3d ago

CRPG folks, got any advice for a newcomer? I've put about 15 hours into Baldur's Gate 3 and honestly I still feel pretty lost.

Everyone says BG3 is a great starting point, and I've even set it to the lowest difficulty, but I'm still struggling to get anywhere. I know nothing about D&D, so the combat system just feels really overwhelming and restrictive. Like, being able to cast a spell once or twice before needing to rest at camp feels weird to me.

On the flip side, I'm loving the visuals, the voice acting, the characters, and the story. It's just the combat that's throwing me off. I think I might be playing it too much like a JRPG or something like Mass Effect or Skyrim, which probably isn't the right approach.

Any tips on how to actually get into CRPGs? Or is there maybe a different game that’s a bit more beginner-friendly?

13 comments

It's funny, I have a few years' experience playing D&D 5e, so when I started playing Baldurs Gate 3, I felt like I had an advantage. I needed to learn how to control the game, but I understood the systems it was based on. Nothing about it really confused me. I don't know all the classes (I'm pretty good with a thief rogue or a shadow monk) but it's exactly what I expected.
That being said I found the game completely obtuse.
The thing about real D&D (played around a table) is, it's mostly in the "theatre of the mind" and things are at the DM's discretion. There's a rock in your way? We'll just pretend you can get around it. At every table I've played at, we use the Sanderson rule. Referring to Mistborn/Stormlight Archive author Brandon Sanderson, the Sanderson rule is "err on the side of cool." That is, if you want to do something and it's slightly against the rules, invoke Sanderson/suggest it would be cool and generally the DM will make it happen. Playing on a screen though? Everything is where it is and the game will not budge to let you do something cool from time to time. (D&D has a mechanic in place for this, it's called Inspiration and it's kind of hard for a computer to decide when you get a point of inspiration.)
Even in a "hardcore" D&D game with a dungeon board and a DM who measures everything, you can still pull off feats impossible in a computer game.
I think these games are for people who are very familiar with tabletop D&D (and not just "theatre of the mind" but figures and boards and measuring) and want more of a challenge, more rigidity. For me that isn't what D&D is. But BG3 isn't just D&D. It's also kind of its own thing.
If you know nothing about D&D, go watch "Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves." It's a movie, and it's very good. The first few D&D movies sucked, and they were meant to suck. This one has all the fun of the first one from 2000, but it does not suck. I mean, it has some really dumb shit in it — see the dragon, for example. But it's never not good. That's what D&D should be about. That feeling at the end of the movie? That's how you should feel every day after playing for a couple hours. That movie is what D&D is and should be. Video games can't really give you that. And BG3 doesn't seem to try. Rather, it uses D&D as a system to make itself familiar to some tabletop players, but it's really its own thing (while it may be set in the D&D world as well). Knowing one doesn't mean you know the other. And some might disagree with that.
But at the end of the day, BG3 is a turn-based strategy game. And I've never been good at those. I think I got about 4 hours into BG3 before deciding it wasn't for me.
- Very interesting analysis! I will definitely watch the movie. I usually don't play strategy games, but BG3 got so much praise I really wanted to see what it is about.
  I even want to try playing an actual table-top RPG, but I don't have friends. Perhaps I should try playing one online.
  
  Lots of games get praise, doesn't mean you'll like them.
  Generally, smaller markets/groups of people tend to be the loudest. Case in point, Souls-like fans. These people dump on any game that is accessible to normal people, and they love their uber-hard games. They love that you can't beat them. They love that they frustrate you. They're a very vocal minority of gamers. Hollow Knight Silksong may end up being 2025's game of the year, and it probably deserves it, but most people can't play it (or at least, get very far). The game is stupidly hard and its gameplay is obtuse by design. But, there are people who love that, and they will sing its praises from the rooftops. Hell, I'm not a fan of that kind of game, and I'm rooting for Silksong. It's $20, it's a Metroidvania side-scroller, and it's fucking gorgeous. I want it to succeed, I don't even care that I can't play it. But I'm holding out for Bloodstained II, which is all of that but accessible to the masses. Anyone can pick it up and work at it and beat it eventually — at least the first one was like that. Sure, a couple bosses seem unfair, but once you get the hang of it? Not hard at all. I play the first one every couple years.
  The only real accessible CRPG I found was Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic. That one was just fun, had a great story, and never got in the way of the fun. Except the underwater level where you move at quarter speed for no good reason. And I got lost in the forest (Kashyyyk, where the Wookiees live) but other than that? Thoroughly loved it. And I'm not a fan of CRPGs. Anything that gets in the way of fun, I'm not gonna like.
BG3 tips:
Try focusing on cantrips a little more. You can cast these as much as you like. They aren't as powerful, but they're reliable.
Save your spells for when you need them. No point casting an area effect spell on a single target, or a powerful spell on a guy with 5 hp, for instance.
Pay attention to concentration. Some spells last multiple turns, so you can just keep the effect going rather than casting a new spell. Heat Metal, for instance.
Some classes can regain spells between long rests. A wizard has arcane recovery, and a warlock regains spells on a short rest instead of a long one. Clerics and druids don't do this, but they can change their spell list on the fly, so it balances out.
Don't be afraid of long rests. This is where a lot of story moments happen, and you aren't as pressed for time as the game claims you are. There's a few long-rest dependant quests, but not many.
For an alternative, I'd say Dragon Age. Bioware made the original Baldurs Gate games, then made Mass Effect, so Dragon Age is a good midpoint between the two. Start with Origins, which is both the first in the series and the most crpg of the bunch.
And if you still can't get into the crpg genre, that's fine. Not everything is for everyone.
- Thanks. Would this be a good party setup for me?
  Fighter, Barbarian, Rogue, Warlock
  Or should I replace one with a Cleric? I like Shadowheart's character.
  I have Dragon Age in my library too, but not so keen on the real-time with pause combat. I should try playing it again if it is easier than BG3.
  
  It's hard to go too wrong, honestly. Healing in combat is not that useful, so think of classes as either tanks, DPS, or both. Clerics lean more towards DPS, and are the best healers if you still want that. I say to just fill your party with whoever you think is best narratively, then check you have someone to take hits, disarm traps, or deal huge damage to the enemies.
  As far as I know, most CRPGs are real-time with pause. BG3 is the outlier, even in the Baldurs Gate series.
  
  BG3 has plentiful items and easy access to resting so a healer isn't necessary. Plus the faster you put down enemies the less healing is needed, and healing during combat instead of doing damage means longer fights which makes more healing necessary. Avoiding damage in the first place is the most important thing, and can be done through positioning, higher armor class, shutting down enemies. and damage reduction. That doesn't mean you shouldn't use a cleric or other healer, but when you do make sure to take spells that reduce damage and the cleric should be doing damage or crowd control stuff most rounds.
  The biggest consideration is that you should really have a mix of long range and close range damage so that you can counter their ranged stuff while the melee characters duke it out in melee.
  There are also a lot of items and environmental effects that can have way more impact on combat than character abilities. Pushing enemies into fires, away from friendlies, and items that push or pull stuff around has way more impact that one would think. Sure, high strength is needed to do it reliably, but if you have a free push and nothing else to do give it a try!
Like, being able to cast a spell once or twice before needing to rest at camp feels weird to me.
Well, the game is basically designed around spamming Long Rest so much you would realistically need horse tranquilizers with how often you force your poor party members back to sleep. I know the game might fool you into thinking there is a time pressure, but that is a complete lie. I know for the sake of Immersion you might want to rest as little as possible as you want to address the crisis with urgency and push forward on limited resources (that's how I felt), but that will actually make you miss out on tons of content.
The rule of thumb is: whenever something happens anywhere that might progress a quest or trigger a flag somewhere, immediately go to camp and do a couple of back-to-back-to-back-to-back long rests until you stop getting cutscenes.
The combat is tactical / strategic and comes from tabletop where each hero is played by a whole person and is designed around keeping the game flowing as much as possible.
Rule of thumb, a “turn” is about 6 seconds of time. There’s not a lot you can do in 6 seconds, run and swing your sword, grab gems from your bag and speak the mystical words of a spell, and so on.
That’s why you can typically move and do an action on a turn (maybe a bonus action too).
Spell slots (your limit to how many spells you can use per long/short rest) represent your physical and mental limit for manipulating the fabric of magic and channeling its energy.
It also stops players spamming crazy powerful spells and denying other players a chance to shine and use their abilities.
Ultimately that’s what the limit is all about, balancing the heroes so that everyone has their chance to do something amazing.
I recommend you watch a few 5min videos from The Dungeoncast that cover these foundational topics. With a little more understanding of the rules of the game might help you be less confused.
D&D Explained in 5min
D&D Combat Explained in 5min
D&D Spellcasting Explained in 5min
Like, being able to cast a spell once or twice before needing to rest at camp feels weird to me.
It's a Dungeons&Dragons -ism. Spells need to have some sort of limitations, and I think that the rise of mana/spell power/energy, another popular convention for constraining spells, post-dates Dungeons & Dragons. And Dungeons & Dragons never dropped the "rest to re-acquire spells" convention.
Could also play non-spellcasters, if you don't like the spell mechanics. I haven't played through all of BG3, but everything I've read is that it's pretty viable to play well with any party composition that you want.
I play DND on a tabletop, but bg3 didn't do it for me either because I was spending more time managing inventories and builds than doing interesting things. Double that trying to play with my partner with each of us waiting for the other to compare new loot, make leveling decisions, figure out what to do next and get everybody there at roughly the same time, etc. (That also happened to us with all the borderlands games, though) I think there are probably mods that can address most complaints that people might have, but I haven't gotten the itch to look into it.

13 comments