Ah sorry. I read it wrong. That’s actually a fair compromise since the game does not offer cover.
That would even work with sharpshooter feat if Larian decides to include it.
Yeah, don't worry, it's an easy thing to get lost in the wording.
One major difference between the BG3 and Solasta communities is how the Solasta community is generally focused on discussing the combat. Although that's really all Solasta has over BG3, but regardless, I bring this up because you get amusing rule lawyering debates here and there, just like in tabletop DnD.
There used to be a pretty crazy bug with the Solasta Greenmage. For the uninitiated, it's a homebrew Wizard archetype that gets access to the Archery fighting style, shortbow and light armor proficency, and can add several Ranger spells to their spellbook such as Faerie Fire, Goodberry and Hunter's Mark. This makes Greenmage a scary competent arcane archer, something that doesn't really exist in 5E except through the fighter archetype of the same name (which doesn't get access to spells at all, but has a bunch of magical arrows instead). Greenmage going off of feedback is by far the most popular Solasta archetype, some going as far as to say that they wish it was an actual official archetype, even if Shock Arcanist is a much stronger blaster archetype.
Anyway, since Greenmage had access to Hunter's Mark, there was a point in the earliest phases of Solasta EA where Hunter's Mark actually interacted with spells that made attack rolls. By tabletop rules, it wasn't supposed to. However, Solasta's wording of the Hunter's Mark spell lead some to believe that this was an intended change and a perk of Greenmage (it did not specify that the bonus damage die would only apply to weapon attacks), so some brief rule lawyering debates broke out about that in the otherwise quiet Solasta discord until the lead developer came in and said it was a bug.
And all doubts on it being a bug were blown away when I discovered a ridiculous interaction between Hunter's Mark and Scorching Ray in that game.
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachme...85101568/Scorching_Ray_L4_HM_VS_Boss.pngThat was an upcasted level 3 Scorching Ray one-shotting the hardest boss during that EA phase. What happened was that *each ray* was rolling *4* Hunter's Mark die, because 4 of the base rays hit the boss, turning what was supposed to be 4 damage rolls into 20.
The game could not fit this total absurdity onto the screen, let alone the normally highly informative combat log.Programming is hard, ya'll.
And yeah, I would love for Sharpshooter feat to be in the game (I want to play a Sharpshooter College of Valor Bard), but I suspect it won't be implemented as long as high ground advantage is a thing. Otherwise it'd be WAY too powerful when the -5 accuracy penalty may as well not even exist while you're on high ground.
---
I'd support that as well. or even if it scaled by how much higher the verticality is to mirror cover.
At the moment, I'm just going with a flat +2 AC bonus, as I'm not sure the game's programming has a way to track exactly how much higher you are relative to an enemy attacking below you beyond a 'yes/no' interaction past a certain threshold like the high ground advantage/disadvantage system. A scaling bonus would be preferable, but I suspect the developers really wouldn't want to mess with that too much, judging from the crazy grenade throw distance that some of the goblins seem to be capable of.
DnD does incentivize having the party collaborate, while Divinity OS2 allows the player to be a solo contributor. I think it's okay for Larian to have mechanics that let players in Baldur's Gate 3 play as a solo contributor. However it should not limit the player's choices in combat.
Hmm, that is true. That is an argument that I had not considered. However, as you've said, BG3's current design does allow characters to be solo contributors, but at the moment, it's at a big cost to the amount of viable tactical choices you can consider.
