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

[ItsChon]

Fighters are non casters.
Clerics are casters that you use religious based magic.
Wizards use Arcane magic.
Druids use nature magic.
Bards use magic/magic.
Rogues have their own non-combat skills that are worth differentiating from fighter.

So what? Just use feats like arcane-magic, religious-magic, etc for the caster class and make them exclusive. And rogues can just be treated as fighters who picked up some non-combat skills over combat skills. Some PnP games, like modern editions of the The Dark Eye actually do something like this.

Also, how would Paladins and Rangers fit into your class list?

I should've clarified that these main classes include sub classes. Wizard gets its various different sub classes, druids their sub classes, etc. Paladin and Ranger would both be under the fighter sub class.

And I personally think that a classless system akin to Underrail's would be best, but I don't know how that would translate to PnP and D&D is known for classes so I think it's fine to keep their current setup.

The game doesn't need less classes, it needs more classes. The problem with the wizard that it's the class that can do everything, since his spell list is so bloated, and in the minds of WotC every spell makes total sense as a wizard spell. 3.5 had the same problem, but it also offered a solution by introducing three classes - Warmage, Beguiler and Dread Necromancer. Each of them excelled in their area of specialization, while also being bad outside of their area of specialziation.

Also, if any of you asks "But why is the class that can do everything in the game a problem?", don't ever talk to me again, you fucking retard

Forgotten Realms as a setting is far from the greatest setting, and the sheer abundance of Wizards and magic users is a big symptom of this. One thing that might help is making Wizards require more experience than other classes. That being said, as someone else pointed out, balance isn't everything, and I'm fine with Wizards being more powerful and versatile compared to other classes as long as some tweaking is done to even it out just a tiny bit. I also wouldn't be against some more strict subclasses that separated utility and combat spells.

 

[AshenNedra]

Lethality gets higher as you level up, not lower.

And that is an GOOD thing. Mainly in 2E. An magician who dedicated his entire live to magic having extremely devastating spells makes sense. The same magician having mildly more powerful spells and at the same time, be able to soak meteors failing from the sky makes no sense. And AD&D is not as high lethality as other CRPGs like GURPS. In GURPS, an sniper with an .338 lapua magnum rifle can kill the average PC at 1.5km away multiple times assuming average damage. In high magical/high tech settings, mages don't try to soak large caliber shots, they try to create mists, illusions and so on to defend themselves from long range weaponry. It forces PCs to be way more cautious and strategic.

but even omegabuffed Unfair dragons in Kingmaker are one-shot by a decently competent party.

Any video? Because here is one of the most OP min/max characters vs Lanthern king >



You could provide examples of this in BG1/2? I can't think in a way to reliable one shot Firkraag. The closest thing would be to cast an chain contingency of lower resist + lower resist + greater malison and then, finger of death him, so he would only have 5%MR and have to do the save at -8 or be instantly slain which is roughly 60% chances of two turn kill the dragon. But it requires an very high caster level.

Quivering palm. Not reliable I know, but one-shotting Firkraag with my main character monk,- finally stepping up to other fighters in terms of power - became a core memory of my gaming experience. So epic and satisfying.

 

[Delterius]

Make the wizard have to specialize into a "research theme" and only able to learn spells relevant to the theme

*learns conjuration*

 

[Grunker]

Lethality gets higher as you level up, not lower.

And that is an GOOD thing.

I realize that you're sort of the Codex village idiot, Victor, but even an idiot doesn't make so contradictory statements one after the other. Not one post ago you told us lethality was higher on lower levels and now you're saying it's good that lethality is higher on higher levels

 

[razvedchiki]

hows the encounter difficulty? made for the "made a fighter with 9 str because i roleplay mkay" crowd?

 

[ERYFKRAD]

Lethality gets higher as you level up, not lower.

And that is an GOOD thing.

I realize that you're sort of the Codex village idiot, Victor, but even an idiot doesn't make so contradictory statements one after the other. Not one post ago you told us lethality was higher on lower levels and now you're saying it's good that lethality is higher on higher levels

If you're already dead at lethal lower levels it stands to reason that at higher levels you'd still be dead. Ergo more lethal.

Besides

The longer you play the probability of dying at any point of time approaches 1.

Quod erat demonstrandum.

 

[Grunker]

Lethality gets higher as you level up, not lower.

And that is an GOOD thing.

I realize that you're sort of the Codex village idiot, Victor, but even an idiot doesn't make so contradictory statements one after the other. Not one post ago you told us lethality was higher on lower levels and now you're saying it's good that lethality is higher on higher levels

If you're already dead at lethal lower levels it stands to reason that at higher levels you'd still be dead. Ergo more lethal.

Besides

The longer you play the probability of dying at any point of time approaches 1.

Quod erat demonstrandum.

flawless logic. you win again, Barbarian

 

[Cryomancer]

you told us lethality was higher on lower levels and now you're saying it's good that lethality is higher on higher levels

Wrong. I said that the lethality in high levels depends on preparation and access to defensive magical spells and defensive magical gear. An lv 20 magic user with access to contigency spells, powerful defensive magical gear, powreful illusion and abjuration spells, can soak a lot of damage. An lv 20 magic user naked inside an anti magical field can die in a single round to any martial class.

The best way to survive in AD&D is to not get hit. Is that hard to understand? Do I need to draw so you can understand?

 

[rusty_shackleford]

I want to see the drawing

 

[Mr. Magniloquent]

Not sure how you guys could want more classes in 5E. All the traditional core classes are there and each has (typically) 3 archetypes. I think only druid has less at 2. What niche isn't being covered exactly?

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Not sure how you guys could want more classes in 5E. All the traditional core classes are there and each has (typically) 3 archetypes. I think only druid has less at 2. What niche isn't being covered exactly?

psionic

 

[Mr. Magniloquent]

rusty_shackleford Keep your sci-fi space magic in Mass Effect, please. Medieval superstitious magic provides well enough, thank you.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

rusty_shackleford Keep your sci-fi space magic in Mass Effect, please. Medieval superstitious magic is already well provided for.

psionic is one of the oldest D&D classes that existed

 

[Larianshill]

Expedition to the Barrier Peaks is also one of the oldest dungeons in existence, but it doesn't mean everyone has to like it

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Expedition to the Barrier Peaks is also one of the oldest dungeons in existence, but it doesn't mean everyone has to like it

yes it does

 

[Grunker]

rusty_shackleford Keep your sci-fi space magic in Mass Effect, please. Medieval superstitious magic provides well enough, thank you.

D&D is all about the kitsch. Without that it's just bad fantasy. That's why my favourite thing about BG3 announcement was the crazy trailer with the mindflayer steering a nautilus by playing intestinal harp. Good shit

 

[Rinslin Merwind]

I am probably late, but problem is not wizard being powerfull - problem is that other classes have less satisfying progression and for some classes half of progression is bloat of numbers. Also there a problem that you can't nerf wizard without making class shit, because class made with versatility in mind and taking spells or nerf them into oblivion will rob class from versatility. It's other classes need to be buffed/changed or whole skill/magic system should be replaced by another skill/magic system. For example, why Sorcerers have to have same spell list as Wizard? Why casters descended from boss level eldritch abominations should cast the same spells as Wizards? They need unique mechanic and spell list imo.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

warlocks are just wizards except better though

 

[Rinslin Merwind]

warlocks are just wizards except better though

And warlocks needs to be more distictive, although in their case it's more about patron-minion relationship than with spells/abilities (although these needs to be more distinctive too)

 

[Mr. Magniloquent]

D&D has become a mess of magic systems. I consider warlocks a failed attempt at improving the gameplay dynamic of Vancian casters. D&D5E works well using the spell point alternative, which could be much better utilized and expanded upon. I've messed around with the idea of the spellpoint cost being reduced by the caster's proficiency bonus. Increasing the cost of spells by 50% (rounding down) would keep nearly the same curve while making Level 1 spells free at CL 9 and Level 2 spells free at CL 17. That reduction would also apply to metamagics or upcasting. So a Level 17 Sorcerer could quicken Thunderwave at no SP cost. Off the cuff, I think it works out well. Two wizard class features would need reworked, but that's easily done.

Spell damage/scaling and concentration could also be improved. The number of damage dice for any given spell could simply be (Spell Level + Proficiency Bonus + Attribute Bonus) d6. Cantrips would go back to being non-damage utility spells or use a d3. Some unique/iconic spells like Meteor Storm could use greater dice, like a d10 or d12. Concentration could also be improved too. Casually speaking, it seems alright if the caster can maintain spell levels equal to their Proficiency + Attribute bonus. Maximally, a 20 INT CL17 wizard could maintain one Level 9 spell and one Level 2 spell, or two Level 4 and one Level 3 spells. Much more flexible and fun. It also opens the door for feats that can improve those abilities for the player. D&D 5E was a good start, and I like it, but it could be greatly improved if they were willing to step further away from tradition.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

D&D5E works well

nah

 

[Cryomancer]

r sci-fi space magic in Mass Effect, please

Dark Sun has lots of psionicists and it not "mass effect".

 

[FriendlyMerchant]

rusty_shackleford Keep your sci-fi space magic in Mass Effect, please. Medieval superstitious magic provides well enough, thank you.

I'd prefer it if the Medieval superstitious magic was actually medieval superstitious magic, not just a shoe-in for heavy artillery in a setting where artillery hasn't been invented and not just a form of deus ex machina as character abilities.

 

[Non-Edgy Gamer]

There's really nothing wrong with D&D magic except how common it is. So it just becomes a crutch for a lot of things and invites people to make up dumb stuff like magic wheelchairs.

 

[Cryomancer]

how common it is

Again, that depends on the setting. If you wanna an setting where magic is scarce and feared, play Dark Sun.

medieval superstitious magic,

D&D even in Faerun is not that based in medieval europe.