Baldur's Gate Baldur's Gate 3 Pre-Release Thread [EARLY ACCESS RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[Cryomancer]

What makes casters so much powerful is when the DM and the player doesn't create characters/settings that makes sense· For eg, on pathfinder a sorcerer of silver draconic bloodline casting sirroco makes ZERO sense. Doesn't matter how cool and powerful the spell is. A scroll of finger of death being easier to obtain than a vorpal weapon makes zero sense. 5e limited far more than 3.5e how much spells after tier 5 arcane casters can cast but also made cantrips at will and greater.

Warlocks are considered the weakest 5e arcane caster because they have a very limited spell selection and their patron can teach (not gave, they aren't clerics) few other spells, so if you have lurker as a patron, you can't learn fireball. At the same way that if you have a fiendhish patron, you can't learn cone of cold. If you force casters roleplay how they obtain magical power and scrolls, much of their power is lost. Just like with multiclassing. It can create pun pun builds and can not.

As for martial classes, i have heard that Barbarians are great on 5e. But never read much about the class.

I personally like fighter companions in games with dumb IA because i need to micromanage they way less.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

What makes casters so much powerful is when the DM and the player doesn't create characters/settings that makes sense· For eg, on pathfinder a sorcerer of silver draconic bloodline casting sirroco makes ZERO sense. Doesn't matter how cool and powerful the spell is. A scroll of finger of death being easier to obtain than a vorpal weapon makes zero sense. 5e limited far more than 3.5e how much spells after tier 5 arcane casters can cast but also made cantrips at will and greater.

Warlocks are considered the weakest 5e arcane caster because they have a very limited spell selection and their patron can teach (not gave, they aren't clerics) few other spells, so if you have lurker as a patron, you can't learn fireball. At the same way that if you have a fiendhish patron, you can't learn cone of cold. If you force casters roleplay how they obtain magical power and scrolls, much of their power is lost. Just like with multiclassing. It can create pun pun builds and can not.

As for martial classes, i have heard that Barbarians are great on 5e. But never read much about the class.

I personally like fighter companions in games with dumb IA because i need to micromanage they way less.

I think this is the first time I've agreed with one of your posts

 

[Mr. Magniloquent]

Of course once fullcasters get 6th/7th level spells or higher most other classes start feeling less relevant.

I agree with you & Lacrymas on this point. Players shouldn't have access to magic beyond the 6th without going epic, but the system would basically need to stop advancing at Level 10, much like AD&D. There is too much legacy to go back now though. 5E has struck a fairly equitable balance, but I'm not sure how much more it can evolve.

What makes casters so much powerful is when the DM and the player doesn't create characters/settings that makes sense· For eg, a sorcerer of silver draconic bloodline casting sirroco makes ZERO sense. Doesn't matter how cool and powerful the spell is. A scroll of finger of death being easier to obtain than a vorpal weapon makes zero sense. 5e limited far more than 3.5e how much spells after tier 5 arcane casters can cast but also made cantrips at will and greater.

I agree about Sorcerers. I feel like they should have significantly more restricted spell lists. Like clerics of earlier editions, they should only have access to spells that their bloodline/domain has descriptors for.

 

[Spectacle]

Fighters and Warlocks will be top-tier in BG3 with automatic short rests after every single combat.

 

[Lawntoilet]

I agree with you & Lacrymas on this point. Players shouldn't have access to magic beyond the 6th without going epic, but the system would basically need to stop advancing at Level 10, much like AD&D. There is too much legacy to go back now though. 5E has struck a fairly equitable balance, but I'm not sure how much more it can evolve.

There are some E10 rules out there that I like in theory, in practice I just plan my campaigns to end around level 9-12. I'm playing in a level 19 game and it is its own kind of fun, but nobody in our party is playing a pure martial either and I'm sure that is helping.

I agree about Sorcerers. I feel like they should have significantly more restricted spell lists. Like clerics of earlier editions, they should only have access to spells that their bloodline/domain has descriptors for.

Sorcerers should have a more restricted list and it should be influenced by their subclass, but they should also get more spells known than they currently do (which is fewer spells than a half-caster can memorize, at high levels) in my opinion.

 

[Mortmal]

Thats for 2e right ? I think i remember to become a dragon in dark sun, which is pretty close to godhood, you needed 20 level in defiler + 20 level in psionics as well .

Yep. And Chronos on 5e who is considered a godslayer is if i remember correctly CR 55(not sure), people here saying that a lv 5 to 20 adventure is ascension to godhood when in reality, a lv 20 character needs a very long road to become powerful as the weakest lesser deity. Demigods, maybe 6 lv 20 guys with careful planing, lucky and DM favoritism can defeat one. And note : i an saying maybe. Demon Lords are far weaker than Gods and Demogorgon is CR 23 on 3.5e according to wiki. https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Demogorgon

Yes 20 is nowhere near godhood, the DM manual gives you a few ideas on how to keep playing past 20 but its unsatisfying , a title there a boon that, bleh.. Not that many people will play past 20 anyway, 10 seems the end of the world here...But it was way more fleshed out in older editions.
So a demon lord like demogorgon is CR26 in 5E , its doable for 4 level 20 players, in the encounter calculator it only rates it as 2X deadly . However i dont really portray a solo fight with that you need to add him a few more goons and raise the encounter to deadly 3X level at least, that doesnt mean TPK but that at least one character is going to get downed.

 

[Efe]

probably warlocks will be just like how they were in nwn2.

 

[Lilliput McHammersmith]

You'd be surprised if you knew how many codexers love their dwarves fighters.

I thought I was the only one!

 

[Cryomancer]

probably warlocks will be just like how they were in nwn2.

NO, warlocks on nwn2 are a abomination. They are so weak that even i who hate number inflation and cooldowns prefer to play DDO as warlock than vanilla nwn2... With warlock reworked that makes the class more in line with P&P(But doesn't fix all invocation), the story is different.

I agree about Sorcerers. I feel like they should have significantly more restricted spell lists. Like clerics of earlier editions, they should only have access to spells that their bloodline/domain has descriptors for.

IMO each bloodline should give spell restrictions, not only on spells Eg:

• Water elemental/silver/white draconic = You can't learn spells with "fire" descriptor and get vulnerability to fire damage
• Fire elemental/red/gold draconic = You can't learn spells with "cold" descriptor and get vulnerability to cold damage
• Undead/Vampiric bloodline = +2 DC of necromancy spells. Can't learn spells from illusion school, -3 DEX penalty and vulnerability to radiant damage
• Abyssal = Can't learn spells from enchantment school. Risk of suffering rage when you fail a concentration check. Your alignment needs to be Chaotic evil, Neutral evil or Chaotic neutral to use your spells.

And so on. What people complain about arcane casters is not their raw power, because a well builded and eqquiped barbarian can cause way more damage. A kineticist on pathfinder too. Is their versatility. Mainly for generalist wizards with a complete spellbook. Unfortunately many players doesn't like having weakness. I personally like to create characters with flaws, vulnerabilities and negative scores...

 

[Mr. Magniloquent]

Fighters and Warlocks will be top-tier in BG3 with automatic short rests after every single combat.

Warlock's basically having their spell be per encounter will be good, but their spell list is mostly utility. Not spells you would find commonly in a CRPG. We'll see how much Larian fudges this list, because it could be major. Fighters will be able to use Second Wind to basically not need a cleric. Wizards are the biggest winner here. Arcane Recovery in between every battle would be phenomenal, depending on how many filler fights or trash mobs there are. Domain selection for clerics will be tough, as Channel Divinity becoming a per encounter refresh would change how you look at the class.

 

[Lawntoilet]

Mainly for generalist wizards with a complete spellbook. .

I like your other ideas, but the super-versatile Wizard is less of an issue in my experience than it is on paper in PnP. Getting access to scrolls and downtime to scribe them is at the discretion of the DM entirely. Of course it's a bigger issue in a CRPG like BG and Kingmaker where you can just buy every scroll.

Warlock's basically having their spell be per encounter will be good, but their spell list is mostly utility. Not spells you would find commonly in a CRPG. We'll see how much Larian fudges this list, because it could be major. Fighters will be able to use Second Wind to basically not need a cleric. Wizards are the biggest winner here. Arcane Recovery in between every battle would be phenomenal, depending on how many filler fights or trash mobs there are. Domain selection for clerics will be tough, as Channel Divinity becoming a per encounter refresh would change how you look at the class.

Warlocks have good buff spells on their lists too.
Arcane Recovery is a long-rest resource: it recharges spell slots on a short rest, but you can only use it once per long rest. If they implement it properly you won't be getting slots back every encounter.
You're right about Clerics though.

 

[Lacrymas]

I agree with you & Lacrymas on this point. Players shouldn't have access to magic beyond the 6th without going epic, but the system would basically need to stop advancing at Level 10, much like AD&D. There is too much legacy to go back now though. 5E has struck a fairly equitable balance, but I'm not sure how much more it can evolve.

The spell levels should be staggered something like this:
1st level - cantrips and 1st spell circle
3rd level - 2nd SC
6th lvl - 3rd SC
10th - 4th
14th - 5th
19th - 6th

That way progression for casters doesn't end at level 10 and you still get to have your cheesy 1 Pal/19 Sorc abominations. Some people would say that even the 6th spell circle is of dubious quality, but I'd throw it in there as a reward for sticking to a single class for 19 lvls.

As for long rests vs short rests, I'm sure they'll figure something out, they'll probably convert the more powerful short rest abilities into long rest ones.

 

[Cryomancer]

but their spell list is mostly utility.

Depends on the pact. Fiend warlocks are pretty blasters. Lurker of the Deep has a lot of powerful offensive spells. Thunderwave is amazing. Shatter too. Lightning bolt too. And even "utility" spells like control water, can be used to deal damage.

http://dnd5e.wikidot.com/warlock:lurker-in-the-deep-ua

That way progression for casters doesn't end at character level 10 and you still get to have your cheesy 1 Pal/19 Sorc abominations.

That is really awful. A 18th lv sorcerer will deal less damage than a lv 12 raging barbarian.

If you wanna useless casters, why not play 4e?

 

[Desiderius]

What i think interesting is. Here in Codex, you have people that love to play as mages(like myself), people that love monks(Pinkie eye), people that love Barbarians, but i don't know anyone that love Fighters.... Anyway, one good thing about lv cap = 10, is that it limits the pun pun builds. So, clerics of a lawful good deity with a warlock pact with a chaotic evil demon will gonna suffer.

Aldori Defender is my favorite MC in P:K, and with latest version can hold his own power-wise.

P:K is the first game where I’ve really enjoyed Fighter.

 

[Lacrymas]

That is really awful. A 18th lv sorcerer will deal less damage than a lv 12 raging barbarian.

Damage is easily controlled by tweaking the numbers and scaling of spells, the idea is that you don't get access to the ridiculous effects of the higher level spells.

 

[Lawntoilet]

That is really awful. A 18th lv sorcerer will deal less damage than a lv 12 raging barbarian.

If you wanna useless casters, why not play 4e?

A raging barbarian SHOULD do a shitload of damage, because they don't have the flexibility that a caster has to buff, debuff, AoE, etc.
That said, Animate Objects (tiny objects) is very strong for DPR.

 

[Ontopoly]

Like who? Expose them!

But seriously speaking - I am curious if you can name more than a single person (rusty).

Rusty is the obvious one
Saravan definitely has a cult like love for Larian
All of Reddit
Swen is without a doubt a cultist
Probably Crispy
And you

Those are a few quick ones. I'm sure I could find More if I went back through the thread but I can't remember any of you. You're all so culty and I can't differentiate a sheep from a sheep, or a sheep from a Larian culty.

I bet you can't find any post in all of these +600 pages that someone share a sentiment akin to a "cultist" or "fanboy" but you are so wrapped up in your butthurt that you are incapable of seeing that.

Anyone who's willing to defend this game is a cultist. I can see no other reason why anyone would support Larian in any regard to this game. Larian has made so many bad decisions and if someone won't admit that and doesn't recognize it as shit then they are clearly blinded by devotion for swen.

 

[fantadomat]

Anything new in this thread,or just Lacrymas sperging about pointless and obscure D&D shit?

 

[Cryomancer]

Damage is easily controlled by tweaking numbers and scaling of spells, the idea is that you don't get access to the ridiculous effects of the higher level spells.

On 5e, a lv 20 wizard can cast a SINGLE tier 9 spell per long rest. Even a circle 1 spell, only 3 per rest. Is one stop time or one wish and you wanna make this spell more limited than already are? Why not just remove casters from the game? I rather not having something than having something pointless. One level delay between sorc and wiz on 3.5e is enough reason for many people to play as wizard. That change will never pass any serious playtesting.

A raging barbarian SHOULD do a shitload of damage, because they don't have the flexibility that a caster has to buff, debuff, AoE, etc.
That said, Animate Objects (tiny objects) is very strong for DPR.

Deal shitton of damage on armor, with greater armor class, hit dices, hit points, non requiring concentration(...) All cool stuff that arcane casters can do already require concentration.

 

[Ontopoly]

Anything new in this thread,or just Lacrymas sperging about pointless and obscure D&D shit?

So much new exciting and juicy stuff. You'll have to read it all to see though. Trust me, it's worth it

 

[Lawntoilet]

On 5e, a lv 20 wizard can cast a SINGLE tier 9 spell per long rest. Even a circle 1 spell, only one per rest. Is one stop time or one wish and you wanna make this spell more limited than already are? Why not just remove casters from the game?

Deal shitton of damage on armor, with greater armor class, hit dices, hit points, non requiring concentration(...) All cool stuff that arcane casters can do already require concentration.

I don't think casters need a hard nerf (rather, martials should be buffed), but "they can only completely ignore all laws of reality and do literally anything they want ONE TIME PER DAY and if you remove that they're useless" is not a very compelling argument.

"Deal shitton of damage on armor" what do you mean by this?
Requiring Concentration to compete with a Barbarian in damage isn't relevant because Barbarians don't concentrate on anything for one thing, and they use their own resources to get their power (ie. Rage) for another.
Yes they have higher armor class and HP, but they're useless in combat unless they're out on the front lines. They need to be able to absorb damage, because they can't completely avoid damage as easily as casters can.
"All cool stuff casters can do requires concentration," yes but so what? Their flexibility means they choose what they're competent at in that moment, and if they pick damage, they do a good job of it. They just can't also choose to simultaneously do a good job of buffing, debuffing, stopping time, etc.

 

[Cryomancer]

I don't think casters need a hard nerf (rather, martials should be buffed)

At this, i agree. Give cool warcryes to barbarian, allowing him to make enemies that fail a save run in fear, ability to decapitate enemies on a critical + failed save, etc.

Martial classes should get a buff. Even on melee arcane casters can defeat martial. Not only with mirror image + stoneskin + Black blade of disaster + tenser transformation on BG/IWD. But also on 3.5e. Here is a build of a Eldritch Glaive warlock on 3.5e that can dish 68d6 damage in a single round or 238 average damage https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Eldritch_Glaive_Master_(3.5e_Optimized_Character_Build)

And i an not considering his metamagic on spell like abilities.. And even at range, he can deal 17d6 damage at 250 feet targeting touch attack and no reflex save like a wiz. That is far more than any archer a +5 bow can do. And since is a warlock, he can fly, become invisible, teleport, throw tentacles to grapple enemies with 28 AB at lv 20... If someone really wanna to nerf high tier magic (tier 7/8/9), increasing the casting time to multiple rounds sounds LESS awful than making it epic only.

 

[Lacrymas]

On 5e, a lv 20 wizard can cast a SINGLE tier 9 spell per long rest. Even a circle 1 spell, only 3 per rest. Is one stop time or one wish and you wanna make this spell more limited than already are? Why not just remove casters from the game? I rather not having something than having something pointless. One level delay between sorc and wiz on 3.5e is enough reason for many people to play as wizard. That change will never pass any serious playtesting.

A single 7th lvl spell is already too much, let alone a 9th lvl one. I'd say by the 5th spell circle you already have all the tools you'll ever need in a campaign, and you are already ridiculously powerful and more versatile than all martials, 6th circle is gravy on top and a reward for not multiclassing.

 

[Cryomancer]

A single 7th lvl spell is already too much, let alone a 9th lvl one. I'd say by the 5th spell circle you already have all the tools you'll ever need in a campaign, and you are already ridiculously powerful and more versatile than all martials, 6th circle is gravy on top and a reward for not multiclassing.

Wizards has worse hit dice, no weapon proficiency(...) You keep comparing then to marial, not trying to make martial better, but making casters worse..

"already have all the tools you'll ever need in a campaign"

In what campaign? You are thinking that fighting bandits on Faerun is every campaign and is not. Elemental planes, abyss, shadowfell, fey world, underdark(...) there are a lot of powerful enemies on that settings. Disagree? Pick NWN1, and try to defeat Vix'thra using only spells from tier 1 to 6. Note that NWN1 is 3.5e, which has way more powerful spells than 5e. If after 666 reloads, you managed to do that, try face mephistopheles on end of act 3 of hotu expansion with spells up to tier 6. Even on base campaign, try to face the final boss without using high tier magic. Try do that. Try not use high tier magic in a game with far stronger magic than 5e.

I have the impression that "nerf A" crowd never played "A"...

 

[Lawntoilet]

Wizards has worse hit dice, no weapon proficiency(...) You keep comparing then to marial, not trying to make martial better, but making casters worse..

I agree martials should be buffed but Wizards can avoid damage more easily by staying out of combat range, so they don't need as much HP, and they have good unlimited cantrips so they don't need weapon proficiencies.