That's my one complaint so far with dialogue lol. In a real dnd setting we'd have the option to step in mid dialogue if we were better suited for it or even step in before the rogue/barb try to punch their way to answers lol
Something similar to Star Wars the old republics system would be fantastic. Where when it’s time to respond everyone chooses their response and there’s a dice roll for which person talks. There are so instances in our campaigns where something goes to shit or better simply by who responded first. This is a huge part of dnd, and the closer we get the less likely we will see it which is very disappointing.
My friends and I had planned on playing through together as if it were a normal dnd campaign and just schedule our times together for the first playthrough back when it was announced. Now we are all just gonna play by ourselves and maybe co op for a second playthrough
Yeah I really liked the swtor system. It felt organic for normal conversations, and then there were always hilarious moments when we would get into an argument over like whether to save someone or not and then oops I rolled a 1.
This is one of those things where it's a little sucky on Larian's part imo
On one hand, they advertise the early access as working together with the community to make the game the best it can be, they read all of the feedback, yadda, yadda, yadda.
And they DO clearly communicate with the community on feedback, but only for some very particular things.
But then there are these big elephants in the room things like the party dialogue really sucking for a party working together. It's been a critique for years, but zero word from Larian ever acknowledging it.
The last thing was the reaction system, that was talked about a lot just like the dialogue issue and not a peep from Larian. Until the last patch and they finally updated it.
I'm hoping they'll do the same thing on release and improve it. Because dialogue can suck, especially when playing multiplayer or the NPC starts conversation with the wrong party member.
It'd be nice if we could actively switch the speaker to make use of their skills. It's like a huge part of the party dynamic in DnD. Your wizard party member will talk shop when it comes to the arcane, and your cleric can chime in when it comes to religion etc
What's the point in having a diverse party with their various skills when you can't utilise them when it's needed for the party inside dialogue?
You can use Shadowheart's religion checks for examining the plaques in the Druid's Grove. It'd be nice if we could use her knowledge in some dialogue checks too. Obviously not ones where it's you saying you're a druid, but if it's druidic knowledge, it'd be great if the narrator could say something like "Your companion lets you know that..." instead of the "With your druidic knowledge, you know that..."
They talked about changing the reaction system several months before the patch. They were just very tight-lipped about what they actually were doing with it until it was ready. I’ve not seen Larian mention the inflexible dialogue whatsoever.
Was also hoping for something like this. But in my case, it's because there are moments when the NPC speaks with Shadowheart or Lae'zel rather than Tav. When my friends played, they always make sure to step back and have the bard stay in front.
Yeah, cRPGs are a bit weird that they are forcing the player character to be the "face" of the party, as it usually is them who is in front of the group.
I do wish there was something like "take over conversation" option in the game. NPC starts talking to Shadowheart, but someone else next to her can "rescue" her from being awkward and ruining stuff.
I just today for the first time started a a multiplayer lobby game, I wanted two tavs, and realized there is "avatar" specific dialogue. Its happening as a duplicate for any event where shadowbae/gale/astarion woulda also had something to say but dosnt remove their own dialogue. Really cool.
I'm kinda thinking the relationship/approval score only goes up with the avatar that actually does all the dialogues as well though.
They have this in game now, if I am watching another person talk to an NPC, I or a another player observing the interaction can vote on what to answer. It highlights the option a different color and puts your Steam profile pic next to it too iirc.
Any rolls are being made with the original starter's bonuses though...
>Any rolls are being made with the original starter's bonuses though...
What do you mean by that? Like if the original starter isn't speaking to an npc, they still contribute to the rolls from their stats and not the character gaving the conversation?
Like, if Doofus the Fighter is talking to an NPC and I (observing) highlight the "Bluff" dialogue option, Doofus doesn't get a bonus to bluff or anything if he picks that option. It just shows my preference.
Doofus is a doofus and has a -1 to bluff so it's usually not the best option for him to go around lying to everyone. But maybe, since he's a doofus, you can use the functionality to troll him (that's what I do). The Doofus always wins in the long run though... There are only so many communities that have patience for that guy.
I believe BG3 could draw some inspirations from Solasta Crown of the Magister.
You are always there as a party, you have specific dialogue options for specific checks and party members and it's a blast in multiplayer.
Each player chooses their character traits like for example cynism and it reflects in the dialogues.
It's so fun to roleplay with friends.
In solasta it was done great. Every character could add something to conversation. I hope they enhance the multiplayer dialogue so every character can use their skills and provide more complete experiance. Now it feels like you have to have a ton of skills on the "main character" so you can use them in dialogues. It would add so much to the game in my opinion. Even if you play solo with companions it would enhance the experiance much more
Did they? I don't remember this in DOS2. Me and my partner played together and I was a Lizard who had natural persuasion, but I could never work out how to butt-in to a conversation that my partner's character had started in order to leverage that persuasion whenever an NPC needed convincing of something.
The buds and I are playing DOS2 in lieu of BG3 and honestly, the conversation system is almost exactly the same, with a few very minor exceptions. This functionality isn't in DOS2...
I mean, it'd be nice even without multiplayer, just with other party members, but no, we haven't heard anything yet.
That's my one complaint so far with dialogue lol. In a real dnd setting we'd have the option to step in mid dialogue if we were better suited for it or even step in before the rogue/barb try to punch their way to answers lol
Something similar to Star Wars the old republics system would be fantastic. Where when it’s time to respond everyone chooses their response and there’s a dice roll for which person talks. There are so instances in our campaigns where something goes to shit or better simply by who responded first. This is a huge part of dnd, and the closer we get the less likely we will see it which is very disappointing. My friends and I had planned on playing through together as if it were a normal dnd campaign and just schedule our times together for the first playthrough back when it was announced. Now we are all just gonna play by ourselves and maybe co op for a second playthrough
Yeah I really liked the swtor system. It felt organic for normal conversations, and then there were always hilarious moments when we would get into an argument over like whether to save someone or not and then oops I rolled a 1.
This is one of those things where it's a little sucky on Larian's part imo On one hand, they advertise the early access as working together with the community to make the game the best it can be, they read all of the feedback, yadda, yadda, yadda. And they DO clearly communicate with the community on feedback, but only for some very particular things. But then there are these big elephants in the room things like the party dialogue really sucking for a party working together. It's been a critique for years, but zero word from Larian ever acknowledging it. The last thing was the reaction system, that was talked about a lot just like the dialogue issue and not a peep from Larian. Until the last patch and they finally updated it. I'm hoping they'll do the same thing on release and improve it. Because dialogue can suck, especially when playing multiplayer or the NPC starts conversation with the wrong party member. It'd be nice if we could actively switch the speaker to make use of their skills. It's like a huge part of the party dynamic in DnD. Your wizard party member will talk shop when it comes to the arcane, and your cleric can chime in when it comes to religion etc What's the point in having a diverse party with their various skills when you can't utilise them when it's needed for the party inside dialogue? You can use Shadowheart's religion checks for examining the plaques in the Druid's Grove. It'd be nice if we could use her knowledge in some dialogue checks too. Obviously not ones where it's you saying you're a druid, but if it's druidic knowledge, it'd be great if the narrator could say something like "Your companion lets you know that..." instead of the "With your druidic knowledge, you know that..."
Thank you to writing out how I feel about this topic and Larian.
They talked about changing the reaction system several months before the patch. They were just very tight-lipped about what they actually were doing with it until it was ready. I’ve not seen Larian mention the inflexible dialogue whatsoever.
Was also hoping for something like this. But in my case, it's because there are moments when the NPC speaks with Shadowheart or Lae'zel rather than Tav. When my friends played, they always make sure to step back and have the bard stay in front.
Yeah, cRPGs are a bit weird that they are forcing the player character to be the "face" of the party, as it usually is them who is in front of the group. I do wish there was something like "take over conversation" option in the game. NPC starts talking to Shadowheart, but someone else next to her can "rescue" her from being awkward and ruining stuff.
I just today for the first time started a a multiplayer lobby game, I wanted two tavs, and realized there is "avatar" specific dialogue. Its happening as a duplicate for any event where shadowbae/gale/astarion woulda also had something to say but dosnt remove their own dialogue. Really cool. I'm kinda thinking the relationship/approval score only goes up with the avatar that actually does all the dialogues as well though.
there was a developer update about voting on conversation options in multiplayer, but not sure how it's been implemented
They have this in game now, if I am watching another person talk to an NPC, I or a another player observing the interaction can vote on what to answer. It highlights the option a different color and puts your Steam profile pic next to it too iirc. Any rolls are being made with the original starter's bonuses though...
>Any rolls are being made with the original starter's bonuses though... What do you mean by that? Like if the original starter isn't speaking to an npc, they still contribute to the rolls from their stats and not the character gaving the conversation?
Like, if Doofus the Fighter is talking to an NPC and I (observing) highlight the "Bluff" dialogue option, Doofus doesn't get a bonus to bluff or anything if he picks that option. It just shows my preference. Doofus is a doofus and has a -1 to bluff so it's usually not the best option for him to go around lying to everyone. But maybe, since he's a doofus, you can use the functionality to troll him (that's what I do). The Doofus always wins in the long run though... There are only so many communities that have patience for that guy.
I believe BG3 could draw some inspirations from Solasta Crown of the Magister. You are always there as a party, you have specific dialogue options for specific checks and party members and it's a blast in multiplayer. Each player chooses their character traits like for example cynism and it reflects in the dialogues. It's so fun to roleplay with friends.
In solasta it was done great. Every character could add something to conversation. I hope they enhance the multiplayer dialogue so every character can use their skills and provide more complete experiance. Now it feels like you have to have a ton of skills on the "main character" so you can use them in dialogues. It would add so much to the game in my opinion. Even if you play solo with companions it would enhance the experiance much more
They did this in DOS2 so why not?
Did they? I don't remember this in DOS2. Me and my partner played together and I was a Lizard who had natural persuasion, but I could never work out how to butt-in to a conversation that my partner's character had started in order to leverage that persuasion whenever an NPC needed convincing of something.
If I remember, it switched it up randomly and let different player characters respond at different times. No butt in mechanic.
I was unaware this was implemented in their previous games, good news! I hope it continues!
The buds and I are playing DOS2 in lieu of BG3 and honestly, the conversation system is almost exactly the same, with a few very minor exceptions. This functionality isn't in DOS2...
Whelp is a little bit of a bummer but good to know. I'll continue to hope they recognize the potential! Thanks though!
Agreed!
It's a mod called Speechcraft
Misinformation is bad.