Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General LV cap -> Dungeons & Low level Kobolds? BG2 > BG

I have heard that the LV cap of EA will gonna be 4. Considering that the last two decent D&D adaptations(NWN1/NWN2) had you at lv 3 after the tutorial on Official Campaign and you around lv 10 after the first chapter of OC, it is a huge disappointment. Almost everyone prefers BG2 over BG1 exactly because you fight no dragons on BG1, casts no powerful spells on BG1 and has a much more bandit slaying adventure.

And I know that most 5e campaigns are kobold slaying on sword coast. In older editions, people played far more in higher levels. I get that 5e suffers from Oblivion effects where there are no lethality on higher levels. However, the low level D&D games are great DESPITE the lv cap. Dark Sun : Shattered Lands and ToEE are great games DESPITE the low level cap but Co8 made ToEE far better by removing the lv cap and the second Dark Sun game : Wake of the Ravager is greater and has lv cap = 15. A Invoker only starts to get SOME decent destructive power at lv 5(fireball, once per rest) and on 2e, necromancers needs to be at least lv 9 to cast animate dead. To fully explore D&D cosmos, you need to go medium/high level. Or do you wanna descent to the 666th layer of abyss, enter the city of liches to face the almighty, all powerful epic .... Lv 4 kobold and spend 100 hours of play only autoattacking with no decent spell or abilities to use?

And considering that we can face a elder brain in the game, and have to deal with the war between demons and devils and a tadpole, I wonder how that epic campaign would work at low level.

I can't imagine fighting terryting enemies with lv cap = 10. When I mean terryfing enemies, I mean for eg, on other D&D video games adaptations. Images from terryfing enemies on Dark Sun : Wake of the Ravager, NWN1 and BG2. Can we have this epic fights with modern graphics?

>the game is too low level i dont only want to fight kobolds :(((

>the game has intellect devourers at level 1 theyre way too high CR creatures! :(((

make up your mind.

mid level DnD is actual dnd.
high level dnd is Marvel movies but with wizards instead of spandex

Simple. Low level D&D games are either autoattacks against low level kobolds like BG1 or massacre like putting a CR 20 Balor against a lv 10 party, in the plane of fire, like ToEE did. Took me almost two hours to beat on my first try. BG3 seems that will be low level but with high CR monsters nerfed to accommodate low level parties. Which combines the worst of both approaches.

As for high level D&D being Dr Strange movies, is not entirely truth. I an playing Dark Sun : Wake of the Ravager and my lv 15 half giant gladiator can kill a Drake in one round. I literally named him Hulk. But in that game is better to multiclass exactly due lv cap(and 2e handled multiclassing differently than 5e). The best party composition on that game is two fighter/clerics, a fighter/preserver and a fighter/psion. Scrolls are very rare and expensive, and enemies has way good saves. Not mention enemies with crazy high MR like Mindflayers. Lv 15 is the beginning of high levels but is not quite high yet.

And note, I an not asking for it to be a lv 20 campaign where you can become a Lich or a Demon Lord like Pathfinder Wrath of The Righteous is doing(not sure about demon lord). If a Elder Brain CR is 14, having a lv cap of 12~15 is the best option for a campaign focused on mindflayers. The original BG2 with no ToB installed had lv cap of 16~24 depending on your class.

I am of mind nowadays that covering 20 levels in single campaign is silly. Doing around 10 sounds like a decent pacing.

I am somewhat confused by type of enemy we face and our level (mindflayers, owl bears, mind devour). While I am not familiar with 5e those strike me as rather higher level encounters. Meh, we will see.

A lot of games does 1~20 campaign. And you reach lv 10 pretty fast. The last two decent D&D adaptations(nwn1/2) and the unique decent pathfinder adaptation did it on official campaign. But I an not asking for lv 1~20, only to have around 12~15.

seems like good design that works with 5es bounded accuracy (even if i hate it)

Usea stronger enemy but only use one.
If youve played infinity engine games or other older CRPG, you never face one of an enemy, or very rareley. Or go wth pathfinder kingmaker.

CR is weird, and the way older games tended to balance encounters is by throwing hordes of level apropriate enemies at you.

So in pathfinder kingmaker youll at the start fight hordes of bandits, and move on to hordes of trolls.

This is more of a classic game way of doing it: fight stronger enemies earlier but dont fight 40 of them but one.

DnD 4e did this by giving each enemy type several stat blocks to represent yougn or injured versions of those enemies so you can use them as bosses for low level parties.

> Usea stronger enemy but only use one.


Yep. This is a good solution. Instead of fighting an horde of mindflayers, a single mindflayer can be a challenge appropriated for a low level party. And in video games, you can reload. On TT, you can't quicksave/quickload... Only create a new character.

Seems like a sound explanation to me.

Well for me level 4 cap is not a disappointment the thing to remember about the EA is it's just away to fix as many bugs as possibly and it's not going to be easy to level up like in NWN1 and NWN2 in BG3 and the level cap of the full game is level 10 so we are getting just under half of the levels in the EA

This is not unexpected news. We've known that the level cap was 10 for many months. It's not secret information. Where did you get the hallucination that you were going to be able to reach level 15-20 in this game?

If you can reach level 4 of a total level 10 game, that seems substantial. This is consistent with how Larian has done Early Access for their last three games: They give you a small portion of the game to help refine the game's systems. Even if they did give the full game, what percentage of players would be able to complete it before the next version comes out forcing them to start all over? Only the most obsessive ones, which won't lead to balanced feedback for less dedicated players.

To be honest, if a game is good enough, you should be enjoying it without even caring about progression.

I have tended to find that if I start wondering about progressing to the next level, its probably because there is nothing worthwhile left in the game for me.

On the whole, I'm not a fan of XP-reward levelling, even though everyone uses it. I would prefer character development and progression to be based on in-world activity and choices, but that seems to be beyond the horizon for most designers.

Like in most campaings, it´s not all about raw numbers. That is more important in sandbox-y campaigns, but that does not look like BG3 is going that route.

Low level adventures could work just fine if they give you plenty to do with the skills you have at your disposal at your level: options to roleplay, interactions with the environment, opportunities for caster classes, sneaky classes, diplomatic classes, or brawling classes to shine, lands to explore, loot to find, etc.

Right now we know we could use stealth, speak with the dead, use animal handling, summon an improved familiar, destroy walls, use fire, etc... So I think there´s going to be lots of things to do that do not rely on your level.

I NEVER said that. I just said that a lv cap more similar to BG2:SoA(non EE and non ToB installed) or like Dark Sun : wake of the Ravager would be better. Being capped at lv 15 is not that bad. However, see members of Veiled Alliance at lv 18 while you can only reach lv 15 is silly and having members of the Asylum on BG2 and Chapter 2 Liches throwing Stop Time which you need a scroll to cast that spell is silly IMO(note : I an talking about original BG2 with no ToB installed. With ToB installed or EE, you can have 8 M xp on SoA).

My point is simple. If I an playing a post apocalyptic RPG like FNV, I wanna use powerful firearms. I wanna use a anti materiel rifle with explosive .50 bmg rounds to snipe armored robots at 200m+. If I an playing a high fantasy RPG, I wanna use powerful supernatural abilities. 5e already nerfed to oblivion most of my favorite spells. With a lv cap = 10, I will still play BG3 due the fact that few good RPG's are being made, but will not enjoy it more than Pathfinder Wrath of the Righteous which allow you to become a Lich and reanimate bosses to serve you(and even on alpha, a lot of people tested Lich), nor like Cyberpunk 2077 which seems amazing.



I an not asking for the full game. However, warlocks getting two eldritch blast beams, fighters two attacks and wizards fireball at lv 5 doesn't seems that far fetched for a EA...




You are also ignoring that this games which campaigns up to lv 20 has you taking much more time to level up past lv 10. Even on BG2 for eg, takes more XP to go from lv 11 to 12 than from 1 to 11 as a mage. And despite doing dozens of quests on chapter 2, unless you are with a small party and do all side content possible, you will only reach lv 13+ on chapter 4+.




Yep. I was wrong saying that this game will be only autoattacks because old school games with low level focus are that way,...

Oh yeah, 3.5 low level warriors were a pain... basically autoattack for 10 levels until you can do something fun...

You do realise how close-minded and childish that sounds? You're litterally talking about 2 games that are not even out yet...

With enough information about both. One is the first game to offers lichdoom since M&M 8 - Day of the destroyer. The other is a low level game...

Your reasoning for why it would be better is based on other, different games. Yes, everyone likes more content. But we don't yet know how much content those 10 levels contains, nor how many more man-hours of time it would take to add enough content for players to reach levels 10-15. You, yourself, just said "Even on BG2 for eg, takes more XP to go from lv 11 to 12 than from 1 to 11 as a mage".




We have no idea how much content those "four levels" contains. The game is still in development and maybe there just isn't enough finished stuff to get to level 5? Maybe there's a geographic cutoff to prevent getting to level 5, beyond which the game isn't in a finished state.

Maybe the level 5 spells and abilities are not actually finished yet.




Yes, I think "close-minded and childish" is a pretty spot-on description.

I think low level is fine as long as encounters are balanced or the key is to run rather than fight sometimes ..you can tell they are really looking at the ability for players to do as much as possible, to give as much freedom for thought & ways of trying things.
I must admit slaughtering piles of kobolds & goblins i've always kinda enjoyed !

This is going to be a hell of a game ..no pun intended ....but i do agree as long as they dont gimp/nerf iconic higher level monsters - like in sword coast legends where you take on a lich at level 6 odd ....never in a million years could you survive that..

Iow to mid level campaigns can be great - bring it on !

SCS is an incredible game: It´s incredible how they managed to mangle so many good things about D&D in so little time. You have to give them credit for that. I bet iwe cannot manage to do it better even if we try.

It´s nice that the new generation of games about D&D are Solasta, Bg3 and Dark alliance, and not the last games with the label D&D.

Except that you start at lv 7 on BG2, almost lv 8 and and if you are soloing, can get animate dead(a tier 5 spell for arcane casters on 2e) and reach lv 10 at the end of the introductory dungeon. I soloed BG2:EE on Legacy of Bhaal difficulty(which only 0,4% of players completed the game in that difficulty)

Anyway, here is the mage XP table. Unless you are soloing or with a extremely small party, you will not get Stop Time and similar spells on SoA, only on ToB.




We have gameplays about BG3 and I know a lot of information about PF:WoTR alpha + the information about mythic paths that OwlCat reveled.

If having a preference for doing cool stuff in RPG's is "close minded and childish", then I an. I enjoy using powerful steampunk on steampunk games, powerful magic in high magic games and powerful firearms in sci-fi games.

Some people prefer if you could only cast magic missile on D&D and if you on fallout new vegas, din't had all cool firearms and limited you to a .38 special revolver... I love using the .45-70 brush gun, put hollow point ammo and see the wild animal heads explode, put .50 BMG high explosive ammo in the anti materiel rifle and obliterate armored robots across montains of distance, just like I love to cast Stop Time and similar powerful spells in a high fantasy game.

That said, I an not saying that I will not play BG3. Only that it would probably the third most expected RPG that I wanna play losing to a game which will have high level and a "better" ruleset(better imo) and a cyberpunk game. How many times since we got a RPG which allow lichdoom? The last decent was Might & Magic 8 - Day of The destroyer(20 years ago). And how much time since the last decent cyberpunk game? Or shooter RPG? The last good cyberpunk game was System Shock 2 and the last good shooter RPG was Fallout new Vegas. All recent 4k/Bugthesda games are trash.



Sword Coast Legends is the greatest bastarization of D&D ruleset ever. They took alway skill checks and spell slots in favor of cooldowns... In order to become a Lich, you need to be able to cast tier 9 spells and fullfil much more harsh requirements.

Hell, the Dread Necromancer 3.5e class only allow you to attain lichdoom at lv 20. And on 5e is even more complex.