>Give me a 4e CRPG, please, you pigs.
God I fricking wish. If BG3 was 4E I don't think I'd ever stop playing it.
they didn't have a choice in the matter, WoTC wouldn't let them make it in other edition.
How does EXP sharing work? Can you run solo or duo and effectively double or quadruple your EXP from a full party?
unfortunately no. your party levels with you, if you go solo and then you recruit or take companion with you, they get XP to match your main character.
Multiclassing was straight up OP in 2E, better for everyone who wasn't a caster in 3E, and strictly better than not doing so in 4E. The frick are you on?
In 5e multiclassing full casters is terrible until you get 9th level spells, once you're 17 a lot of caster capstones are trash and you'd benefit from dipping something else for the last couple levels.
5e is a terrible system to make a CRPG out of, the fact BG3 is shackled to it kills all motivation I have to play the game
Feel like they wanted to make it sort of realistic and have some more grounded gameplay at the start. The game would have had to be 200 hrs long and had you fighting a God at the end, which you do in Pillars, to allow you level 20. Feel like they could've had level 14 max level and it wouldn't have made much of a difference. At that point you can actually multiclass a bit, have some feats, play something other than what your class restricts you to play as.
Although it is a bit disappointing that fireball is essentially the strongest spell I can wield as a Sorcerer. Might reclass to a Fighter unironically because fighters are just OP in this game with the lack of spells and the significance of resting, so many timed quests.
Because the higher levels (18, 19, 20) are usually bloat and lack material since most tabletop campaigns for d&d don't last that long, and as a consequence less material gets made for players at those levels, and since there's less material for those levels even less players do campaigns that last up to those levels, creating this snowball of a downward spiral. Also most campaigns at that point have you going into the Abyss or Hell and assaulting demons and devils or something very over the top and extra planar.
I am kind of going to go in blind so all i know so far is you get tad polled by some mind flyers and at some point there is some bear sex or something. Kind of expected to fight some kind of god though (considering DoS2) so i was expecting 18 or 20 levels (more so considering cool spells usually start to be available at lvl 14 or so)
Honestly feels like Tyranny had more and more varied spells. Again, I really feel cheated as a sorcerer. Damage wise I get fricked because no armor and because I would have to waste one of three? feats I gain on that, I only get cantrips which can either be really OP or absolutely useless. Damage output is also stifled by the fact that in classic pen and paper fashion I have very varied but combat wise ultimately useless spells. I use two to three spells all the time and when I'm out of spell slots I have to hope my cantrips take effect.
Pillars even had way more spells and it's about the same length as BG3. Pathfinder is more wank but still has such a massive repertoire.
I feel like Divinity also had more options.
Visually the spells also all look the same no matter which level. In Tyranny even your base spells started to look way more impressive with time.
Imagine a firebolt cantrip looking like a fireball and a fireball one hitting a house to actually show the progress you made from level 1 to 12
my fireball unironically did 17 damage there. less than my firebolt on average, for some reason.
you have one single target spell in every elemental variety, one circle AoE in almost every variety and one line AoE. That's it. That is your playthrough as a Sorcerer.
Using weapons? Not with your dex and strength.
Does going into Char actually matter for your damage? a little. it doesn't really feel like it does. what feels like matters most is that you're the same level and don't get the lower level debuff.
Looked at spell book im bg3. Its a fricking shame. Mages are so weak early game, at least in pathfinder they can drop grease at level 1 and glitterdust at 2 to target reflex&will saves.
>fighting a god at the end
Yeah in this you just fight and defeat an avatar of myrkul at level 8 and the final boss is a super elder-brain. You can fight and kill Cazador as well who is a full vampire lord. It's moronic justification to say it's grounded when you're fighting shit that is much stronger than you should be.
Then I will try to tell you why: the higher level monsters are starting to become a stat bloat without anything interesting going on for them, the "boss monster mechanics" of the legendary monsters are too gimmicky and feels bad (like: LOL LMAO this monster will succeed on his first three saving throw) and yet the players will still rape everything.
Because the higher levels (18, 19, 20) are usually bloat and lack material since most tabletop campaigns for d&d don't last that long, and as a consequence less material gets made for players at those levels, and since there's less material for those levels even less players do campaigns that last up to those levels, creating this snowball of a downward spiral. Also most campaigns at that point have you going into the Abyss or Hell and assaulting demons and devils or something very over the top and extra planar.
People minmax because game forces them to. In all dnd games i can recall, either you minmax or you get raped. Maybe devs just should stop putting 50 balors per screen?
>force >raped
You're exaggerating. I'm probably the best minmaxer on this board, but because of that I don't have to completely minmax to win fights and like to just make a strong RP build.
Maybe if you're talking some ancient Temple of EE or Pool of Radiance shit but frickery like Monk/Sorc/RDD builds didn't even exist then it was just simple shit like 18 str or Int lol.
Frick you have so many options and gear by the time of PF it got even easier to win fights with less minmaxing, not harder. People are just lazy and think they have to use the guides Ineffect cooked up instead of putting their own thought into how things play out with their own party and character.
It's really a bit refreshing to see that and laundry lists of buffs get thrown out and get back to basic tactics like "jump out of the fire" "shove this guy", and I say that as also one of the biggest build autists here.
9 months ago
Anonymous
>I'm probably the best minmaxer on this board
9 months ago
Anonymous
deserved
Also baity as frick which is why I'm replying to you instead of the fedora tipper
>People minmax because game forces them to. In all dnd games i can recall, either you minmax or you get raped.
Either your definition of minmaxing is just "don't make a shit character" or you're incredibly bad at RPGs. Minmaxing is a crutch for players who need an OP character to make up for the fact that they can't play the game.
If that's you then that's okay, I'm not trying to hate on how you play the game. But don't act like the game is forcing you when the problem was you all along.
>Why would they do this?
It's always like this when a (new) company makes a new D&D or related game. NWN already had all the base classes and a few prestige classes, then NWN 2 is released and doesn't come with everything NWN 1 had AND more but goes back to the basics and only adds new stuff with the expansions. The worst part of crpgs being forced to update to new dnd version is that instead of getting crpgs that get closer and closer to completely adapting the PNP version we always go back to rudimentary shit with the new versions.
We already had a game that was the closest adaptation of tabletop DnD. It was one of three games Troika (heh) put out before shutting their doors.
Low Magic Age is a decent adaptation of 3.5, assuming you adjust the ruleset. Otherwise it's a weird mix of 3.5 and 4e.
its way more likely that it will be Baldurs Gate 4, just like the original saga, so you would import your BG3 character and then the max level would be 20 (or beyond, not sure what the rules are for 5th edition)
Larian never did DLCs for the Divinity: Original Sin games
Higher level always kills the mood in tabletop as the party becomes cartoonishly full of abilities and the stakes have to be raised in moronic ways.
In 5e, this is even worse because the classes are balanced like shit.
If you want to go to level 20 you have to absolutely embrace the powerfantasy to its full extent like pathfinder and ditch any idea of a normal adventure rpg.
You save an entire city from three gods planning to dominate everyone through an elaborate mind flayer plot, involving the gith, nine hells, and balduran the founder of baldur's gate, also sarevok returns and you take respeccing options from jergal, the og god of death. This campaign is full on epic and they haven't increased the level cap because the team was busy making gay romance scenes.
I love high level campaigns in D&D when the DM is actually competent, I'm in one right now where we are level 17 and in Mount Celestia looking to talk to a god because my character felt guilty that his servant went insane, its really cool
It tells you all you need to know that nobody has mentioned that the max level in BG1 was somewhere between level 9 and 11 depending on your class (since different classes level at different rates in that game). D&D has always been at its best roughly in the 5-12 range, and that's definitely true for 5e as well. But nobody cares or even remembers this because most of the replies are just here to whine about games they haven't played.
On that same note, the morons crying about DLC have obviously never played any Larian game, including BG3. Larian has always supported their games with content patches and free "definitive edition" upgrades, not with DLC.
Has larians patches in previous games ever added something as huge an expansion with enough content to expand character progression by 8 pevels for every class? Somehow I doubt it.
It's funny that you manage to spell out the point and somehow still miss it.
Anon, everyone is aware of BG1's level cap. Everyone is also aware of BG2's level cap, where many multiclasses and dual jobs showed their power fully (classic ex. the triple multiclass.)
That's always the crux of the matter, isn't it. Base power level wanking.
Anon, everyone is aware of BG1's level cap. Everyone is also aware of BG2's level cap, where many multiclasses and dual jobs showed their power fully (classic ex. the triple multiclass.)
Doubtful on that, since it's Larian's engine and tools. You'd have to retrain an entire team just to use Larian's tools. Larian have put themselves into a pretty good position where they're not so easily replaced.
Do Warlock, they get spells back on a short rest. They're also really good with multiclassing as Paladin, which if you pick an Arch Fey as your patron, isn't as shit of a backstory conflict if you're doing Oath of Ancients or Vengeance. Light Cleric and Tempest Clerics are also really good, people are sleeping on Clerics in this game.
You should speedrun your life for the good of /vrpg/, schizo.
9 months ago
Anonymous
What a levelheaded response to a simple statement of a fact. A normal, sane person wouldn't get that angry so quickly over something so petty.
Let me try again: speedrunning BG1 takes 40 mins. BG3 only 10 mins. How mad does this make you?
9 months ago
Anonymous
It makes me want disingenuous morons to take a dive down a flight of stairs just as much as before. Speaking of, you should get to it.
9 months ago
Anonymous
NTA, but Anon gave you even seen that speed run? It's not even the full game really just the optional ending at the end of act 2. Kinda like judging Far Cry if you go for one of the mend early endings. And with how speed runs abuse games, I'm not sure why you'd ever judge a game by them.
Because 5e kind of sucks dick and is incredibly dumbed down and simplified so that normies can pick it up easily and not have to think too hard. You can do some good multi classes but they are limited and not nearly as powerful as in 3.5 or pathfinder.
Because Larian is "worried" that higher levels become too powerful. Notice all the other people here talking about the same shit.
In a game where they allow you do stupid shit like set up explosive barrels to 1 shot bosses. In a game where if you have even an inkling of knowledge of the system you can win over 90% of fights within the first 3 or so turns
The reality is that they just don't want to do the work to implement all of the spells and other systems. That is their choice but their cope answer about "balance" is bullshit.
I wouldn't worry about it. It's a Larian game so it's going to be unplayably bad, buggy and short the second you get out of the early access acts.
Doubt you're even going to hit level cap.
Baldur's Gate 1 had an expansion that increased the level cap and a sequel was planned from the beginning.
I reached level 12 early in chapter 3 and there is definitely enough xp by the end of the game to add a couple more levels.
12 is too low for this game unless there is some expansion or sequel that increases the cap.
The thing is, it should be, Just based on his ability to make deals and the fact his devilish patron doesn't frick you right after he has to be a powerful Greater devil and not some piddly shit cambion. He's powerful enough to have his own little slice of hell just for himself and thousands of souls just sitting in pillars in his house. this isn't common in the Realms let alone any version of the hells I've heard of that's used in D&D There is no reason a level twelve party of four would realistically be able to take him on and live with what he is shown to have, let alone his ability to forge a hammer that can BREAK ALL HELLCHAINS let alone other kinds of chaining shit.
CR in 5e is stated to be the level that a party of four is recommended to be to challenge and overcome a given foe with a reasonable amount of difficulty with perhaps a few levels leeway at best when accounting for the random nature of dice rolls, now point me to the Challenge rating that the Avatars of Bane, Bhaal and Myrkul would all have, ot less than a CR of 20, not something that would be harmed by a level 8 or even 12 party, no? A traditional elder brain has a CR of 14 in 5e, presuming you challenge it alone, and it's noted in the lore that deities are concerned when an elder brain is even remotely hinted at being somewhere they shouldn't be, this particular one would very clearly have a challenge rating of 18 at least, being magically augmented, and yet a party of level twelve is supposed to oppose it? I understand CR just fine, Larian has no concept of the power a deity would have especially the Dead Three.
Is it? I've got Karlach at 5 Barbarian/2 Fighter and the fighting style and action surge feel way more useful than the extra rage charge and +3 to initiative I'd have had staying pure. My protagonist is at Paladin 5/Sorc 2 and I've got level 3 smites (which I usually wouldn't get until level 9 staying pure) and the ability to convert them into loads of level 1s via the sorcery points system instead depending on the situation. I've kept everyone else pure but these two felt like no brainers.
I've got pure barbarian main, and level 6 was nice after I respecced into wildheart. Stallion aspect + Eagle Heart is a pretty neat combo (Eagle heart gives you bonus action dash, Stallion gives you twice your barbarian level in temp hp when you dash (no limit except you have to use up all your temp hp before you can reapply it), makes for a very tanky character). Level 7 with immunity to surprise is neat with how often they happen, but nothing ridiculous.
Because 5e is not designed with multiclassing in mind, despite containing it, and there is little reason to do so. In earlier editions you could be a fighter/thief and have that be an extremely meaningful choice, getting the benefits of thief skills while being able to hit like a truck. In 5e if you want to be a fighter/thief there is zero reason to go through the effort of multiclassing to get access to dex related skills while also being able to hit well and do tons of damage, just pick Urchin or Criminal background, start with thieves tools and crank your dex at char creation and just stick with Fighter. Subsequently this has also made baseline non-variant humans quite useless in 5e, since in earlier editions the benefit of playing as a human (outside of human specific classes such as paladin) was the ability to multiclass efficiently, and now (outside of roleplaying reasons) there is no good reason to pick standard human.
This title is taking a "tactics all the way down" approach versus the usual "tactics up front" where 99% of the combat is decided by minmax/buffs/build up front. This game is an SRPG inside of the Bioware dialogue format.
They're also trying to put the tabletop feel back in which unfortunately for many ADD riddled folks involves many cinemas dialogue and cut scenes. The system is conducive toward this with the inspiration system for example where you get rerolls for acting in character.
If you want your carefully constructed tactical setups to continue to matter all the to the end of the game you have to lock down the power creep of the players, which means more rigidly pre-defined classes and far less multiclass options that do anything to keep people from building minmaxed monstrosities at level 1 5. I do this myself but usually restrict myself heavily for RP justification.
Because I know how to minmax, which is tactical and permutation based, and tactical RPGs are just tactics and permutations in more dimensions I'm fine in either environment, and this environmental SRPG is a nice change of pace, I see what they're going for when the wizard on the other side of the locking door mechanism I set up to ambush them through and cut half their party from each other does shocking hands on the water puddle under the frame. I responded by having Shadowheart and Laz'iel jump out of the puddle while my Drow ranger is still set up to archer down the guys on the other side of the door after Laz'iel pushed the button to reopen the door so it didn't do them much good but it does create interesting combat moments versus say PF where my minmaxed ubermensch just cuts everything down almost solo. It's also nice not restricting myself on minmax build and just doing pure BM ranger with some stat tweaks. Blind playthrough on tactical here.
>This game is an SRPG inside of the Bioware dialogue format.
Yep. This is not CRPG in terms of combat. It is more like tactical game with a lot of environmental focus and a lot of immersive sim influence - more about what abilities you use at the right time in the right place and how you approach the encounter than the amount of damage and numbers in what you do.
Drop the settings and/or res as low as you can stand. Allegedly, full screen mode has better performance than borderless windowed. Also, allegedly, Vulkan has better performance than dx11, but I got a couple crashes on vulkan so back to dx11 for me.
Multiclassing in 5e is terrible.
3e multiclassing was powerful but 3e also had mechanics to encourage it, namely prestige classes which functioned as "get X levels of main class, grab some entry feats or a couple level dip in a side class, and then switch from Rogue to Murdersassin of the Shadowbad and reap both the rewards and your enemies".
5e instead put a lot of the stuff that you'd think of as PrC material into subclasses, and disincentivised multiclassing.
>Meanwhile 4e got it right on every fricking track >Give me a 4e CRPG, please, you pigs.
I wouldn't say terrible, there are some benefits to it for a lot of builds.
They do incentivize 1-3 level dips instead of anything like an equal split though. A lot of classes come front loaded (obvious examples being fighter or cleric or warlock) and since many classes have empty levels later on or just crap tier capstones you don't really lose that much.
The biggest hit to multiclassing I see is really a result of another aspect of 5e, and that's the overwhelming presence of full-caster classes. If you are playing a full-caster there's almost no incentive (often a lot of discouragement) to multi-class because you get higher level spells later than you normally would and that's a huge drop in power.
Shield is great but yeah they didn't add spells like Green Flame Blade and Booming Blade so you lose quite a bit of offensive power compared to tabletop.
How do I make my eldritch knight good. Or should I mutilclass with sorcerer and fighter. Also i switched to duel wielding because shield is shit in this game. The shield master feat doesn't even work right.
If you want to optimize, use Defense or Duelist for your fighting style. Those two are easily the best for 99% of melee builds. Defense just makes you harder to hit which is always good, while Duelist is a significant increase to your average damage while still allowing you to use a shield.
Also, any Eldritch Knight should take 1 level of Wizard IMO. I'm not sure if this is intended or not since they mentioned before that they made multiclassing better, but having any levels in Wizard allows you to learn from scrolls like a Wizard, so you're not limited in your spell selection. Going ti Wiz level 2 and learning the Abjuration or Divination school is good as well, but I wouldn't go beyond 2.
I wouldn't recommend Sorc/Fighter myself. If you want to be a melee Sorc you're better off going Sorc/Paladin.
>If you want to optimize, use Defense or Duelist for your fighting style
What the frick am i reading.
The best fighting style is archery, followed by two handed.
Nah he's right for front liners. One more round of combat isn't going to be a show stopper if you're not doing as much damage but those extra hits from less AC might and it's less restrictive. >Archery
True but he specified melee.
Archery is true, but it's not a melee fighter. Plus crossbow cheese doesn't work as well in the game as it does on tabletop.
Two-handed is subpar. It's okay for polearm memes but statistically just plain worse worse than Defense and Duelist.
9 months ago
Anonymous
1d8+2 is inferior to 2d6 base, let alone 2d6 reroll 1s and 2s which is 8.33 average. It doesn't matter that Duelist gives more damage itself when it's working off of a much shittier base.
9 months ago
Anonymous
>leaving out the benefits of the shield
lole
the entire point of duellist is to get you closer to 2H damage (obviously not exactly the same damage, that'd be moronic) while still being able to equip a shield
9 months ago
Anonymous
And you lag behind 2H massively because of feats.
9 months ago
Anonymous
does it matter ? 2H still lags behind TWF, it's not like you're picking an actual good damage spec
9 months ago
Anonymous
Wrong edition m8, two weapon fighting is infamously bad after level 5.
9 months ago
Anonymous
TWF isn't bad, it's just that is more convenient to use a polearm instead.
You could easily say a similar thing for greatswords. It's not that they're bad, but polearms are better.
Or sword/mace/axe and shield. It's not that they're bad, but polearms (and shield) are better.
9 months ago
Anonymous
Greatswords are still better than any form of two weapon fighting.
9 months ago
Anonymous
Doesn't that kinda depends on whether you have something to do with your bonus action (BG3 gives you plenty of that with shove and jump even if your class doesn't)? Or if you have some additional effects on a hit? In base 5e also greataxe might be better for crit fishing on barbarian half orc and such.
9 months ago
Anonymous
Greatweapon master is also a strong feat that often gives you an extra attack as a bonus action, not to mention +10 damage on attacks.
Shields in 5e are mostly a thing for clerics and druids who rely on their spells, especially concentration ones to impact the fights.
Martials need to do damage.
9 months ago
Anonymous
In tabletop I have a paladin of vengeance with spear + shield and it's pretty nice. Extra survivability from shield saved me a couple times and the damage from the extra bonus attack is neat, especially if I still have spellslots for smite. We had free feat at start and play with extra dice from criticals maximized. Pulled off 102 damage on 5th level in one round.
>Also, any Eldritch Knight should take 1 level of Wizard IMO.
I don't know if the game is playing according to RAW, but strictly speaking you'd only ever be able to prep your non-EK spells as a level 1 Wizard. Otherwise, EKs in 5th ed use Spells Known.
Good for getting more cantrips though.
well, at lv 7, you get War Magic (when casting cantrip, can burn bonus action to melee). best direct dmg cantrip is lock's eldritch blast, which can be further strengthened with lock incantations. ie, lv7 eldritch + lv5 lock uses action to cast a double e.blast that have +cha modifier x2 each, followed with bonus action for 2x melee atks.
well, I'm lv 4, so I haven't tested it yet. but that's the class combo that makes the most sense to me with Eldritch Knight.
Part of the issue then is that 5e distributes a few "must have" options into every single sourcebook so that players feel obligated to own most of them, even if it's just for one feat or spell.
Nobody would remember or care about the Strixhaven book if it didn't have Silvery Barbs, which is fricking obscene (as a reaction, force an enemy who has just rolled to reroll and take the lower result, and then give advantage to an ally on their next roll).
They put a "must have" option into everything so you need to consoom.
It's balanced out by itemization. Expeditious Retreat lets you make solid use of Linebreaker or Speedy Lightfoot. Giving yourself on demand +1/+1 or a constantly stacking (effectively) +2 damage every round ends up being pretty strong.
Putting the returning property on a heavy thrown weapon is also a solid strategy. Throw pikes from height like you're fricking Zeus.
Because since 3.0, all classes use the same experience table for the total level. In 2e, you could take 8 levels of fighter, dual class to mage and catch up eventually so you're effectively 1 level behind. In newer editions, you'll always be 8 levels behind.
Similar for 2e multiclasses where you spread your XP, which have no equivalent in WotC D&D.
In 2.5ed you also had different exp requirements that really spiced things up, and made classes really unique. Druid would need 1.5m xp to get to lvl. 14, but then need whooping 3m xp to get to lvl. 15 (Thief would get lvl 23 at 3m), and it was done with a reason. There can be only one lvl.15 druid in the world, requiring mad role-playing storytelling for a druid to achieve that rank. Then immediately when he gains lvl.15 and that status, he receives mad spellpower abilities, he goes instantly from one six level spell, to six of them. His spells and abilities are some of the most whacky in whole d&d, like summoning whole forests, and having full grove of lesser druids constantly at his command.
As far as spellcasters are concerned lvl. 12 really isn't good regarding multiclassing. Just two levels of a secondary class lose you the ability to cast 6th lvl spells.
nothing is "bad" in this game man you can cheese shit so fricking hard. instead of having a big fight with the goblin witch I dropped the statues on her head. Instead of fighting the strong butthole hobgoblin boss I shoved him into the spider pits. I found some paladin frickers that wanted to run out of the room when combat starts so I just stacked barrels in front of the doors to trap them inside. you have to be a goddamn moron to be doing poorly in this game. You have every opportunity to be insanely unfair to your enemies
it's almost like the game is trying to give you similar freedom to what you'd have in a d&d campaign
It's no surprise moronic grognards are still drooling all over themselves trying to fricking powergame in 5e of all things. Go play pathfinder you morons.
So me and a friend are doing an MP run of BG3 and we're concerned the Illithid Tadpole powers and its consequences are shared between players. I'm all for leaning into and abusing the tadpole and absorbing more of them but I don't want to shit on his parade if Larian has the balls to give me bad consequences for doing so, does anyone know if I'll be fricking him over by using them?
You just have to build a synergistic multiclass but doing so over 12 levels is dependent on knowing 5e decently well. 12 also isn't a great breakpoint for casters because you can only afford 1 multiclass level before you lose 6th level spells.
You very rarely want to multiclass more than 1-3 levels, usually 2 for most builds. Mixing Fighter with a lot of stuff is usually the go-to, but a Ranger-Cleric isn't all that bad. Or Sorcerer-Paladin or Warlock-Paladin. It really depends on what you're going for.
If it's anything like regular 5e, Barbarian 5/Rogue 7, Paladin 2/Bard/Sorcerer/Warlock X or Paladin 6/Bard/Sorcerer/Warlock X and Fighter 2/pretty much anything should all be decent options. You don't have the levels or full customisation to do silly shit like Grave Cleric 2/Evocation Wizard.
I'm planning to go Swords Bard 6 and then respec to Fighter 2/Bard 6 when I can and finish with more Bard.
I did notice it looks like you can do the build that is trained in all skills by level 7 in the game.
I don't think there is even space for that with the level cap. I hit level 10 and am not even in Baldur's Gate, though very, very close. Hit it when I beat Ketheric on top of the tower
>free shield prof >extra 25% carry capacity
That second one especially screams main character. You loot on one character so you don't have to look through four inventories looking for shit and spend even more time selling all these cups and spoons
It's the same shit with every RPG. Dipshits who don't know how to play RPGs become very loud and start making tier lists and everything for classes they've never even played. It then sorts itself out a few months later when they all go back to call of duty and fortnite.
im 60 hours in and pissing arround in some wizard book store. try to get into a door in the basement so i solved a riddle to get to the head guy and then i jumped down some floating tables into a room with wizard gear that is protected by some magic shield and magic canons while my group is waiting in the magic basement.
First time playing a Baldur's Gate game and I have a question: I've heard subclassing is also bad.
I just reached Lvl 3 with my fighters and it seems the game just forces me to make them Battle Masters instead of keeping them as pure Fighters, is this ok?
You have to pick a subclass, but you can choose from several options. Battlmaster is just the first one on the list or whatever. It’ll be a section on the left of the level up menu.
As others have said, subclasses are part of the game. For what it's worth, the Champion fighter archetype is your classic beatstick warrior, just with better numbers.
How do I distract the Guards in Moonrise without starting a fight?I'm doing the Gnome/Tiefling escape bit but I don't have a bard or anyone with performance.
If I twin spell a witchbolt, do I get to hit both targets every turn as long as the concentration hold or do I have to pay the twinned price every time
Why I dislike BG3 despite it getting so much right:
While it's a good fricking around simulator and it has a lot going on under the hood to make combat more fun than just casting spells and/or attacking, it completely misses the mark on being an actual roleplaying game. A roleplaying game should be a journey where your means gradually expand with the scope of the adventure. It should start out rough and early party composition decision should be impactful, and be transformative to the experience. But BG3 lets you respec everyone all the time for a negligible cost, something that's not just immersion breaking but that also cheapens any decision you have made so far. Your ability combo only spikes out lategame ? Don't worry, just use a good early game class in the meantime and respec when you have the exp to get started on your real build. Don't like how this NPC is built ? Don't worry, just rearrange their stats, change their class, who gives a shit bro. Every encounter is self contained and there's not a greater story of your progression being told.
Additionally, the game starts out at level 2 and gives you instantly, without even mentioning it, functionally your own demi plane with a bottomless chest of holding that you can access at any time, from anywhere. It also instantly gives you teleportation waypoints for extreme convenience. As a level 2 adventurer you have access to things that would make archmages 10 levels above you green with envy. It also completely breaks exploring and encounters the same way respeccing does by reducing the stakes to nothing.
Overall, it feels like a game too insecure and unfocused to really want to offer a consistent experience. It just wants you to do funny things and frick around with its physics. It pretends to be a story driven rpg, but it's actually just a bad sandbox. Real sandboxes actually have meaningful progression and early game stakes.
>But BG3 lets you respec everyone all the time for a negligible cost, something that's not just immersion breaking but that also cheapens any decision you have made so far. Your ability combo only spikes out lategame ? Don't worry, just use a good early game class in the meantime and respec when you have the exp to get started on your real build. Don't like how this NPC is built ? Don't worry, just rearrange their stats, change their class, who gives a shit bro.
Oh.
I'm just starting and overthinking what character I want to make.
That's disappointing.
I'm mostly just playing to meet bg1+2 cameos though, so I guess I'll use this to my advantage and just respecc later.
>Additionally, the game starts out at level 2 and gives you instantly, without even mentioning it, functionally your own demi plane with a bottomless chest of holding that you can access at any time, from anywhere. It also instantly gives you teleportation waypoints for extreme convenience. As a level 2 adventurer you have access to things that would make archmages 10 levels above you green with envy.
Does this really matter? I mean functionally what's the problem with it? Perhaps in lore terms being around to teleport around everywhere is something level 2 characters shouldn't have access to, but mechanically it's just a convenience and doesn't really give you a huge advantage. Would you still have a problem with it if they didn't flavour it as teleportation runes and just said your party walks there but the game skips over it?
With the bottomless chest too, again functionally it just saves you having to make a million trips back and forth between towns and wilderness/dungeons. Maybe you "shouldn't" be able to haul all that stuff around as a level 2 adventurer but the game wouldn't be improved in any way if you couldn't.
If neither of those features existed the game wouldn't be more challenging or strategic or anything, it would simply add more busywork.
Add to that the game does not require use of the waypoints or bottomless camp chest. If somone wants to roleplay without those elements, that's totally within their ability. Amazing the lengths folks go to formulate a negative opinion on something. Contrainians gotta contrary.
>lmao just close your eyes and pretend like it's not there!
I guess you do need that level of denial to actually ignore all the massive flaws this game has.
Add to that the game does not require use of the waypoints or bottomless camp chest. If somone wants to roleplay without those elements, that's totally within their ability. Amazing the lengths folks go to formulate a negative opinion on something. Contrainians gotta contrary.
I agree with first anon that it is stupid and lore-breaking and silly for low level characters. But I also agree that it’s just a convenience/QoL feature and it can be ignored if one wants for RPing.
There is something to be said about not giving the player an infinite stash/chest in that If the game is balanced around it, it adds a layer of complexity to resource/inventory management. Managing inventory and what's worth looting becomes a choice players actuallly have to engage with instead of just looting everything like a hoover and churning it into gold. It would make STR feel better as well.
Ofc if your goal is to qppeal to theblcd and sell as many copies as possible, you would never do it.
I find this rarely ever works in RPGs because the economy is usually balanced around hauling off massive amounts of loot back to sell at the vendor. Which means that in order for the game to be bearable to play, they need to give you enough inventory space to comfortably carry a decent amount of loot on top of all the equipment, potions etc. that you're actually using. So you never have to make hard choices about what useful equipment to bring, you can bring it all using just a fraction of your inventory space and save the bulk of it for all the loot you're going to bring back.
This argument didn't work for Underrail, which went well out of its way to both punish and mock being an Al Fabet. I don't know why you think it'd work for a game on a series everyone already hoarded loot in (for good reason, considering the magic items you could craft) in a franchise known for encouraging players to seek out and hoard loot like madmen.
Underrail is actually a perfect example of it done well. They balanced the economy around only being able to sell a few things at a time and the result was players looted less compulsively. It rewarded players who looted intelligently and punished morons that grabbed every single weapon they found. Though I know this went over some morons heads who cry about styg """"""forcing""""" to create a massive pile of loot on the floor of vendors, but that is just player moronation.
Underrail *alleviating* the problem of loot hoarding by increasing the opportunity cost of selling it didn't *solve* it. You can ask anyone in the general threads to show off their stash and you'll find piles of garbage scattered across the game world. Styg's attempts at balancing just made it so that the piles of garbage have a minimum value of 1000 value per item instead of 500 per item. Even on a more conservative playthrough I still took multiple trips from each dungeon back to Junkyard and Core City, because Styg also incentivized getting a lot of money to pay for crafting materials and upgrades for your house.
>They balanced the economy around only being able to sell a few things at a time >Crafting system increases loot exponentially >Crafting system is mostly necessary for high end gear/weapons/traps/etc
It sure did bud.
t. Chempistol user.
9 months ago
Anonymous
What is your argument? Are you saying you couldn't afford high end components because the game did t allow you to loot everything and sell as much as you want?
If so, I do not believe you. Underrail culled loothoarders and still maintained a healthy economy, or at the very least had as good an economy as you can expect from any rpg, as virtually every rpg has you become rich as frick by the end.
There is actual neurological/psychological work and theory about how our experiences are built up as interactions and mastering interactions. In a sense it does matter and it does degrade the experience and the immersion by adding in conveniences. The player becomes less rooted in the fantasy world and less rooted in their actions and the body of the avatar they're controlling. Busy work as you call it grounds you in the role of the character. For a role-playing game, along with the aims of what such a game aims to achieve, the inconveniences are crucial.
I'm not arguing that you should not have your quality of life, your fast travel, your infinite storage, your autoloot and so on. However, it becomes less of an RPG as a result. That said, when I play a fighting game, or a shooting game, or a puzzle game, then I probably don't want to be bothered by those things.
The real answer is that looting game loops are inherently flawed and have to make compromises on either immersion or gameplay. People claim to want immersion but in practice want tedium reduction.
I'm dual-classing Shadowheart to a gloom stalker after she gets a feat from 4 levels of cleric. It seems like it'll synergize well with my shadow monk MC.
It's certainly much more viable to fit in a multiclass with marital classes than with spellcasters, because you don't have the overwhelming cost of losing spell levels to balance out, but there still is a cost to pay.
I definitely wouldn't frick around until after getting extra attack, because that's just a massive increase to what your character can do. As an extension of that, for fighters it's still a really heavy loss to lose their extra extra attack at level 11, so anything more than a 1 lvl dip is going to hurt quite a bit.
Monks and Rogues are also a bit disincentivized, because you lose out on scaling Ki points / Sneak attack dice. Generally, I find that that's a bigger issue for monks than rogues, and I think monks benefit more from their higher level subclass features as well.
Barbarians are probably the easiest to do it imo. There's nothing that they get at high levels that is gonna be worth not doing at least a 2 level fighter dip for a fighting style and action surge - they don't really lose anything.
Boomer here. When I played Baldur's Gate 1&2 for the first time I started with a paladin. Now with BG3 I want to start yet again as a paladin. Is that bad because what I've seen is the game is mostly le grey area morality and vampires and 50 shades of grey.
Devotion has a lot of leeway with deception etc as long as you keep your eyes on the prize of doing good shit. None of the standard companions are moronic evil, most of them have a level of pragmatism that means you can keep them in line as long as you keep up the successes. The vampire can be sated with feeding on animals and evil guys you're killing anyway.
lvl.12 is cap, you gain lvl.6 spells at lvl.11, and you loose one Feat for not getting lvl. 12. And you're always one lvl behind as far as progression is concerned.
Though, all of that is outweighed, since I hear that just a lvl in wizard will allow any caster to learn any spell from the scrolls, which sounds as a huge plus for a whole game, but I'm really not certain that it works like that, and if it does, it may be patched.
Not sure about the precision attack in particular, but some battle master manouvers give back the dice if you miss, so if it was changed the reason probably wasn't just technical.
There's no reason to play War Cleric since Tempest, Light and even Knowledge are just vastly superior. With Tempest and Light you gain Cleric that easily matches Mages for destructive output, while still retaining all major support and healing spells. With Knowledge you gain some really great out of combat versatility. His Chanel Divinity is very unique. Nature may be even more pointless that War Cleric, though, just play Druid or even a race that has Speak With Animals instead.
not required at all, the game is so easy/simple you don't need to spam cc even on the hardest difficulty, so there's no point dipping one level into wizard to learn scrolls. If you want to be mr flexible just go pure wizard
Did they properly impelement war cleric domain?
After seeing how they butchered precision attack for battlemaster (you spend the superiority dice before rolling) I imagine the engine can't deal with conditional bonuses to your roll
They also made divination wizards feature 3 dice and they recharge on a short rest, wtf were they thinking?
There's no reason to play War Cleric since Tempest, Light and even Knowledge are just vastly superior. With Tempest and Light you gain Cleric that easily matches Mages for destructive output, while still retaining all major support and healing spells. With Knowledge you gain some really great out of combat versatility. His Chanel Divinity is very unique. Nature may be even more pointless that War Cleric, though, just play Druid or even a race that has Speak With Animals instead.
I haven't finished exploring Grymforge yet and I'm almost lv 6. Is this right?
Also I don't like any the companions, real lack of evil buttholes, even astarion is gonna have a sob story
Could be good, almost tempted to try something like it. Maybe only 2-3 in Fighter is all you need, but I honestly don't know how to make Rangers work too well. At least the Larian interpretation of Ranger works better than the pre-Tasha and Xanathar's version of it.
How do people feel about class balance? I feel like I am doing broken stuff with Astarion as Rogue(Assassin) and I am doing alright with Shadowheart as a cleric. I am still trying to figure out how to squeeze the juice out of the wizard class (Gale), so I haven't gotten good at that yet. I do feel like I chose some meh spells for him. My MC however is a paladin, and I feel like he does jackshit in most combat scenarios. He is constantly chasing after people for OK damage.
I have to ask, but what is sincerely the appeal of going solo in these games? And how do people do this without incredible amounts of savescumming or cheesing?
This. For almost every class you basically just hit next on the level up. Every few levels you raise your ASI, or pick a new spell you want. When you run out of ASI you pick the feats that suck the least that are left over.
Oath of Vengeance with a two-handed weapon is your probably best bet for damage, with maybe Oathbreaker being the other best option. If you're open to multiclassing, consider maybe 1-2 in Fighter. Or possibly 2-3 in Warlock. If you're even comfortable with it, you could put 5 into Warlock 7 into Paladin. You'll get Eldritch Blast, Pact of the Blade which lets you use Charisma as your damage modifier for your melee. But the other pacts are solid.
If you want to multiclass good you need at least a bit more.
With 12, at most all your should do is a little dip. But generally you're just going to be mostly one class.
Pretty much. Only one you could probably split well would maybe be Warlock up to 5, then everything else in either Paladin, Bard, or Sorcerer. Only the Charisma classes seem like an even split is doable.
>delay getting my main class spells or abilities by a few levels so I can get some literal what % increase on attack accuracy or something like that or abilities that will also be way underleveled for the part of the game I'm at
I've never been able to wrap my head around multiclassing in any of these games
it's a tradeoff, for example the paladins level 7-12 features aren't as good as multiclassing into sorcerer for higher level smite spell slots and better utility spell selection
Is it really that much better? In base 5e (easier to lookup, dunno if BG3 changed it):
Lvl 12 paladin spell slots:
4/3/3/-/-
Lvl 6 paladin/lvl 6 sorcerer spell slots:
4/3/3/3/1
But, with improved smite your smite is basically by one level, and actually even better, because the base smite caps at 5d8, so smite from level 4 and level 5 both hit the same.
So if we were to translate that into smite slots:
damage/damage against fiends and undead: paladin number of uses, multiclass number of uses
1d8/1d8: endless, 0
2d8/3d8: 0, 4
3d8/4d8: 4, 3
4d8/5d8: 3, 3
5d8/6d8: 3, 4
So not that different. Depending on how many smites you expect to use between rest might decide which is better. In most cases sorc will be, but if you'd want to spam it more than 14 (a bit more with channel divinity and sorcery points spell slot creation) times between long rests, then pure paladin has that 1d8 to keep him running.
Pure paladin gets one more ASI (which on a paladin is quite important), 8 more hp (average, also bigger hit dice but that doesn't apply in BG3), aura of courage (rather meh), and level 7 subclass feature. Also level 3 paladin spell list, which has revivify but overall isn't that great, if it were level 4 in 5e there'd be Find Greater Steed which is neat.
Sorcerer instead gets sorcerer spell list up to 3rd level which is something. Cantrips. Metamagic (which in that setup isn't that useful). And subclass lvl 1 and 6 features which mostly aren't that great.
Don't get me wrong, it's not a bad multiclass, but I don't think it's a must have or anything. You get more higher level smites, and some utility, but your overall sustain might be a bit worse.
That's of course unless BG3 changed relevant stuff, I'm not aware of. I had neither paladins nor sorcerers in my party.
A 6 Pal / 6 Sorc can do a lot more with those higher spell slots than just smite
That’s the difference
Factor in twin cast, range, etc and you can do much much more
It’s trade offs either way but the Sorc adds a ton of versatility
Id rather throw in a dedicated caster in the party than go for this mix really. You get level 4 and 5 spell slots while limited with level 3 spells, and to get benefits from the ability to smite you need to be in the thick of it cause smites only work on melee, so your concentration (and life, you're squishier) is also at risk and not sure how useful you'd find the distant metamagic. Sure, having stuff like counterspell and the ability to twin spell is nice, but I don't think it's really worth it at that point, especially with spell scrolls being so abundant in the game. You're going for kind off level 8/9 sorcerer capabilities at level 12. Itemization also will be more difficult if you need to split stuff between items that buff your casting and those that buff your melee/survivability, and your stats (you get one less ASI while being quite a MAD build).
Is it really that much better? In base 5e (easier to lookup, dunno if BG3 changed it):
Lvl 12 paladin spell slots:
4/3/3/-/-
Lvl 6 paladin/lvl 6 sorcerer spell slots:
4/3/3/3/1
But, with improved smite your smite is basically by one level, and actually even better, because the base smite caps at 5d8, so smite from level 4 and level 5 both hit the same.
So if we were to translate that into smite slots:
damage/damage against fiends and undead: paladin number of uses, multiclass number of uses
1d8/1d8: endless, 0
2d8/3d8: 0, 4
3d8/4d8: 4, 3
4d8/5d8: 3, 3
5d8/6d8: 3, 4
So not that different. Depending on how many smites you expect to use between rest might decide which is better. In most cases sorc will be, but if you'd want to spam it more than 14 (a bit more with channel divinity and sorcery points spell slot creation) times between long rests, then pure paladin has that 1d8 to keep him running.
Pure paladin gets one more ASI (which on a paladin is quite important), 8 more hp (average, also bigger hit dice but that doesn't apply in BG3), aura of courage (rather meh), and level 7 subclass feature. Also level 3 paladin spell list, which has revivify but overall isn't that great, if it were level 4 in 5e there'd be Find Greater Steed which is neat.
Sorcerer instead gets sorcerer spell list up to 3rd level which is something. Cantrips. Metamagic (which in that setup isn't that useful). And subclass lvl 1 and 6 features which mostly aren't that great.
Don't get me wrong, it's not a bad multiclass, but I don't think it's a must have or anything. You get more higher level smites, and some utility, but your overall sustain might be a bit worse.
That's of course unless BG3 changed relevant stuff, I'm not aware of. I had neither paladins nor sorcerers in my party.
Dumb, bardadin or palalock is a better combo here.
I multiclassed into barb 8 (wildheart, bear heart, stallion aspect) rogue 4 (thief) and use the rapier that was a reward for rescuing the child from the hag and it's very nice. With the gauntlets that set my strength to 23 and amulet that does the same for Constitution, I was able to dump them on respec and focus asi elsewhere, so I have 23/20/23/12/16/14 stats and a tough feat. With no armour I have 23 AC (5 Dex + 6 con +1 cloak of protection
+1 from boots (looking for some decent clothing that would bump me +1 more, for now I use the one that gives advantage on spell saving throws or something like that)), 177 hp iirc, get 24 temporary hp on a dash that I can do as a bonus action, with rage also resistance on everything except psychic, so I'm very tough to put down. Damage is also decent cause of the rapier being +3, getting a bonus action attack (once per turn though), criting on 19, once per turn sneak attack, extra reaction that I can use to add 4 necrotic on hit, and a ring that adds +2 acid. With reckless attack I can easily get the sneak attack and look for crits. BTW the crossbow that gives you advantage against aberrations works even in melee, so that's neat.
>TW the crossbow that gives you advantage against aberrations works even in melee
that's nothing, if you beat the act 3 dragon you get a bow that applies guiding bolt on hit
Is Arcane Trickster supposed to be able to replace AT spells for spells from the expanded wizard list in this game or is it an oversight?
In tabletop they can only replace AT spells with other AT spells. The expanded list is supposed to be limited to the extra spell you pick at levels 3/8/14/20.
Pure battle fighter with 20 strength is a fricking blast. Athlete, HASpecial, Tavern Brawler, I yeet myself across the screen and yeet other people off cliffs. They keep trying to pawn off these headworms on me. Frick your worms schizo dream b***h.
Why only 20? if act 3 grab the gauntlets that set it to 23, if act 2 then you can get the elixir that gives you +2 if you bring Astarion to the drow alchemist in the moonrise tower, or just use the elixirs. Helps a lot.
> Always take a 1 level dip in wizard to learn spells from scrolls OR a 1-2 level dip in cleric for prof + divine domain feature > Martial should go lvl 5 for extra attack, eventually 6 for class feature then 3 level dip in thief rogue for extra bonus action > CHA classes might want to dip warlock 2 for EB + invocations > Fighter wants level 11 for extra extra strike
There, I solved all your multiclassing questions, u welcome
The only reason people multiclass in 5e is to take a dip of 1 or 2 levels into a class that shares their casting stat because many level 20 class abilities are objectively just garbage and underpowered, so you're getting more bang for your buck by multiclassing at that point. That's it. You have dumbasses unfamiliar with 5e as a system just meshing random classes together that have no synergy in a 5e game that only goes up to level 12, and then get dumfounded as to why their characters end up being dogshit in a system that isn't designed around multiclassing at all.
Not really. Going barb would give me brutal critical, one more aspect, one more rage per day, +1 rage damage, and 8 more hp.
Going full rogue would make me squishy as frick but the whole build would be different.
I was tanky as frick. 177 hp (23 con from the amulet + tough) + 24 temporary hp (Stalion scales off character level) on dash I could do with a bonus action, and I had two of those, so basically any time my temporary hp was gone, I could refresh it easily, so effectively it was much more hp if the topic wasn't being destroyed in one round, which nothing in the game even came close to. With bear resistances, unless there was psychic damage (I wish gem dragonborn were in the game, then that wouldn't be a problem), the hp was also effectively doubled.
With 24 AC and pretty great saves getting hit in the first place wasn't even often.
The attack bonus was also pretty massive so misses were rare and then I could reckless to avoid them too, though I'd get hit a bit more in return (which I could take because of the meatbag I was).
Damage is probably the most lacking one, but it was still decent. The hag rapier with its necrotic damage, bonus action attack, ring that added +2 acid, crit on 19, strength of 23 (gauntlets), rage damage, sneak attack I could trigger with reckless. I was going, so iirc usually it was something like 1d8 (rapier) + 6 (strength) + 2 (rage) + 2 (acid ring) + 1d4 (rapier necro) + 3 (rapier enchant) per hit base, plus 4 for two hits (rapier proficiency necro damage for reactions), and 2d6 for sneak attack once, with possible crits on top of that. So average of 75 per round if all hit (which wasn't difficult), no crits (which weren't rare, cause advantage was plenty), enemies aren't resistant to piercing, necro and acid (that was often so then reduce it a bit), sneak attack is possible.
Mobility was great with jumping, dash, barbarian bonus movement and ignoring difficult terrain.
Shove for days with two bonus actions 23 strength (or if I drank the elixir more, but it wasn't needed), rage advantage and expertise in athletics. Could also just throw a lot of enemies due to strength.
Skills were also okay thanks to rogues bonus skills and expertise.
With no tadpole powers it was a build powerful enough, that on balanced by the end of the game I felt I was never really in danger, cause even if my backline falls my main character could just solo everything even if the damage wasn't that great so it'd be a bit tedious.
I actually didn't realize how much I hated D&D 5th ed until playing BG3. Holy frick the last 30% of the game was a slog and boring. You're not excited for any level ups because most classes are completely done capstone wise.
I am glad I stopped playing D&D after 3.5e.
The first 60% of the game (excluding the system) was pretty good but I really felt Act III was just so shit. Minsc was cool but clearly him and Jaheira were put in to be like "look its a bg sequel!!"
making the emperor balduran was so fricking stupid and pointless, contributed nothing to the story
>Hunting Shortbow still gives you advantage against monstrosities even when you're not wielding it
Seems a bit busted for how easy and cheap it is to get
I think it's a conscious change with the fact that switching between melee and range was made free (whether that's a good decision is a separate matter). Otherwise you'd just have to remember to switch back to melee whenever you aren't shooting.
In Mount&Blade having a shield on your back gave you protection from arrows on your back. It was a viable multiplayer strategy to run around with two shields.
5e buffed pures a shitload and the low level cap favors them. BG2 had a much higher level which is why everyone had their very original kansai/mage they looked up online. Give it a couple more months and the normies stop bloating the discussion with their easy mode builds and people will discover dipping into 1-3 levels or whatever dramatically increases effectiveness and so on.
Finished the game on Tactician and systematically completed all the content available to me based on my choices. 9.5/10 game. I was diplomatic and skipped a bunch of fights, and I still ended up reaching level 12 with an exp cap of 99999 at least 15 hours before I fought the Netherbrain.
Didn't encounter that many bugs. One major one, which I'm sure is a bug, was Orin kidnapping Halsin and the quest log updating as if Halsin had just left the party due to a disagreement. When I saved him, he turned into a pet and couldn't speak or be interacted with at all, and he followed along until the end of the game. Wasn't present in the cutscenes.
You can suggest heading to Amn at the end of the game, and another post-level 12 approach is joining Voss and Lae'zel in killing Vlaakith, if they're ever going to make an expansion.
My only complaint is that there is no unarmed fighting style, so I pretty much have to play a monk for my brawler character. Also of course that the character creator prevents me from making him a morbidly obese norfman.
Tavern Brawler is basically unarmed fighting style. It costs a feat so it's less efficient than the other fighting styles, but then Monk is supposed to be the specialized unarmed fighter anyway and they get unarmed bonuses for free.
I know, he has Tavern brawler. But it's still inefficient as hell when his damage die is stuck at a d4 forever, making monk more or less mandatory. What I'd want is the unarmed fighting style from the TCE source book, which gives a d6 when using a shield and a d8 if both hands are free, mainly because barb/fighter fits the concept better.
Random question: I've seen some people saying that Barbs should go nakey. But what benefit does this have for Karlach? Her AC is higher with armor, not to mention the bonuses the armor confers (both helm and chest)
Naked barb is an option, but rather late game one when you can pump those stats hard (had 20 ded and 23 con when I finished so that's 21 AC from that), and you get some decent clothing (the quartermaster in act 2 sells a robe that gives you +2 con (up to 20) and when you rage 2 wrath per turn, there are robes that add +1 AC and so on). Those are rather specific builds though, so going medium or light armour is perfectly fine (heavy blocks most rage effects so that's a no-no even if you get the one that doesn't require proficiency).
I don't see it applied on his character, only the dex bonus and the shield bonus.
You don't lose the bonus with a shield
>I don't see it applied on his character, only the dex bonus and the shield bonus.
As I understand it, the "Modifier" is the points over 10 that you've dumped into the stat, divided by two and rounded down. So for CON, +7 / 2 = 3.5, meaning 3 points (in this case, added to AC, but this applies generally).
>meaning 3 points
Actually this is clearly incorrect, as the AC tool tip says Karlach has +2 to AC from CON. I was looking at the wrong stat (saving throws). If you look at her base stats, she has 15 CON, which is 5 over the starting 10. 5 / 2 = 2.5, rounded down to 2.
Still calculating it wrong, the bonus for fifteen con is +2, no need to do division, D&D gives a plus 1 bonus to anything with a given stat for every two points above ten that stat is.
>I don't see it applied on his character, only the dex bonus and the shield bonus.
As I understand it, the "Modifier" is the points over 10 that you've dumped into the stat, divided by two and rounded down. So for CON, +7 / 2 = 3.5, meaning 3 points (in this case, added to AC, but this applies generally).
Yeah, now it makes sense. I thought you somehow managed to have a +7 to con.
problem with multiclassing in this game is that the system itself is not nearly complex enough to fully warrant the existence of the mechanic
there are no brainer dips, like fighter 2 due to the action economy and a few others and that's where it all begins and ends
there needs to be more variety and complexity for multiclass to be fun or relevant
I saw a weapon that had a Shillelagh bonus, I think it was an uncommon axe, could be wrong though. Anyone know the name of it? I can't find it amongst my party members, the camp chest, or with the vendors I usually sell to
Even without the stacking extra attack that shit is broken. A Paladin with like 9-10 3rd+ level Smites a day after you use items and equipment to restore your slots + Fireball/Hold Person/Hunger of Hadar. Hell go Warlock 10 and you can turn Raphael into your own personal target practice dummy without any outside help using Hold Monster
Had a fight where I snuck up on the enemy, 3 of my characters were 6 meters away, from their closest unit.
I snuck closer with my fourth, did a sneak attack.
Combat started, and their units, going up to 25 meters away all moved, and I learned that only my one character was in combat.
They weren't activated until all of their characters had basically moved up to me.
It's like, yeah sure, I can work around this, git gud and stuff, and adjust how I engage fights in the future, but it's supremely silly that this is how it works.
>You could have
Yeah I know. There's no confusion there.
I said >It's like, yeah sure, I can work around this, git gud and stuff, and adjust how I engage fights in the future, but it's supremely silly that this is how it works.
It is still a janky, it is bad that it works that way.
I'm not looking for tips, I have discovered that the game does a thing poorly, and will have to play according to that poor game design, you're not offering me anything new.
It really is. I had a fight where I opened with some barel explosions. For a bit some enemeis started acting during my turn, so I'm assuming I somehow managed to start two fights in the same room. Thankfully the game fused them together during the first turn.
>Level 12 cap means you can't 10/10, 15/5 or 5/5/10 a character >5e means you don't have prestige classes >Forgotten Realms means Artificers aren't canon. >Larian going mostly by PHB options means that a lot of the good subclasses aren't available >Slow leveling means you're stuck with empty levels longer, and your character is deadweight for longer
I like 5e well enough but I wouldn't recommend multiclassing to anyone except Roguelocks (on the tabletop, their utility is insane), Sorcadins, and Sorlocks.
>>Slow leveling means you're stuck with empty levels longer, and your character is deadweight for longer
I wouldn't say leveling is slow, and because you can respec, you can also just switch into multiclass later when you're in the level it kicks in.
Haven't played the game. Why is multiclassing so bad?
Because it's D&D 5th edition and the game only goes up to 12 level.
Using D&D 5e is literally the worst thing they could possibly have done. And the game unequivocally suffers for it in every respect.
they didn't have a choice in the matter, WoTC wouldn't let them make it in other edition.
unfortunately no. your party levels with you, if you go solo and then you recruit or take companion with you, they get XP to match your main character.
The jizz is in your face.
Multiclassing was never good, you are flat out gimping yourself by not going with a single class all the way though.
But for the final 5 minutes of the game I'm gonna be so OP!
This was never true unless you're playing a full caster
>Never
You never played 3e
It's more or less a necessity multi in 3e/3.5e
Only if you consider prcs "multiclassing" and even then pure full casters, clerics especially, rule
Multiclassing was straight up OP in 2E, better for everyone who wasn't a caster in 3E, and strictly better than not doing so in 4E. The frick are you on?
single level of wizard never hurts.
It's hurting your character.
In PoE 2 my wizard-chanter hybrid kicks so much ass
In 5e multiclassing full casters is terrible until you get 9th level spells, once you're 17 a lot of caster capstones are trash and you'd benefit from dipping something else for the last couple levels.
5e is a terrible system to make a CRPG out of, the fact BG3 is shackled to it kills all motivation I have to play the game
Only goes to level 12 right?
Multiclasses generally (used to at least) pay off at later levels.
>Only goes to level 12 right?
Why would they do this?
Zoomers whinge whenever anything is "OP" 50 hours in and doesn't require 50 hours of min-maxing. Same shit as with Pillars.
NTA, I didn't mind level 12 much in theory, but playing it, it feels weird I hit level 9 and not even in Baldur's Gate yet.
Christ.
If we're being fair, you don't get to Baldur's Gate until nearly the end of BG1, too.
In BG2 you aren't in Baldur's Gate even for a second.
You are, in the tutorial.
>Franchise called Baldurs Gate
>Never even go to Baldurs Gate
huh?
>Franchise
no
theirs multiple games, novelizations, merch, its a franchise.
not when bg2 came out
It's about catching the dragon, not having a dragon
Feel like they wanted to make it sort of realistic and have some more grounded gameplay at the start. The game would have had to be 200 hrs long and had you fighting a God at the end, which you do in Pillars, to allow you level 20. Feel like they could've had level 14 max level and it wouldn't have made much of a difference. At that point you can actually multiclass a bit, have some feats, play something other than what your class restricts you to play as.
Although it is a bit disappointing that fireball is essentially the strongest spell I can wield as a Sorcerer. Might reclass to a Fighter unironically because fighters are just OP in this game with the lack of spells and the significance of resting, so many timed quests.
I am kind of going to go in blind so all i know so far is you get tad polled by some mind flyers and at some point there is some bear sex or something. Kind of expected to fight some kind of god though (considering DoS2) so i was expecting 18 or 20 levels (more so considering cool spells usually start to be available at lvl 14 or so)
Honestly feels like Tyranny had more and more varied spells. Again, I really feel cheated as a sorcerer. Damage wise I get fricked because no armor and because I would have to waste one of three? feats I gain on that, I only get cantrips which can either be really OP or absolutely useless. Damage output is also stifled by the fact that in classic pen and paper fashion I have very varied but combat wise ultimately useless spells. I use two to three spells all the time and when I'm out of spell slots I have to hope my cantrips take effect.
Pillars even had way more spells and it's about the same length as BG3. Pathfinder is more wank but still has such a massive repertoire.
I feel like Divinity also had more options.
Visually the spells also all look the same no matter which level. In Tyranny even your base spells started to look way more impressive with time.
Imagine a firebolt cantrip looking like a fireball and a fireball one hitting a house to actually show the progress you made from level 1 to 12
my fireball unironically did 17 damage there. less than my firebolt on average, for some reason.
you have one single target spell in every elemental variety, one circle AoE in almost every variety and one line AoE. That's it. That is your playthrough as a Sorcerer.
Using weapons? Not with your dex and strength.
Does going into Char actually matter for your damage? a little. it doesn't really feel like it does. what feels like matters most is that you're the same level and don't get the lower level debuff.
Looked at spell book im bg3. Its a fricking shame. Mages are so weak early game, at least in pathfinder they can drop grease at level 1 and glitterdust at 2 to target reflex&will saves.
>had you fighting a God at the end, which you do in Pillars
Literally just a really old guy thougheveralbeit
>fighting a god at the end
Yeah in this you just fight and defeat an avatar of myrkul at level 8 and the final boss is a super elder-brain. You can fight and kill Cazador as well who is a full vampire lord. It's moronic justification to say it's grounded when you're fighting shit that is much stronger than you should be.
No idea, but I also don't know anything about 5e.
Then I will try to tell you why: the higher level monsters are starting to become a stat bloat without anything interesting going on for them, the "boss monster mechanics" of the legendary monsters are too gimmicky and feels bad (like: LOL LMAO this monster will succeed on his first three saving throw) and yet the players will still rape everything.
Because the higher levels (18, 19, 20) are usually bloat and lack material since most tabletop campaigns for d&d don't last that long, and as a consequence less material gets made for players at those levels, and since there's less material for those levels even less players do campaigns that last up to those levels, creating this snowball of a downward spiral. Also most campaigns at that point have you going into the Abyss or Hell and assaulting demons and devils or something very over the top and extra planar.
It's DnD so at higher levels shit like Barbarians sprouting wings and flying starts to happen. They didn't want to deal with that.
Because 5e peaks at level 12. Any more than that and it just becomes a bloated mess
So they can sell you DLC
THINK for once.
This also but there is a legitimate push to stop minmax and power creep that I can see.
People minmax because game forces them to. In all dnd games i can recall, either you minmax or you get raped. Maybe devs just should stop putting 50 balors per screen?
>force
>raped
You're exaggerating. I'm probably the best minmaxer on this board, but because of that I don't have to completely minmax to win fights and like to just make a strong RP build.
Maybe if you're talking some ancient Temple of EE or Pool of Radiance shit but frickery like Monk/Sorc/RDD builds didn't even exist then it was just simple shit like 18 str or Int lol.
Frick you have so many options and gear by the time of PF it got even easier to win fights with less minmaxing, not harder. People are just lazy and think they have to use the guides Ineffect cooked up instead of putting their own thought into how things play out with their own party and character.
It's really a bit refreshing to see that and laundry lists of buffs get thrown out and get back to basic tactics like "jump out of the fire" "shove this guy", and I say that as also one of the biggest build autists here.
>I'm probably the best minmaxer on this board
deserved
Also baity as frick which is why I'm replying to you instead of the fedora tipper
>People minmax because game forces them to. In all dnd games i can recall, either you minmax or you get raped.
Either your definition of minmaxing is just "don't make a shit character" or you're incredibly bad at RPGs. Minmaxing is a crutch for players who need an OP character to make up for the fact that they can't play the game.
If that's you then that's okay, I'm not trying to hate on how you play the game. But don't act like the game is forcing you when the problem was you all along.
The sweet spot for D&D is around Level 3 to Level 12-14ish. Anything before or after that is tedious shit.
>Why would they do this?
It's always like this when a (new) company makes a new D&D or related game. NWN already had all the base classes and a few prestige classes, then NWN 2 is released and doesn't come with everything NWN 1 had AND more but goes back to the basics and only adds new stuff with the expansions. The worst part of crpgs being forced to update to new dnd version is that instead of getting crpgs that get closer and closer to completely adapting the PNP version we always go back to rudimentary shit with the new versions.
We already had a game that was the closest adaptation of tabletop DnD. It was one of three games Troika (heh) put out before shutting their doors.
Low Magic Age is a decent adaptation of 3.5, assuming you adjust the ruleset. Otherwise it's a weird mix of 3.5 and 4e.
its way more likely that it will be Baldurs Gate 4, just like the original saga, so you would import your BG3 character and then the max level would be 20 (or beyond, not sure what the rules are for 5th edition)
Larian never did DLCs for the Divinity: Original Sin games
5th edition caps at 20
Higher level always kills the mood in tabletop as the party becomes cartoonishly full of abilities and the stakes have to be raised in moronic ways.
In 5e, this is even worse because the classes are balanced like shit.
If you want to go to level 20 you have to absolutely embrace the powerfantasy to its full extent like pathfinder and ditch any idea of a normal adventure rpg.
>embrace the powerfantasy to its full exten
Worked for MotB
yeah, I didn't say it's a bad thing, but doing it for EVERY game ends up boring. Some games can allow themselves to be more chill
You save an entire city from three gods planning to dominate everyone through an elaborate mind flayer plot, involving the gith, nine hells, and balduran the founder of baldur's gate, also sarevok returns and you take respeccing options from jergal, the og god of death. This campaign is full on epic and they haven't increased the level cap because the team was busy making gay romance scenes.
I love high level campaigns in D&D when the DM is actually competent, I'm in one right now where we are level 17 and in Mount Celestia looking to talk to a god because my character felt guilty that his servant went insane, its really cool
Predatory DLC practice, of course. They give you 60% of the game with the base game, then charge you more if you want to play the rest.
It tells you all you need to know that nobody has mentioned that the max level in BG1 was somewhere between level 9 and 11 depending on your class (since different classes level at different rates in that game). D&D has always been at its best roughly in the 5-12 range, and that's definitely true for 5e as well. But nobody cares or even remembers this because most of the replies are just here to whine about games they haven't played.
On that same note, the morons crying about DLC have obviously never played any Larian game, including BG3. Larian has always supported their games with content patches and free "definitive edition" upgrades, not with DLC.
Has larians patches in previous games ever added something as huge an expansion with enough content to expand character progression by 8 pevels for every class? Somehow I doubt it.
It's funny that you manage to spell out the point and somehow still miss it.
That's always the crux of the matter, isn't it. Base power level wanking.
Anon, everyone is aware of BG1's level cap. Everyone is also aware of BG2's level cap, where many multiclasses and dual jobs showed their power fully (classic ex. the triple multiclass.)
Larian has never made a game for WotC before. If they dont want to make the DLc, wizards will find someone who will
Doubtful on that, since it's Larian's engine and tools. You'd have to retrain an entire team just to use Larian's tools. Larian have put themselves into a pretty good position where they're not so easily replaced.
Wizards murked every other D&D video game project in a crib like half a year ago. They ain't gonna do shit.
The only reason I am not buying the game.
>love casters
>cant use all my cool spells
Casters are OP as frick in BG3 though
Do Warlock, they get spells back on a short rest. They're also really good with multiclassing as Paladin, which if you pick an Arch Fey as your patron, isn't as shit of a backstory conflict if you're doing Oath of Ancients or Vengeance. Light Cleric and Tempest Clerics are also really good, people are sleeping on Clerics in this game.
Just pure incompetence. You literally reach max level in Act 2. BG3 is the only game I have ever played where level progression ends mid-game.
Maybe it's so people don't have to do all the side quests and can still get max level while speedrunning.
Speedrunning this "game" takes 10 minutes.
You should speedrun your life for the good of /vrpg/, schizo.
What a levelheaded response to a simple statement of a fact. A normal, sane person wouldn't get that angry so quickly over something so petty.
Let me try again: speedrunning BG1 takes 40 mins. BG3 only 10 mins. How mad does this make you?
It makes me want disingenuous morons to take a dive down a flight of stairs just as much as before. Speaking of, you should get to it.
NTA, but Anon gave you even seen that speed run? It's not even the full game really just the optional ending at the end of act 2. Kinda like judging Far Cry if you go for one of the mend early endings. And with how speed runs abuse games, I'm not sure why you'd ever judge a game by them.
honestly a much better decision than DOS2 where it got tedious to do side content just to maintain appropriate level on subsequent playthroughs.
I was level 10 when I finished act 2 I believe. Hit level cap in a somewhat early act 3. Still nowhere as fast as I did in deadfire.
Because 5e kind of sucks dick and is incredibly dumbed down and simplified so that normies can pick it up easily and not have to think too hard. You can do some good multi classes but they are limited and not nearly as powerful as in 3.5 or pathfinder.
Because Larian is "worried" that higher levels become too powerful. Notice all the other people here talking about the same shit.
In a game where they allow you do stupid shit like set up explosive barrels to 1 shot bosses. In a game where if you have even an inkling of knowledge of the system you can win over 90% of fights within the first 3 or so turns
The reality is that they just don't want to do the work to implement all of the spells and other systems. That is their choice but their cope answer about "balance" is bullshit.
Hopefully in Baldur's Gate 4 they'll let you get to level 20.
I wouldn't worry about it. It's a Larian game so it's going to be unplayably bad, buggy and short the second you get out of the early access acts.
Doubt you're even going to hit level cap.
I hit level cap not even halfway into the baldurs gate section of the game it was infuriating
GUYS WTF??? I'M PLAYING BALDURS GATE 1 AND YOU ONLY GET TO LEVEL 6??? WHY WOULD THEY DO THIS???
Always remove the xp caps. You kid, but still. Hell I played the trilogy as a solo paladin and found out the infinity engine hard caps you at lvl 50
Baldur's Gate 1 had an expansion that increased the level cap and a sequel was planned from the beginning.
I reached level 12 early in chapter 3 and there is definitely enough xp by the end of the game to add a couple more levels.
12 is too low for this game unless there is some expansion or sequel that increases the cap.
No expansion planned as of yet, and a sequel is pretty much guaranteed with how well this has sold.
There's no content in the game that would require you going to 13 or 14, even the hidden Raphael fight isn't that hard at 12
The thing is, it should be, Just based on his ability to make deals and the fact his devilish patron doesn't frick you right after he has to be a powerful Greater devil and not some piddly shit cambion. He's powerful enough to have his own little slice of hell just for himself and thousands of souls just sitting in pillars in his house. this isn't common in the Realms let alone any version of the hells I've heard of that's used in D&D There is no reason a level twelve party of four would realistically be able to take him on and live with what he is shown to have, let alone his ability to forge a hammer that can BREAK ALL HELLCHAINS let alone other kinds of chaining shit.
I think you have a bad understanding of CR.
CR in 5e is stated to be the level that a party of four is recommended to be to challenge and overcome a given foe with a reasonable amount of difficulty with perhaps a few levels leeway at best when accounting for the random nature of dice rolls, now point me to the Challenge rating that the Avatars of Bane, Bhaal and Myrkul would all have, ot less than a CR of 20, not something that would be harmed by a level 8 or even 12 party, no? A traditional elder brain has a CR of 14 in 5e, presuming you challenge it alone, and it's noted in the lore that deities are concerned when an elder brain is even remotely hinted at being somewhere they shouldn't be, this particular one would very clearly have a challenge rating of 18 at least, being magically augmented, and yet a party of level twelve is supposed to oppose it? I understand CR just fine, Larian has no concept of the power a deity would have especially the Dead Three.
Is it? I've got Karlach at 5 Barbarian/2 Fighter and the fighting style and action surge feel way more useful than the extra rage charge and +3 to initiative I'd have had staying pure. My protagonist is at Paladin 5/Sorc 2 and I've got level 3 smites (which I usually wouldn't get until level 9 staying pure) and the ability to convert them into loads of level 1s via the sorcery points system instead depending on the situation. I've kept everyone else pure but these two felt like no brainers.
I've got pure barbarian main, and level 6 was nice after I respecced into wildheart. Stallion aspect + Eagle Heart is a pretty neat combo (Eagle heart gives you bonus action dash, Stallion gives you twice your barbarian level in temp hp when you dash (no limit except you have to use up all your temp hp before you can reapply it), makes for a very tanky character). Level 7 with immunity to surprise is neat with how often they happen, but nothing ridiculous.
Because 5e is not designed with multiclassing in mind, despite containing it, and there is little reason to do so. In earlier editions you could be a fighter/thief and have that be an extremely meaningful choice, getting the benefits of thief skills while being able to hit like a truck. In 5e if you want to be a fighter/thief there is zero reason to go through the effort of multiclassing to get access to dex related skills while also being able to hit well and do tons of damage, just pick Urchin or Criminal background, start with thieves tools and crank your dex at char creation and just stick with Fighter. Subsequently this has also made baseline non-variant humans quite useless in 5e, since in earlier editions the benefit of playing as a human (outside of human specific classes such as paladin) was the ability to multiclass efficiently, and now (outside of roleplaying reasons) there is no good reason to pick standard human.
Humans also got an extra feat in 3+.
This title is taking a "tactics all the way down" approach versus the usual "tactics up front" where 99% of the combat is decided by minmax/buffs/build up front. This game is an SRPG inside of the Bioware dialogue format.
They're also trying to put the tabletop feel back in which unfortunately for many ADD riddled folks involves many cinemas dialogue and cut scenes. The system is conducive toward this with the inspiration system for example where you get rerolls for acting in character.
If you want your carefully constructed tactical setups to continue to matter all the to the end of the game you have to lock down the power creep of the players, which means more rigidly pre-defined classes and far less multiclass options that do anything to keep people from building minmaxed monstrosities at level 1 5. I do this myself but usually restrict myself heavily for RP justification.
Because I know how to minmax, which is tactical and permutation based, and tactical RPGs are just tactics and permutations in more dimensions I'm fine in either environment, and this environmental SRPG is a nice change of pace, I see what they're going for when the wizard on the other side of the locking door mechanism I set up to ambush them through and cut half their party from each other does shocking hands on the water puddle under the frame. I responded by having Shadowheart and Laz'iel jump out of the puddle while my Drow ranger is still set up to archer down the guys on the other side of the door after Laz'iel pushed the button to reopen the door so it didn't do them much good but it does create interesting combat moments versus say PF where my minmaxed ubermensch just cuts everything down almost solo. It's also nice not restricting myself on minmax build and just doing pure BM ranger with some stat tweaks. Blind playthrough on tactical here.
>This game is an SRPG inside of the Bioware dialogue format.
Yep. This is not CRPG in terms of combat. It is more like tactical game with a lot of environmental focus and a lot of immersive sim influence - more about what abilities you use at the right time in the right place and how you approach the encounter than the amount of damage and numbers in what you do.
Sounds like a (You) problem. Itemization in this game encourages all kinds of strange builds.
Any miracle cure to make this run on a toaster without constant lag? My i58300 gtx1060 old fart of a laptop just struggles so much it's unplayable.
Drop the settings and/or res as low as you can stand. Allegedly, full screen mode has better performance than borderless windowed. Also, allegedly, Vulkan has better performance than dx11, but I got a couple crashes on vulkan so back to dx11 for me.
Eh i tried all that already. Still too laggy to be enjoyable. Guess it'll have to wait until I get a new pc
Multiclassers deserve the rope. As bad as race-mixers, in my opinion.
Sorlock is pretty good.
It was too good in 3e and that's why they cucked it n 4e and 5e (barring some frindge neckbeard rule crunching degeneracy like coffeelock).
Multiclassing in 5e is terrible.
3e multiclassing was powerful but 3e also had mechanics to encourage it, namely prestige classes which functioned as "get X levels of main class, grab some entry feats or a couple level dip in a side class, and then switch from Rogue to Murdersassin of the Shadowbad and reap both the rewards and your enemies".
5e instead put a lot of the stuff that you'd think of as PrC material into subclasses, and disincentivised multiclassing.
>Meanwhile 4e got it right on every fricking track
>Give me a 4e CRPG, please, you pigs.
I wouldn't say terrible, there are some benefits to it for a lot of builds.
They do incentivize 1-3 level dips instead of anything like an equal split though. A lot of classes come front loaded (obvious examples being fighter or cleric or warlock) and since many classes have empty levels later on or just crap tier capstones you don't really lose that much.
The biggest hit to multiclassing I see is really a result of another aspect of 5e, and that's the overwhelming presence of full-caster classes. If you are playing a full-caster there's almost no incentive (often a lot of discouragement) to multi-class because you get higher level spells later than you normally would and that's a huge drop in power.
Some examples.
Barbarian 5 then Figther 3 (champion) for sick crits
Dex dual wield fighter battler master 6 then rogue Assasin
Dex dual wield ranger and then rogue assasin.
2 levels of paladin with:
Sword bard: more smites / two attacks
Warlock: Charisma for everything
Sorcerer: Become a melee mage.
Storm cleric dip and Storm sorcerer with elemental adept for max dmg
>Give me a 4e CRPG, please, you pigs.
God I fricking wish. If BG3 was 4E I don't think I'd ever stop playing it.
begone satan
No.
I'm level 5 battlemaster and dumping the rest in cleric
i dont give a frick
whens icewind dale 3
Dont know if it's good but Im Paladin/Bard for inspiration and long rest
Using College of Swords ranged mobile flourish to get close enough to smite a motherfricker is dope.
Why is eldritch knight so shit in this game? It gets zero good buff spells. All it has is shield spell.
Shield is great but yeah they didn't add spells like Green Flame Blade and Booming Blade so you lose quite a bit of offensive power compared to tabletop.
How do I make my eldritch knight good. Or should I mutilclass with sorcerer and fighter. Also i switched to duel wielding because shield is shit in this game. The shield master feat doesn't even work right.
If you want to optimize, use Defense or Duelist for your fighting style. Those two are easily the best for 99% of melee builds. Defense just makes you harder to hit which is always good, while Duelist is a significant increase to your average damage while still allowing you to use a shield.
Also, any Eldritch Knight should take 1 level of Wizard IMO. I'm not sure if this is intended or not since they mentioned before that they made multiclassing better, but having any levels in Wizard allows you to learn from scrolls like a Wizard, so you're not limited in your spell selection. Going ti Wiz level 2 and learning the Abjuration or Divination school is good as well, but I wouldn't go beyond 2.
I wouldn't recommend Sorc/Fighter myself. If you want to be a melee Sorc you're better off going Sorc/Paladin.
>If you want to optimize, use Defense or Duelist for your fighting style
What the frick am i reading.
The best fighting style is archery, followed by two handed.
Nah he's right for front liners. One more round of combat isn't going to be a show stopper if you're not doing as much damage but those extra hits from less AC might and it's less restrictive.
>Archery
True but he specified melee.
two handed fighting style is a mega meme for people bad at maths
Archery is true, but it's not a melee fighter. Plus crossbow cheese doesn't work as well in the game as it does on tabletop.
Two-handed is subpar. It's okay for polearm memes but statistically just plain worse worse than Defense and Duelist.
1d8+2 is inferior to 2d6 base, let alone 2d6 reroll 1s and 2s which is 8.33 average. It doesn't matter that Duelist gives more damage itself when it's working off of a much shittier base.
>leaving out the benefits of the shield
lole
the entire point of duellist is to get you closer to 2H damage (obviously not exactly the same damage, that'd be moronic) while still being able to equip a shield
And you lag behind 2H massively because of feats.
does it matter ? 2H still lags behind TWF, it's not like you're picking an actual good damage spec
Wrong edition m8, two weapon fighting is infamously bad after level 5.
TWF isn't bad, it's just that is more convenient to use a polearm instead.
You could easily say a similar thing for greatswords. It's not that they're bad, but polearms are better.
Or sword/mace/axe and shield. It's not that they're bad, but polearms (and shield) are better.
Greatswords are still better than any form of two weapon fighting.
Doesn't that kinda depends on whether you have something to do with your bonus action (BG3 gives you plenty of that with shove and jump even if your class doesn't)? Or if you have some additional effects on a hit? In base 5e also greataxe might be better for crit fishing on barbarian half orc and such.
Greatweapon master is also a strong feat that often gives you an extra attack as a bonus action, not to mention +10 damage on attacks.
Shields in 5e are mostly a thing for clerics and druids who rely on their spells, especially concentration ones to impact the fights.
Martials need to do damage.
In tabletop I have a paladin of vengeance with spear + shield and it's pretty nice. Extra survivability from shield saved me a couple times and the damage from the extra bonus attack is neat, especially if I still have spellslots for smite. We had free feat at start and play with extra dice from criticals maximized. Pulled off 102 damage on 5th level in one round.
>Also, any Eldritch Knight should take 1 level of Wizard IMO.
I don't know if the game is playing according to RAW, but strictly speaking you'd only ever be able to prep your non-EK spells as a level 1 Wizard. Otherwise, EKs in 5th ed use Spells Known.
Good for getting more cantrips though.
well, at lv 7, you get War Magic (when casting cantrip, can burn bonus action to melee). best direct dmg cantrip is lock's eldritch blast, which can be further strengthened with lock incantations. ie, lv7 eldritch + lv5 lock uses action to cast a double e.blast that have +cha modifier x2 each, followed with bonus action for 2x melee atks.
well, I'm lv 4, so I haven't tested it yet. but that's the class combo that makes the most sense to me with Eldritch Knight.
Why would you get 2 attacks? It's a bonus action for one attack.
Part of the issue then is that 5e distributes a few "must have" options into every single sourcebook so that players feel obligated to own most of them, even if it's just for one feat or spell.
Nobody would remember or care about the Strixhaven book if it didn't have Silvery Barbs, which is fricking obscene (as a reaction, force an enemy who has just rolled to reroll and take the lower result, and then give advantage to an ally on their next roll).
They put a "must have" option into everything so you need to consoom.
but you don't need to own the book to use the feat or spell
It's balanced out by itemization. Expeditious Retreat lets you make solid use of Linebreaker or Speedy Lightfoot. Giving yourself on demand +1/+1 or a constantly stacking (effectively) +2 damage every round ends up being pretty strong.
Putting the returning property on a heavy thrown weapon is also a solid strategy. Throw pikes from height like you're fricking Zeus.
Multiclassing is fine.
People that theory craft lvl 20 builds however are no game morons.
5e breaks after level 12, Larian is right to stop there.
It's not you and many others in this thread are just idiots who think slapping any 2 random classes together will be good.
Because since 3.0, all classes use the same experience table for the total level. In 2e, you could take 8 levels of fighter, dual class to mage and catch up eventually so you're effectively 1 level behind. In newer editions, you'll always be 8 levels behind.
Similar for 2e multiclasses where you spread your XP, which have no equivalent in WotC D&D.
Captcha: TSR ANY
In 2.5ed you also had different exp requirements that really spiced things up, and made classes really unique. Druid would need 1.5m xp to get to lvl. 14, but then need whooping 3m xp to get to lvl. 15 (Thief would get lvl 23 at 3m), and it was done with a reason. There can be only one lvl.15 druid in the world, requiring mad role-playing storytelling for a druid to achieve that rank. Then immediately when he gains lvl.15 and that status, he receives mad spellpower abilities, he goes instantly from one six level spell, to six of them. His spells and abilities are some of the most whacky in whole d&d, like summoning whole forests, and having full grove of lesser druids constantly at his command.
As far as spellcasters are concerned lvl. 12 really isn't good regarding multiclassing. Just two levels of a secondary class lose you the ability to cast 6th lvl spells.
nothing is "bad" in this game man you can cheese shit so fricking hard. instead of having a big fight with the goblin witch I dropped the statues on her head. Instead of fighting the strong butthole hobgoblin boss I shoved him into the spider pits. I found some paladin frickers that wanted to run out of the room when combat starts so I just stacked barrels in front of the doors to trap them inside. you have to be a goddamn moron to be doing poorly in this game. You have every opportunity to be insanely unfair to your enemies
it's almost like the game is trying to give you similar freedom to what you'd have in a d&d campaign
It's no surprise moronic grognards are still drooling all over themselves trying to fricking powergame in 5e of all things. Go play pathfinder you morons.
Huh? But it's not. It's bretty good IMO.
So me and a friend are doing an MP run of BG3 and we're concerned the Illithid Tadpole powers and its consequences are shared between players. I'm all for leaning into and abusing the tadpole and absorbing more of them but I don't want to shit on his parade if Larian has the balls to give me bad consequences for doing so, does anyone know if I'll be fricking him over by using them?
No, whatever consequences there are, are confined only to your character, and there aren't many consequences.
You just have to build a synergistic multiclass but doing so over 12 levels is dependent on knowing 5e decently well. 12 also isn't a great breakpoint for casters because you can only afford 1 multiclass level before you lose 6th level spells.
You very rarely want to multiclass more than 1-3 levels, usually 2 for most builds. Mixing Fighter with a lot of stuff is usually the go-to, but a Ranger-Cleric isn't all that bad. Or Sorcerer-Paladin or Warlock-Paladin. It really depends on what you're going for.
If it's anything like regular 5e, Barbarian 5/Rogue 7, Paladin 2/Bard/Sorcerer/Warlock X or Paladin 6/Bard/Sorcerer/Warlock X and Fighter 2/pretty much anything should all be decent options. You don't have the levels or full customisation to do silly shit like Grave Cleric 2/Evocation Wizard.
I'm planning to go Swords Bard 6 and then respec to Fighter 2/Bard 6 when I can and finish with more Bard.
I did notice it looks like you can do the build that is trained in all skills by level 7 in the game.
How does EXP sharing work? Can you run solo or duo and effectively double or quadruple your EXP from a full party?
I don't think you get more exp with less party members. I'm soloing right now and I got 10xp from each of those skeletons in the tomb early on.
I don't think there is even space for that with the level cap. I hit level 10 and am not even in Baldur's Gate, though very, very close. Hit it when I beat Ketheric on top of the tower
I'm stuck with attack on click and I can't drag and move any item
How do I disabled this
>they had to give humans shit rules so people would play more diverse characters
>free shield prof
>extra 25% carry capacity
That second one especially screams main character. You loot on one character so you don't have to look through four inventories looking for shit and spend even more time selling all these cups and spoons
>The reign of the Murderhobos was supreme for generations.
>Until one day the Peddlerhobo took up the call to garbage arms.
Bro they lost a feat for this.
Humans didn't have a feat inherently, dipshit. That was for Variant Human.
It's the same shit with every RPG. Dipshits who don't know how to play RPGs become very loud and start making tier lists and everything for classes they've never even played. It then sorts itself out a few months later when they all go back to call of duty and fortnite.
im 60 hours in and pissing arround in some wizard book store. try to get into a door in the basement so i solved a riddle to get to the head guy and then i jumped down some floating tables into a room with wizard gear that is protected by some magic shield and magic canons while my group is waiting in the magic basement.
it's great.
First time playing a Baldur's Gate game and I have a question: I've heard subclassing is also bad.
I just reached Lvl 3 with my fighters and it seems the game just forces me to make them Battle Masters instead of keeping them as pure Fighters, is this ok?
Subclasses are mandatory.
You have to pick a subclass, but you can choose from several options. Battlmaster is just the first one on the list or whatever. It’ll be a section on the left of the level up menu.
As others have said, subclasses are part of the game. For what it's worth, the Champion fighter archetype is your classic beatstick warrior, just with better numbers.
Multiclassing is for incels.
How do I distract the Guards in Moonrise without starting a fight?I'm doing the Gnome/Tiefling escape bit but I don't have a bard or anyone with performance.
Summon Familiar -> cat - use cat meow, it's like the minor illusion cantrip
Thanks broski
I used a strength potion and trew them into the abyss.
I just killed them one by one.
Me too. Stuffed the bodies into a chest while I was at it. Seemed unnecessary, though.
is there any reason NOT to put companion's charisma down to 8 if it's not their spell stat?
No, charisma saving throws aren't common.
If I twin spell a witchbolt, do I get to hit both targets every turn as long as the concentration hold or do I have to pay the twinned price every time
Why I dislike BG3 despite it getting so much right:
While it's a good fricking around simulator and it has a lot going on under the hood to make combat more fun than just casting spells and/or attacking, it completely misses the mark on being an actual roleplaying game. A roleplaying game should be a journey where your means gradually expand with the scope of the adventure. It should start out rough and early party composition decision should be impactful, and be transformative to the experience. But BG3 lets you respec everyone all the time for a negligible cost, something that's not just immersion breaking but that also cheapens any decision you have made so far. Your ability combo only spikes out lategame ? Don't worry, just use a good early game class in the meantime and respec when you have the exp to get started on your real build. Don't like how this NPC is built ? Don't worry, just rearrange their stats, change their class, who gives a shit bro. Every encounter is self contained and there's not a greater story of your progression being told.
Additionally, the game starts out at level 2 and gives you instantly, without even mentioning it, functionally your own demi plane with a bottomless chest of holding that you can access at any time, from anywhere. It also instantly gives you teleportation waypoints for extreme convenience. As a level 2 adventurer you have access to things that would make archmages 10 levels above you green with envy. It also completely breaks exploring and encounters the same way respeccing does by reducing the stakes to nothing.
Overall, it feels like a game too insecure and unfocused to really want to offer a consistent experience. It just wants you to do funny things and frick around with its physics. It pretends to be a story driven rpg, but it's actually just a bad sandbox. Real sandboxes actually have meaningful progression and early game stakes.
>But BG3 lets you respec everyone all the time for a negligible cost, something that's not just immersion breaking but that also cheapens any decision you have made so far. Your ability combo only spikes out lategame ? Don't worry, just use a good early game class in the meantime and respec when you have the exp to get started on your real build. Don't like how this NPC is built ? Don't worry, just rearrange their stats, change their class, who gives a shit bro.
Oh.
I'm just starting and overthinking what character I want to make.
That's disappointing.
I'm mostly just playing to meet bg1+2 cameos though, so I guess I'll use this to my advantage and just respecc later.
>Additionally, the game starts out at level 2 and gives you instantly, without even mentioning it, functionally your own demi plane with a bottomless chest of holding that you can access at any time, from anywhere. It also instantly gives you teleportation waypoints for extreme convenience. As a level 2 adventurer you have access to things that would make archmages 10 levels above you green with envy.
Does this really matter? I mean functionally what's the problem with it? Perhaps in lore terms being around to teleport around everywhere is something level 2 characters shouldn't have access to, but mechanically it's just a convenience and doesn't really give you a huge advantage. Would you still have a problem with it if they didn't flavour it as teleportation runes and just said your party walks there but the game skips over it?
With the bottomless chest too, again functionally it just saves you having to make a million trips back and forth between towns and wilderness/dungeons. Maybe you "shouldn't" be able to haul all that stuff around as a level 2 adventurer but the game wouldn't be improved in any way if you couldn't.
If neither of those features existed the game wouldn't be more challenging or strategic or anything, it would simply add more busywork.
Add to that the game does not require use of the waypoints or bottomless camp chest. If somone wants to roleplay without those elements, that's totally within their ability. Amazing the lengths folks go to formulate a negative opinion on something. Contrainians gotta contrary.
>lmao just close your eyes and pretend like it's not there!
I guess you do need that level of denial to actually ignore all the massive flaws this game has.
I agree with first anon that it is stupid and lore-breaking and silly for low level characters. But I also agree that it’s just a convenience/QoL feature and it can be ignored if one wants for RPing.
There is something to be said about not giving the player an infinite stash/chest in that If the game is balanced around it, it adds a layer of complexity to resource/inventory management. Managing inventory and what's worth looting becomes a choice players actuallly have to engage with instead of just looting everything like a hoover and churning it into gold. It would make STR feel better as well.
Ofc if your goal is to qppeal to theblcd and sell as many copies as possible, you would never do it.
I find this rarely ever works in RPGs because the economy is usually balanced around hauling off massive amounts of loot back to sell at the vendor. Which means that in order for the game to be bearable to play, they need to give you enough inventory space to comfortably carry a decent amount of loot on top of all the equipment, potions etc. that you're actually using. So you never have to make hard choices about what useful equipment to bring, you can bring it all using just a fraction of your inventory space and save the bulk of it for all the loot you're going to bring back.
This argument didn't work for Underrail, which went well out of its way to both punish and mock being an Al Fabet. I don't know why you think it'd work for a game on a series everyone already hoarded loot in (for good reason, considering the magic items you could craft) in a franchise known for encouraging players to seek out and hoard loot like madmen.
Underrail is actually a perfect example of it done well. They balanced the economy around only being able to sell a few things at a time and the result was players looted less compulsively. It rewarded players who looted intelligently and punished morons that grabbed every single weapon they found. Though I know this went over some morons heads who cry about styg """"""forcing""""" to create a massive pile of loot on the floor of vendors, but that is just player moronation.
Underrail *alleviating* the problem of loot hoarding by increasing the opportunity cost of selling it didn't *solve* it. You can ask anyone in the general threads to show off their stash and you'll find piles of garbage scattered across the game world. Styg's attempts at balancing just made it so that the piles of garbage have a minimum value of 1000 value per item instead of 500 per item. Even on a more conservative playthrough I still took multiple trips from each dungeon back to Junkyard and Core City, because Styg also incentivized getting a lot of money to pay for crafting materials and upgrades for your house.
>They balanced the economy around only being able to sell a few things at a time
>Crafting system increases loot exponentially
>Crafting system is mostly necessary for high end gear/weapons/traps/etc
It sure did bud.
t. Chempistol user.
What is your argument? Are you saying you couldn't afford high end components because the game did t allow you to loot everything and sell as much as you want?
If so, I do not believe you. Underrail culled loothoarders and still maintained a healthy economy, or at the very least had as good an economy as you can expect from any rpg, as virtually every rpg has you become rich as frick by the end.
There is actual neurological/psychological work and theory about how our experiences are built up as interactions and mastering interactions. In a sense it does matter and it does degrade the experience and the immersion by adding in conveniences. The player becomes less rooted in the fantasy world and less rooted in their actions and the body of the avatar they're controlling. Busy work as you call it grounds you in the role of the character. For a role-playing game, along with the aims of what such a game aims to achieve, the inconveniences are crucial.
I'm not arguing that you should not have your quality of life, your fast travel, your infinite storage, your autoloot and so on. However, it becomes less of an RPG as a result. That said, when I play a fighting game, or a shooting game, or a puzzle game, then I probably don't want to be bothered by those things.
The real answer is that looting game loops are inherently flawed and have to make compromises on either immersion or gameplay. People claim to want immersion but in practice want tedium reduction.
Respec as fist class Paladin, go to level 2, spec the rest into sorcerer
Profit?
I'm dual-classing Shadowheart to a gloom stalker after she gets a feat from 4 levels of cleric. It seems like it'll synergize well with my shadow monk MC.
doesn't seem like there is much reason not to multiclass martials or rogues after you get your main class abilities after lvl 3-5...
It's certainly much more viable to fit in a multiclass with marital classes than with spellcasters, because you don't have the overwhelming cost of losing spell levels to balance out, but there still is a cost to pay.
I definitely wouldn't frick around until after getting extra attack, because that's just a massive increase to what your character can do. As an extension of that, for fighters it's still a really heavy loss to lose their extra extra attack at level 11, so anything more than a 1 lvl dip is going to hurt quite a bit.
Monks and Rogues are also a bit disincentivized, because you lose out on scaling Ki points / Sneak attack dice. Generally, I find that that's a bigger issue for monks than rogues, and I think monks benefit more from their higher level subclass features as well.
Barbarians are probably the easiest to do it imo. There's nothing that they get at high levels that is gonna be worth not doing at least a 2 level fighter dip for a fighting style and action surge - they don't really lose anything.
Pet class ranger is also a bad one to multi because it loses pet levels.
paladin+bladelock(glaive)
2/10, 6/6, or something else?
not trying to powergame, but don't want to gimp too much
5/7
Paladin extra attack stacks with Warlocks blade pact extra attack
>Paladin extra attack stacks with Warlocks blade pact extra attack
lol really? They fricked that up from base 5e then.
Boomer here. When I played Baldur's Gate 1&2 for the first time I started with a paladin. Now with BG3 I want to start yet again as a paladin. Is that bad because what I've seen is the game is mostly le grey area morality and vampires and 50 shades of grey.
Devotion has a lot of leeway with deception etc as long as you keep your eyes on the prize of doing good shit. None of the standard companions are moronic evil, most of them have a level of pragmatism that means you can keep them in line as long as you keep up the successes. The vampire can be sated with feeding on animals and evil guys you're killing anyway.
everywhere I go becomes a bloodbath
System isn't designed for it.
How the frick do sorcery points work in this game
I'm supposed to have 2 at level 1 + 1 per level
why do I have 3 at lvl 3.
it's 1 per level
Literally every caster benefits from taking 1 level of Wizard.
why?
They don't. They cripple themselves unless every other level they have is wizard too
lvl.12 is cap, you gain lvl.6 spells at lvl.11, and you loose one Feat for not getting lvl. 12. And you're always one lvl behind as far as progression is concerned.
Though, all of that is outweighed, since I hear that just a lvl in wizard will allow any caster to learn any spell from the scrolls, which sounds as a huge plus for a whole game, but I'm really not certain that it works like that, and if it does, it may be patched.
>lvl.12 is cap
Fricking zoomers.
Not sure about the precision attack in particular, but some battle master manouvers give back the dice if you miss, so if it was changed the reason probably wasn't just technical.
Meant for
not required at all, the game is so easy/simple you don't need to spam cc even on the hardest difficulty, so there's no point dipping one level into wizard to learn scrolls. If you want to be mr flexible just go pure wizard
>Why is multiclassing so bad?
You're just dumb.
Did they properly impelement war cleric domain?
After seeing how they butchered precision attack for battlemaster (you spend the superiority dice before rolling) I imagine the engine can't deal with conditional bonuses to your roll
They also made divination wizards feature 3 dice and they recharge on a short rest, wtf were they thinking?
There's no reason to play War Cleric since Tempest, Light and even Knowledge are just vastly superior. With Tempest and Light you gain Cleric that easily matches Mages for destructive output, while still retaining all major support and healing spells. With Knowledge you gain some really great out of combat versatility. His Chanel Divinity is very unique. Nature may be even more pointless that War Cleric, though, just play Druid or even a race that has Speak With Animals instead.
I haven't finished exploring Grymforge yet and I'm almost lv 6. Is this right?
Also I don't like any the companions, real lack of evil buttholes, even astarion is gonna have a sob story
Multiclassing cleric just so I get more dialogue options than the standard lloth-sworn ones.
is going 5 into gloom, 3 ass and 4 champion the best gloomstalker build with long bow or no?
Could be good, almost tempted to try something like it. Maybe only 2-3 in Fighter is all you need, but I honestly don't know how to make Rangers work too well. At least the Larian interpretation of Ranger works better than the pre-Tasha and Xanathar's version of it.
How do people feel about class balance? I feel like I am doing broken stuff with Astarion as Rogue(Assassin) and I am doing alright with Shadowheart as a cleric. I am still trying to figure out how to squeeze the juice out of the wizard class (Gale), so I haven't gotten good at that yet. I do feel like I chose some meh spells for him. My MC however is a paladin, and I feel like he does jackshit in most combat scenarios. He is constantly chasing after people for OK damage.
I just ditched my custom party of paladin bard cleric wizard and restarted as a solo paladin. Wish me luck, I foresee a lot of save scumming!
I have to ask, but what is sincerely the appeal of going solo in these games? And how do people do this without incredible amounts of savescumming or cheesing?
it's been a tradition ever since fairy ninja solo runs in wizardry
>faerie ninja
Ahh, the good old Cane of Corpus.
I don't want to manage 5 morons and deal with their leveling and stats, I only care about the player character.
Lol 5e you don't even gotta do anything. It's all preset
This. For almost every class you basically just hit next on the level up. Every few levels you raise your ASI, or pick a new spell you want. When you run out of ASI you pick the feats that suck the least that are left over.
Oath of Vengeance with a two-handed weapon is your probably best bet for damage, with maybe Oathbreaker being the other best option. If you're open to multiclassing, consider maybe 1-2 in Fighter. Or possibly 2-3 in Warlock. If you're even comfortable with it, you could put 5 into Warlock 7 into Paladin. You'll get Eldritch Blast, Pact of the Blade which lets you use Charisma as your damage modifier for your melee. But the other pacts are solid.
Oath of ancients got better once I got divine smite and then the second attack ability. Great Weapon Specialty is a really good feat too.
How do you even multiclass? I'm like level 4 and haven't noticed any option pop up?
you can multiclass at any level look for the add class button on the level up screen.
Upper left corner when you level up. If you're playing on Balanced and Tactician, it should be apparent. It's disabled on the Story Mode difficulty.
Because level cap is 12
>D&D 5e
>Game playable after the 12th level.
If you want to multiclass good you need at least a bit more.
With 12, at most all your should do is a little dip. But generally you're just going to be mostly one class.
Pretty much. Only one you could probably split well would maybe be Warlock up to 5, then everything else in either Paladin, Bard, or Sorcerer. Only the Charisma classes seem like an even split is doable.
>delay getting my main class spells or abilities by a few levels so I can get some literal what % increase on attack accuracy or something like that or abilities that will also be way underleveled for the part of the game I'm at
I've never been able to wrap my head around multiclassing in any of these games
it's a tradeoff, for example the paladins level 7-12 features aren't as good as multiclassing into sorcerer for higher level smite spell slots and better utility spell selection
Is it really that much better? In base 5e (easier to lookup, dunno if BG3 changed it):
Lvl 12 paladin spell slots:
4/3/3/-/-
Lvl 6 paladin/lvl 6 sorcerer spell slots:
4/3/3/3/1
But, with improved smite your smite is basically by one level, and actually even better, because the base smite caps at 5d8, so smite from level 4 and level 5 both hit the same.
So if we were to translate that into smite slots:
damage/damage against fiends and undead: paladin number of uses, multiclass number of uses
1d8/1d8: endless, 0
2d8/3d8: 0, 4
3d8/4d8: 4, 3
4d8/5d8: 3, 3
5d8/6d8: 3, 4
So not that different. Depending on how many smites you expect to use between rest might decide which is better. In most cases sorc will be, but if you'd want to spam it more than 14 (a bit more with channel divinity and sorcery points spell slot creation) times between long rests, then pure paladin has that 1d8 to keep him running.
Pure paladin gets one more ASI (which on a paladin is quite important), 8 more hp (average, also bigger hit dice but that doesn't apply in BG3), aura of courage (rather meh), and level 7 subclass feature. Also level 3 paladin spell list, which has revivify but overall isn't that great, if it were level 4 in 5e there'd be Find Greater Steed which is neat.
Sorcerer instead gets sorcerer spell list up to 3rd level which is something. Cantrips. Metamagic (which in that setup isn't that useful). And subclass lvl 1 and 6 features which mostly aren't that great.
Don't get me wrong, it's not a bad multiclass, but I don't think it's a must have or anything. You get more higher level smites, and some utility, but your overall sustain might be a bit worse.
That's of course unless BG3 changed relevant stuff, I'm not aware of. I had neither paladins nor sorcerers in my party.
A 6 Pal / 6 Sorc can do a lot more with those higher spell slots than just smite
That’s the difference
Factor in twin cast, range, etc and you can do much much more
It’s trade offs either way but the Sorc adds a ton of versatility
Id rather throw in a dedicated caster in the party than go for this mix really. You get level 4 and 5 spell slots while limited with level 3 spells, and to get benefits from the ability to smite you need to be in the thick of it cause smites only work on melee, so your concentration (and life, you're squishier) is also at risk and not sure how useful you'd find the distant metamagic. Sure, having stuff like counterspell and the ability to twin spell is nice, but I don't think it's really worth it at that point, especially with spell scrolls being so abundant in the game. You're going for kind off level 8/9 sorcerer capabilities at level 12. Itemization also will be more difficult if you need to split stuff between items that buff your casting and those that buff your melee/survivability, and your stats (you get one less ASI while being quite a MAD build).
Dumb, bardadin or palalock is a better combo here.
I multiclassed into barb 8 (wildheart, bear heart, stallion aspect) rogue 4 (thief) and use the rapier that was a reward for rescuing the child from the hag and it's very nice. With the gauntlets that set my strength to 23 and amulet that does the same for Constitution, I was able to dump them on respec and focus asi elsewhere, so I have 23/20/23/12/16/14 stats and a tough feat. With no armour I have 23 AC (5 Dex + 6 con +1 cloak of protection
+1 from boots (looking for some decent clothing that would bump me +1 more, for now I use the one that gives advantage on spell saving throws or something like that)), 177 hp iirc, get 24 temporary hp on a dash that I can do as a bonus action, with rage also resistance on everything except psychic, so I'm very tough to put down. Damage is also decent cause of the rapier being +3, getting a bonus action attack (once per turn though), criting on 19, once per turn sneak attack, extra reaction that I can use to add 4 necrotic on hit, and a ring that adds +2 acid. With reckless attack I can easily get the sneak attack and look for crits. BTW the crossbow that gives you advantage against aberrations works even in melee, so that's neat.
>TW the crossbow that gives you advantage against aberrations works even in melee
that's nothing, if you beat the act 3 dragon you get a bow that applies guiding bolt on hit
That also works on melee?
do druid wildshape attacks count as unarme? should i take the tavern brawler feat?
Is Arcane Trickster supposed to be able to replace AT spells for spells from the expanded wizard list in this game or is it an oversight?
In tabletop they can only replace AT spells with other AT spells. The expanded list is supposed to be limited to the extra spell you pick at levels 3/8/14/20.
Pure battle fighter with 20 strength is a fricking blast. Athlete, HASpecial, Tavern Brawler, I yeet myself across the screen and yeet other people off cliffs. They keep trying to pawn off these headworms on me. Frick your worms schizo dream b***h.
Why only 20? if act 3 grab the gauntlets that set it to 23, if act 2 then you can get the elixir that gives you +2 if you bring Astarion to the drow alchemist in the moonrise tower, or just use the elixirs. Helps a lot.
It's even better if you tadpoleMAX and can literally fly around at no cost.
> Always take a 1 level dip in wizard to learn spells from scrolls OR a 1-2 level dip in cleric for prof + divine domain feature
> Martial should go lvl 5 for extra attack, eventually 6 for class feature then 3 level dip in thief rogue for extra bonus action
> CHA classes might want to dip warlock 2 for EB + invocations
> Fighter wants level 11 for extra extra strike
There, I solved all your multiclassing questions, u welcome
The only bad thing is that feats are tied to class level and not character level.
The only reason people multiclass in 5e is to take a dip of 1 or 2 levels into a class that shares their casting stat because many level 20 class abilities are objectively just garbage and underpowered, so you're getting more bang for your buck by multiclassing at that point. That's it. You have dumbasses unfamiliar with 5e as a system just meshing random classes together that have no synergy in a 5e game that only goes up to level 12, and then get dumfounded as to why their characters end up being dogshit in a system that isn't designed around multiclassing at all.
In BG3 I really liked my Wildheart Barb 8/Thief Rogue 4.
And you would be much more mechanically powerful had you went either full barb or full rogue, whether or not you "like" it is a different story.
Not really. Going barb would give me brutal critical, one more aspect, one more rage per day, +1 rage damage, and 8 more hp.
Going full rogue would make me squishy as frick but the whole build would be different.
I was tanky as frick. 177 hp (23 con from the amulet + tough) + 24 temporary hp (Stalion scales off character level) on dash I could do with a bonus action, and I had two of those, so basically any time my temporary hp was gone, I could refresh it easily, so effectively it was much more hp if the topic wasn't being destroyed in one round, which nothing in the game even came close to. With bear resistances, unless there was psychic damage (I wish gem dragonborn were in the game, then that wouldn't be a problem), the hp was also effectively doubled.
With 24 AC and pretty great saves getting hit in the first place wasn't even often.
The attack bonus was also pretty massive so misses were rare and then I could reckless to avoid them too, though I'd get hit a bit more in return (which I could take because of the meatbag I was).
Damage is probably the most lacking one, but it was still decent. The hag rapier with its necrotic damage, bonus action attack, ring that added +2 acid, crit on 19, strength of 23 (gauntlets), rage damage, sneak attack I could trigger with reckless. I was going, so iirc usually it was something like 1d8 (rapier) + 6 (strength) + 2 (rage) + 2 (acid ring) + 1d4 (rapier necro) + 3 (rapier enchant) per hit base, plus 4 for two hits (rapier proficiency necro damage for reactions), and 2d6 for sneak attack once, with possible crits on top of that. So average of 75 per round if all hit (which wasn't difficult), no crits (which weren't rare, cause advantage was plenty), enemies aren't resistant to piercing, necro and acid (that was often so then reduce it a bit), sneak attack is possible.
Mobility was great with jumping, dash, barbarian bonus movement and ignoring difficult terrain.
Shove for days with two bonus actions 23 strength (or if I drank the elixir more, but it wasn't needed), rage advantage and expertise in athletics. Could also just throw a lot of enemies due to strength.
Skills were also okay thanks to rogues bonus skills and expertise.
With no tadpole powers it was a build powerful enough, that on balanced by the end of the game I felt I was never really in danger, cause even if my backline falls my main character could just solo everything even if the damage wasn't that great so it'd be a bit tedious.
>dumbasses unfamiliar with 5e as a system
Yeah, (You).
Multiclassing isn't viable after 3.5 and 2e is the objective best multiclass ruleset.
False.
What's up with her point allocation? Isn't she a paladin?
How does one change their race to lolth-sworn? My school is super uncool. Do I need to go off-campus?
Cleric + Paladin for deity dialogue.
What's the best way to use Arcane trickster's level 10 talent?
It feels I should use it on save or die spells but there's no level 3 spells that can make use of that
I actually didn't realize how much I hated D&D 5th ed until playing BG3. Holy frick the last 30% of the game was a slog and boring. You're not excited for any level ups because most classes are completely done capstone wise.
I am glad I stopped playing D&D after 3.5e.
The first 60% of the game (excluding the system) was pretty good but I really felt Act III was just so shit. Minsc was cool but clearly him and Jaheira were put in to be like "look its a bg sequel!!"
making the emperor balduran was so fricking stupid and pointless, contributed nothing to the story
because it's not ADnD 2e or PoE2
Holy shit summoning is completely busted
If every NPC didn't react poorly to it and start following you around and bugging I would just summon an army of pets
They don't seem to mind devas and cambions.
>Hunting Shortbow still gives you advantage against monstrosities even when you're not wielding it
Seems a bit busted for how easy and cheap it is to get
Having a shield also gives you ac even when using a bow/ranged. 3 years early access everyone.
I think it's a conscious change with the fact that switching between melee and range was made free (whether that's a good decision is a separate matter). Otherwise you'd just have to remember to switch back to melee whenever you aren't shooting.
In Mount&Blade having a shield on your back gave you protection from arrows on your back. It was a viable multiplayer strategy to run around with two shields.
Well larian didnt model unequipped weapons/shields/bows either so even this cope doesn't work
My Barbarian/Monk has no issues with multi-classing. But he does have issues with modesty.
My Monk/Barbarian multi class says otherwise
5e buffed pures a shitload and the low level cap favors them. BG2 had a much higher level which is why everyone had their very original kansai/mage they looked up online. Give it a couple more months and the normies stop bloating the discussion with their easy mode builds and people will discover dipping into 1-3 levels or whatever dramatically increases effectiveness and so on.
Because its 5e. Larian should have told them to frick off with their leveling system.
Finished the game on Tactician and systematically completed all the content available to me based on my choices. 9.5/10 game. I was diplomatic and skipped a bunch of fights, and I still ended up reaching level 12 with an exp cap of 99999 at least 15 hours before I fought the Netherbrain.
Didn't encounter that many bugs. One major one, which I'm sure is a bug, was Orin kidnapping Halsin and the quest log updating as if Halsin had just left the party due to a disagreement. When I saved him, he turned into a pet and couldn't speak or be interacted with at all, and he followed along until the end of the game. Wasn't present in the cutscenes.
You can suggest heading to Amn at the end of the game, and another post-level 12 approach is joining Voss and Lae'zel in killing Vlaakith, if they're ever going to make an expansion.
My only complaint is that there is no unarmed fighting style, so I pretty much have to play a monk for my brawler character. Also of course that the character creator prevents me from making him a morbidly obese norfman.
Tavern Brawler is basically unarmed fighting style. It costs a feat so it's less efficient than the other fighting styles, but then Monk is supposed to be the specialized unarmed fighter anyway and they get unarmed bonuses for free.
I know, he has Tavern brawler. But it's still inefficient as hell when his damage die is stuck at a d4 forever, making monk more or less mandatory. What I'd want is the unarmed fighting style from the TCE source book, which gives a d6 when using a shield and a d8 if both hands are free, mainly because barb/fighter fits the concept better.
I hope in dlc/BG4/BG4 dlc we get level 40 cap
5e max level is 20, after that progression is with epic feats.
The game can't even handle level 5 characters, Larian trying to balance lv 20s would be a sight to see
They made Tavern Brawler such a busted-ass feat.
Random question: I've seen some people saying that Barbs should go nakey. But what benefit does this have for Karlach? Her AC is higher with armor, not to mention the bonuses the armor confers (both helm and chest)
Wearing armor removes the positives of rage
I'm not sure that's true. You can't use Rage while using Heavy armor, but you can while using Medium. I'll have to do some experiementation
Yeah my mistake I can't read, it's only heavy armor
Naked barb is an option, but rather late game one when you can pump those stats hard (had 20 ded and 23 con when I finished so that's 21 AC from that), and you get some decent clothing (the quartermaster in act 2 sells a robe that gives you +2 con (up to 20) and when you rage 2 wrath per turn, there are robes that add +1 AC and so on). Those are rather specific builds though, so going medium or light armour is perfectly fine (heavy blocks most rage effects so that's a no-no even if you get the one that doesn't require proficiency).
IIRC you lose the unarmoured bonus if you use a shield.
At least in 5e, for monk yes but not for barbarian. I don't think they changed that.
I don't see it applied on his character, only the dex bonus and the shield bonus.
You don't lose the bonus with a shield
>I don't see it applied on his character, only the dex bonus and the shield bonus.
As I understand it, the "Modifier" is the points over 10 that you've dumped into the stat, divided by two and rounded down. So for CON, +7 / 2 = 3.5, meaning 3 points (in this case, added to AC, but this applies generally).
>meaning 3 points
Actually this is clearly incorrect, as the AC tool tip says Karlach has +2 to AC from CON. I was looking at the wrong stat (saving throws). If you look at her base stats, she has 15 CON, which is 5 over the starting 10. 5 / 2 = 2.5, rounded down to 2.
Still calculating it wrong, the bonus for fifteen con is +2, no need to do division, D&D gives a plus 1 bonus to anything with a given stat for every two points above ten that stat is.
Yeah, now it makes sense. I thought you somehow managed to have a +7 to con.
Crank her strength and con and go naked for unarmored bonus and use two handed weapons for maximum beef.
problem with multiclassing in this game is that the system itself is not nearly complex enough to fully warrant the existence of the mechanic
there are no brainer dips, like fighter 2 due to the action economy and a few others and that's where it all begins and ends
there needs to be more variety and complexity for multiclass to be fun or relevant
>Why is multiclassing so bad?
It's not.
Tav:
>lvl 1 Nature Cleric(cleric cantrips/druid cantrip/talk with animals, nature skill, heavy armor)
>lvl 11 Transmuter(alchemy/transmuter's stone/shapechange)
Astarion:
>lvl 5 Asssasin(improved sneak attack 3d6)
>lvl 6 Battlemaster(archery , pushing strike, disarming strike, menacing strike, extra fighter attack)
>lvl 1 War Cleric
Lae'zel
>lvl 11 Battlemaster(Great Weapon Fighting)
>lvl 1 War Cleric
5e armor proficiency rules are so bonkers goddamn
I saw a weapon that had a Shillelagh bonus, I think it was an uncommon axe, could be wrong though. Anyone know the name of it? I can't find it amongst my party members, the camp chest, or with the vendors I usually sell to
>they don't know about warlock paladin
I was thinking of respeccing everyone into either Fighter, for just 1 level for heavy armor, and then rest warlock.
First thought was Paladin, but not sure.
Maybe 1fighter/the rest warlock, until I'm level 12 and go for 2paladin/10warlock.
Hexadin doesn't work so great because it's now a 3 level dip instead of 1 level.
Even without the stacking extra attack that shit is broken. A Paladin with like 9-10 3rd+ level Smites a day after you use items and equipment to restore your slots + Fireball/Hold Person/Hunger of Hadar. Hell go Warlock 10 and you can turn Raphael into your own personal target practice dummy without any outside help using Hold Monster
Won't Raphael smite you right back? He had that radiant reflection passive.
initiative is pretty janky in this game
Surprise! BG3 is rolling a d4 instead of a d20 for initiative, because reasons.
Which is weird because EA rolled d20. I'm modding to fix it until they actually fix it as a bug
ohh
I wasn't even thinking that.
Had a fight where I snuck up on the enemy, 3 of my characters were 6 meters away, from their closest unit.
I snuck closer with my fourth, did a sneak attack.
Combat started, and their units, going up to 25 meters away all moved, and I learned that only my one character was in combat.
They weren't activated until all of their characters had basically moved up to me.
It's like, yeah sure, I can work around this, git gud and stuff, and adjust how I engage fights in the future, but it's supremely silly that this is how it works.
You could have moved in and attacked with all your other characters if you didn't end the turn of the one who attacked first
>You could have
Yeah I know. There's no confusion there.
I said
>It's like, yeah sure, I can work around this, git gud and stuff, and adjust how I engage fights in the future, but it's supremely silly that this is how it works.
It is still a janky, it is bad that it works that way.
I'm not looking for tips, I have discovered that the game does a thing poorly, and will have to play according to that poor game design, you're not offering me anything new.
It really is. I had a fight where I opened with some barel explosions. For a bit some enemeis started acting during my turn, so I'm assuming I somehow managed to start two fights in the same room. Thankfully the game fused them together during the first turn.
>Level 12 cap means you can't 10/10, 15/5 or 5/5/10 a character
>5e means you don't have prestige classes
>Forgotten Realms means Artificers aren't canon.
>Larian going mostly by PHB options means that a lot of the good subclasses aren't available
>Slow leveling means you're stuck with empty levels longer, and your character is deadweight for longer
I like 5e well enough but I wouldn't recommend multiclassing to anyone except Roguelocks (on the tabletop, their utility is insane), Sorcadins, and Sorlocks.
>>Slow leveling means you're stuck with empty levels longer, and your character is deadweight for longer
I wouldn't say leveling is slow, and because you can respec, you can also just switch into multiclass later when you're in the level it kicks in.
Level cap is too low. Should have been at least 16.
Why are you so bad at multiclassing?
My Tav Ranger got nothing good after level 5, speced 5 classes into Rogue>Assassin instead of continue Ranger, and it has played out well.