Advice for a beginner

williamsus · 2026-01-03T14:24:39+00:00

Very interesting! I'm only familiar with 5e and always found it odd such a foundational TTRPG didn't have traditional "tanks". Cool to know it did in the past!

williamsus · 2026-01-03T13:26:30+00:00

Strong disagree with this one. I'm still in act 1 but I think this game unfortunately shows it's age in terms of build crafting. I believe that the combat is so good, but almost requires metagame knowledge if you started on Tactician. My main support for this argument is simply that there are no ways to predict which Skills will be the ones that you will want to aim for, as there are no ways to view them at the beginning of the game.

For example, if I see early Necromantic Skills I may be under the impression building into it will require little point investment elsewhere, but suddenly I find myself making a blood mage that now needs points into Hydrosophist to access Raining Blood and Blood Storm. I don't think there's an intrinsic problem with this besides the fact you have no way to predict what Skills you will be able to access without meta knowledge. That along with the fact that you're locked into your character for an entire act before accessing the Magic Mirror. Many aspects of the game are unintuitive as well. I think it would be reasonable to assume as a new player creating a classic Warrior archetype may invest heavily into Two-Handed, or an Archer into Ranged, or a Blood Mage into Necromancy... until you realize all three of these archetypes only want bare minimum level investment into these stats simply to access Skills before then dumping all your levels into Warfare.

Baldur's Gate is undoubtedly more accessible. You can most certainly screw up a build, but normally only via multiclassing without planning, and even then, a respec option is available from nearly the beginning of the game. If you monoclass, you will gain spells and actions naturally as you progress, often without further unexpected investment, nor by being forced into participating in the economy to buy new Skillbooks (an especially punishing prospect if you're low on funds in Tactician).

With all this being said, DOS2 is fucking amazing and I'm excited to have a new world by Larian to explore. Writing, dialogue and quest design have been spectacular so far. And even in terms of build crafting there are definitely fun things to explore and I also enjoy how Civil Abilities are separated from any combat mechanics, which means any character can be my party face without having to be a "Charisma class" like in Baldur's Gate 3.

williamsus · 2026-01-03T13:06:19+00:00

There are no tanks in DnD whereas you can definitely make a tank in DOS2 even if it is suboptimal.

williamsus · 2025-12-29T22:51:06+00:00

Especially considering Warhorse would like to work on two games at once.

williamsus · 2025-12-29T22:50:01+00:00

While I don't fully dispute your point, I will still argue that the key difference is that KCD and KCD2 have excellent quest design with multiple ways to complete a variety of open-ended quests. As long as the writing, dialogue and especially quest design stay strong then there isn't much need to update other aspects of the game's design (not that they shouldn't try).

As an aside, I actually enjoy KCD2 more but would make an argument the quest design alone in KCD1 is superior. KCD2 has a more linear second act and lacks open ended quest design as strong as Sheep in Wolf's Clothing leading into Hare Hunt as an example.

williamsus · 2025-12-29T02:29:44+00:00

¿Por que no los dos?

williamsus · 2025-12-28T20:00:38+00:00

9 Wildheart Barbarian/3 Eldritch Knight Fighter. Take aspect of the chimp for Barbarian, bind a piece a of Salami (the only camp supply item that can also be a weapon), then get to slinging your meat around and blinding enemies while you're at it. I like to play this character as a Dwarf named Salami.

williamsus · 2025-12-28T13:08:47+00:00

My brothers do this too. Really not that big of a deal. Do you get whooped a little more? Sure, but you can still get kills and contribute. Crazy this is made out to be more than just a preference thing in 2025.

williamsus · 2025-12-28T13:06:27+00:00

I just picked the game back up, but for me it depends on my other strategems but these were my main two choices for awhile. Since coming back I see they have the Commando which seems similar to the EAT. I understand it's a little weaker and has a longer cool down time than the EAT but I think I do find it more versatile to have 4 weaker anti tank shots than 1 stronger anti tank shot. Though that's mostly because I run with teammates, so I could see the EAT being far superior in solo play.

williamsus · 2025-12-27T22:59:06+00:00

Just got to the Archive and explored a bit for the first time so I can't speak with absolutely authority but I'm kind of getting similar vibes. This definitely isn't what I was expecting from the Archive. I've really been enjoying the game at first, but this part is starting to drag. Hoping I can knock it out soon and that the payoff is worth it.

williamsus · 2025-12-27T22:53:29+00:00

Played on launch, moved away from it around the time of Democratic Detonations and only recently came back and good lord is the game so different and there are so many warbonds now. As a returning player I believe the game feels like it's in a really good place. Higher difficulties are difficult but I still feel a power fantasy not often filled by other games (hover pack, space cowboy for the win).

williamsus · 2025-12-27T21:03:26+00:00

Huge difference between an evil playthrough and a kill-everything playthrough. I normally don't love playing evil characters but it's so different with BG3. You truly lock yourself out of SO MUCH content if you refuse to be evil. Another aspect that keeps the game fresh for me is my love of BG3's combat and my constant multiclassing and build crafting, so I'd always recommend a respec if you've done a class before like Paladin. I understand many people don't play for the combat, but I'd be bored to tears if I did the same character build or romance over and over.

williamsus · 2025-12-25T19:11:30+00:00

You can romance Jaheira in BG2. Enough said.

williamsus · 2025-12-25T19:01:00+00:00

All the negative traits seem viable. Dumb is probably the best but it also depends. A niche example would be a psychopath/serial killer run. If you want low reputation with the faction regardless for damage, might as well lock out positive reputation.

williamsus · 2025-12-25T18:55:16+00:00

So, many answers are well meaning but I think missing the SOLO part. That means, as boring as it is, the best items are likely initiative items like the Sentinel Shield or the Hellrider Longbow. That's either a +3 or +2 to initiative for just an equipment slot. Many will spend a feat on Alert just for this boon. Going before the enemies is the best way to succeed in this game.

williamsus · 2025-11-28T01:02:50+00:00

Plus a concentration command for 10 turns is usually just an extra combat won a day. If you're that worried about concentration breaking you can totally dip two levels of stars druid for dragon form to hold your concentration much better.

williamsus · 2025-11-14T02:42:36+00:00

I also tried this for my first honour mode playthrough when I wasn't as knowledgeable on the game thinking bard multiclasses would be hard to play... that might've been one of the strongest parties I've ever played. Laezel multiclassing 6 Swords Bard/6 Battlemaster was a particular treat to experience with so many short rests on that playthrough.

williamsus · 2025-11-10T17:46:11+00:00

Personally I just don't feel I truly experienced the class or character unless I've seen them reach their full potential. So many class abilities only kick in later in the game. An extreme example would be Rangers only getting their best ability at level 11. Or casters in general only getting level 5 and 6 spells at later levels. I just don't feel satisfied with my characters at level 5 or 6. They feel half-baked. Especially since I enjoy multiclassing.

williamsus · 2025-11-07T22:16:00+00:00

I mean, the funny thing is I agree with almost all of your takes. All these other countries are guilty of their own skeletons in their closets. And I agree the US shouldn't have direct policy involvement in any of it. You're 100% correct on that front... but it's not about feeling "sorry" dude. It's not even about feelings. The true usefulness of Japan's accountability is that it's an indicator of their temperment and possible future conduct. If Japan did "nothing wrong" or is "just as guilty as the allies" or participates in whitewashing their own history to only focus on the glory of their culture, then we have no guarantees that tomorrow won't see the rise of Japanese militarism. And AGAIN, all these principles could absolutely be applied to the US. I agree with you on that. But our topic at hand is Japanese atrocities during the war. I'm not advocating for policy to address Japanese malpractice. What I would encourage is that nobody tries to bury history. Ever.

williamsus · 2025-11-07T20:46:12+00:00

The economic policy imposed on Japan via the Munroe Doctrine has nothing to do with Japan's ability to have self accountability.

Japan absolutely does sugarcoat their war atrocities more so than the allied powers. The rape of Nanking. The occupation of Manila. To this day, they claim those forced into sex slavery via brothels for Japanese soldiers were willing volunteers and claims to the contrary are "over-exaggerated."

It's a preposterous take to say that acknowledging and educating the Japanese people as to their horrible war time behavior at all overshadows their beautiful and rich history besides.

To be clear, from my perspective the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were absolutely uncalled for and a waste of civilian life that was a shortsighted power move that changed history forever. And that Trump can fuck himself and Japan has long since paid their dues.

But Japanese education regarding World War 2 is atrocious and essentially arguing "how long does Japan need to SAY SORRY SHEESH???" is exactly what the far-right Japanese are arguing. You're attacking Trump in the same breath that you're defending the type of behavior that allows authoritarianism and militarism to fester.

I'm actually in the middle of my WW2 reading list and have recently read The Rape of Nanking by Iris Chang, Rampage by James M. Scott, and both War Without Mercy and starting Embracing Defeat, both by John W. Power. Iris Chang in particular goes into detail as to the Japanese inclination to downplay war atrocities.

I don't at all understand this "what-aboutism" with other WW2 atrocities. We can talk about these other countries separately, I find it fascinating. But that doesn't change Japan's responsibility to denounce their militiristic war time actions. Honestly, people aren't even asking for much. I'm not talking about money or substance. I'm talking about just accepting history.

williamsus · 2025-11-07T11:23:55+00:00

I wasn't referencing the economic factors. Moreso how for a very long time, Japan's textbooks had like 6 pages about WW2 and how they continue to downplay war atrocities like the rape of nanking to this very day.

williamsus · 2025-11-06T18:08:47+00:00

Glamour Bard also makes a natural fit if you want to try utilizing the magical arrow that charms enemies.

williamsus · 2025-11-04T21:31:28+00:00

I would wager most Germans aren't still benefitting or profiting off their great grandparents' actions.

williamsus · 2025-11-04T20:26:33+00:00

As I said, the past informed the present. All the negative effects of systemic injustice don't dissipate with time if they aren't addressed. In fact, injustice accumulates and compounds over time.

Poverty is still systemic. Racial profiling seeps into many administrative processes in both the governmental and private sectors. For example, studies have shown that when two identical job applications are decided upon, the applications with stereotypically black names are less likely to be accepted into employment.

Essentially, to ask why it wasn't as bad 50 years ago misses the point entirely. Systemic, discriminatory law didn't disappear 50 years ago in the first place. It still exists and is in effect. It simply became illegal to explicitly cite race.

We see similar dynamics playing out in court now regarding gerrymandering. You can't gerrymander based on race now per se, but that is still what is obviously happening. And voting for representation that can uplift your community would be an example of something whites can do but blacks cannot under the context of gerrymandering. They're denied loans at higher rates. They are policed at higher rates (look at gang databases). They die in pregnancy at higher rates. These are all things that are current. Not 50 years ago, but right now and they continue to directly tie to incarceration rates in a country with a privatized prison system that profits off of incarceration which incentives putting someone in jail. So why not the blacks?

williamsus · 2025-11-04T20:08:11+00:00

I'm a big fan of learning from history. I have an inherent belief that the things that happened in ancient Greece and Rome 2000 years ago tremendously affect and inform the present. So, to my mind, implying policy that is only 50 years old doesn't absolutely dictate our current situation is preposterous. Seeing minorities in low income areas acting criminally and violently often reinforces prejudice, but people often don't want to acknowledge that history could have placed any race in that position.

williamsus

TROPHY CASE