When asked why people should try Baldur's Gate 3, Neil "Astarion" Newbon said something like it was the closest you could get to playing pencil and paper Dungeons and Dragons on a computer. Of course we've had plenty of computerised D&D going back to the Gold Box games of the late 80s that I cut my teeth on: Curse of the Azure Bonds
in the four glorious colours of CGA, isn't it? Wasn't it? Four 5.25"
disks, swapping them around every time you entered combat for
goalposts... BG3 really accentuates its tabletop origins, putting the D20 front and centre (literally, for
some skill checks). I don't know if there's a carefully calibrated
level of distancing, if anyone's tried a CRPG where you start in a
first-person view walking up to a table, sitting down, and filling out a
paper sheet of stats before the screen dissolves into graphical
character creation. Maybe they did but Brecht said "guys, tone down the
alienation a bit" in play testing. Anyway, BG3 has a nice balance, the narrator/DM complementing the visuals to
set the scene and stat/skill checks being flagged up in conversations or
popping up on screen as they happen. Those dice checks can be a little
frustrating; oddly I mind it less if there's an obvious impact on the
game, like failing a charisma check meaning you can't talk your way out
of a fight, that seems fair enough and you can always reload the game if
you're absolutely desperate to follow that path. It's the little things
like missing out on a bit of extra information from a failed knowledge
check that don't seem to add much. At least in a pencil and
paper campaign a set of hilariously bad rolls can lead to some fun
roleplaying opportunities if the DM and players are on board ("Team
Oblivious don't recognise the markings on the stone. In fact they're
pretty hazy about the concept of 'markings' at all, and while Geoff is
reasonably certain he's seen a stone before the rest of you aren't
convinced...") That's a pretty minor quibble, though.
Combat is (as far as I've read) a good representation of the 5th edition rules, I haven't kept up with things since 3rd edition and it took a little while to get used to bonus actions, class and item abilities and the like. As well as being rusty on the ruleset I'd grown accustomed to games easing you in with an hour or two of ineffectual minions barely able to dent your health bar ("Oh I'm sorry, I'd just gone to make coffee, I didn't realise you were attacking me. Would it help if I said 'ow!' a bit?") An early encounter quickly reminded me how squishy low-level D&D characters are; spotting a couple of thuggish types I casually ambled over and half my party were down within a couple of turns, previously unseen archers in elevated positions proving most unsporting.
Being purely turn based, rather than real time with pause like the first two Baldur's Gate games, combat can be a time-consuming affair which presumably accounts for the lack of ineffectual minions. The game doesn't constantly throw 'trash mobs' at you, few encounters are trivial, though things got considerably easier as I got the
hang of positioning and movement (the leap action: not just for jumpy
puzzles) and environmental interactions (like water/lightning or
grease/fire). Increased familiarity with the rules also allowed for a bit of
character tweaking after accepting recommended choices for a while, though I didn't go full munchkin (I should've probably added
a few levels of Fighter to my Rogue for optimal dual-crossbow
plinking).
If a straight fight is proving tough there are usually other ways to approach things, sometimes obvious (load up on silencing spells and arrows when facing mages), sometimes a little borderline (carefully positioning your main character to avoid triggering a battle-starting conversation while another member of the party artfully places explosive barrels amongst a not-yet-hostile crowd). That's the beauty of a single player (or co-operative hosted) game, you can either adjust the difficulty setting or be as 'cheesy' as you feel comfortable with (more irregular verbs: I am tactically innovative, you are cheesy, they are a dirty exploiter).
The interface can be a little finicky at times when trying to get a good view of a particular area or select a specific item, and the AI pathfinding can't be relied on for delicate manoeuvres. If I forget to un-group the party and start cautiously picking my way through some caves the other three get into a quick huddle: "Right, this is a very dangerous environment, we'll need to be on top of our game here. Karlach: you run back into that chamber over there, do a couple of laps of it, come back out, then straight back in again. Gale: trap duty. If it explodes, releases poison gas, or shoots an arrow you're shoving your face into it. Now off you go while I hurl myself off this precipice, almost kill myself with falling damage, and run through every single passageway as I make my way back to Tav pursued by 17 spiders, three umber hulks, and a particularly confused Darkspawn who tunnelled in from a nearby franchise. Go, go, go!" Overall, though, it's all done very well and feels like a pencil and paper game without 'gamified' elements - no gathering 100 of a particular resource to upgrade a thing to allow me to refine 100 of a different resource into another thing. That can be fine when integrated well, I love making numbers go up as much as the next person, but can be counterproductive when trying to tell a story - looking at Bioware the path from Mass Effect 3 to Dragon Age: Inquisition to Mass Effect: Andromeda to Anthem wasn't exactly a glorious triumph (to the point I had to check Google as I couldn't remember Anthem's name). Fingers crossed for Dragon Age: The Veilguard. Anyway, BG3 has a really sound foundation to tell its story. Or stories. There's a lot packed in.
The combination of the writing, direction, performance capture, and visuals are truly
remarkable. The main quest is a good backbone, it pushes you on but
gives plenty of space for the rest of the world, from little vignettes
you might stumble across to your companions stories, probably the heart of the game and what really sets it apart. Of course there've been great companions in
other RPGs but I can't think of a better set than the origin characters
of BG3. Some are immediately likeable (I was hopelessly smitten with
Karlach from the first meeting), others a little standoffish or
actively hostile, but they all have layers and depths as you spend time
with them. Hearing the developers and actors talk about the
process has been fascinating, the main cast really seem to be passionate
about the game (or are good enough actors to come across like they
are). That's not a prerequisite for a fine performance, Alec Guinness in
Star Wars perhaps being the exemplar, but you'd imagine it makes a difference, even if only subconsciously. A stream of the cast playing pencil and paper is lot of fun, also showing the strengths and weaknesses of computer vs tabletop. A good human DM can improvise and adapt, give context and flavour to dice rolls, and gently nudge players without removing their agency but, even if he do the police in different voices, can hardly rival 200+ human actors for the NPCs (unless they have (hello to) Jason Isaacs and JK Simmons on speed dial). Even the smallest encounters in BG3 can surprise you with NPC performances.
Six seems like a sensible number of primary companions, especially with a party limit of four. Games with 12+ companions like Mass Effect 2 and Midnight Suns (especially with DLC) felt over-stuffed; you didn't have to recruit everyone or spend time with them but when there were in-game benefits for doing so I always felt compelled. The option to fully respec every member of the BG3 party is fantastic and means you don't have to include or exclude anyone just for their role; I had the Rogue side of things covered so Astarion had to sit tight at camp ("a travesty, dahling!") until I was confident enough to respec him. After finding a bunch of robes and items boosting unarmed combat I turned him into a Monk, and blimey the lad couldn't half stun opponents. The attention to detail, each cast member recording themselves casting spells for all the classes, is most impressive. There are others you can recruit as you go through the game but I felt it gave enough space to follow everyone's story, or at least one version of that story, without excessive diversion or bogging down into a rut.
Act 3 did feel a little over-stuffed compared to the first two and perhaps could have done with a little more direction; one particular quest sounded like it was building up to a grand confrontation so I'd been carefully avoiding that and skirting my way around the city, but it turned out to be a more minor step that I'd skipped. Fair play to the writers, though, everything still worked in the order I did it, even if a couple of bits didn't quite make as much sense as they might have done. I can only imagine the flowcharts needed to keep track of all the possibilities, especially being able to play as your own character, any of the six Origins, or the Dark Urge. I might well go for another run in the future, once I've given it a little time to digest. All in all it's been quite the ride and I very much look forward to seeing what Larian might do next, and if someone else picks up the Baldur's Gate franchise hopefully they can do something equally interesting. Bravo!
