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

[Lawntoilet]

Monks are in a weird place in 5e, they hold up relatively well until level 7, then they completely fall behind. In general one of the weaker classes.

They're still decent if they Stunning Strike on the regular. It's probably the best way to burn through Legendary Resistances, too.
Monks and Rangers are probably the weakest classes though.

But at that level legendary resistance start to show up, and DnD has so high damage that it is very rarely a good idea to burn through them. Just kill the boss and be done with it.

As a rough tier list i would say:

Tier 1: Wizard, Cleric, Druid*, Fighter*, Bard, Paladin
Tier 2: Warlock, Sorcerer, Druid, Fighter, Rogue
Tier 3: Barbarian, Ranger, Monk

* Moon Druid and abusing Variant Human on Fighters puts them in T1. Otherwise T2

Ironically the entire T3 suffers the most from the bonus action rule change. Maybe Ranger the least as he needs his bonus action only once for Hunters Mark. I hope that rule doesnt survive the EA.

I'd put Barb above Ranger and Monk, for the unkillable Bear Totem if nothing else.
They are more MAD than other martials though since they're the only ones who really want both Str and Dex.

 

[Thac0]

Monks are in a weird place in 5e, they hold up relatively well until level 7, then they completely fall behind. In general one of the weaker classes.

They're still decent if they Stunning Strike on the regular. It's probably the best way to burn through Legendary Resistances, too.
Monks and Rangers are probably the weakest classes though.

But at that level legendary resistance start to show up, and DnD has so high damage that it is very rarely a good idea to burn through them. Just kill the boss and be done with it.

As a rough tier list i would say:

Tier 1: Wizard, Cleric, Druid*, Fighter*, Bard, Paladin
Tier 2: Warlock, Sorcerer, Druid, Fighter, Rogue
Tier 3: Barbarian, Ranger, Monk

* Moon Druid and abusing Variant Human on Fighters puts them in T1. Otherwise T2

Ironically the entire T3 suffers the most from the bonus action rule change. Maybe Ranger the least as he needs his bonus action only once for Hunters Mark. I hope that rule doesnt survive the EA.

I'd put Barb above Ranger and Monk, for the unkillable Bear Totem if nothing else.
They are more MAD than other martials though since they're the only ones who really want both Str and Dex.

Bear Totem is by far the best subclass for them and probably puts them at the tail of T2. Also the Warlock is an odd one since he offers the most build options and can be anywhere from T1 to T4 waste of space depending on what you are picking. As long as you use hex, eldritch blast and the invocation for extra damage he is solidly t2 tho.
In general those tiers are a lot closer together than in older editions or in pathfinder. Nothing really sucks enough to be unfun RaW, except maybe the two subclasses 4 Elements Monk and the Beastmaster Ranger.

 

[Lawntoilet]

Is there multiclassing in this game?

Spoiler

if so

And what is the deal with Reactions - are they not in?

Spoiler

Total if so

 

[Black]

We have 614 pages of reactions so far so I'd say they're in.

 

[Gangrelrumbler]

Monks are in a weird place in 5e, they hold up relatively well until level 7, then they completely fall behind. In general one of the weaker classes.

They're still decent if they Stunning Strike on the regular. It's probably the best way to burn through Legendary Resistances, too.
Monks and Rangers are probably the weakest classes though.

But at that level legendary resistance start to show up, and DnD has so high damage that it is very rarely a good idea to burn through them. Just kill the boss and be done with it.

As a rough tier list i would say:

Tier 1: Wizard, Cleric, Druid*, Fighter*, Bard, Paladin
Tier 2: Warlock, Sorcerer, Druid, Fighter, Rogue
Tier 3: Barbarian, Ranger, Monk

* Moon Druid and abusing Variant Human on Fighters puts them in T1. Otherwise T2

Ironically the entire T3 suffers the most from the bonus action rule change. Maybe Ranger the least as he needs his bonus action only once for Hunters Mark. I hope that rule doesnt survive the EA.

Was there ever a DnD edition where monk wasn't among the worst classes?

 

[Dodo1610]

Multiclassing yes!

Their answer on reactions was; https://www.reddit.com/r/baldursgate/comments/fhq9cq/compiled_baldurs_gate_ama_20200313/

Adam: In BG3 players will be able to pre-emptively select which reactions will trigger automatically when their conditions are triggered. E.g. a Wizard would disable their Attack of Opportunity and enable their Shield spell

 

[Lawntoilet]

Multiclassing yes!

Their answer on reactions was; https://www.reddit.com/r/baldursgate/comments/fhq9cq/compiled_baldurs_gate_ama_20200313/

Adam: In BG3 players will be able to pre-emptively select which reactions will trigger automatically when their conditions are triggered. E.g. a Wizard would disable their Attack of Opportunity and enable their Shield spell

How "pre-emptive" do you have to be with your reaction? Like if you're playing an Abjurer with Projected Ward, can you enable that when your turn rolls around if your Fighter is getting low on HP?

 

[Lawntoilet]

Monks are in a weird place in 5e, they hold up relatively well until level 7, then they completely fall behind. In general one of the weaker classes.

They're still decent if they Stunning Strike on the regular. It's probably the best way to burn through Legendary Resistances, too.
Monks and Rangers are probably the weakest classes though.

But at that level legendary resistance start to show up, and DnD has so high damage that it is very rarely a good idea to burn through them. Just kill the boss and be done with it.

As a rough tier list i would say:

Tier 1: Wizard, Cleric, Druid*, Fighter*, Bard, Paladin
Tier 2: Warlock, Sorcerer, Druid, Fighter, Rogue
Tier 3: Barbarian, Ranger, Monk

* Moon Druid and abusing Variant Human on Fighters puts them in T1. Otherwise T2

Ironically the entire T3 suffers the most from the bonus action rule change. Maybe Ranger the least as he needs his bonus action only once for Hunters Mark. I hope that rule doesnt survive the EA.

Was there ever a DnD edition where monk wasn't among the worst classes?

Uh oh you done it now
Paging Pink Eye

Spoiler

Monks are pretty good in Pathfinder but suck in 3.5

 

[DraQ]

Also further, this time for a friend. Is it gay if they do glow? And which colours are acceptable?

Tell your, uh, friend to put on dark, non-transparent underwear afterwards.
Should be ok.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Multiclassing yes!

Their answer on reactions was; https://www.reddit.com/r/baldursgate/comments/fhq9cq/compiled_baldurs_gate_ama_20200313/

Adam: In BG3 players will be able to pre-emptively select which reactions will trigger automatically when their conditions are triggered. E.g. a Wizard would disable their Attack of Opportunity and enable their Shield spell

How "pre-emptive" do you have to be with your reaction? Like if you're playing an Abjurer with Projected Ward, can you enable that when your turn rolls around if your Fighter is getting low on HP?

Sounds like they're implementing it exactly RAW.

 

[Lawntoilet]

Multiclassing yes!

Their answer on reactions was; https://www.reddit.com/r/baldursgate/comments/fhq9cq/compiled_baldurs_gate_ama_20200313/

Adam: In BG3 players will be able to pre-emptively select which reactions will trigger automatically when their conditions are triggered. E.g. a Wizard would disable their Attack of Opportunity and enable their Shield spell

How "pre-emptive" do you have to be with your reaction? Like if you're playing an Abjurer with Projected Ward, can you enable that when your turn rolls around if your Fighter is getting low on HP?

Sounds like they're implementing it exactly RAW.

RAW isn't pre-emptive at all, you pick whether or not you use the reaction at the moment that the appropriate conditions are met.
If that's what they're doing then cool but that's not what that comment was saying.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Multiclassing yes!

Their answer on reactions was; https://www.reddit.com/r/baldursgate/comments/fhq9cq/compiled_baldurs_gate_ama_20200313/

Adam: In BG3 players will be able to pre-emptively select which reactions will trigger automatically when their conditions are triggered. E.g. a Wizard would disable their Attack of Opportunity and enable their Shield spell

How "pre-emptive" do you have to be with your reaction? Like if you're playing an Abjurer with Projected Ward, can you enable that when your turn rolls around if your Fighter is getting low on HP?

Sounds like they're implementing it exactly RAW.

RAW isn't pre-emptive at all, you pick whether or not you use the reaction at the moment that the appropriate conditions are met.
If that's what they're doing then cool but that's not what that comment was saying.

I think there's a confusion of terms here and they were referring to ready actions, because it sounds more like that.
Ready Action is entirely preemptive.

 

[Lawntoilet]

You're confusing reactions with ready action.
Ready Action is entirely preemptive.

Yes readied actions are preemptive, but I wasn't asking about readied actions in the first place.
I was asking about reactions.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

You're confusing reactions with ready action.
Ready Action is entirely preemptive.

Yes readied actions are preemptive, but I wasn't asking about readied actions in the first place.
I was asking about reactions.

I was reading the wrong question answer, my bad. Look at my updated post.

 

[Mr. Magniloquent]

Monks are pretty cool in 5E. I like all the variants, and how they took inspiration from The Last Airbender. I don't really understand the statements that they are particularly weak. They have a great deal of class features that make them incredibly good survivors. They also have several tricks that can be incredibly useful and powerful. I'd certainly rate a monk above a Fighter, Barbarian, or Ranger. While Paladins have more appeal to me, I wouldn't consider the monk weaker than them either.

PS: Larian better get reactions correctly. This is my #1 concern with 5E being adapted to the digital medium. For this edition to work correctly, it is imperative that they get this mechanic correct.

 

[Lawntoilet]

Monks are pretty cool in 5E. I like all the variants, and how they took inspiration from The Last Airbender. I don't really understand the statements that they are particularly weak. They have a great deal of class features that make them incredibly good survivors. They also have several tricks that can be incredibly useful and powerful. I'd certainly rate a monk above a Fighter, Barbarian, or Ranger. While Paladins have more appeal to me, I wouldn't consider the monk weaker than them either.

I think they are somewhat underrated because 4 Elements monk sucks, and because they're a little difficult to play properly, as a skirmisher/stunning strike-er and not a straight stand-up fighter.
They do have cool flavor and can be quite effective but they are not as strong and effective as a Fighter, Paladin, or a Barbarian (most subclasses, anyway).

 

[ERYFKRAD]

You guys putting barbarian in the wrong tier.

 

[Lawntoilet]

You guys putting barbarian in the wrong tier.

Flavorwise they're tier 1.
Played an Ancestral Barb that was a total blast.
But past level ~9, caster supremacy starts to rear its ugly head (not so much as 3.PF, but it is there).
For a CRPG that is primarily combat-focused though Barbarian would be high-tier, it's certainly good at dealing and absorbing damage.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

caster supremacy

Caster supremacy is elfish propaganda, lies and perfidy.

 

[Saerain]

Oh here we go. Blah blah elven conspiracy blah everyone I disagree with is a magocrat. Get help you barbarian chuds.

 

[Rinslin Merwind]

Oh here we go. Blah blah elven conspiracy blah everyone I disagree with is a magocrat. Get help you barbarian chuds.

Considering how long these "chads" whining about magic in RPG, image of brutal guy with sword slowly vanishing from my memory, replaced with ugly and envious weak moron, because self confident person would not act like that at all.
I think sometime ago it was all jokes, but some people don't know where to stop and recycle these jokes for ratings. In result this attitude looks like mental illness than just "one guy jokes".
Interestingly enough, while I had issues with some D&D classes and players, I had never thought badly about barbarians and barbarian players (except maybe intelligent barbarians in PoE, but that game has muscle wizards, so barbarians built from INT ain't big problem), but I guess some people just want their reputation spoiled.

ERYFKRAD If your feud started when wizard player taken your beloved chocolate bar from stand in mall before you or something - just let it go. Seriously right now you hurt yourself more than "pesky wizards" by recycling shit that once was a funny joke and now just boring as hell.
This is applicable to all people here, including people who trying to look as "good fella" and grind rating and people who enable such behaviour with ratings.

 

[DraQ]

Oh here we go. Blah blah elven conspiracy blah everyone I disagree with is a magocrat. Get help you barbarian chuds.

Considering how long these "chads" whining about magic in RPG, image of brutal guy with sword slowly vanishing from my memory, replaced with ugly and envious weak moron, because self confident person would not act like that at all.
I think sometime ago it was all jokes, but some people don't know where to stop and recycle these jokes for ratings. In result this attitude looks like mental illness than just "one guy jokes".
Interestingly enough, while I had issues with some D&D classes and players, I had never thought badly about barbarians and barbarian players (except maybe intelligent barbarians in PoE, but that game has muscle wizards, so barbarians built from INT ain't big problem), but I guess some people just want their reputation spoiled.

Personally I think that when it comes to intelligence there should be two kinds of cRPG protagoinsts: intelligent and dead. Regardless of class.
Doesn't apply to using pre-established PnP system, though.

ERYFKRAD If your feud started when wizard player taken your beloved chocolate bar from stand in mall before you or something - just let it go. Seriously right now you hurt yourself more than "pesky wizards" by recycling shit that once was a funny joke and now just boring as hell.
This is applicable to all people here, including people who trying to look as "good fella" and grind rating and people who enable such behaviour with ratings.

Elves OTOH...


ERYFKRAD
If you truly hate wazards weyzards wrizards... ah fuck it, this might be of help:
https://forum.zdoom.org/viewtopic.php?f=43&t=60781

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Personally I think that when it comes to intelligence there should be two kinds of cRPG protagoinsts: intelligent and dead

Luck is a completely valid replacement for intelligence.

 

[DraQ]

Personally I think that when it comes to intelligence there should be two kinds of cRPG protagoinsts: intelligent and dead

Luck is a completely valid replacement for intelligence.

Intelligence is how you play.
Luck is how your dick dice roll.
Neither needs in-game implementation.

Plus, moron protagonist who just gets lucky all the time makes for shitty storytelling.

Spoiler

And that's one of the main problems with savescumming, actually

 

[NJClaw]

lack of crit ranges and equipment weights are incline now?
wheres the kool aid fountain?

If the "lack of crit ranges" comes with not having to look at this:

Spoiler

I'm fine with it.

Reducing your weapons to a damage formula it's not a fucking incline.

Sure, with more grounded weapons should come more grounded quirks and modifiers rather than every other sword allowing you to breathe lightning and fart flames (and abominable number bloat has been anyway), but having mechanically rich items (and everything else) is not only good, it's part of the only way a cRPG may possibly approach flexibility and reactivity of a PnP or even surpass it - by simulating everything with autistic levels of depth.
Expecting cRPG to be able to abstract shit away and only track it if its meaningful like live DM would is futile because for a piece of software that is cRPG "meaningful" is not meaningful itself.

So yes, give me a full page of crunchy mechanics (explicit or hidden and only indicated via flavour or common sense) per item and yes, this includes items having both weight AND size - beats "this is a gem-quality garnet, it takes one inventory slot; this is a flamberge, it takes one inventory slot; this is an M1A2 main battle tank, it takes one inventory slot..." lunacy.

Of course in this particular case (BG3 using DnD 5e rules) item description should be consistent with the system used, but there should still be quirks baked into it simulating what a good DM might or might not allow to do with that weapon.

Obviously I'm not against mechanically rich items, far from it. What I want are memorable magic items that will stick with me for more than 10 minutes (and with "stick with me" I mean both with the character and with me as a person). I still remember Varscona from BG1 and Crom Faeyr from BG2 (actually, I think I remember every single weapon in those two games), while I've already forgotten "Lohar's Two-Handed Source Hammer" and "Executor Ninyan's Axe". Having mechanically rich and interesting items doesn't mean that the game has to throw at me five of them at the end of each encounter.

As for inventory slots, I never find myself having fun managing inventories, unless that's a crucial gameplay element (like in Darkest Dungeon, where you have to balance supplies and rewards). Since usually it's just boring to me, I prefer to have nothing to do with it (something like what they did with PoE and Deadfire is what I would consider ideal, but I can see why someone wouldn't like that).