Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Question RE: Edition Choice

With the game doing all the calculations and rolling for you, 3.5e mechanics wouldn't be any more difficult for a player to grasp.

Well i suppose you conclude you ran out of things to say then.
I made a pretty coherent argument why 3.5s issues cannot be solved by beeing emulated by a computer.

The only reason spellcasters are not ridicolously dominant in 5E is because the vast overwhelming majority of 5E campaigns don't get into the 12+ level territory. That's it.

I did a bit more research and found this is far, far, FAR from the whole story. For example, in 3.5e, the dominance of spellcasters had a lot to do with their ability to buff themselves sky-high, which is gone from 5e thanks to the concentration mechanic and reworking of buffs, killing CoDzilla. Also, spells no longer gain power automatically (outside cantrips) and non-spellcasters received significant buffs that make them more dangerous and survivable, such as barbarian rate halving damage received and rogues getting unlimited 3e style defensive rolls with no save needed at level five. That last one will be interesting to see implemented, actually.

Charm and illusion spells will still mess up your fighters on higher levels. Magic was never really about dealing damage, it was about control, and casters still have that covered.

Dungeons & Dragons 3rd Edition (and Pathfinder) - The first case of this being shown. All casters benefited from their casting stats contributing to how many times they could cast in a day, all spells scaled with the caster's level, and spells were so potent that you could actually cast them during a turn without risk of losing it while prepping it. Also present is metamagic, which allows a caster to add extra effects to a spell for the cost of a higher spellslot than intended.
...
Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition - Also attempted to solve this problem with less overtly new mechanics. Their solution was, firstly, to remove the idea of spells automatically increasing in potency due to their caster's level except for cantrips; in this version, you have to sacrifice a spell-casting slot of higher level to increase the might of your spells. They also removed the "chain of buffs" approach that had been integral to CoDzilla; most buffs became "Concentration" Spells, preventing you from casting more than one and also making it riskier to go into battle whilst buffed yourself. Finally, "minion mastery" spells were heavily nerfed.
Meanwhile, martials are fundamentally similar to their 3e counterparts but with major defensive buffs: fighters can replenish a chunk of HP in one turn and reroll saving throws, barbarians roll twice for dex saves and rage now halves damage from attacks, and rogues get the benefits of 3e Defensive Roll at level 5 but with unlimited uses and no save needed. Casters still have the edge in sheer versatility, but over time high-level martials can match their damage output and are much harder to kill.

Wizards in 5e are designed to augment the other party members when they "do their thing". Wizards help rogues be better rogues, fighters be better fighters, etc. They can also, I'm a pinch, take on someone else's role (but without any of the style or finesse that specific class brings to the role). Wizards can open locks, but not silently. Wizards can cast sleep on a crowd, but it is a waste of a spell if they don't let the fighter or the rogue whittle down some hp on the baddies first.

In 3.5/Pathfinder, they tried to follow the same path but it got out of hand. Wizards ended up being better than everyone at anything they put their minds to. Greater invisibility and zones of silence negates the rogue (and doesn't really cost the caster that much). A single summon spell left the fighter twiddling his thumbs as beings that could die without cost went into the fray instead. Wizards stopped helping out and started just solving all the problems by themselves, leaving every noncasting class in the dust around level 6 or so. Most of the game was waiting for the wizards and other casters to win the game for them or overcompensating by building super OP charge builds to stay relevant (while the casters still were able to do everything without a problem or much work). An unoptimized caster beat an optimized martial player or skill monkey at least half the time.

To someone who liked 3.5/Pathfinder, 5e will seem like a nerf. Casters have less spells and can't have as many going at the same time. And technically, it is a nerf, 5e casters aren't the gods of everything that they were in the past. And that's a good thing. Your friend just needs to understand what the new wizard is, and the new wizard is everyone's best friend instead of a genie out of his lamp. He'll have to get used to it but he'll come around.

Yes, BG1 and 2 were 2.0; we had no games based on 3.5 and it is unfortunate that there weren't any. Nowhere was it declared that DnD belongs to 3.5 players - it seems like you just have a chip on your shoulder.

I must jump in here and give NWN2 a shoutout (which used 3.5E). The base game was merely decent, but I personally think the expansion (Mask of the Betrayer) is a work of art. One of the best DnD stories to date, and by far my most favorite epic level campaign. You should try it out if you haven't had a chance to play it. The other expansion, Mysteries of Westgate is also worth a play IMO.

I agree that Mask of the Betrayer was a work of art. But it wasn't because of 3.5... it was because the writing was amazing. DnD 3.5 did its job I suppose, but the combat was just "okay" and probably would not have been worth the hassle if the story had not been so exceptional.

as a dnd noob who knew 2nd ed through BG 1&2 i found the 3rd (3.5) ed of NWN(2?) to be a step too far in terms of wtf does all this shit mean: "here's a list of a billion feats make sure u chose the right ones or else!" - in the end alt-tab to walkthrough became the most powerful feat of all. BG3 EA had me doing almost none of that. just mai 2 scents

I loved the feat system in 3.5 - I felt like it gave a better system for really customizing your PC (although, I always liked it more for the RP aspects, than to try to optimize my PC - I don’t really care if my PC is “the best” as long as I can act out my vision for the character - also, DM’s are supposed to take the party into account when drafting their campaigns - that is not really an option in a video game, though : /)

Do you remember at some points in your life when you were listening megadeth some old rocker would tell you led zeppelin is the best and thats how that music should be,
it feels exactly same when an old person claims about how 2nd edition was better or3rd or whatever

The only good thing with that was probably different weapons got different speeds.

Like everything else DnD evolves with positives and negatives depending on your point of view.
Anygame should be using the latest edition avilable tbh, it is out dated otherwise as a start.
It can be changed /modified, according to designing needs which will also give an oppotunity to fix what you see wrong.

out dated otherwise as a start.

That would assume that new = better && old = worse, which is not true.