Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Baldur's Gate Baldur's Gate 3 Early Access Thread [GAME RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

hell bovine

Arcane
Joined
Sep 9, 2013
Messages
2,711
Location
Secret Level
To be fair to Victor, casters really are the life of the party in all D&D cRPGs (and others, when applicable) for me. Can't imagine playing a no-caster or low-caster party, not strictly because of their power, but because the gameplay would be pretty boring without them. It's why I often fail my Willpower roll when I want to replay Temple of Elemental Evil. It takes a while to level up to the point where your casters won't be relegated to just casting Sleep or Grease over and over again.
Spellcasters are fine in BG3, though. If you look at levels 1 - 4 in the original BG, they aren't that far off in terms of power, at leasst if you compete against e.g. an elven archer. Spells in BG1 vary from very useful in combat (sleep) to completely useless (infravision). Sleep in BG3 isn't useful against trash mobs, but because only actual hit points matter, it can be used even against level 5 githyanki, while in BG1 sleep is completely ineffective against higher level enemies. Charm in BG1 I don't think I've ever used in combat (it's not particularly useful), but it opens up some additional dialogues. Same with disguise self & detect thoughts in BG3 (there is also speak with the dead, but you get this early on from an item). So in terms of variety of low level spellcasters, my impressions so far are that BG3 is actually better, once you take the druids & their shapeshifting into account.

BG1 shifts the power in favor of arcane spellcaster by introducing an overabundance of wands, but this has nothing to do with spells vs. enemies balance. And at the same time archers get fireball arrows, so.
 

Lambach

Arcane
Joined
Feb 11, 2016
Messages
12,730
Location
Belgrade, Removekebabland
Spellcasters are fine in BG3, though. If you look at levels 1 - 4 in the original BG, they aren't that far off in terms of power, at leasst if you compete against e.g. an elven archer. Spells in BG1 vary from very useful in combat (sleep) to completely useless (infravision). Sleep in BG3 isn't useful against trash mobs, but because only actual hit points matter, it can be used even against level 5 githyanki, while in BG1 sleep is completely ineffective against higher level enemies. Charm in BG1 I don't think I've ever used in combat (it's not particularly useful), but it opens up some additional dialogues. Same with disguise self & detect thoughts in BG3 (there is also speak with the dead, but you get this early on from an item). So in terms of variety of low level spellcasters, my impressions so far are that BG3 is actually better, once you take the druids & their shapeshifting into account.

BG1 shifts the power in favor of arcane spellcaster by introducing an overabundance of wands, but this has nothing to do with spells vs. enemies balance. And at the same time archers get fireball arrows, so.

Yeah, people keep telling me casters are slightly better off on early levels in 5e, mostly because of Cantrips. But I'm currently reading some popular spell descriptions, and it does look like arcane casters were hit with the nerf bat on later levels. For example, the "never, ever leave home without it" Haste in 3.5e is now "nice, but nothing special" in 5e.

EDIT: Ouch, Finger of Death, a 7-th level single-target spell deals only 7d8 + 30 damage, and only on a failed save. Victor does kinda have a point, a bunch of these spells are absolutely not worth wasting slots on pretty much ever.
 
Last edited:

Cryomancer

Arcane
Glory to Ukraine
Joined
Jul 11, 2019
Messages
14,470
Location
Frostfell
Lacrymas treatment

Lacrymas at least read about what he is criticizing and he only enforce his BS on his setting. There are people here wanting all D&D games to be a game set in a "Lacrymas setting"

Cantrips.

Cantrips aren't that useful either compared to 3E where you could have a Hell Hound, Panther, Pseudo Dragon, Imp, Quasit familiar and attack with the familiar while fire a heavy crossbow dealing the same damage of a at will 5e cantrip while your pet tanks and enemies has lower hp. But on Pathfinder 1E, Arcanists are ridiculous powerful. They can have the best of prepared casters + the best of spontaneous casters and exploits making then having some decent offensive powers even at extremely low levels(1~5), and D6 hit points. Honestly, PF1e has probably the strongest caster and 4E has the weakest.

As for usefulness of level spells like Haste, Stoneskin, etc on 5e, all non evocation spells fells worthless on 5e. Necromancy probably took the greatest hit. From being able to finger demon lords like a succubus to 7d8+30 damage. From being able to have mid and even high tier undead, to only skeletons and zombies.
 
Last edited:

Reinhardt

Arcane
Joined
Sep 4, 2015
Messages
29,233
Go pew pew some gobbos with cantrips while i just shoot one arrow and destroy everything on screen.
:repost:
 

hell bovine

Arcane
Joined
Sep 9, 2013
Messages
2,711
Location
Secret Level
Yeah, people keep telling me casters are slightly better off on early levels in 5e, mostly because of Cantrips. But I'm currently reading some popular spell descriptions, and it does look like arcane casters were hit with the nerf bat on later levels. For example, the "never, ever leave home without it" Haste in 3.5e is now "nice, but nothing special" in 5e.

EDIT: Ouch, Finger of Death, a 7-th level single-target spell deals only 7d8 + 30 damage, and only on a failed save. Victor does kinda have a point, a bunch of these spells are absolutely not worth wasting slots on pretty much ever.
In terms of power they aren't really better, or at least it didn't feel like that in BG3. But I like low level combat and I've enjoyed that you get to play a spellcaster outside of combat, by using skill checks & spells for exploration (even if some are really cheesy, like the raven familiar).
 

Cryomancer

Arcane
Glory to Ukraine
Joined
Jul 11, 2019
Messages
14,470
Location
Frostfell
Skill usage out of combat is 5E IE - having a fully specialized character only gives +few points. The way that the game handles jumping is honestly awful. Arcanum decades ago did spell usage out of combat much better. Speak with the dead allow you to solve quests in a unique way. Disintegrate can actually disintegrate objects in the world, like windows and doors and (gnomes) are treacherous.
 

Lacrymas

Arcane
Joined
Sep 23, 2015
Messages
17,948
Pathfinder: Wrath
Skill usage out of combat is 5E IE - having a fully specialized character only gives +few points.
That's why I house rule all non-proficient skills to be rolled with disadvantage. Otherwise everyone is an expert in everything (or has the potential to be, depending on RNGesus).
 

Elex

Arbiter
Joined
Oct 17, 2017
Messages
2,043
Yeah, people keep telling me casters are slightly better off on early levels in 5e, mostly because of Cantrips. But I'm currently reading some popular spell descriptions, and it does look like arcane casters were hit with the nerf bat on later levels. For example, the "never, ever leave home without it" Haste in 3.5e is now "nice, but nothing special" in 5e.

EDIT: Ouch, Finger of Death, a 7-th level single-target spell deals only 7d8 + 30 damage, and only on a failed save. Victor does kinda have a point, a bunch of these spells are absolutely not worth wasting slots on pretty much ever.
People talk like caster in 5e are shit tier.

full caster are superior to any non full caster class, and wizard is the top caster in 5e the strongest of all the full casters.
 

Cryomancer

Arcane
Glory to Ukraine
Joined
Jul 11, 2019
Messages
14,470
Location
Frostfell
Whoa, Vik's got a kewl sorcerer name?

Meredoth is a pretty interesting Dark Lord. I posted his "sheet" some pages ago.

What's next, a skill point in grammar?!

My grammar sucks even on my native language. I an not kidding, but will try to improve it.

That's why I house rule all non-proficient skills to be rolled with disadvantage. Otherwise everyone is an expert in everything (or has the potential to be, depending on RNGesus).

What? I an agreeing with a Lacrymas homebrew rule? Anyway, your homebrew should be the default rule. A lv 20 wizard who spended decades studying magic on 5e is just +30% likely to pass on a arcana check than a lv 0 commoner and just +20% likely to pass than someone who casted his first level spell today(lv 1 wiz).

I get that 3.5e had too much power creep and modifiers to take into account, but 5e is too much in the other extreme.

People talk like caster in 5e are shit tier.

full caster are superior to any non full caster class, and wizard is the top caster in 5e the strongest of all the full casters.

Nobody said that. Evocation is pretty great. Some spell schools are now extremely weak. For example, imagine someone who played 2e as a necromancer with OHK spells and powerful undead to create, played 3e as a necromancer with OHK spells and powerful undead to create, skipped 4e cuz 4e is generic wow clone : tabletop edition instead of a proper D&D game and now on 5e, can only animate skeletons, zombies and his offensive necromancy spells are very lackluster.
 

Storyfag

Perfidious Pole
Patron
Joined
Feb 17, 2011
Messages
15,898
Location
Stealth Orbital Nuke Control Centre
For example, imagine someone who played 2e as a necromancer with OHK spells and powerful undead to create, played 3e as a necromancer with OHK spells and powerful undead to create, skipped 4e cuz 4e is generic wow clone : tabletop edition instead of a proper D&D game and now on 5e, can only animate skeletons, zombies and his offensive necromancy spells are very lackluster.

Nothing ever prevents the Necromancer from actually learning Fireball...
 

Cryomancer

Arcane
Glory to Ukraine
Joined
Jul 11, 2019
Messages
14,470
Location
Frostfell
For example, imagine someone who played 2e as a necromancer with OHK spells and powerful undead to create, played 3e as a necromancer with OHK spells and powerful undead to create, skipped 4e cuz 4e is generic wow clone : tabletop edition instead of a proper D&D game and now on 5e, can only animate skeletons, zombies and his offensive necromancy spells are very lackluster.

Nothing ever prevents the Necromancer from actually learning Fireball...

Yep. In order to be a effective necromancer, you must use evocation spells...

I mean, pick Liches which are cakewalk on 5e. Replace all of his high level necromancy spells for evocation spells and he becomes at least 3 times stronger. There are rumors that ravenloft is coming to 5e, I can't wait to see what they will do with Meredoth, Vecna and other powerful Dark Lords which are mostly necromancers.
 
Last edited:

Delterius

Arcane
Joined
Dec 12, 2012
Messages
15,956
Location
Entre a serra e o mar.
guide to a delt setting
  • barbarians are intelligent people who may or may not scream that day i dunno
  • no sci fi if its fantasy
  • not set in fake england or france
  • someone might still call you a guv'nah because i can't help myself
this is a list of demands we have nuclear powered weapons pointing at belgium
 

Cryomancer

Arcane
Glory to Ukraine
Joined
Jul 11, 2019
Messages
14,470
Location
Frostfell
The MMs say: GTFO

Arcanum too. On but arcanum is more "steampunk" than "sci fi".

What is the difference of a disintegration beam being launched by a sci fi gun or by a mage who memorized a disintegration spell? The result is the same, but one is sci fi and other is fantasy. A scroll/tome of fireball is not that different than a implant which allows you to create "exotherme spheres". Constructs and Robots are similar, spaceships and spelljammer ships are similar and so on.

One class which I would love to play is Technomancer, but sadly, there are very few games which are high fantasy and high tech at the same time. And honestly, Starfinder Technomancer is very lackluster.
 

Mazisky

Magister
Joined
Mar 8, 2015
Messages
2,082
Location
Rome, IT
Helo, I am Larian fan. How is Baldur Gates 3 is good?

Im love for Divinity Originial Sin 2 he best writing best character in history of role plays hiihhiih Larian is best devoloper in world

I find recomended rpgs like Planescape Troment relly boring and bad, only talk talk talk all game never fart or laugh like south park and u can not throw cats at guys. In Divinitys you talk dog and cats this best feature in gaming

So is BG3 best game like Dos? thank you

PS: Watch Dogs 2 is me favourite rpgs
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom