Originally Posted by Isaac Springsong
Originally Posted by Eugerome

Because there are classes that are built around hitting things - Fighter, Ranger, Rogue, Warlock. Hitting things and hitting them hard is what they are all about.

I am not saying you shouldn't use other things like surface effects/shoves, etc. I am all for using them. But if your core class abilities are about hitting things then they should be around hitting things.

And my arguments is that in 5e, the high miss chance is acceptable because it is an excellent chance for RP. Which is completely gone in BG3 because it is a video game. Instead you are stuck with messages saying: miss, miss, hit, miss, which is not fun.



No, you're wrong. It's pretty clear you don't have extensive experience with 5e if you think that the 'martial' classes should be able to hit everything to their own satisfaction.

D&D, 5e, and the Baldur's Gate series of games has always been about the party, not the person. In some fights, the big guy with the big stick will get to excel. In other fights, they have to take a backseat and have someone else excel. Or maybe the fight is such that one character has to *help* the other character, so their combined firepower is greater than each individually.

I totally agree, those classes shouldn't rely on shove or Surfaces because I absolutely despise the importing of DoS surfaces into a game system where they don't belong. The Rogue has the ability to BA hide, providing Advantage which is a huge boost in hit-chance. The Ranger has some spellcasting support like Entangle to try and Restrain the enemy, granting *all* of their allies Advantage. The Ranger also potentially has a pet or two, further adding utility to help the battle by increasing the number of attacks they get to make.

The Warlock is literally a spellcaster. Yes EB + Hex is their bread and butter, but it's not the only thing they have. Maybe you sacrifice that Hex and instead cast Hold Person, so your big fighter that was missing suddenly has Advantage *and* automatically crits, devastating the enemy.

And what about the Fighter? Well, ideally Larian will implement the rules of 5e correctly when they can. That means the Battle Master will get the Precision maneuver (add d8 to a hit to possibly turn a miss into a hit) and things like Grapple, to pin the enemy down so the ranged characters aren't getting attacked as often.

Ultimately, it's pretty clear that D&D just isn't for you. It's not an Action RPG, it's not meant to make every character feel supremely powerful in every encounter. Some enemies have Low AC, and your Fighter will wreck them. Some enemies have high AC, so your Fighter will either need help, or its your spellcasters time to shine.

Party synergy and teamwork beats everything else in D&D, and it should here too.


I don't know why you would assume 5e is not for me - I have been enjoying it as a player and a DM. But this is not about 5e, this is about BG3.

I think you are missing my point. In 5e most of the joy doesn't necessarily come from combat, but from the roleplay. The rogue will shine if your party is breaking into a dungeon, scouting ahead, stealing from npc's. But in combat you pretty much do one thing - you set up and execute Sneak Attacks.

BG3 exploration and social interactions are scaled down compared to 5e. I am sure you can't deny that. Most of the time you will be fighting.

And if during the first chapter of the game the rogue's key feature brings very little to the table, then why play it. That is the point I am trying to make.

I feel like tweaking the enemies is the simplest solution. If every goblin you faced in EA was a 7 HP 15 AC goblin then the game would quickly become incredibly boring and frustrating for classes that focus on hitting AC. Which at the moment comprise 4/6 classes in EA. I include Warlock in this because most of your time you will be using Eldrich Blast for damage output.

Which is why Larian scales goblin AC - they seem to have AC 9-14 from what I saw. Which I think is a perfectly fine approach.