I've been playing some older CRPGs because of the hype around BG3, and what amazes me is how useless mages are and how much they drag the rest of your party down. They have hardly any health so they always need to be way in the back and can't survive a single hit. They can cast decent spells, but they don't have a ton of slots near the start of the adventure, so they have to rest after every battle. But even a lot of spells they do have have drawbacks, a lot of the crowd control spells can affect your party too. Or their offensive spells might just miss.
Having a mage in your party is like constantly having to manage someone. It's hard to believe a serious band of adventurers would want one in their party.
the virgin mage vs the chad ranger
Low level mages always sucked dick in D&D settings. At least in old rulesets I dunno how it works these days.
>constantly having to manage someone
Do you want the game to play itself? Or do you just wish you didn't have to tell your mage what to do 100% of the time, maybe just half the time or something.
these days in D&D5e we've got things called cantrips which are weak spells you can cast as many times as you want.
so you can keep throwing out weak little fire bolts, or kinda OP eldritch blasts while saving your good spells for when you need them, and not being dead weight with a pocket knife until the next long rest.
>but they don't have a ton of slots near the start of the adventure, so they have to rest after every battle.
It's just gay dnd no fun allowed bullshit from BG series. Every decent rpg series got rid of it decades ago.
Thing is that fighters are linear, wizards are quadratic.
Say fighter starts at a 'power' of 2 and gains 2 each level. Wizard starts at 'power' 1 and doubles in power each level.
So in this example a level 1 fighter is worth two wizards, but a level 5 wizard is worth one and a half fighters. And the gap widens as you climb.
A level 10 wizard would have the power of twenty five level 10 fighters.
Obviously not real numbers but that's roughly how it works.
Shit, that's actually pretty well put.
I want to make a truly evil necromancer in BG3 but you have to grind away halfway up the level scale before you get the core mechanic of the fricking class.
mages in dnd go from being pretty useless to hilariously overpowered but I think the level cap in BG3 is too low for them to really get to that point
No. Mages in BG 3 are ridiculous. Scorching ray will frick up anything and everything. Add to that the ability to cast haste and everything is just done.
There’s no way to make wizards good when a min maxxed lvl 12 fighter can dish out 400 dmg a turn in bg3.
>martialBlack person thinks dmg matters in D&D
>literal BIG NUMBER GO UP moron
Get Forcecaged, metal-wearing homosexual.
This, all you really get in BG3 is finding ways to spam Chain Lightning. Concentration prevents you from stacking effects to any meaningful degree and the truly hilarious nukes are 7th and 8th level.
The problem is 5e, and more importantly, Larian's interpretation of 5e rules. I'll explain:
In most editions of D&D, mages scale "quadratically", which is to say that their power is backloaded/reserved for the later levels, but when they *do* hit their power spike they become GAME. BREAKINGLY. POWERFUL. And that's not an exaggeration -- anyone who has played a high level 3.5e/Pathfinder 1e game can tell you loads of stories about wizards trivializing entire -arcs- planned by a DM in mere seconds.
Bosses killed in one round.
Bosses and their cronies completely shut down and eradicated before an initiative can be called.
Obstacles and puzzles contrived by the DM to be a full halt for the party? The wizard casts and spell or two and *poof*, problem solved.
Time reversed to give the players infinite opportunities to get a correct roll (save scumming, but in a pen-and-paper game).
Being able to kill the entire party if they wish, with literally a 0% chance of failure.
As you can imagine, this can cause quite the problem for a DM that wants to give their party a good challenge, and moreover, it causes problems when other players who aren't playing a wizard steadily realize that the wizard can basically do anything they can do, but better. This is obviously a case where the classes are not "balanced", at least the way we contemporarily define it. So the solution from WotC's perspective was to buff most of the other classes a bit by rounding out their abilities through things like feat/ASI acquisition, per short rest/long rest abilities, and backgrounds, which helped martial characters acquire non-martial proficiencies that aided party efforts outside of simple combat. On the flip side, WotC also felt it necessary to nerf wizards quite severely.
Whether or not these nerfs were warranted, and more importantly, if those nerfs went to far, is still controversial, and is one of the key points of contention among D&D player's view of 5e's impact on the game.
Essentially, the following happened to try and "balance" the classes in later levels:
DC inflation was nullified through constraining stackable modifiers.
Wizards lost Intelligence-based bonus spells.
Wizards lost school specialization bonus spells.
Wizards lost most of their high level spell slots.
Spells, particularly save-or-die spells, were heavily nerfed or removed entirely.
Several classes, specifically fighter and barbarian, were given bonuses against spells or the ability to outright force a successful roll against a spell every day.
Inspiration and Legendary Actions were added, giving powerful monsters and PCs the ability to frequently nullify a failed saving throw vs. spells.
And most importantly, the Concentration mechanic was added to the game, and wizards were explicitly denied proficiency in Constitution saving throws. This meant that every time a wizard cast a spell, it was very possible for them to lose it if they were attacked for any damage at all, even a single point, they could entirely lose a very powerful high-level spell.
>DC inflation was nullified through constraining stackable modifiers.
>Wizards lost Intelligence-based bonus spells.
>Wizards lost school specialization bonus spells.
>Wizards lost most of their high level spell slots.
>Spells, particularly save-or-die spells, were heavily nerfed or removed entirely.
>Several classes, specifically fighter and barbarian, were given bonuses against spells or the ability to outright force a successful roll against a spell every day.
>Inspiration and Legendary Actions were added, giving powerful monsters and PCs the ability to frequently nullify a failed saving throw vs. spells.
>And most importantly, the Concentration mechanic was added to the game, and wizards were explicitly denied proficiency in Constitution saving throws. This meant that every time a wizard cast a spell, it was very possible for them to lose it if they were attacked for any damage at all, even a single point, they could entirely lose a very powerful high-level spell.
all of this was based and needed to happen.
And mages still shit on martialBlack folk. Funny, aint it?
the bonus spells really didn't need to go away
What is pic related
Pathfinder: Wrath of the Righteous. It's a Demon Illusionist I made one-round insta-killing a boss on Unfair with Phantasmal Killer (save-or-die).
Oh that's what I thought, I'm moronic
Gonna be replaying the pathfinder games when I'm done with BG3, never actually finished either of them I got burnt out
As you can imagine, this substantially lowered the power of wizards in D&D. But, we still need to go further: even with all of the above taken into consideration, wizards are still frequently considered to be either the most powerful or nearly the most powerful class in 5e. The reason for this is that, despite the additional caution which is needed by a wizard to successfully land their most powerful spells, the still maintain a unique feature that literally no other class in the game carries: the ability to narratively interact with the game second only to the DM themselves. For example, a wizard can simply generate a stone wall, create water or flame, teleport dozens of kilometers, scry invisibly on the dreams of someone on the the other side of the planet, shift into another plane of existence, etc. These things aren't based on damage, or skill checks, they're *narrative* manipulation. For this reason, wizards can interact with the game world of PnP D&D like no other character.
And of course, all of the above doesn't work with a computer game. Computer games don't permit negotiation with a storyteller because they're pre-programmed to give the player a defined story. For this reason, wizards in a CRPG environment are always going to be neutered in comparison to their PnP counterparts. They are relegated to being simple AoE damage dealers (which they're decent at) or controllers (where they excel). And herein lies the problem: Larian, for some reason, felt that wizards in 5e, even with all their nerfs, even with the inability to manipulate the narrative of the story through powerful magic, were still simply too powerful as controllers. So they nerfed the -shit- out of basically every single CC spell in 5e that could be cast by wizards.
I know this is an 'tism storm effort post, but I'm trying to answer your question truthfully, OP. Typically I would say 'git gud' because wizards are an advanced class that has a well-earned reputation for being unstoppable powerhouses in mid/late game D&D. But unfortunately, in my 50+ hours of BG3, I currently have to agree with you. Wizards have been hit so hard in so many different ways, they're so inflexible in their contribution to a team, that yeah, they kinda suck.
considering OP was talking about older casters, i think the problem is really just low hp, level cap, 0 out-of-combat utility, and an overwhelming focus on combat encounters, which is enough to mitigate the strengths of a proper wizard
when there's no way to negotiate the story with a computer "DM" and all you do is fight, even no-strings-attached full rests after every encounter are not good enough to rival the effectiveness of 2handed fighters
You seem pretty based, do i play bg 1 before bg2 and also do i want to get bg 2 complete or the enhanced edition?
If you can, play both sequentially. If you can only play one, play BG2 after reading about BG1. EE or original is fine, just recognize that the EE companions and their quests are of noticeably inferior quality to the characters/writing of the original games.
Avoid Siege of Dragonspear at all costs.
Thanks i got bg 1 EE but ive been reading some opinions that its not worth playing (as bg 2 retcons it or something along those lines) , ill jump into it
BG1 is absolutely worth playing. It's a quarter of century old and still has surprises for even the most seasoned of players. The writing is kinda hammy, but it still has the occasional well written passage that will keep people interested. It's also not very long, probably around 40ish hours for a first time playthrough.
Thanks
>me and my broes all going different specializations
>i go illusion or enchantment can't remember
>proceed to clutch a dozen encounters thanks to my control spells
i literally could not do a single other thing though that wasn't involving spellcasting or writing scrolls
what are you in act 1? gale is so OP my other companions are basically just trash mobs to distract the ai from him. fireball wipes boards. magic missle kills anyone faster than the most mobile character can. hold enemy cancels people of the board.
if you want to talk about useless, lets talk about late game warlocks, and why larian seems to go out of its way to despise on of the most popular classes to the point it's roleplay tier, and how it's also shit in that respect.
>magic missle kills anyone faster than the most mobile character can
lol, 3 1d4 missiles at 30+ health enemies
>b-but i upcast it so i get 5 missiles instead!
omegalul
>don't need to spend actions and movement to find that one hard to reach enemy who is designed to thin your squad out and make you lose
>doesn't have the gear that gives you extra missiles
>don't need to spend actions and movement to find that one hard to reach enemy who is designed to thin your squad out and make you lose
every character in the game gets to swap for free between ranged and melee sets lol
>doesn't have the gear that gives you extra missiles
oh no am i missing out on the EIGHT 1d4 missiles that average out at 16-20 damage against 40+ health enemies?
its not ideal but that is what its for, its not a damage dealer, its a utility spell for enemies on the third floor and through a window.
Spellcasters should have always been treated as literal mobile glass cannons, able to turn the tides of battle with immense firepower and control that the other party members have to carefully work around and protect.
But unfortunately I guess everyone got their fee-fee's hurt over "MAGIC TOO STRONG" so now they are still made of glass but instead of cannons they are slingshots since morons have no clue how to actually balance anything.
You can get super broken wizards in BG3, and they can scale incredibly with the gear you find. But it will not be given to you for free. You will need to actually put in the effort to come up with the build and find the items.
its kind of annoying how specializing in a school blocks them from another school
at some point wizard turned into "that kid"'s developer self insert pet class. while other classes are based on folklore and mythology, the wizard is magical batman. he has an answer for everything, including the weakness he is supposedly balanced around. archetypal wizards like gandalf and merlin were known for being wise, but the wizard is a super nerd and powers up by studying. wizard players will claim that they deserve to be overpowered and will cry and whine if the game doesn't entirely revolve around them.
frick wizards. kill wizards. behead wizards with vorpal swords. silence filthy casters. defecate in a wizard's component pouch. burn a wizard's spellbook. flurry of blows a wizard into an anti-magic zone. curb stomp level 1 wizards with cr5 encounters. stop wizards from resting. slam dunk a wizard's familiar into the plane of fire. total wizard death.
lmao seething impotent martialBlack person.
Be a good meatcuck and soak some more damage for me or I won't give you your precious Haste, homosexual.
>but they don't have a ton of slots near the start of the adventure, so they have to rest after every battle.
You have unlimited cantrips that scale with your level.
This a DnD meme that died a while ago.
>Having a mage in your party is like constantly having to manage someone. It's hard to believe a serious band of adventurers would want one in their party.
On table top combat is not as common. Magic is incredibly useful outside of combat too.
>casters very OP in 3.0/3.5
>WOTC puts out a book to try and address this for martials
>banned from my table 🙂
>people shit on it for years
Glad to see this trend hasn't continued
Talking about BG1 and BG2. Even a level 1 wizard can cast Sleep, which can trivialize entire encounters. At Level 3 you get horror and web, which can also trivialize entire encounters. Level 5 brings Haste and Fireball. Sure, they might not get a lot of spell slots, but when a single spell slot can disable multiple enemies, they're damn well good enough. Plus, there's always wands. A blast or two from a wand of fire does wonders.
And that's just low level wizards. High level wizards can become literally unkillable. Protection From Magical Weapons, Protection from <whatever element(s) the enemy uses>, Spell Immunity Abjuration and you become basically immortal. Who needs high HP when the massive dragon's attacks simply print out "Weapon ineffective"?
Chain Contingency - on enemy sighted, three horrid witlings will instantly shred a vast majority of things. Or equip -cast time gear, cast Improved Alacrity and Timestop and just machine gun out spells until there's nothing left but ash.
Most parties don't have access to quicksave/load, and a well timed spell can get you out of quite a few pickles. High mortality rate tends to not get across in either vidya or tabletop anymore though.
Melee is just better in BG3. In previous larian games melee was pretty weak. In dos2 I never had melee in my party as the ground was always on fire and you would spend 2 turns just trying to get into can’t act with the enemy or waste the mages turn teleporting them
This is a BG3/DnD5E problem. Almost no enemy in BG3 casts crowd control or disabling spells on you, so martials are significantly more powerful. No risk of every being disabled.
Wizards in BG1 and 2 were terrors. If you were unprepared your entire party could be shut down with fear, chaos, and various other nasty shit.
Not having a wizard of you own meant you could not easily shut down an enemies defenses, making your martials useless as they fruitlessly hacked away at an enemy who is immune to normal and magical weapons.
My first playthrough of BG3 I did not take any arcane caster and had zero issue on Tactician.
Ah, the good old days.
But unfortunately, the golden era of Baldur's Gate was over 20 years ago. These days the average IQ of cRPG consoooomers is about 30 points lower than it was in 2001, so for most of the newer players, wizard chess and spell protection removal is simply too much for their moronic monkey brains to handle. That's why Larian didn't even give the players access to Dispel Magic lol.
Spell slot vancian magic is a horrible system and it's shocking so many games still use it.
Even braindead MP enables more realistic risk-reward.
moronic Black person take no. 209213857021785 in this thread.
Vancian is for 120 IQ only. Cope.