site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1mo ago (text post)   2143 thread views

Friday Fun Thread for November 21, 2025

Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.

1
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Should I get Baldur's Gate 3? Considering picking it up... but idk. I loved the other Divinity games.

Tell us later how many companions manage to worm their way into your pants from innocuous dialog choices.

During my recent downtime I had the choice between playing BG3 and Cyberpunk. I chose BG3 and it was an enjoyable experience, the other mottizens have covered its strengths and flaws quite well.

Having now started playing Cyberpunk I think it has more interesting things to say. It's not quite the same genre, but if you haven't played either, I'd say Cyberpunk has more relevant ideas to explore.

Yeah, with the caveat that (1) if you liked the Divinity games, you'll like this (2) if instead you are coming for the D&D and series lore, you won't. From what I gather elsewhere, it plays about with the lore and takes it different ways.

It's a Larian game, so it's very open to romance (let us say); you don't have to play it that way but if you want the option of sleeping with party members, it's there, and it likes to take the viewpoint that the gods are bastards, the Great Heroes of the past were maybe not all that and being slightly grubby roguish grayish (not all good, not all bad) is the way to survive and have fun in the world. If you've played the Divinity games, you know what I mean.

It's fun, it's not very deep, the plot goes fairly linearly from A to B (you get Good Enough ending, Kinda Good ending, and Bad ending, slightly varying depending what character you are playing). The best thing is to play through the first time fairly straightforwardly so you get a handle on combat mechanics (which can be frustrating; why the razzle-frazzle does this gang of low-level mooks get about three turns each while my party of what should be killing machines just have to stand there and be pincushions?) but then the second time you can experiment with do you want to be a hero or a villain, different original characters, and so on.

I hesitate to say it's a relationship game, but (at least from my view of it), it is mostly about who you choose to play as, how you get on with other members of the party, and how you get on with other characters in the world. There's almost two plots running at the same time: the main one about Saving The World and the second one dealing with Raphael, the arch-devil who keeps popping up and offering you a bargain. Not to get too spoilery, since the surprise is all part of it, but his boss fight should have you going "well, that was different".

Would I recommend it? Yes! And while you play, don't forget to be good to yourself in the matter of treatos!

The writing ranges from tolerable(dumb but excusable to okay if artless - much of the plot) to barely tolerable (Netflix tier slop - certain characters, notably Karlach).

Otherwise it's a fun game, nice graphics, interesting tactical combat on the higher difficulties. I'd defo buy it for say €30.

I got vastly more fun out of Rogue Trader which is mechanically somewhat worse but writing ranges from quite decent to tolerable.

If you're not sure, you can pirate it first, play it a bit and then decide. But personally, I would just say "yes". Haven't heard a single person I know dislike the game.

It plays and feels like D:OS so if you enjoyed that, pick up BG3. I think that they did a really good job with it, though I do have my gripes (for example there are characters whose dialogue sounds like it was taken from Reddit, which is a horrible writing choice for a medieval fantasy like the Forgotten Realms).

Arguably an accurate choice for a setting designed by Ed Greenwood, though.

How compelling is the story? I tried to pick up D:OS but there's just so much pissing about for stuff that doesn't really feel like it matters. I hoped BG3 would be more emotionally deep and driven.

It's alright. I certainly wouldn't call it emotionally deep. It is, in the end, a high fantasy "save the world from apocalyptic threats" story which is entertaining but isn't going to knock socks off. I think the thing the game does best is giving you agency in how to approach situations, they really let you come at things pretty much any way you can think of and still accomplish your goals. Obviously there are limits, cause it's a computer game and it can't react to you creatively, but you won't run into them often.

It is better, with a few segments that are genuinely good, but ultimately its still a Larian game.

What is it that you dont know? If you liked the divinity games then this is a no-brainer, it's effectively Divinity 3.

Oh I thought it was really different and based on the dnd system?

It doesn't matter much for how the game plays. It's still a larian game with the same kind of gameplay and writing, but better.

It's very similar to DOS 2. But better, IMO. Moving to D&D doesn't make a huge difference.

Definitely try it. I'm only a few hours into act 2 (out of 3) but it seems like one of the best rpgs ever. It's pretty wokeified but you can adjust that with mods.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats