Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Limited to spell tier 6 seems awful?

Grognard is an insult, because it's entire existence and reasoning is to insult, and belittle others and to state their opinion is stupid, asanine and they can't handle change and auto dislike new things.

Also, it doesnt fit me. I started with basic dnd. I love 2e, really enjoy 3e, and actually mostly like 5e. I started playing crogs with FF and GB games yet really love and enjoy games like FO and BG. I am lpro NWN while many of fellow BGers loathe it. I really like the Pathfinder games, I am pro Solasta, and despite its flaws, am enjoying BG3.

So, even your insult doesnt even fit me.


Anyways,...


Bg 1 and Bg 2 spells are way cooler, more fun, and way more exciting than BG3'S. Instant death spells are great fun and they force the player to adapt. Plus, being to use them to your advantage. Not to mention all those mage battle spells. Defensive spells like stoneskin and improved invisibility are better than theur BG3 counterparts. Summoning spells are superior. Summons like demons where PFE comes into play, or the anti magic ones like the hakeshesar are great whether the player or enemy casts it. The spells that let you quick cast or have instant protections when needed are sweet. So, yeah, spells are vastly superior in BG2.

The magical items are designed with way more love espicially in terms of lore. Carsomyr, the Silver Sword, Llyacore, and more absolutely destroy BG3 items in almost every way.

BG2 has a day/night cycle - a system that can't even be pulled off in the 'modern' BG3. And, it plays a huge role with encounters espicially in terms of vampires. You literally meet a vamp in BG3 on a beach in the middle if the day. Lol Doesn't faze him. I'm.sure later on there's some excuse (I killed/attacked it because it attacked me, no bueno).

The npcs are more varied, and for the game that really solidified joinables in WRPGs decades ago, it's still the legit standard. BG3 doesn't quite live up to that. They are way too try hard. 1 or 2 have an outside chance if making my top 20 not. The foes you face in BG2 are just cooler.

I could go on, but it is very clear.

Bg2 is literally legendary. Bg3 is just not at its level. But, hey, it's better than many games, and is fun, so kudos to that.

The standard for video games has simply slipped so low for the last 10-20 years which is exactly what inflates BG3 to people's 'best game ever' mentality, not to mention a lot of people that play it wont have played the first two and similar games.

Folks, can we take it down a notch in this thread? There's zero need for insults, and everyone is entitled to their own preferences.

For what it's worth, I played BG1 & BG2 when they came out and many times since. In many ways I prefer BG1 to BG2. And I'm still only half way through BG3, but I think, in 2023, I prefer it to both. Though of course they did some good things that BG3 doesn't, and I still love them all. That's just one of the many, many different perspectives people will have on the game, so I'd also recommend that people speak for themselves rather than others.

There aren't five threads complaining about spells, not since release anyway. Also, it's not the tools but the user. Not all spells are great but most are useful and at least good. There are also utility spells...if you don't see the value of non-combat spells that's your fault. And not all spells will be equally suitable to your class/subclass/party combination...these are all D&D 5e spells and they put the vast majority of the good spells in the game. At this point you're not even really complaining about BG3 but about D&D 5e, which is rather ridiculous.

***Ahem***

Hey, DND mechanics is serious business

They could easily make wish useful. I hate it when I hear people say, spells like Wish are godlike and therefore almost impossible to put in a game. You could have said the same for Divine Intervention, and they handled it really well. Wish would be the same way i'm sure, as would other spells.

Personally, I'm less concerned about spell levels and mechanics than having a story that justifies higher levels. I think of someone reaching level 20 as being the culmination of a career, after years of different adventures, so going from level 1 to 20 in one game isn't really something I want unless it is ridiculously huge and spans many years. And in gameplay terms, I don't like levelling too quickly and prefer to get the opportunity to experiment and use the abilities I get at different levels.

I'd be all for an expansion or DLC, or BG4, that could take us to higher levels, but I am very glad Larian didn't try to cram more levels into BG3. And even if we don't get those expansions, then I wouldn't want the pacing of increasing levels in BG3 to be any higher than it is now, though admittedly I'm still only at level 8 at the moment.

I mean, it's basically a 'DM choice', with Larian, and the game, being the DMs.
I can't be the only person who has had DMs (Or said myself as a DM) "We won't go above <x> level, because I don't have content planned for that in this story."

BG 1 & 2 aren't 'better' just because they arbitrarily have level 20 in their game; They are good games with enjoyable story (Though I'm not a fan of RTwP, so I have not revisited them in years. But they are still good games).
BG3 is not 'worse' just because the devs went with a lower level cap.

On top of that, coding and animating for literally everything was much easier twenty-five years ago.
To say "BG1 has more spells, so why is BG3 only level 12?!" is disingenuous, when said spells were simpler to code and animate a quarter of a century ago.
Not to mention Second Edition mechanics versus 5E mechanics.

Anyone can decide that BG1 and/or 2 are better than 3. For any reason they enjoy.
Anyone can decide that BG3 is better than 1 and/or 2. Again, for any reason they enjoy.
But that's just an opinion. Not an objective fact.

Honestly; I'd love post-game DLC that ups the level cap and/or adds more classes and races. I'd be first in line to buy it.

I feel the same way. A campaign would have to be ridiculously long, like an epic trilogy, with some significant time jumps between chapters to get you to 15+. Most D&D characters never reach anywhere near level 15 or 17 because it's getting in the legendary territory and you get powers like leveling entire cities with Meteor Swarms. How many Wizards like that can there be in a setting? How do you control them if they go insane? RPG worlds need to make sense.

A video game shouldn't be a rush to max level either. I want to experience every single level and get a feel what it means to be level 5 or level 9. So you appreciate the new levels more. Sometimes finding just one new item can be a cool upgrade. Leveling is already too fast in BG3. You go from a complete rookie into a powerful hero over just a quick trip to a wilderness, a little visit to the Underdark and some shadow cursed lands. Then you do some quick stuff in the city and bam, you're level 12. BG1 was paced better. I think the original level cap of 10 would have been enough for BG3 with slower advancement. But there is always pressure from players to have all the levels and all the powers and 100 levels and bigger numbers.

The illusion that more is always better.

Meteor swarm has been implemented in lots of games, it doesn't level cities if its the same range as ice storm, just bludgeon & fire with higher damage dice instead of bludgeon and ice.

Level 9 and epic spells have been done in lots of games, they arent difficult to balance.

I hope they do add the Wish spell into BG3 eventually. It was one of the best high level spells in BG II ... especially once I edited the wish.2da table just a little bit, hehe. You need big magic like Wish when the fighters are getting 5+ attacks per round at 30-35 points average damage each, plus an irresistable slow effect.

Maybe they shouldn't be balanced. Maybe the most powerful spells shouldn't be reduced to satisfy the needs of some generic video game progression that never ends. You're level 20, then what? You start nagging devs for level 30 and 10th level spells that do 2d6 more damage.

Higher levels start with higher level content. If the content doesn't exist, neither should the levels. It's as simple as that.

I wasn't a big fan of the late game battles in BG2. It was basically just an exchange of weapons of mass destruction on the first turn which the human player would easily dominate because they understood ranges, blast areas and positioning better than the ai. I think the same issue would persist with more powerful spells and features in BG3.

Well the new spells came with new content, you cant do level 30 stormhorns raid without a group of at least level 26+ players. You can't do reaper difficulties without strongly build min maxed and perfect geared characters and a fully balanced party. Theres 2 raids in DDO which I have never been able to beat even with a full level 30 epic group, and the raids in question drop materials to make the strongest items in the game, so my wizard never got his extra +2 Necromancy DC level 30 weapon.

The whole point of an expansion would be to add higher level content as well.

Personally I have a fun build in DDO - 16 Sorc / 4 FVS / 10 epic. He doesn't even get meteor swarm and doesn't need it because his Scorching Ray is the best Scorching Ray in the game and melts and CCs mobs together with magic missile and chain missile cos one of the epic levels domains is Shiradi and Shiradi triggers with each individual missile and ray. Everything that does ranged or spell damage gets a 7% paralyze chance, 7% of multiple types of damage chance, 7% chance of ability drain and whatnot. If you make a pure or 18 levels of sorcerer and use meteor swarm, you add Draconic Destiny with Fire Dragon spec as usual and do similar. They also added in homebrew level 9 spells for each element so all Draconic dragons could shine.

For Wizards they even added in a Necrotic Dragon, which I don't think anyone even uses on a Wizard because Magister destiny is unbeatable for a wizard, and if you dont have the spell DC for it yet then likewise you just magic misile spam in Shiradi instead - evocation archmage also gets a second copy of chain missile SLA, so missiles go brrrrr.

My favourite fight in BG2 was the Demogorgon and the whole dungeon it was in. You weren't going to beat that dungeon or the demogorgon at level 12.

'Lol this is easy, I have time stop' ... Demogorgon is immune to timestop but my party isnt :x

Tob and hotu, and even nwn2's expansion dud epic/high levels very well. The combat was varied, could be challenging, abd was hella fun. Even Bg2 going up to level 16-17 was good stuff. Time stop, summon high level demons, shape change, snd more. Coolio beanio.

Also so many times I've heard 'DnD campaigns aren't supposed to go that high', so why exactly do the spells and levels exist in the first place if they are never intended to be used?

Oh also Eldritch Knight in DDO lol, you don't even need spells as a caster - Intelligence to hit and damage and what not - https://ddowiki.com/page/Wizard_Eldritch_Knight_enhancements

If your DC was still too low, make a Warforged EK and self heal with reconstruct and go smash stuff like a barbarian.