungeons & Dragons, play Dungeons & Dragons. BG3 is probably as close as humanly and technologically possible as we can get right now to a game that takes into account the full gamut of player choice inherent to tabletop roleplaying games.

[stun]

Originally posted by Ruffio:

WoTC says its D&D... so your opinion means diddly really. Until you buy WoTC and can decide such yourself -)

All opinions mean diddly squat, unrelated to any outside factors.
It's an objective fact that BG3 isn't D&D. WoTC doesn't have any bearing on that fact, and never can, and never will, because D&D is a cultural concept, it's like a word. Culturally, nobody considers BG3 D&D because nobody thinks of it as a BG game, they (incidentally) rightfully consider it DivOS3.

[Gregorovitch]

Originally posted by stun:

It's an objective fact that BG3 isn't D&D.

Really? Perhaps you could enlighten us why, objectively of course.

[Josephus]

Originally posted by Gregorovitch:

Originally posted by stun:

It's an objective fact that BG3 isn't D&D.

Really? Perhaps you could enlighten us why, objectively of course.

It is just his objective lol. BG3 is made of the Weave.

[Incandescence]

Doesn't matter what i think, doesn't matter what anyone things, doesn't change the reality that it is D&D, Just like it will always be a sequel to BG2 regardless how distraught those who love the originals are about it.

It is what it is, denying reality is also known as delusion and it is considered a negative trait.

[viziel]

I think the definition of what a "D&D" game is has changed. I too have played since the red box basic edition game and the core of this genre is role play. I dont feel any computer game can ever achieve this, it may get very very close but the ability to choose your own path is NOT something you can do in computer games, there are always going to be limits in a fixed system. So BG3 is no different, however that is not the focus of computer games since they are not very good at it, instead they focus on creating a dramatic story which you participate in, and try their best to provide the illusion of choice (subject of much debate in itself).

I also feel the fantasy genre has lost its bearings and the modern portrayal is very much high/wild fantasy power trips, and not a focus on the life and world. This clearly isnt as popular, therefore dosnt sell game copies..therefore we dont see it, which is why the quality of the genre slips (In my opnion).

That being said, game development has proven it can make amazing titles, and I think keeping true role play to pen and paper (or TTRPG, etc), is still the best option for creating true role playing freedom. You just gotta use your imagination...(like the old TSR slogan, a product of your imagination..you luddite... something like that).

[vamirez]

Originally posted by viziel:

I think the definition of what a "D&D" game is has changed. I too have played since the red box basic edition game and the core of this genre is role play. I dont feel any computer game can ever achieve this, it may get very very close but the ability to choose your own path is NOT something you can do in computer games, there are always going to be limits in a fixed system. So BG3 is no different, however that is not the focus of computer games since they are not very good at it, instead they focus on creating a dramatic story which you participate in, and try their best to provide the illusion of choice (subject of much debate in itself).

I also feel the fantasy genre has lost its bearings and the modern portrayal is very much high/wild fantasy power trips, and not a focus on the life and world. This clearly isnt as popular, therefore dosnt sell game copies..therefore we dont see it, which is why the quality of the genre slips (In my opnion).

That being said, game development has proven it can make amazing titles, and I think keeping true role play to pen and paper (or TTRPG, etc), is still the best option for creating true role playing freedom. You just gotta use your imagination...(like the old TSR slogan, a product of your imagination..you luddite... something like that).

Longer rant, read at your own peril ;)

Yeah, initially in the early 80s all adventure modules were dungeon crawlers, and the simulation aspect was a big thing. This wasn't about the players' guaranteed hero arc. You put together a party and tried to win the adventure, and you were expecting losses. Nowadays a player death is often a drama, especially when it was caused by random dice rolls. Back then in some adventures, if two made it out alive of the end fight, the scenario was considered beaten, and it was a good time. This included relatively strict adherence to the rules - because it needed to be fair - and also expected players to roleplay in addition to outsmarting the dungeon. Sure, many didn't play this as hardcore as this may sound, but this was basically what was the idea.

Now, in BG3, yes you can have hard fights, but the main focus is all celebrating character. Just look at your party - each single one of them is a complete freak of nature or magic. And your char is, too, if you chose one of the fleshed out backgrounds. In a random group of people, maybe one should have an insane story like that. Here everyone has one. There's almost no "monsters" - everything is a weirdly modern feeling person, down to the English poor working class goblins and love-making ogre women. It's weird, frankly. The setting has been replaced mostly by the rule of cool, as well. Originally, non-evil drow that were accepted on the surface were non-existent - there was only one, Drizzt (and everyone wanted to play him just like today everyone wants to be Geralt). There were no dragonborn, there was just one... saurial. There were no tieflings - they came from Planescape and initially you had to roll on a table for your disfigurements. Now they are all good-looking devils. Githyanki had a shock of black hair and were skeletal figures with skull-faces, and they wore full plate armor and used saddles for riding their dragons. This was their second-greatest honor - the greatest being getting life-absorbed by their lich queen when they got even more powerful. They didn't have human hairdos, and I think in their armor you couldn't tell their gender. While developed from humans initially, they were utterly inhuman. Also most people inhabiting the world didn't know about githyanki and mind flayers. The people in this game seem like... the players tbh, like they have player knowledge. I could find tons of more examples...

Just pointing out the differences and what may irk some folks, not judging about personal taste or preference btw. BG3 is still an achievement in any case.

[Zogtar]

Frankly, it's not DnD until they add a campaign builder.

Otherwise it's a DnD campaign with fudged rules in a virtual world.

[GubbyTheChubby]

BG3 is a poorly made Parody of DnD and tbh...its better than the actual DnD5e Ruleset of Wizfarts of the Cockroaches

[Pancake is Me]

Guys the OP isn't out here to have their mind changed, they're just fishing for like-minded thinkers, the days of having meaningful discussions are over until we're past the civil war.

[Vixziค็็็็็n]

Originally posted by Pancake is Me:

Guys the OP isn't out here to have their mind changed, they're just fishing for like-minded thinkers, the days of having meaningful discussions are over until we're past the civil war.

^ Facts ... not that it will change anything though lol

[Aegix Drakan]

Edit: And someone made the same point as me at the top of this very page, LMFAO. Well played. :P

If you're more familiar with old editions of D&D, then yeah, I can understand why you feel that way.

Old D&D and Current D&D is very different.

Old D&D was a Dungeon Crawler. A Meat Grinder that you shoved characters into with the understanding that they'd almost certainly get massacred in the quest for Sick Loot like a +5 Holy Avenger. Having backup character sheets was a must.

Sure, sometimes your characters would have cool story arcs, but it was generally more of a wargame than a medium for collaborative storytelling. (Although the video games, especially BG2, went for a more story-heavy approach)

In the decades since then, it's turned more and more towards roleplaying, where character arcs are more important. It turned into a collaborative storytelling system with crunchy combat.

A lot of the gameplay nowadays is players trying to find creative workarounds to the situations they run into, and doing zany problem solving instead of just charging into direct combat. (Seriously, look at that dragon fight in Season 2 of Vox Machina, which itself is based on a Critical Role campaign)

BG3 does the new style of D&D exceptionally well.

You have characters with deep, complex, themetically subtle arcs (I just wrapped Shadowheart's arc in Act 3 and it did some genuinely clever thematic stuff when I thought about it. Full on Xanatos Gambit was put into play there).

You also have crunchy combat that can either be brute forced with tactical planning, or cheesed with clever plans and workarounds that nullify the main threat.

And the game actually takes into account so many different possibilities for player choices that it's legitimately staggering.

It's less that BG3 isn't "D&D" anymore...Just that D&D itself has changed over the years. Players enjoyed roleplaying more than wargaming, and the game has adapted to fulfil that desire.

Neither old nor new D&D is the "one true D&D". Both have their merits and their fans and haters. But the new style is more popular, so that's what we get.

[vamirez]

Originally posted by Aegix Drakan:

Edit: And someone made the same point as me at the top of this very page, LMFAO. Well played. :P

Cheers! :)