I’m currently in two different D&D campaigns. One plays combats on the regular 5ft grid, the other is “theatre of mind” where where everything is just described. Both are fine, I don’t really feel like I lose anything with either method, it’s just two different abstractions for the same ideas.
Larian’s previous game, Divinity Original Sin: 2, was still highly tactical despite its lack of grid-based positioning or targeting. The game used its mechanics of skills, freer movement, and surfaces/clouds to really shake up each battle and make them unique. Each combat was like a little puzzle. For me, who usually bounces off the likes of XCOM, it was absolutely brilliant. BG3 is much the same, just with a different ruleset (and I’m glad I was familiar with it beforehand. It must be daunting to be thrown into 5e without having a book thrown at you).
Being a nerd now, there is actually a grid in these games, but it’s only used for navmeshes and the surfaces. The game doesn’t expose either of these to you in-game. Visually, the edges of surfaces are messy and extend/retract from where they technically are according to the engine. I suppose you can kind of see the navmesh grid by clicking all around the edges of walkable areas, but other than walking up to edges, the navmesh has little impact on anything else.
I mean, I don't mind too much the lack of a grid system but I just can't get used to the turn-less combat system of games like "Pillars of Eternity", Tyranny or Pathfinder.
They are great, though. It's just a nitpick I have.
Even in tabletop rpgs, I advocate for the removal of the grid. I prefer to do combat in the style of tabletop wargames, free movement in any direction, treating each inch of movement as 5 feet (for D&D and Pathfinder).
I’vealways seen grids as a way to simplify what is otherwise a challenging mechanic to track and utilize. They function as something of a “good enough” for when you are willing to sacrifice accuracy for simplicity. And there’s something to be said for the way that simplicity can be appealing to the player, as it get some of the more fiddily mechanics out of the way and frees you up to focus on more substantial or engaging mechanics like character builds and team comps.
So, do I miss then when they’re replaced with the more intricate measurement systems that they were designed to simplify? Not really. But I can certainly see why some would feel that way.
I like both, frankly. I get going with free positioning in BG3, mostly because that's how it is in both BG1&2 and Divinity OS 1&2, so it'd be a weird change. But also, it makes sense on CRPGs where you're trying to depict very fluid, dynamic "do what you want" situations more than tactical precision.
I do hate in BG3 when I accidentally step on something or a command to do something places a character on top of a hazard first, but... you know, table top jank captured, I suppose.
I will say that I'm not sure "immersion" is what the grid triggers for me one way or the other, though. Mostly grid tactical games are about optimization and precision while free roaming is about looser, fluid improvisation. If it's a full-on tactics game I'd prefer a grid for that reason, for narrative RPGs I can go either way.
I did like Midnight Suns quite a bit, although that's because I'm also a CCG guy and a superhero nerd, so that angle works for me. Weirdly, it was XCOM 2 that didn't quite do it for me compared to the first.
Hah, yeah, I guess they technically weren't. Could have fooled me, because if you didn't play those by pausing, queuing up every action and then only unpausing until you can queue up the next I don't know how your brain works. BG3 is basically a Divinity sequel, though, and it goes for that same improvised feel where you're supposed to go through the game chucking bags full of rotten fish at enemies instead of engaging with the actual combat rules. I agree that it's a very different feel in both, though.
CCG is "Collectible card games". I look at Midnight Suns as a card game with some positioning mechanics, more than a tactics game. It makes a lot more sense like that, in terms of the small puzzle-like encounters and the turn optimization and so on.
Oh gosh, I vaguely remember the pausing & queueing up action thing. I usually played 2 player, and I’m trying to remember if that paused everyone or not.
Yea, I saw Midnight Suns as a mashup between something like XCom and a CCG. I haven’t played too many CCGs, though I did enjoy Slay the Spire. I see the cards as adding some randomness to the game, but as far as the tactical positioning it doesn’t really change things for me. I remember the environment actually factoring in quite a bit… pushing people into things, or throwing things. I guess the lack of grid didn’t really hurt that, but I wonder if I would have enjoyed it more if the grid had been there. Ultimately I don’t know if it’s the grid itself, or just a fundamental shift in style of gameplay that leads to me not enjoying these games as much.
Yeah, in Midnight Suns specifically I don't think the grid would have worked, because that game is built on grinding extra turns and extra damage from interactions, so you need to be able to line up things with each other. Like, you don't just want to hit, you want to hit so that the guy goes flying into an explosive that topples a thing that then falls on another guy. It's more of a puzzle game than anythign else sometimes. They even have a challenge mode in there with those sorts of setups.
I think it's perfectly fair to be mostly into grid tactics, it's almost a different genre. I don't think you can legitimately look at BG3 or Midnight Suns and suggest it's the same type of thing as Final Fantasy Tactics or even XCOM. There's connective tissue there, but it's like comparing, say, Devil May Cry and Tekken.
Off topic, how’s Solasta? Halfway through my second playthrough of BG3, and looking for another crpg. I’m not new to the genre (played wasteland 2-3, PoE: DF and D2OS previously), but new to DnD.
On topic: I don’t know if I need it, honestly. I feel like I would appreciate knowing distances and where exactly my character will stand according to a grid, but I haven’t found it to be very necessary.
I don’t expect any other crpg to take a swing at BG3’s presentation in a very long time, honestly. Don’t need fancy graphics. Would it be a better introduction to someone looking into getting into dnd? Might be running a one shot soon, my first one.
I may not be the right guy to answer that. What I played of it felt very... knowing. Tool-like. It really seemed to want you to know what you wanted to do with it, just in the way it presents itself. Once I got to playing it felt like a good one of those, though, it mostly didn't get in its own way as much as I feared it would.
I'm assuming you already played the Divinity Original Sin games if you're not considering rolling into those after BG3, right? Because those are pretty much more of that.
The other obvious "basically DnD" option is the Pathfinder duology, but those games go hard in ways I definitely would not recommend for "looking into getting" into anything. It's be ready to start over from an unwinnable scenario 30 hours in or stay away.
Not 5e. I'm not a tabletop guy, but my read on Pathfinder from Osmosis is that it's DnD for the people that never got over 3 or 3.5. Like, literally it's based on DnD through that whole open format they were trying to shut down recently. You can tell in the videogames, too. In many ways they feel more like the old BG releases than BG3. If those games were unreasonably huge and had some wild campaign-wide mechanics.
We're getting into the weeds of DnD now and I'm not into the tabletop side of things enough to be that guy for you, so I suggest you google these things from better sources.
But basically, as I understand it there is an open license that allows people to make RPGs based on the DnD ruleset and actually sell them. Been there for ages, it's at the core of several other popular systems, including Pathfinder's "just keep playing 3rd edition forever" take. Hasbro tried to shut that down and monetize those derivatives as part of a wider push to milk the recent mainstream popularity of DnD (on the plus side that's also how we got BG3 and the new movie, so... take the good with the bad, I guess?).
Fan pushback was swift, strong and mainstream, so I believe they pulled back on those plans for now.
The core rules of d&d (mechanics but not settings) are available under a free license (it was the Open Gaming License, or OGL, although I have a feeling it’s a different license (Creative Commons , maybe?) now following the backlash from earlier this year when Wizards tried to scrap the OGL and replace it with a worse license)
Pathfinder was originally based on the d&d 3.5e ruleset. I’m not sure how far it has diverged from that, as I’ve played neither. Solasta is based on d&d 5e (the latest version of the rules), but is in a non-d&d setting of their own creation. BG3 is also based on 5e (although less strictly than Solasta), but also has the D&D license, so can use the Forgotten Realms/Sword Coast setting
Personally, I enjoyed Solasta, and think it’s a great representation of combat on 5e. The writing and story aren’t amazing, and it lacks the crazy amount of freedom/choices of BG3, but mechanically, it’s a great implementation of 5e rules.
I friggin love Solasta. Our tabletop D&D game kind of fell apart, and this was the first thing I found that gave me that D&D vibe. My wife liked it right away, too, so this gave us some quality together play time.
The graphics & acting probably don’t come close to BG3, but I honestly don’t care. The battles are very fun. I think the UI is easier to understand and use than BG3, at least to start. Main actions, bonus actions, spells, etc. are all very clearly marked. Another fun feature is that you can create characters outside of games, and level them up, too. I’ve spent a good amount of time just making characters, looking for interesting results. At in person games I tend to always play the same kind of character, but being able to explore lots of different classes in an easy way was a big unexpected bonus of the game.
There’s also a ton of user created content.
It often goes on sale for $15. Definitely worth checking out.
I'll say this, of all the DnD-like CRPGs it's the one I hear mentioned the least, and it absolutely deserves to be a lot more visible because it's far from the worst of those.
I’m convinced, getting it tonight and starting it as soon as I finish my dark urge playthrough. Thanks! Kinda wanna give a go to the character I prepared yesterday, a rock gnome bard who hates rich people and dual wields a hammer and sickle. (Ik two weapon fighting sucks in 5e).
Books3 corpus would like you to know that all the data in it is from copyrighted books. It has reportedly been widely used in closed-source AI LLMs. “Rules for thee, not for me” shit. They’ll break copyright and then copyright what they made from it.
You’re allowed to train on copyrighted works, it isn’t illegal for anybody. This article by Kit Walsh does a good job of breaking it down. She’s a senior staff attorney at the EFF.
This has the same vibe as Github (owned by microsoft) training its AI Copilot on repositories under the GPL license, which specifically forbids any work based on it not be made proprietary. Literally a blatant disregard for the license, but it’s ok because it’s a mega-corporation doing it
I prefer grids myself, I’ve never gotten very far in gridless strategy games I’ve played (Mario+Rabbids, Valkyria Chronicles) because I just have too hard a time keeping track of what I can do with any given unit when I don’t have the grid for reference. That said, I can understand the appeal to some as an immersion enhancement, as others have said, and as something of a “modernization” of turn-based strategy allowing for more freedom of movement. Cool if you enjoy that kind of thing in strategy, but just not my jam. I was raised on Fire Emblem in the genre, lol.
Unless they start offering on-prem or there are some very high profile server hacks I don’t see that being possible. Unlike media and client software they don’t need to provide the core functionality to end users, just the output.
I feel like a lot of design decisions downstream are dependent on that choice. You could absolutely lock gridless combat to a grid, but I don't think it'd feel the same.
I'm trying to remember a game that has done that, because I'm pretty sure there's at least one.
bin.pol.social
Gorące