# My Sword Coast Legends First Impressions



## Morrus (Oct 19, 2015)

I grabbed the head start for the upcoming D&D videogame from n-Space last night (the actual release is this coming week) and played it for an hour or so.   Overall, I enjoyed it.  My system isn't quite up to it, being 7 years  old now, so the experience was a bit jerky, but I coped.  I really need  to upgrade! So, first impression: this is Neverwinter Nights.  It looks like NWN in  terms of interface and general view (that familiar 3D isometric view).   It sounds like NWN. It feels like NWN.  The gameplay and plotting feels  like NWN. While playing the single player campaign, I could totally  believe I was playing NWN.

View attachment 71178​

I've only tried the single player campaign stuff so far.

Character creation is D&D-ish, but adapted for the format.  That's fine by me. I'd have preferred a more direct conversion of the tabletop rules, but it's not a problem.   It's quick - choose race, class, background, allocate ability scores, pick some feat/skill type things. It takes a couple of minutes, plus however long you want to spend customizing appearance and voice.   The feats/skills are where it really differs from the tabletop game -- it's a branching tree of abilities you purchase with skill points.  I had 3 points to spend, and went for Charge I, Charge II, and Charge III for my fighter character.

The biggest issue I had was that it took me ages to realise you could move the viewpoint via WASD.  My guys kept moving to the edge of the screen and I couldn't see any further.  Once I realised that, it was easy.

So the game - I woke up in a tavern bedroom in a dream sequence.  The tavern was on fire.  Brief conversation with some allies who said to meet them downstairs.  Wandered around upstairs a bit, found some clothes/armor/weapon, went downstairs.  Solves a super-easy problem to open a secret basement entrance, went down there, fought some bad knights, met a demon, fade to black.

Then the game started properly.  I was guarding a caravan.  Wandered round doing the usual talking to everyone and picking up the expected quests - get some mushrooms for one woman, find this guy's brother, get a bit of backstory from this guy, etc. I always struggle with game dialogues which try to give you info about the plot or region, because it's not usually very interesting.  

One mild curiosity was the sheer amount of loot just lying around in crates and bags around the caravan camp.  Nobody seemed to mind me helping myself, so I grabbed a pile of potions and other stuff.  Plus some better armor, weapon, helm, boots, etc.

That's as far as I got. It was late!  Overall, if you like the NWN single player stuff, you'll like this, though it is only a brief first impression.  I haven't tried the DM stuff, though I hear a rumour those tools are "robust".


----------



## Tyranthraxus (Oct 19, 2015)

Morrus: You liked this so much you posted it twice?


----------



## Morrus (Oct 19, 2015)

How odd. The second post is a completely different one when viewed from the news page. For some reason, it's just repeating the first one in the forums. Stupid computers!


----------



## Ricochet (Oct 19, 2015)

Thanks for the impressions, Morrus. I will be checking this game out once I get some vacation time!


----------



## Chimpy (Oct 19, 2015)

My impressions seem good too. It has a few "quirks" for me - mainly relating to the game controls, but the atmosphere and feel of the game seem like something I want to play more. The difficulty feels quite hard, but I think I am more used to more casual action games and this requires more character management.


----------



## Reinhart (Oct 19, 2015)

I got deep into the guts of Neverwinter Nights, and was eventually able to design and manage MUDs with it. I could download entire adventure paths and campaigns that other people designed, and play them with or without other players and a DM. NWN's game mechanics were so similar to D&D at that time that I could recreate my favorite player characters from table-top games and test out different builds and powers. I was even able to easily modify and import prestige classes, spells, and races from the various splat books for my players. 

SCL really does none of the above yet so it's not the spiritual successor to NWN. I doubt anything ever will be.


----------



## EthanSental (Oct 19, 2015)

I've enjoyed playing the story mode this weekend, nostalgically reminds me of baldurs gate and the game has been challengingly fun.  I echo Morrus' statement about the environments as you can walk by the wagons and such in the woods easily.  I guess they have some of the MASH type camouflage in effect


----------



## Zalbar The Mad (Oct 19, 2015)

Morrus said:


> I ran into some minor issues - sometimes party members just stand around and don't follow or fight. I guess that's a pre-release bug or something.  Not sure.




When moving either box your characters and then click to move, or click 1 PC and then hit T. The advantage of double-clicking a PC is that the camera will now follow them instead of having to WASD around.




Morrus said:


> ...The thing which will keep me is if the DM tools produce an easy to use tile-based area creator (like the NWN1, not the horrid NW2 one) and some kind of support for persistent environments.  I'd love to set up a little EN World village which folks could pop into at any time of day or night.  I did that with NWN1, and that was fun.




Prepare for a lot of disappointment. I spent all weekend with the DM tools and there are some serious things lacking. Every dungeon and area is pregenerated. There are no tilesets to build your own specific dungeon/area/locale/village/city/forest/mine/mountains etc. You are stuck using their preset terrains (mountain, forest, swamp, city, underdark) with 2-3 variants within each archetype. Mountain A, Mountain B, Forest A, Forest B, Forest C, City Street A, etc.

 You can populate it with monsters, npc's and characters. The list of monsters is extremely limited. The quest scripting is also extremely limited. As far as I can tell you can't make dialogue with mutliple options as in the campaign. You can "quest text" > accept y/n. That's it. Add an update somewhere to give you more info along the way, then quest complete here's your reward.

Want to have rescued npc's trigger an event? 

nope.

Want to have an npc unconscious and a prisoner?

nope.

Want to build your own dungeon or villain lair?

nope.

Want to build a small village like Red Larch, Hommlet, etc?

nope. There's not even a village terrain.

Coastal area? nope. Jungle? nope. Docks? Warehouse? Back Alley? nope, nope, nope.


They have said some DM stuff is not included in the head start because of spoilers, yet the entire campaign is there to play.

I'm waiting till after the full release before condemning this as a failure of implementation and imagination but I am not too hopeful. There are just too many negatives and bugs at this point to consider this even remotely like a proper D&D campaign editor.

P.S. do not put anything up near the spine of the world, you'll never be able to zoom in on it or move the location you created. UI blocks it. Actually the entire map section of Faerun they have is horrible. Moving, zooming, panning or scrolling. Good luck with that.


Zalbar The Mad


----------



## jhilahd (Oct 19, 2015)

I'm with you, Zalbar. I want to be able to customize alot of the content, not just reposition existing sets.
I'm still holding off to see what changes will open up on Tuesday.

(fingers crossed!)


----------



## Zaran (Oct 19, 2015)

It's a bit ironic.  It seems like so much focus was put into the multiplayer aspect of this game but I would rather an excellent single player experience.  When I can get a group of my friends together we play real d&d.  when I can't I want to play by myself.  If the game doesn't feel like D&D, then it won't scratch that itch for me.  Id like to be able to remake my characters that I can't play for real.   It bothers me that people put the name on a game and expect us to say "that's good enough for me".  It needs to be a CRPG and not just an actioner which is what I hear it is more like.  The Tome Show said was more like Diablo than Balder's Gate but with less to do.  I wish they had just made it turn-based.


----------



## Zalbar The Mad (Oct 19, 2015)

Zaran said:


> The Tome Show said was more like Diablo than Balder's Gate but with less to do.  I wish they had just made it turn-based.




You can, in effect, make it turn based with the pause system.


----------



## Jiggawatts (Oct 19, 2015)

Baldur's Gate was a very faithful rendition of 2E. Neverwinter Nights was a very faithful rendition of 3E. It boggles the mind why this game wasn't made to be a very faithful rendition of 5E.


----------



## Jeff Strix (Oct 19, 2015)

Nice! Can't wait^^ Few days more. In what FR year is  the game set? Is it post Sundering?


----------



## Zaruthustran (Oct 19, 2015)

Pausing ≠ turn-based. 

Turn-based, by definition, means that everyone is taking turns. Not moving at once. It's "I go, then you go, then he goes, then that goes." When the person's whose turn it is is moving, _no one else is moving._ 

It's not "we all go at once, but you can stop everyone at any time." Which is what happens when you pause a real-time game.

Big, big difference.

I agree with Jigawatts. I really wish we had a D&D game that replicated D&D. Turns, like in D&D. Armor Class, like in D&D. Classes, which functioned like D&D classes. Instead, SCL's mechanics are generic action/RPG. It's Pillars of Eternity set in the Forgotten Realms. Actually no; Pillars of Eternity had systems for preparing and casting spells, and you had to rest after you expended a certain number of your prepared spells. 5E spellcasting, in other words. That game is more D&D than SCL. 

It's still a good game if you're into that style of gameplay, and are really into the Forgotten Realms. From what I've been able to tell, it delivers on the Realms fan service. 

Me, I don't have any particular affinity for the Realms. And I couldn't get over the mechanical differences from 5E. This game "isn't for me", as they say.


----------



## Ricochet (Oct 19, 2015)

Jiggawatts said:


> Baldur's Gate was a very faithful rendition of 2E. Neverwinter Nights was a very faithful rendition of 3E. It boggles the mind why this game wasn't made to be a very faithful rendition of 5E.




One reason is because a video game like this takes 3-5 years to make, and they didn't have the completed ruleset to build the game with. Baldur's Gate came years after the 2e rules had been released. If WotC had done a 100% in-house design rather than a playtest, their software developers could have been better prepared I think, but that is how the cards fell.


----------



## Corpsetaker (Oct 19, 2015)

ParagonofVirtue said:


> One reason is because a video game like this takes 3-5 years to make, and they didn't have the completed ruleset to build the game with. Baldur's Gate came years after the 2e rules had been released. If WotC had done a 100% in-house design rather than a playtest, their software developers could have been better prepared I think, but that is how the cards fell.




Then they should have waited.


----------



## Agamon (Oct 19, 2015)

ParagonofVirtue said:


> One reason is because a video game like this takes 3-5 years to make, and they didn't have the completed ruleset to build the game with. Baldur's Gate came years after the 2e rules had been released. If WotC had done a 100% in-house design rather than a playtest, their software developers could have been better prepared I think, but that is how the cards fell.




Or they could have just spent more time on it.  NWN came out 2 years after 3e launched, for example.  I might be more interested in this game if more time would been invested in it.  Luckily, Fallout 4 is right around the corner....


----------



## IgnatiusJ.Reilly (Oct 20, 2015)

I just hope that folks that don't play this and think it's anything like 5e. Vorpal Magic Missiles, non concentration mechanic, no wizard sub-classes, no skills short of stealth, open locks and search, and the list of abominations goes on and on. I'm convinced they didn't have anything more than the table of contents of the Player's Handbook for reference. 5e is so much better, it would make a great action game really.


----------



## Dargrimm (Oct 20, 2015)

I honestly believe that this game began its life as an independent action RPG and later, in the middle of development, it was somehow decided that it was going to be a D&D game. Even Mike Mearls didn't know of the game until GDC 2014. So all the developers did was to disguise their custom rules as D&D (and they did a poor job of it).

I just wish they stopped selling it as a D&D game (even in the ad in Dragon+ they're writing "D&D 5E ruleset") and acknowledge that it is just an action RPG set in the Realms instead of a D&D game. (That won't happen thou, they're not going to admit they mislead us).


----------



## Sonny (Oct 20, 2015)

Corpsetaker said:


> Then they should have waited.




I doubt they could afford it. Game development is increasingly expensive in both development costs and time. Waiting years isn't something a small developer can afford.

Doesn't mean they get a free pass for gameplay/content issues with the game (and there are issues with it, from the couple of hours I've played). It just means waiting isn't always an option for a game developer.


----------



## EthanSental (Oct 20, 2015)

I've only played the story mode so far and I'm in the sewers but what games issues are people referring too?  In story mode or dm creation stuff?  Maybe I'm not as critical as I've enjoyed it and nothing has stood out to me as a drawback.  
As far as development, remember pillars of eternity had a HUGE patch a week or two right after the game came out due to development issues and actual play so this isn't a new thing to see in a games release and it not being 100% ready to go.


----------



## EthanSental (Oct 20, 2015)

Playing the full game now.  Steam download and up and running full version.


----------



## Ricochet (Oct 20, 2015)

Agamon said:


> Or they could have just spent more time on it.  NWN came out 2 years after 3e launched, for example.  I might be more interested in this game if more time would been invested in it.  Luckily, Fallout 4 is right around the corner....




Sure, of course. There are also, naturally, budget concerns with prolonging a development cycle or starting it later.  Yet there are two distinct philosophies in videogame development at the moment: 1) Take your time and get it right, and 2) Let's get it out the door so we can strike while the iron is hot. WotC clearly opted for the latter, and that's one of the reasons the 5e rules aren't 100% involved in the gameplay. Yes they could have waited and made a truer adaptation, but they decided not to. Couple that with the fact that they might have wanted a more action-y game rather than strict turn-based, this is probably the end result. Don't think there's much more to it really.  It's not like wishing for it to be a truer adaptation will make it into one. I think Morrus has the right approach: take it for what it is, and see if the gameplay holds up.


----------



## Tyranthraxus (Oct 20, 2015)

How is is going Ethan?


----------



## JValeur (Oct 20, 2015)

I played a few hours during headstart. When I first heard that the game would feature cooldowns instead of rest periods, I was disappointed, but not put off. I can live with that. Then I found out that it would feature skill trees, instead of class features, I was put off, but decided to still give it a chance. I played a few hours during headstart. Here's my take on it, for those who care:

*Graphics*
I guess it looks okay, although it plays choppily (could be my setup, and not the game) and have jarring cuts to black whenever you speak to an NPC. Item icons are very small and not very pretty. Outdoors terrains feel cluttered, which completely ruined my immersion. I've heard others love it, though.

*Characters and gameplay*
Doesn't feel like D&D here, for me. Some skills have the same names, but they rarely do the same as in the PHB. You increase them by 'leveling' up the skill (increasing damage by investing more points in the skill, similarly to Diablo 2), which just feels very.. empty. The wizard has it worst, with 3/4 of his 'skills' being evocations, that scale really poorly into the higher levels. Magic Missile I, II, III, IV, anyone?

*Loot*
Magical items drop from level 1. They have Diablo'esque stats, like 10% cooldown reduction, 5% acid resistance, and so on. They feel bland, and you feel overdecked. Makes magic items seem positively SPARSE in NWN2, which was overflowing with magic items. I never got excited over picking up a magic item.

*Monsters*
They scale to fit your level, so you never really feel strong or weak. You feel adequate. Which is nice, I guess, but doesn't really make it very exciting to gain levels, because you'll just... be the same.

*Death*
You can't die. You can stabilize someone mid combat, and bring them back in. Not just make them not die, but just 1-click resurrect them. If your party is wiped, you just come back to life, and so does the monsters you were fighting.

*DM Mode*
I didn't do much with the DM mode, but from what I've read, it's full of restrictions, and lack simple things like tile-by-tile dungeon building, customizable creatures and branching dialogue. I do think, however, that the interface is pretty and accessible, which makes it good for the creative mind, that doesn't want to learn hours and hours of code. If the gameplay itself had fit my wishes more - closer to 5E D&D - I think I would have LOVED the dungeon builder after it had these features implemented.

I refunded my game before launch, but will check back periodically to see if things start swinging in a direction I like. The game has tons of potential, but no draw for me, in it's current form.


----------



## EthanSental (Oct 20, 2015)

Nice write up JV, although I disagree on the overall fun factor.  I ended up staying up and playing until 3 am this morning (glad I don't have to work today) something I haven't done for a game since I first played WoW back 10 or so years ago when it first came out.  I died many a time with a total party wipe on the normal setting and the stabilize feels like the Ttrpg where a party member can go down but stabilize them. Granted there's no death saves but the feel of being able to get them back up and into the fight is better than having to say, dang now I have to load from my last save point since the fighter died. 

I still haven't tried dm mode other than to click through as I was about to quit, I'll try it today.  I never got into the depths of creation some on here seem to have with neverwinter nights so my expectations might be different than theirs in regards to adventure building.


----------



## Chimpy (Oct 20, 2015)

Bear in mind that I reckon 95% of people that play this game won't have ever played the tabletop game or know much about it. They'll just want a fun game and don't care about the similarities with the tabletop game.


----------



## JValeur (Oct 20, 2015)

Chimpy said:


> Bear in mind that I reckon 95% of people that play this game won't have ever played the tabletop game or know much about it. They'll just want a fun game and don't care about the similarities with the tabletop game.




I think that's what the devs figured as well, but I think they're mistaken. Firstly, the game was intensively marketed on pages like this one, and on WotC's own page, in the Dragon+ magazines, and so on, and so on. This will draw MANY people expecting a game build on 5E D&D (which was what was promised).

Even if most potential players are completely oblivious to PnP and FR, this game has little draw. The DM mode appeals mostly to PnP fans, the campaign story (which I've heard is good) caters specifically to those with knowledge of the Forgotten Realms - not the casual players. So what you have falling back on would be good action gameplay, but truly, Diablo 3 looks 10x better than this game, is much better balanced, has more exciting loot and is just more exciting to play. 

My point is, this game has been marketed one way, designed a second way, and plays a third way. It wants to do a lot of different things, and does neither really good. It's not a faithful D&D RPG. It's not a very good action RPG. It's not an extensive world-building tool.

Mind you, I could be wrong, but I think they could've landed closer to the sweet spot if they had stuck closer to 5E ruleset. Would've satisfied my nerddom, I can say that at least.

60% positive reviews on Steam tells me that not everyone is satisfied, at least. Many of the positive reviews still list several flaws - either lack of 5E, problems with gameplay, or problems with DM mode.


----------



## Doctor Futurity (Oct 20, 2015)

This game is not the prettiest (the backgrounds are cool but the models "meh." It's using the names from 5E elements to create a more conventional set of abilities for characters. It's clearly got designs on microtransactions down the road. It's more of a tactical/action RPG hybrid than a pure RPG sim of D&D. It has good voice acting though, and the story mode is great. 

I concur with others that the mix as presented is very compelling....it works well for what is intended and it was very hard to stop playing last night, and I'll be resuming tonight. I'm not sure if it is better than Pillars of Eternity, but it's definitely fun to go adventuring along the Savage Frontier again and cause some havoc in Luskan.


----------



## Doctor Futurity (Oct 20, 2015)

JValeur said:


> Even if most potential players are completely oblivious to PnP and FR, this game has little draw. The DM mode appeals mostly to PnP fans, the campaign story (which I've heard is good) caters specifically to those with knowledge of the Forgotten Realms - not the casual players. So what you have falling back on would be good action gameplay, but truly, Diablo 3 looks 10x better than this game, is much better balanced, has more exciting loot and is just more exciting to play.




I agree it's got a measure of action RPG DNA in it's mix, but Diablo 3 is a different sort of experience from what Sword Coast Legends offers. Real ARPGs like Diablo 3 are fun but they lack substance.* SCL is much closer to tactical and exploratory RPGs in this sense, even if you can play it like it's an ARPG to a certain degree. This game plays closer to how I wished Diablo 3 would have, and I think that there are an enormous number of people out there who feel that way (ergo why Pillars of Eternity, Divinity: Original Sin and Wasteland 2 are so popular). SCL will feed well in to that need, but I'll agree that the fans won't be people who love the Diablo 3 style of play; that's really not the same as what SCL and other isometric RPGs offer, even if there are action RPG similarities.






*to clarify: if Diablo 3 had the "susbtance" I am talking about then we'd also be comparing it to games like Dragon Age: Inquisition or Baldur's Gate. Which we don't, because they are in separate realms of story scope, decision making and complexity. SCL has an auto-attack element and is a top-down perspective, yes....but it's design leans closer to the Dragon Age side of storytelling (or Baldur's Gate side, more accurately) and far, far less the Diablo 3 side, which is a programmed story with no real choice other than to keep charging up your kill totals and unlocks.


----------



## Reinhart (Oct 20, 2015)

While I was disappointed with the lack of features for DM's and a lack of authentic D&D game mechanics, I do think SCL has a unique set of features compared to most computer RPG's.

Sword Coast Legends differs from most action RPG's (like Diablo) in that SCL is more focused on a party of detailed characters instead of a singular heroic player avatar. That's a significant difference in the single-player experience that makes it closer to Dragon Age. Of course, the multi-player experience is probably quite similar to Diablo-clones in that each player is controlling only one custom avatar. That said, Diablo doesn't have a DM mode so you're getting something novel either way. It's too bad the marketing of this game was so mismanaged. You'd think the response to 4e D&D would have made it clear that many fans have very strong preconceptions about what makes a set of rules "D&D." Be very careful how you court those customers.


----------



## JValeur (Oct 20, 2015)

camazotz said:


> I agree it's got a measure of action RPG DNA in it's mix, but Diablo 3 is a different sort of experience from what Sword Coast Legends offers. Real ARPGs like Diablo 3 are fun but they lack substance.* SCL is much closer to tactical and exploratory RPGs in this sense, even if you can play it like it's an ARPG to a certain degree. This game plays closer to how I wished Diablo 3 would have, and I think that there are an enormous number of people out there who feel that way (ergo why Pillars of Eternity, Divinity: Original Sin and Wasteland 2 are so popular). SCL will feed well in to that need, but I'll agree that the fans won't be people who love the Diablo 3 style of play; that's really not the same as what SCL and other isometric RPGs offer, even if there are action RPG similarities.
> 
> *to clarify: if Diablo 3 had the "susbtance" I am talking about then we'd also be comparing it to games like Dragon Age: Inquisition or Baldur's Gate. Which we don't, because they are in separate realms of story scope, decision making and complexity. SCL has an auto-attack element and is a top-down perspective, yes....but it's design leans closer to the Dragon Age side of storytelling (or Baldur's Gate side, more accurately) and far, far less the Diablo 3 side, which is a programmed story with no real choice other than to keep charging up your kill totals and unlocks.




I'm talking about how it plays, not just the story. I agree that the story in the campaign is a lot closer to Dragon Age, and while you can compare the actual gameplay mechanics (skilltrees, cooldowns, etc.) it's not really the same thing, since Dragon Age isn't a classic isometric game. It's a different beast. Hence the Diablo comparison, which to me, is really the closest to the actual gameplay feeling (for me, at least). However, even if you compare it to Dragon Age, it loses both storywise and gameplay wise as well - so no win there.


----------



## Sword of Spirit (Oct 20, 2015)

JValeur said:


> My point is, this game has been marketed one way, designed a second way, and plays a third way. It wants to do a lot of different things, and does neither really good. It's not a faithful D&D RPG. It's not a very good action RPG. It's not an extensive world-building tool.




And this is a major problem. Who do they think is primarily planning to buy this? People who are attracted to the D&D label--and most of those probably play the TTRPG.

If someone doesn't care about D&D, I'm going to guess that there are better games out there.

D&D label = draws D&D fans.

I mean, this ought to be patently obvious. Build a product for the same audience you are marketing it to.

People really need to invest a bit in consumer response consulting before making business decisions.


----------



## Morrus (Oct 20, 2015)

Sword of Spirit said:


> And this is a major problem. Who do they think is primarily planning to buy this? People who are attracted to the D&D label--and most of those probably play the TTRPG.
> 
> If someone doesn't care about D&D, I'm going to guess that there are better games out there.
> 
> ...




We can all make snotty comments about how companies make decisions, and how much cleverer than them we are - hell, it's an Internet requirement - but it seems to be doing just fine.  

I submit that your expert market analysis is less thorough than theirs.


----------



## Reinhart (Oct 20, 2015)

Morrus said:


> but it seems to be doing just fine.




Does it though? SLC's ratings so far on Steam and Metacritic are both less than 60%. Keep in mind that in many development studios, desks get cleared for aggregate approval ratings less than 80%. (I don't necessarily agree with that stance, but it happens.) We can skip talking about the self-selection process of negative reports, because most successful CRPG's have a more favorable reaction than we're seeing so far. Shadowrun Returns and Pillars of Eternity both have ratings around 90%. Something's different here. Of course, it may not be the quality of the game, but the difference in how public expectations were managed.


----------



## Zaruthustran (Oct 21, 2015)

Morrus has the right of it. There are way, way, way more videogame players than TT D&D players. Way, way more RPG videogame players than TT D&D players. Orders of magnitude greater audience.

One data point: according to this aggregator, the 5E PHB has sold 50,000 copies on Amazon. Since launch.

Another data point: according to Steam Spy, SCL has sold 42,000 copies (+/- 5,000). Since yesterday.

The fact of the matter is, the general RPG videogame audience dwarfs the TT RPG audience (nevermind the D&D TT RPG audience). 

Now, does that mean that the D&D TT RPG audience should be ignored? Absolutely not. That's the game's core. Those are the people that champion the game, and therefore the brand, for years and years, and spread the love to others. Including, nowadays, their kids. It'd be extremely foolish for a brand to ignore the people who love the brand the most. 

But it does mean that when making either/or decisions (like "should this videogame be like most other videogames, or should it be like the TT RPG?") a conservative choice is to go with what you think will appeal to the larger audience. 

I don't think that's necessarily the _right_ decision. Nowadays, videogame players crave novelty--they're bored of the same-old. Plus, the same-old gameplay in this specific example is better executed by other games. And, one of the most popular RPG videogames in the world (albeit, French), Dofus, has turn-based combat. As does one of most critically-acclaimed RPGs in recent memory, The Banner Saga. It's not like RPG videogamers are allergic to turns.

But I can see how a brand could come to the conclusion that the best way to ensure a RPG videogame reaches success is to make that RPG videogame as similar to most other RPG videogames as possible. 

My hope is that SCL does well, and gets a lot of people interested in the Forgotten Realms, and eventually interested in D&D. And I hope that someone, somewhere, is working on a turn-based RPG videogame that actually does play like D&D.


----------



## Zaruthustran (Oct 21, 2015)

Reinhart said:


> Of course, it may not be the quality of the game, but the difference in how public expectations were managed.




This is the crux of it. The marketing for SCL repeatedly referenced "actual D&D ruleset." SCL doesn't include that feature. Which is disappointing. Not objectively, but because of a mismatch of expectations and reality. 

If the game had been called "The Forgotten Realms: Storm Coast Legends", and didn't mention the D&D rules anywhere, nobody would say boo. It's not like anyone considered Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance "a D&D game." That was clearly an action/RPG hybrid set in the Forgotten Realms. It wasn't, and wasn't marketed as, a D&D game.

I'm sure it'll still be a big success. The DM mode is a very cool innovation that people have been wishlisting for years. I can see SCL being a big hit at LANs, and for D&D groups that can't get together in person but still want to play a game together that involves the holy trinity of kicking down doors, killing monsters, and taking their stuff.


----------



## Dargrimm (Oct 21, 2015)

Zaruthustran said:


> This is the crux of it. The marketing for SCL repeatedly referenced "actual D&D ruleset." SCL doesn't include that feature. Which is disappointing. Not objectively, but because of a mismatch of expectations and reality.
> 
> If the game had been called "The Forgotten Realms: Storm Coast Legends", and didn't mention the D&D rules anywhere, nobody would say boo. It's not like anyone considered Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance "a D&D game." That was clearly an action/RPG hybrid set in the Forgotten Realms. It wasn't, and wasn't marketed as, a D&D game.
> 
> I'm sure it'll still be a big success. The DM mode is a very cool innovation that people have been wishlisting for years. I can see SCL being a big hit at LANs, and for D&D groups that can't get together in person but still want to play a game together that involves the holy trinity of kicking down doors, killing monsters, and taking their stuff.




Those are my thoughts EXACTLY. My problem with the game is not with the game itself but with the way it was (and it is being) advertised. Because SCL it is NOT D&D (not even remotely).


----------



## psimon85 (Oct 21, 2015)

ParagonofVirtue said:


> Sure, of course. There are also, naturally, budget concerns with prolonging a development cycle or starting it later.  Yet there are two distinct philosophies in videogame development at the moment: 1) Take your time and get it right, and 2) Let's get it out the door so we can strike while the iron is hot. WotC clearly opted for the latter, and that's one of the reasons the 5e rules aren't 100% involved in the gameplay. Yes they could have waited and made a truer adaptation, but they decided not to. Couple that with the fact that they might have wanted a more action-y game rather than strict turn-based, this is probably the end result. Don't think there's much more to it really.  It's not like wishing for it to be a truer adaptation will make it into one. I think Morrus has the right approach: take it for what it is, and see if the gameplay holds up.



Sorry I can't agree with "take it for what it is" not when they branded it as a D&D game with the 5th ed ruleset. There are too many thing missing for it to be either of those things which were massive selling points!

If they had put out as an independent action game fine, I'd have no issue with that. Infact the game is good and does the action thing well.

They seem to have the lore pretty down, but for me that's as far as the D&D experience goes. As for the 5th ed ruleset...I was hopeful during character creation, then I met the abilities selection. That felt like I had bricks tied to me and thrown in the sea. 

It's a shame that it was, imo totally mismarketed as d&d with 5the ed rules. We couldn't the just say action game that WotC helped develop?!


----------



## Tyranthraxus (Oct 21, 2015)

I played about Half an Hour this morning before going into work. Only single player mind you and I replicated my Human (future Necromancer) that I created for Adventurers League Season 1. Character creation process was okay. 

You started off in some hazy dream sequence and everyones voices sounded very.. distorted and Demonic.  I had a few battles and found myself tapping pause a lot, got setup with some NPC buddies and met some dude on a bridge. Graphically it seemed okay.. although I noticed when I alt tabbed out a lot of my already open programs were very sluggish and slow and then in the final battle my full screen experience because a windowed experience for some reason.


----------



## pukunui (Oct 21, 2015)

I impulsively got the basic pre-order with the free access to the Rage of Demons DLC yesterday. Downloaded the game today. Played for about 45 minutes, or so it tells me. Can't say I was particularly impressed. The game was choppy and slow, although that was probably because my PC is old and only just meets the minimum reqs.

The characters are kinda ugly when viewed up close in the character creation sequence - and I felt like there weren't enough options in terms of hair and eye colors, hair styles, and so on. 

I wasn't impressed with the dream sequence "tutorial". It didn't really feel like a tutorial. It just felt like a random opening sequence with tooltips. Most of the time I was able to anticipate what I was supposed to do before the tooltip popped up, as well.

I was even less impressed with the UI. Moving the camera around is somewhat unintuitive and clunky. I also don't like the "fade to black" before speaking with an NPC thing. What's up with that?

It's a pity they won't do refunds.


----------



## Pssthpok (Oct 21, 2015)

I'm glad I held off on buying this. If it's not using the 5E rules, then it's not what was advertised.


----------



## Tyranthraxus (Oct 21, 2015)

I couldnt work out via the Steam purchase page what the difference was between the Deluxe version and the standard version (which I bought). Can anyone tell me?


----------



## psimon85 (Oct 21, 2015)

Tyranthraxus said:


> I couldnt work out via the Steam purchase page what the difference was between the Deluxe version and the standard version (which I bought). Can anyone tell me?



The deluxe version includes these following items:
Tome of Knowledge, Order of the Burning Dawn Cloak, Armor and Weapons, Beholder (DM use), Lost Mines dungeon tile set (DM use), Wisps (DM use cursors), Hero Forum Badge, DM Forum Badge, Game Soundtrack (Digital)

Hope this helps


----------



## Ricochet (Oct 21, 2015)

psimon85 said:


> Sorry I can't agree with "take it for what it is" not when they branded it as a D&D game with the 5th ed ruleset. There are too many thing missing for it to be either of those things which were massive selling points!
> 
> If they had put out as an independent action game fine, I'd have no issue with that. Infact the game is good and does the action thing well.
> 
> ...




Had a long piece here about how they aren't using the 5e terminology on the website, well... Oops! They actually do call it 5e on the official website. My bad.

I really don't know what people were expecting though. Even NWN was by no means strict 3e off the boat, with its real-time/pseudo-pause system and streamlined feat/combat trees. Only Temple of Elemental Evil was a strict rules conversion since 3e IIRC (a very good adaptation too). I might very well be wrong, mind you, but I just feel that people might be too optimistic-and-subsequently-irritated about this game because of some image that it was never painted as by the developers. Yes, 5e heavily inspired the rules in the form of classes, races and whatnot, and D&D is the setting, but that's as far as this game is D&D and I for one never expected different. Maybe I'm too cynical about these things having reviewed videogames for a decade several years ago.

Anyway, this game looks interesting regardless of the rules it uses in my opinion, and I think we will be seeing numerous expansions to it no matter how the crossover tabletop audience responds because they are ultimately not the bread and butter for this project - even though the crossover potential does seem wasted somewhat by the poor rules adaptation, I will strongly agree.


----------



## dracomilan (Oct 21, 2015)

I'm usually the DM of my group, so I use CRPGs to play D&D characters in interesting campaigns. This game lacks the first part of the equation (no-D&D ruleset) so it's not for me. 
No hard feelings, anyway.


----------



## JValeur (Oct 21, 2015)

Zaruthustran - I'm fairly certain I've seen far larger numbers than 50.000 for the PHB sales. I think 500.000 would be closer to the real number, and some groups (including my own of 7 people) have only 1 PHB. There's plenty of sales to be made by D&D'ing it up.

Besides, the way they would make money out of SCL (and might still), is to deliver a story mode and a world builder. Then you can expand on the story mode (or the player side of things) with not-so-often DLC's or expansions that bring new classes, races and feats, and expand on the world builder with a more continous stream of micro-transactions or small DLCs. If this game had played closer to a pretty NWN2 with D&D 5E rules, my group would have been all over it, and I would have gladly shelled out 5 bucks once in a while to buy the 'Goblin Hordes' or 'Waterdeep Intrigue' tiles and placeables DLCs. If you make aRPGS you better make them +AAA (like D3) or you should stick to making cRPG to focused groups of players that you KNOW are going to pay out. Like the D&D crowd. 

Honestly, if you have that D&D sticker on your game, you're BOUND to make the first 50,000 sales. Anything less on launch day is a failure (which is what we're seeing). They should've catered to the customer group that was delivered to them for virtually zero cost of marketing, made a game that was closer to the rules (as they advertised it) and they would've been loved and successful.

As it is now, this game is getting slaughtered in reviews, and for good reason. They catered to a group of customers with trigger words like 'D&D 5E Rules' and 'Baldur's Gate' and 'tabletop experience' and then delivered this watered down Dragon Age and Diablo abomination.

By the way, Morrus, for the sake of transparency - and not to be crass - are they paying you to advertise the game on the front page? Just curious - there's nothing wrong in paid reviews, but I would like to know if there's any bias.


----------



## IgnatiusJ.Reilly (Oct 21, 2015)

Tyranthraxus said:


> I played about Half an Hour this morning before going into work. Only single player mind you and I replicated my Human (future Necromancer) that I created for Adventurers League Season 1. Character creation process was okay.




I hate to disappoint you, but the Necromancy 'tree' is not open to PCs. One of the NPC companions has access to the tree however, it replaces the NPC's 'Frost' tree in the wizard class ability trees. They've got an Arcane, Fire, Lightning, Frost, Summoner, and Manipulator tree that you can choose spells from. There's no real sub-classes for PCs actually. The Evoker's Overchannel ability is the only ability from the wizard sub-classes that made it into the game unfortunately.


----------



## Reinhart (Oct 21, 2015)

JValeur said:


> They should've catered to the customer group that was delivered to them for virtually zero cost of marketing, made a game that was closer to the rules (as they advertised it) and they would've been loved and successful.




That marketing wasn't zero cost though. Digital Extremes definitely paid Hasbro (through WotC) to license the D&D brand for this game. And Hasbro made that brand prohibitively expensive for many studios to license. Which makes this all the more serious an error. They went out of their way and spent a lot of time and money to court the D&D fans, but set an expectation different from what they were delivering.

And for the other people saying that NWN wasn't that faithful? Compared to SCL, NWN was almost a virtual PHB. If a player learned about D&D from NWN, they could easily recreate their character using the D&D 3.0 table-top rules. They would find they had the same selection of races, same skill bonuses, same saves, similar hit-points, class features, and selection of feats. It certainly adapted, but actually quite conservatively. And where it did differ, as far as skills like Discipline, and Parry? That was because NWN was in development at the same time as D&D 3e and so they were working with an evolving set of rules.

In truth, SCL had a similar problem: It had to begin its development before 5e was released. But it sounds like the license agreement wasn't hammered out until last year. That means it happened after the game was half completed and 5e was about to hit the shelves. They weren't building their game off of 5e, they were paying for permission to use D&D's name and copyrighted IP such as the Forgotten Realms and the various names of D&D spells.

That's all fine and good, if they'd just been up front about what the game really was. I'm not saying they needed to explain that it *wasn't* based on 5e. They just shouldn't have presented it as the "first ever" "most authentic" conversion of the D&D experience to computers since Baldur's Gate. That's why people expected it to be Neverwinter Nights 3 and were disappointed.


----------



## EthanSental (Oct 21, 2015)

Well, I'm in the minority then as I've thoroughly enjoyed the story mode so far and at level 6.  Temple of elemental evil, like mentioned above is about the closest PC game to the ruleset and although I'm a stickler for rules, having to rest after my spell casters used up their 2 spells for the day is a drag.  SCL is more fun than pillars to me so it meets my expectations of what I was hoping in the gameplay.


----------



## Zaruthustran (Oct 21, 2015)

Ethan, the Gold Box games are the PC games that adhered closest to the D&D ruleset. Pool of Radiance, and such. 



			
				Wikipedia said:
			
		

> The "Gold Box Engine" had two main game play modes. Outside of character creation, game play took place in a screen that displayed text interactions, the names and current status of your party of characters, and a window which displayed images of geography, and large or small pictures of characters or events. When combat occurred, which was often in these games, you switched to a full screen combat mode, in which player character icons could move about to cast spells or attack icons representing the enemies. All the games typically involved long dungeon crawls, and were heavier on combat than on role-playing.




This replicated the TT experience: your party explores until they encounter monsters, at which point the game switches to turn-based combat. Character builds, equipment, and spells are strictly AD&D, exactly as they exist in the PHB. 

In other words those games were no more or less than D&D, on your computer. And they're widely credited with causing the mass migration of gamers from TT to computers/videogames. They're available in a collection (every game in the series) on GOG for $10: http://www.gog.com/game/forgotten_realms_the_archives_collection_two

Really, that's all I want. A new Gold Box game. I don't need fancy graphics or voice acting. All I need is D&D.


----------



## Zaruthustran (Oct 21, 2015)

JValeur said:


> Zaruthustran - I'm fairly certain I've seen far larger numbers than 50.000 for the PHB sales. I think 500.000 would be closer to the real number, and some groups (including my own of 7 people) have only 1 PHB. There's plenty of sales to be made by D&D'ing it up.




Oh, certainly total sales are greater than 50,000. The site I cited was specifically for Amazon's sales. Sorry; I thought I mentioned that.

I'd be surprised if total sales were 500,000, but I don't have any data to go on. I'd be curious if anyone has a reputable source for global sales to date. 

Point still stands, though: the TT audience is a tiny fraction of the videogame audience. Which justifies the decision to cater to the perceived preferences of videogamers instead of TT players.


----------



## EthanSental (Oct 21, 2015)

Zar - that's is some old school goodness, I remember them well as they fed my D&D desire.  Thanks for the link too, I'll have to pick them up soon.


----------



## Sword of Spirit (Oct 22, 2015)

I'd probably say the most faithful D&D games are, (in rough order and off the top of my head):

Temple of Elemental Evil
Gold Box games
Baldur's Gate and friends
NWN/NWN2
Eye of the Beholder and company

You can throw Menzoberranzen and probably a couple more I'm forgetting on there somewhere, but I can't remember the play experience well enough to rate them appropriately. Birthright: Gorgon's Alliance is a good one that's hard to classify, and there was a Dark Sun one I once had that I'd really like to have a copy of again.

NWN is definitely on the low side--but it's one the low side _of the faithful recreations_. There are plenty of other D&D-lore games that don't even try, some of which are great fun. The problem is that SCL is one of those that doesn't try, and it's apparently trying to market itself as one that does.




Zaruthustran said:


> Ethan, the Gold Box games are the PC games that adhered closest to the D&D ruleset. Pool of Radiance, and such.
> ...They're available in a collection (every game in the series) on GOG for $10




They don't have the Dragonlance ones yet though! Hopefully they'll get them before too long.


----------



## Tyranthraxus (Oct 22, 2015)

You picked Temple of Elemental Evil over the Gold Box games for rules closeness? The Gold Box games are so close to the rules of the time as to be indistinguishable. 

I was just trying to imagine Sword Coast Legends with the same sort of adherence to rules the Gold Box games and I definetly think Id actually probably run it more like Divinity: Original Sin. 

You would have your action points but everyone would have the same bar the Rogue (with the cunning Action). so if you spend your AP on all movment the game would conslude that you had burned your standard action for Dash. 
Rogues would of course get their bonus cunning action. You could still use the number keys for 'powers' read spells and class abilities but their would be no refresh time.. you would simply have another screen which waiting for everyone else to click on that said short rest/long rest. Once everyone clicked on that then you would deal with either the short rest mechanics or long rest ones. 

And you could still do this co-op. Combat starts. The computer rolls init for everyone based on their sheets and the monsters. You have a set time to do your action, then it passes to the next then the next and so on. 

I know people keep saying that people wont buy those types of games, but lets be honest .. who is SCL marketed at? D&D players who want a D&D computer game, or Computer rpg players who would play those types of games? And if thats the case then why not at least try to use it as a tool to market it to those Computer game players who might think ' Hey.. this could of been a copy of Dragon Age.. but look.. no cool down timers.. and you need to rest to get stuff back.. thats different I might try that'  

And if that leads them to think that they might try the Tabeltop after that then .. thats great for the hobby in general. 

A) We wouldnt have to teach them much in the way of extra rules.. they would have the basics downpat
B) It would certainly raise the number of gamers. 

As it is, a Computer gamer buys SCL via steam. They install it. They learn that D&D has Moon Elves and Sun Elves and Wood Elves and that there is a Human and a Human Variant and that there are a limited number of classes and they pick 'trees of skills' (again like DA). 

They think 'Hey, D&D plays out like Dragon Age. I can level up my magic missile or my healing and it takes X amount of time to come back'

Then next week they are invited to a lets say Encounters game on the Wed night. They attempt to rebuild their character and look confused when they see no trees but a whole big list of spells to pick from in the Players handbook for their mage.  Confusion isnt great, and Im not sure SCL is going to be a way to bring people into the TT version.


----------



## Sword of Spirit (Oct 22, 2015)

Tyranthraxus said:


> You picked Temple of Elemental Evil over the Gold Box games for rules closeness? The Gold Box games are so close to the rules of the time as to be indistinguishable.




That's mainly based on things like weapon type vs. AC, declaration phase of initiative, and any other messy details that didn't make it in. Temple of Elemental Evil has a few tiny discrepancies, but follows its editions rules for initiative and such, so it's a pretty close call either way.


----------



## Tyranthraxus (Oct 22, 2015)

Im currently replaying the Gold Box Pool of Radiance. (Currently bashing heads over at Sokol Keep). The graphics might be ugly, the death sounds a little humorous, and due to my pc speed turns fly by but Im still enjoying it. I do however miss the later healing abilites.


----------



## Jiggawatts (Oct 22, 2015)

Here's the Rock Paper Shotgun review...its not pretty.

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2015/10/21/sword-coast-legends-review/

I checked for the IGN review also, but they haven't posted it yet.

The fact is that in this day and age, with the likes of Divinity: Original Sin, Pillars of Eternity, Shadowrun, the upcoming Torment: Tides of Numenera (which we all know is most likely going to be a masterpiece), etc, with all these great amazing games out there, developers cant put out a game mired in mediocrity and expect it to be successful and beloved. A worthy successor to Baldur's Gate this is not, sadly.


----------



## Tyranthraxus (Oct 22, 2015)

Yeah I was listening to the Tome Show look at the preview? or something like that yesterday on the way home from work and those guys are normally pretty much half full guys.  Most of them were really laying the boot in (even almost the one that sounds a bit like a character I can remember from a Cheech and Chong movie) When the Tome Show does that then you know its not good.  Am looking forward to the Next Divinity: Original Sin 2. If only for the Weresheep...

Edit: Anyone go back and watch the recomendation trailers for SCL? The one where PCGAMES called it : Batshit Brilliant!' or Nerdist  called it 'The most Comprehensive D&D Experience  Yet'. Damn its making me chuckled right about now.


----------



## pukunui (Oct 22, 2015)

Jiggawatts said:


> Here's the Rock Paper Shotgun review...its not pretty.
> 
> http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2015/10/21/sword-coast-legends-review/



Yeesh. I'm really wishing I hadn't impulsively bought this thing.


----------



## Tyranthraxus (Oct 22, 2015)

Dont sweat it. The gaming industry wouldnt exist if impulsive buying was not a thing.


----------



## pukunui (Oct 22, 2015)

Yeah, but that's $35 that could've been better spent on, say, more miniatures for my tabletop games.


----------



## RedSiegfried (Oct 22, 2015)

If you want a more authentic D&D experience, save your money and pick up TOEE or NWN or even the old Gold Box games, as many here have recommended, then pick up Sword Coast Legends when it hits the discount rack.

Though in my humble opinion which I repeat over and over again to anyone who will listen  NWN is the best overall because of the excellent multiplayer experience with a real person playing as the DM (you can even have more than one DM!).


----------



## Zaukrie (Oct 22, 2015)

Well, this is all rather disappointing. I wanted a D&D game. Of well, money saved.


----------

