I sure hope that we get a PF2e ORC licensed CRPG!

[krazmuze]

I was excited for the announced video game RPG until the kickstarter came out and found it was ARPG with Golarion iconics rather than turn based CRPG with PF2e characters and systems. Not for me but seems there is a market for that.

Instead I bought Solasta from Tactical Adventures (GOG summer discounts), and finding that it is a great turn based CRPG- and I am even enjoying it even more than DOS2 or Deadfire because of it close adherence to D20 mechanics (at the level of Temple of Elemental Evil decades ago). It is sticking to its principles of being a true port of a TTRPG, with it's biggest failing it is 5e rather than PF2e - they had to homebrew exploration/crafting system as well as homebrew classes/monsters because of the 5e OGL SRD limitations - so you are not really playing 5e by the book (but that again is how 5e is played anyways). It is not cinematic in scope like Baldur's Gates III but that is a good thing to have a system that lends itself to 30hr modules than 300hrs open ended campaign (might as well play TTRPG if it is that long!). RP cut scenes are mostly automated by personality choices, so there is no protagonist it truly is a party (single/multiplayer). They really leveraged 3D in a way that is too hard to do on TTRPG even with Dwarven Forge terrain. There are lots of community modules, harkens back to Neverwinters nights in that regard (including 2nd/3rd classic and recent 5e module conversions)

But it is full of slogging thru waves of minions intended to wear me down, as the party stands in place and wacks the HP moles - but there is save scumming and strategically placed long rest campfires recognizing the 5e 5m workday that nobody actually plays the adventuring day and they did not actually balance for it. On the flip-side they have lots of options to adjust difficulty (like non-random player favour dice). Then finally you get the legendary boss fight designed as a dark soul wannabe designed to only be beatable with (modded) multiclass party combo that was cherry picked random rolled stats rather than point buy and then you beat it in a few rounds as you learned to exploit the AI mechanics because that is how 5e is actually played.

That is when I sure wish it had the true team based play balanced tactics of PF2e. Combat with leveled proficiency for skills and criticals shifting with strategy would be so much more fun. It is clear Owlcat is too much fans of PF1e to make the PF2e switch, but I really hope with ORC that Paizo is pursing Tactical Adventures and pitch them on the advantage of getting all the game systems and monsters they need with PF2e ORC compared to 5e OGL. I think TA has an excellent modular CRPG engine that would lend itself to lots of modules (harken back to neverwinter nights or goldbox era), and I think it would help capture 5e players that are scared off of PF2e rules if there was a CRPG helping automate their exposure to the system rules leading to them seeking (V)TT play. The timing is also right as they are done with Solasta DLC and looking into the next thing right when ORC is coming out - and I think pitching them that they do not need to do TTRPG game design to complete a CRPG is a win/win (do to limits of 5e SRD OGL vs. PF2e ORC)

[CastleDour]

I know it's not pathfinder, but Larian's Baldur's Gate 3 is going to drop like a bomb on the gaming industry. It's going to blow everybody's expectations out of the water. If I were Mark Moreland, I'd be on the phone with Larian ASAP.

[krazmuze]

I have played DOS2 and kept up with BG3. DOS2 is responsible for reviving CRPG as a genre. BG3 though in my mind it is DOS3 set in Faerun and pays lip service to 5e mechanics. Playing thru Solasta and reading their forums makes that very clear - there are a lot of BG3 expats there that also realized it is very loose 5e mechanics and more about D&D lore/RP and moved on to Solasta. OF course BG3 will not bomb like past 5e video games, because Larian makes very good video games.

I would just play it knowing that mechanically it is stuck somewhere between 5e and DOS2 mechanics and will not feel as satisfying as either - so ignore that and play that for what it is. It will be a great cinematic open video RPG up there with Skyrim or Bioware with rich companion stories/romance for sure combined with multiplayer mayhem. But do not think Skyrim had something to do with the mechanics of Morrowind nor the homebrew D&D campaign Elder Scrolls came from - they are very far removed from each other.

What I was more referring to was that Solasta has very well done mechanical implementation that would be better migrated to PF2e mechanics- to the point that my frustrations with it are identical to the frustrations I have with 5e TTRPG. T/A being on a smaller indy scale would be more feasible for the 2nd place TTRPG to work with, considering that AAA video game budgets (time/money) are exceeding superhero movie budgets (and even the star studded 5e movie seems will be lucky if it breaks even - as a D&D property it did better at lore than mechanics). Having a dozen 30hr modules on 6mo DLC cycle would be far better than 5yrs of 360hr huge RPG.

I think Paizo is in a position to having a game that promotes their mechanics, much like they had great success with Owlcat but it promoted PF1e mechanics and did more to bounce off TTRPG converts despite it not representing PF2e. Invade a 5e reddit and bring up PF2e and they will nope at you either pointing to that game (or the illusion of choice videos) and will not listen to you when you say neither had anything to do with PF2e actual play. Paizo need the equivalent for PF2e and with ORC they can enable that and not have to do the blockbuster golarian licensed property. Even what T/A did of aligning new rules/classes with new adventures aligns with the way Paizo publishing does things - you want Gunslinger it would be with a season pass of outlaw DLC (no need for it to be Alkenstar it could be the Solasta world)

[keftiu]

CastleDour wrote:

I know it's not pathfinder, but Larian's Baldur's Gate 3 is going to drop like a bomb on the gaming industry. It's going to blow everybody's expectations out of the water. If I were Mark Moreland, I'd be on the phone with Larian ASAP.

I don’t know that Paizo can afford Larian. There’s an order of magnitude difference between them and WotC/Hasbro.

[QuidEst]

Paizo would be very happy if a PF2 CRPG happened.

Paizo is not in a position to make a PF2 CRPG happen.

As somebody with no business experience, I also wouldn't really expect a game studio to approach Paizo about making something based on their rules system while that rules system is right in the middle of a remaster and the ORC license is still being finalized. It'd be a "we'll wait until after" situation, or "we'll see how much the Pathfinder brand helps sell BKOM's games".

[dirtypool]

I mean, the ORC license is finalized and given the release window - so is the remaster.

[krazmuze]

Indeed that is why that time is now. Sure the books are not printed but the rule book is written. As a Paizo partner they might get early access and heads up to start writing the mechanics into the game. ORC is headed to the library of congress which takes a while, but it is finalized. Solasta DLC are wrapped up and TA is talking what their next game should be and should they look at other systems. So there is no better time than now to start talking and work out a calendar of milestones for the next year, and hit early access a year after that. Again they are an Indy studio this is not a massive half decade like Larian or decade like Bethesda. They already have a solid mechanical engine it would be more about modding it into a new ruleset, most of their work would be writing a new story for main and DLC. Very different than with 5e where they had to playtest class and monster mechanics because 5e SRD OGL is extremely limited - so my bet is they could turn around a PF2e ORC game a lot quicker. That is the point of ORC is saving others from figuring out how to de-OGL and de-D&D themselves all the hardwork there is done. They can use their existing Solasta world it does not need to be Golarion.

Paizo is absolutely in a position to partner to see that it happens, hoping it happens is not what they should be doing. Maybe they make the mistake of listening to their 5e players who want them to update to one D&D rules (now called D&D2024 printing) only to find out that their new VTT actually is just a turn-based CRPG with official modules/monsters with a GM multiplayer mod (scriped AI like decades of games or human override) and find themselves competing with Hasbro. So Paizo should be reaching out if they want to influence the market to benefit themselves.

It is a win/win for CRPG and TTRPG if done properly. Many of us started D&D decades ago because of the videogames that adhered fairly closely to the rules, it and not just BG1 - there was a lot of them.

[Dancing Wind]

There is a big difference between the license document and the material being licensed.

We haven't heard anything from Paizo about when they will publish the material they're making available for other people to use. All that's being send to LoC is the legal contract for how the material will be made available. Any company can use the ORC to license their material, as can/will Paizo. We just need to see what they keep as their own Intellectual Property and what they make available for everyone to use under the ORC.

Until the Monster Core and Player Core 2 books are sent to the printer, Paizo probably won't have a complete grasp on what they're freely offering to everyone and what they're keeping for themselves.

Meanwhile, any 3rd party publishers can start the negotiations for using Paizo IP. They don't have to wait until all four Remastered volumes are finished.

[krazmuze]

But the work they need to start revamping the mechanical engine is in fact done that is all PC1. Other classes and mechanics came in later DLC so PC1 can start now and PC2 starts after which is the same thing they did in Solasta for 5e. Obviously if you was planning on doing an evil aligned draconic story you would need to wait for the monster book draft to be sent so you could make an illusory wyvern story. But your basic orcs and goblins are straightforward not deOGL and they can get an early heads up.

And absolutely Paizo does partner with digital products before print street date, how do you think Foundry is aligning their premium DLC adventure releases with print? It is only the community effort ones that have to wait until they get their PDF just like we do.

Unlike WOTC Paizo's OGL did not restrict anything mechanical, there was no subsets SRD (other than the WOTC 3.5 ref) - which was the biggest hurdle for Solasta as the 5e SRD is very incomplete. Unlike WOTC Paizo OGL clauses just refer to the cited PF2e books used, with no SRD ref book. ORC like OGL you just needed to follow the Product Identity clause (whatever it is called now) which basically boils down to if its a Proper Name of Golarion and art you cannot use that - and all the community efforts do a good job of figuring out where to rename those lines even when Paizo was not specific on that exclusion list. But those sorts of things are easy to string out during development after the mechanics are done - change a possible 'Scarlet Assassins' feat to a 'Red Killers' feat in your world if that ends up being Paizo specific story material. Even ORC AXE give examples of how to thread things when there is no subset SRD given and it appears story is woven into mechanics. But that type of mechanic is more likely found in the lore books than the core books.

[keftiu]

It sounds like you really like Solasta. I don’t know that your fondness translates into realistic business sense. Who is making this hypothetical PF2 game? Who is funding them?

[krazmuze]

It is as realistic biz sense as small studio Owlcat making a PF1e game. That worked out well for Owlcat they are moving on to do Warhammer 40k which is even bigger than PF1e and have been clear they have zero intentions of doing a PF2e game and would go back to a PF1e game if they did another one. And Paizo has made it clear PF2e is more of a success for them than PF1e, especially after the 5e OGL expats bought all their books. So the market for PF2e is there and the market for small studios following TTRPG mechanics is clearly already there.

I am pointing to Solasta (Tactical Adventures) because they did an OGL version of 5e without any IP license in their own campaign world (so less work for Paizo), they did well enough to put out DLCs and get wide distribution and community modding support- and are already at the point of asking what should be doing next game - so right time right place. They survived early access and actually put out a game, which in itself makes them a success because steam is full of early access unfinished garbage.

Do you know of other small studios with a history of tactical turn based games that is at a similar point in time? As was already pointed out Larian/WOTC deal is an entirely different scale.

InXile Wasteland 2/3 are also good squad turnbased tactics, but dunno if they are into leveraging existing TTRPG fantasy and where they are at in their dev cycle. (EDIT just had a look at their site - they are actually working on a Robots and Rangers TTRPG - as well as redid Bards Tale)

[Deriven Firelion]

Is Baldur's Gate 3 going to be any good? I've heard not great things about it. Maybe they've improved it since then. I heard character customization by class and such not a thing. Pre-generated characters. And you can't create your own party.

[Castilliano]

Deriven Firelion wrote:

Is Baldur's Gate 3 going to be any good? I've heard not great things about it. Maybe they've improved it since then. I heard character customization by class and such not a thing. Pre-generated characters. And you can't create your own party.

That's...horrible.

I replayed Baldur's Gate dozens of times because of the variety of PCs available (and a lack of IRL gaming opportunities). One only need look at how Diablo adds more and more development options as its primary replayability aspect to see the importance of player input. Heck, that gives a PC personality in a game which lacks RPing, how much more important in a BG game which hopefully lives up to its predecessors re: PC paths.
Of course if we're talking about 5E mechanics, maybe the rest is moot anyway since I have little desire to play, and do have IRL gaming opportunities. I suppose I could always pull out an older version or Planescape.

[Deriven Firelion]

Castilliano wrote:

Deriven Firelion wrote:

Is Baldur's Gate 3 going to be any good? I've heard not great things about it. Maybe they've improved it since then. I heard character customization by class and such not a thing. Pre-generated characters. And you can't create your own party.

That's...horrible.

I replayed Baldur's Gate dozens of times because of the variety of PCs available (and a lack of IRL gaming opportunities). One only need look at how Diablo adds more and more development options as its primary replayability aspect to see the importance of player input. Heck, that gives a PC personality in a game which lacks RPing, how much more important in a BG game which hopefully lives up to its predecessors re: PC paths.
Of course if we're talking about 5E mechanics, maybe the rest is moot anyway since I have little desire to play, and do have IRL gaming opportunities. I suppose I could always pull out an older version or Planescape.

The closest games to Baldur's Gate I've played are the Pathfinder Kingmaker and Wrath of the Righteous games. Both were fun. Very much like Baldur's Gate.

I've watched Baldur's Gate 3's development. Great graphics, but not sure it has the customizability of other D and D and PF type of video games. My friend said it is built like the gaming companies other popular game. I can't recall the name, but he said it was the same game engine and style of game which is not like the original Baldur's Gate.

[Pieces-Kai]

I've Divinity Original Sin 2 which is by the same company and I found most of the game pretty fun but I don't know how much of that would translate to this game because it looks like it will be leaning more into the mechanics of 5e

[Bluenose]

Deriven Firelion wrote:

Is Baldur's Gate 3 going to be any good? I've heard not great things about it. Maybe they've improved it since then. I heard character customization by class and such not a thing. Pre-generated characters. And you can't create your own party.

I don't know where you heard there was no character customisation, because the beta has had that from the very start and hasn't had pre-generated characters to play. Whether it's a good game will always be a matter of opinion but I'd be very doubtful that all the time they've spent on their character generation system in the beta is going to be thrown away when the full game comes out later this year. And all their publicity up to the most recent Panel From Hell earlier this week has discussed creating your own characters.

[Errenor]

krazmuze wrote:

I am pointing to Solasta (Tactical Adventures) because they did an OGL version of 5e without any IP license in their own campaign world (so less work for Paizo), they did well enough to put out DLCs and get wide distribution and community modding support- and are already at the point of asking what should be doing next game - so right time right place. They survived early access and actually put out a game, which in itself makes them a success because steam is full of early access unfinished garbage.

Well, I have to point out that Solasta is sadly simply a bad game. Yes, all that above is mostly true, but the level of implementation is very low. And only part of that could be attributed to low budget.

Graphics is ugly, style is basically non-existent, game performance is bad, the game is still buggy in the core things, dialogs are completely terrible, campaign plots are full of clichés and nonsensical, campaign structures aren't well thought-out and are easily broken (they have open-world elements).
5e mechanics implementation is more or less decent, but bugs in the main systems and unfinished things coupled with 5e deficiencies and level design (which is also bad) prevent from enjoing the game too much. For example, they pride in their implementation of 3d levels. It works, yes. And then in all their levels everywhere there are invisible walls above virtually nothing which restrict flying. That is mostly a consequence of impassable cells on the ground, as they couldn't solve the problem of falling there. Changes nothing, the result is 'you can't fly over these bushes, because... we said so'.
The game is still playable with a friend online (ah, yes, hello 5 desynchronizations and/or disconnects per hour! The multiplayer is also bugged), but it's still not very good experience.

Deriven Firelion wrote:

Is Baldur's Gate 3 going to be any good? I've heard not great things about it. Maybe they've improved it since then. I heard character customization by class and such not a thing. Pre-generated characters. And you can't create your own party.

That's all completely wrong. There is customization (as much as 5e allows), you can create your characters and probably party. Though if you reject all written NPCs/characters from your party, you won't get their quests and interactions, and there are a lot.

[Totally Not Gorbacz]

BG3 lets you have sex with a wild shape druid, insta buy for me, this is this weird s++@ that D&D was always about.

[krazmuze]

Errenor wrote:

Well, I have to point out that Solasta is sadly simply a bad game.

Steam

RECENT REVIEWS:
Very Positive (389)
ALL REVIEWS:
Very Positive (15,165)
RELEASE DATE:
May 27, 2021

GOG 4/5

OK we will mark your strong opinion as the vocal minority....

When you go in with the expectation of it being a Turn-Based Tactical RPG based on the SRD 5.1 Ruleset, it meets those expectations which is why I suggested that Paizo should work with them on PF2e they have demonstrated that they are very good at getting tactics.

Yes if you want druid companion bear sex and worry if the game lets your choose your ass pimples or not - BG3 is certainly a more cinematic RP/companion game up there at AAA Skyrim/Bioware levels - but as far as implementing 5e combat tactics go it is clear by reviews Solasta did a much better job. With PF2e optimal play being team based combat tactics it would make a good rewrite for their new game. I would much rather have a game with dozens of 30hr DLC than one with 360hr cinematics, because it fits with the frequency of paizo adventures.

[Squiggit]

NGL this thread kind of just reads like the OP trying to market Solasta than anything else.

[krazmuze]

Then add to the convo by bring another studio into the discussion that you think can do CRPG justice to PF2e turn based team based combat tactics - which is the strength of PF2e compared to 5e.

We already know Owlcat is a strong nope for PF2e, I also suggested maybe inXile but not sure.

The recent kickstarter was a strong nope as its iconic ARPG, and not at all a character CRPG.

You don't really think they will get Larian do you? Even if they did it will be another six years or more because they keep expanding scope with each game.

Maybe the studio that is current holder of the BG1/BG2 extended editions since they got snubbed by WOTC to do BG3?

Obsidian did Pillars of Eternity, but they seem to be heavy into a skyrim killer open world RPG right now based in their POE world.

[keftiu]

This thread is basically just hyping up Solasta and spreading complete misinformation about Baldur’s Gate 3. It has very little to do with Pathfinder… or reality.

[Deriven Firelion]

Bluenose wrote:

Deriven Firelion wrote:

Is Baldur's Gate 3 going to be any good? I've heard not great things about it. Maybe they've improved it since then. I heard character customization by class and such not a thing. Pre-generated characters. And you can't create your own party.

I don't know where you heard there was no character customisation, because the beta has had that from the very start and hasn't had pre-generated characters to play. Whether it's a good game will always be a matter of opinion but I'd be very doubtful that all the time they've spent on their character generation system in the beta is going to be thrown away when the full game comes out later this year. And all their publicity up to the most recent Panel From Hell earlier this week has discussed creating your own characters.

Is the character customization based on the 5E rules? Level based and such? Do you get pick your race, class, and make all other adjustments? Does it use feats which are optional in 5E?

I have heard the customization is far, far less than the original Baldur's Gate in terms of race and class? How does it compare to Paizo's games which are incredibly customizable?

[keftiu]

BG3 is launching with all of the D&D 5e classes except for Artificer (most get 3 subclasses, some get more) and 12 races (with a number of subraces). There are several Origin characters, who can either be chosen as your premade PC or recruited as a party member, and several other Companions who can be recruited but are not themselves playable Origins. Completely custom main characters have always been in the game, since the first days of Early Access, and I believe making your own Companions is coming at launch if it isn’t in already.

Pretty much everything said upthread has never been true about it. I’m no fan of 5e or Larian, but spreading easily-debunked nonsense just makes this thread seem even more off-topic.

[MEATSHED]

To my knowledge bg3 is just 5e's core rulebook stuff for race and class (after looking it up, oathbreaker and gith are also in). Solasta I found to be the most 5/10 game, but I also found it after being tired out of 5e.

[krazmuze]

I doubt anyone will ever beat Owlcat for character customization, they clearly are fans of how absurd PF1e builds can get and how wide/deep they pulled from a decade of PF1e, which is why they refuse to do PF2e.

But having played DOS a lot (ditto for POE), much of the story is delivered thru companions - so if you did custom party you have a much less of an experience (NPCs react to your traits you chose is all) unless you are doing multiplayer and doing RP outside the game itself . BG3 being DOS3 has really cranked the companions up a lot. BG was never really about build your own party though - it was about interacting with companions. I am not going to play it expecting it is a great 5e party simulator that will replace a VTT, I am going to play it because it is DOS3+BG3.

That is why I liked Solasta it really was about building a customized party, of course hampered by the lack of a 5e IP license so feats and classes are not truly 5e. There is a mod that adds homebrew classes/feats and multiclass which makes it better. And 5e itself really lacks in the optimal team placed play that PF2e has so I think it would really shine the strength of a party based play game. Wasteland also did a really good job at party gameplay.

[krazmuze]

MEATSHED wrote:

To my knowledge bg3 is just 5e's core rulebook stuff for race and class (after looking it up, oathbreaker and gith are also in). Solasta I found to be the most 5/10 game, but I also found it after being tired out of 5e.

Having played PF2e for years now and Solasta being the first time coming back to 5e, I initially also rated it much lower like yourself. But then I realized the frustrations I was having with it was because of coming back to 5e not because of Solasta. Since then after cracking open my 5e books and reading up the wiki on their homebrew version of feats/classes I have admired it for being the best respect of source TTRPG turn based tactics since ToEE decades ago. If there is a place for bioware/skyrim companion/open world, and there is a place for Diablo ARPG, there is also a place for turn based team tactics.

[WWHsmackdown]

Strange thread but I'll throw my hat in saying I've played DoS 1 & 2 while also putting lots of hours in the BG3 early access. Lirian is gonna smash it outta the park and release an amazing game with bg3 bc they're good at producing tight, engaging games. DOS2 is in the tier of games where I put things like Sekiro and insomniac's spiderman: lovingly crafted, cohesive experiences. There's no contest between BG3 and Solasta in my eyes, good as Solasta was it's not in that weight class

[Squiggit]

keftiu wrote:

BG3 is launching with all of the D&D 5e classes except for Artificer (most get 3 subclasses, some get more) and 12 races (with a number of subraces).

Man artificer just gets nothing but Ls

[krazmuze]

WWHsmackdown wrote:

Strange thread but I'll throw my hat in saying I've played DoS 1 & 2 while also putting lots of hours in the BG3 early access. Lirian is gonna smash it outta the park and release an amazing game with bg3 bc they're good at producing tight, engaging games. DOS2 is in the tier of games where I put things like Sekiro and insomniac's spiderman: lovingly crafted, cohesive experiences. There's no contest between BG3 and Solasta in my eyes, good as Solasta was it's not in that weight class

Not going to disagree, though I am going to play Starfield before touching BG even though it release on PC early I know it cannot possibly finish in a month. Maybe after they get their DLC out will look it next year. Solasta is a quick small indy game I can get in before the big fall games, yet come back to again and replay with the DLC and was just pleased how well they pulled off D&D tactics (for better and worse)

But the only reason this thread veered into BG3 discussion I think is they just did the live stream and seems people are hyped about druid getting their freak on.

The topic of this thread I am trying to get discussed what would be a good studio for a turn-based CRPG that would highlite the strengths of team based tactics of PF2e. That is not feasibly Larian, you are looking at three years more for BG3 DLC, then a decade from now they will do BG4, (DOS2 was started a decade ago their kickstarter had a lot done already). And a decade from now when they are 10x bigger, unless WOTC kills the magic dragon somehow that is not going to be a Paizo partnership game. Lets be realistic here.

[keftiu]

Squiggit wrote:

keftiu wrote:

BG3 is launching with all of the D&D 5e classes except for Artificer (most get 3 subclasses, some get more) and 12 races (with a number of subraces).

Man artificer just gets nothing but Ls

That’s what happens when you get left out of the OGL and tied to a (very, very good!) niche setting.

[krazmuze]

keftiu wrote:

Squiggit wrote:

keftiu wrote:

BG3 is launching with all of the D&D 5e classes except for Artificer (most get 3 subclasses, some get more) and 12 races (with a number of subraces).

Man artificer just gets nothing but Ls

That’s what happens when you get left out of the OGL and tied to a (very, very good!) niche setting.

For sure that will be the first mod if not DLC though. artificer warforged, just snag the existing constructs in the recent antagonist trailer as the body skin.

[MEATSHED]

Squiggit wrote:

keftiu wrote:

BG3 is launching with all of the D&D 5e classes except for Artificer (most get 3 subclasses, some get more) and 12 races (with a number of subraces).

Man artificer just gets nothing but Ls

They truly just released it and had zero ideas on what to do with it.

[Deriven Firelion]

keftiu wrote:

BG3 is launching with all of the D&D 5e classes except for Artificer (most get 3 subclasses, some get more) and 12 races (with a number of subraces). There are several Origin characters, who can either be chosen as your premade PC or recruited as a party member, and several other Companions who can be recruited but are not themselves playable Origins. Completely custom main characters have always been in the game, since the first days of Early Access, and I believe making your own Companions is coming at launch if it isn’t in already.

Pretty much everything said upthread has never been true about it. I’m no fan of 5e or Larian, but spreading easily-debunked nonsense just makes this thread seem even more off-topic.

Any word on feats? 5E is trash without feats in my opinion.

I stopped following BG3 development because it was taking them far too long to launch. The game has been in development for quite a while. You get bored of waiting for a game that keeps getting pushed back.

Early on is when I heard the comments about it. I won't touch the game until it has customizable companions as well. I hate being stuck with a party I had no control in creating.

BG was awesome because of the customizability of the characters and the party as a whole.

We'll see if BG3 holds a candle to the old game.

In reality, hopefully it actually releases on time in a playable and enjoyable state. That game has teased so much that I grew tired of waiting. I'm looking for the old BG experience, not something they think is cool.

[keftiu]

It’s out in a month.

[willfromamerica]

I forget how many, but BG3 is launching with feats available. There's also the option to do full respecs of your character, and the option to recruit fully customizable hirelings, in addition to the 10 options for companions with a whole story of their own.

I'm someone who hates 5e with a passion and will never DM using the system again if I have the choice, but I think the game looks phenomenal and will be playing the hell out of it.

[Zero the Nothing]

Totally Not Gorbacz wrote:

BG3 lets you have sex with a wild shape druid, insta buy for me, this is this weird s*~@ that D&D was always about.

The hype for digital bestiality will never cease to amaze and disgust me.

[PossibleCabbage]

I mean, if the bear is a wild-shaped druid (who can thus give consent, because they're a person) all the ethical questions are easily resolved.

At that point, it's just aesthetics.

[ikarinokami]

Solasta, the problem in my opinion is that 5e is too simple, it's just hard in my opinion to make an interesting combat focused CRPG from that system. once you get to level 5 it feels like you've maxed out the system.

I think owlcat would do an amazing job with P2E, I wouldn't be surprised if they make a P2E game eventually.

[krazmuze]

I am suggesting Tactical Adventures the studio because they demonstrated they are willing to respect turn based mechanics of D&D, obviously it is not just a Solasta PF2e DLC level of effort - but rather that you would think they would show the same level of respect to team based turn based mechanics of PF2e.

owlcat has clearly said no....do you think Paizo has enough money to dump on them and willingness to pull their PF1e license if they do not comply? I would rather go with someone that is a true fan of PF2e for the best chance of something good.

Of course using Solasta as an engine itself is not possible, talking about the studio making a new game so obviously they would have to work on the code - all doable to start now with the finished remaster books. They already raise the possibility of new systems for a new game they are not beholden to sticking with D&D as they are in precarious OGL position especially with D&D's VTT wanting to be a similar modular video game. Maybe some of it is easily modified, like leveled proficiency/training is easy code extensions and crits DC+-10 (not that far awaay from brutal critical) and adding four levels of success and roll against DC not against dice. For skill actions they have shove/trip/jump/climb so it would need a lot more work to cover all the possible combat/exploration skill actions since D&D is lacking there. But ABCD feats is easy as they already have feats they just need a way better level up UI for them (there are already user mods that easily add classes/feats). Even BG3 learned something from Solasta how to implement reactions. The biggest hurdle based on their slowness of class releases is eventually getting to all the classes and doing them justice because a lot of the advanced class features are probably tricky. They already modified the bestiary to be more like PF2e because they think mobs being sacks of multiattack HP is boring (much like several 5e 3p already have). They even sort of implemented a bestiary recall knowledge with four levels of info after you fight them, D&D has no room for wasting main/bonus actions on that - not that hard to turn that into a exploration/combat action. They have a crafting system that will need adapted to whatever the remaster version is, but I like that you find the time when you can and its not just forced downtime.

BG3 UI still looks a lot like DOS2, it did not take them a decade to make the D&D mechanical changes. Mostly early access was triple tug of war with those bemoaning the loss of DOS2 mechanics gameplay and the 5e diehards insisting it be true D&D and the BG12 diehards insisting if it was not RtWP they are out and Larian tried to find a happy middle. It was the hundreds of hours of celebrity voiced cinematics for every frakking possibility where that time/money went (seriously longer than Game of Thrones - how many thousands of hours will a 100% run even take?), as well as updating the graphical engine to handle the closeup cinematics - you would not want to do that with the DOS2 gfx. But even Larian took time doing new classes and races, so I would fully expect they are saving more for DLC just like Solasta did. It was funny when someone added a swivel camera mods to the original 'isometric' DOS, it was actually a 3D game done with stage sets and not as 2D drawings like BG1/2

[Deriven Firelion]

willfromamerica wrote:

I forget how many, but BG3 is launching with feats available. There's also the option to do full respecs of your character, and the option to recruit fully customizable hirelings, in addition to the 10 options for companions with a whole story of their own.

I'm someone who hates 5e with a passion and will never DM using the system again if I have the choice, but I think the game looks phenomenal and will be playing the hell out of it.

I may give it a shot. I don't like the 5E system, but with feats in a video game it might be fun.

[krazmuze]

Deriven Firelion wrote:

willfromamerica wrote:

I forget how many, but BG3 is launching with feats available. There's also the option to do full respecs of your character, and the option to recruit fully customizable hirelings, in addition to the 10 options for companions with a whole story of their own.

I'm someone who hates 5e with a passion and will never DM using the system again if I have the choice, but I think the game looks phenomenal and will be playing the hell out of it.

I may give it a shot. I don't like the 5E system, but with feats in a video game it might be fun.

Please please take that discussion about playing BG3 to off topic discussions or discord chats where it belongs. I want this to be about what it would take to get a turn-based team-based PF2e ORC CRPG happening.

To make PF2e team-based turn-based mechanic work, you really need to have the party centric game play that respects the mechanics.

Given BG3 reluctance to go all in on D&D mechanics like Solasta did, I really do not see it happening. Unless you have suggestions of how Paizo will get Larian to sellout BG4 to do a Paizo game I do not see the relevance.

[Rysky]

You’re talking nonstop about SOLASTA, other people can bring up similar games they’d like as comparison for another potential Pathfinder CRPG (also you keep bringing BG3 up too)

[Dancing Wind]

krazmuze wrote:

do you think Paizo has enough money to dump on them and willingness to pull their PF1e license if they do not comply?

I am amused by your underlying assumptions in this thread: that Paizo staff are spending time trying to bribe or threaten other companies to force them to convert Paizo's games into other media.

They're still working on remastered classes that won't even come out until next year.

[Totally Not Gorbacz]

Zero the Nothing wrote:

Totally Not Gorbacz wrote:

BG3 lets you have sex with a wild shape druid, insta buy for me, this is this weird s~&$ that D&D was always about.

The hype for digital bestiality will never cease to amaze and disgust me.

Yes, but how do you actually feel right now?

[Zaister]

The biggest strike against my having any interest in BG3 is that it is set in the most boring campaign world imaginable.

[WWHsmackdown]

Zaister wrote:

The biggest strike against my having any interest in BG3 is that it is set in the most boring campaign world imaginable.

I don't think it's boring per se; like Golarian faerun is a kitchen sink if you go back and look at lore from previous editions. The only issue is that WOTC spent a decade not fleshing out or retreading that setting to the millions of new inductees (like myself) that started playing with the release of 5e (maybe bc sword coast was the least liked book?) so most people people don't even consider faerun a developed setting. One of my biggest draws with P2e was the interest and drive to show off Golarian to the customer. WOTC really doesn't seem to care about faerun. Eberron, dark sun, and spell jammer are definitely more interesting, but they're also more niche in theme/conceit (despite eberron being my fav setting). I chalk faerun being boring squarely on WOTCs apathy moreso than the content itself being boring.

[Errenor]

krazmuze wrote:

OK we will mark your strong opinion as the vocal minority....

Yep, sure. I'm a bit surprised about that too. I guess overall people have lower standards and/or experience. Or not ehough choice, like I and my friend. Or maybe user custom campaigns from workshop are that good. We played through two official campaigns and I can't look at the game anymore, at least for a year I suppose.

Ah, also their DLC policy is not nice - half majority of the base classes are in there.
And moreover, I was a bit of a fan myself when I'd only seen the demo version of the game. After the release, when we actually had played it - not at all.

[ikarinokami]

truthfully as a video game company there is no reason to make p2e over p1e. in my opinion strictly as a computer game where there is no DM and the computer keeps track of all options, I think pf1e is superior to pf2e.

[PossibleCabbage]

ikarinokami wrote:

truthfully as a video game company there is no reason to make p2e over p1e. in my opinion strictly as a computer game where there is no DM and the computer keeps track of all options, I think pf1e is superior to pf2e.

I disagree. If nothing else, just having the interface clearly show "your three actions" is a lot clearer for the player than having to separate move, standard, full-round, swift, etc. actions. Particularly since basically everything costs 1 or 2 actions to do now.

This was a thing I found very frustrating in the owlcat games, it was very easy to move too far and not be allowed to cast a spell, for example.