Storyfag
Perfidious Pole
They have turned DnD into Command and Conquer.
You say it like it's a bad thing.
They have turned DnD into Command and Conquer.
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.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.
Good. Casters must suffer.
The cowardly Polish sorcerer fears the mighty Ruthenian knight.Good. Casters must suffer.
Be silent, worm, or you will get the Lacrymas treatment
He's right though.Good. Casters must suffer.
Be silent, worm, or you will get the Lacrymas treatment
The cowardly Polish sorcerer fears the mighty Ruthenian knight.Good. Casters must suffer.
Be silent, worm, or you will get the Lacrymas treatment
Lacrymas treatment
Cantrips.
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).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.
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).Skill usage out of combat is 5E IE - having a fully specialized character only gives +few points.
There are people here wanting all D&D games to be a game set in a "Lacrymas setting"
People talk like caster in 5e are shit tier.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.
Whoa, Vik's got a kewl sorcerer name?
What's next, a skill point in grammar?!
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).
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.
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.
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...
no sci fi if its fantasy
not set in fake england
It don't add up Cap'n.someone might still call you a guv'nah
The MMs say: GTFO
clause 4 corollary 5 paragraph 2 oxford comma 72: 'i can't help myself bossman'not set in fake englandIt don't add up Cap'n.someone might still call you a guv'nah