Originally Posted by Chief_Jericho
Originally Posted by ArcticRevenge
Originally Posted by Chief_Jericho
I'm looking at the full spell list for Wizards andd it already looks pretty offensive. Wouldn't the Sorcerer being able to create new spell slots undermine the point of having that garbage approach to magic in the first place making it OP?

Right now, with the wizard being able to learn every spell in the game, yes you're right it's a bit irrelevant to compare spell lists. It's not like that in the tabletop, and i think wizards shouldn't be able to learn everything precisely because it undermines the identy of other spellcasters.

As for the undermining, it really isn't because you have a limited pool of metamagic points, and the conversion is expensive.

Number of metamagic points = sorcerer level.

Spell points-to-created-spell-slot cost:
lvl 1 slot: 2 points
lvl 2 slot: 3 points
lvl 3 slot: 5 points
lvl 4 slot: 6 points
lvl 5 slot: 7 points

You can convert spell slot into points to gain 1 point per spell level. (Player handbook page 101)

Also keep in mind that these points are also used to fancy up your spells.

Putting aside TT rules for the moment (because I haven't the faintest what they are) it might be a better approach if the Wizard focused on crowd control and the Sorcerer was a damage dealer. That would give them two distinct gameplay experiences in the game, meaning both could be useful if used in the same party.


Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD
I believe we still dont understand each other ...

You're correct because the problem is you are approaching this from a D&D enthusiasts perspective. This is not a TT game, it's a video game, a very different beast. Remember, your average BG3 player on release is not going to be an enthusiast, they're going to be a gamer, and all that junk you listed has to be translated into a fun gameplay experience for the player. Sure you can turn shocking grasp into a ranged spell but how is it functionally different to Witch Bolt? Gameplay styles should be different. To expand on the example I gave above, you could have DoT vs Burst Damage dealing. That offers the two roles very different gameplay experiences. I can have a choice between walloping one or two baddies out of the fight and then being restricted to catnips the rest of the fight or I can whittle them all down over time, weakening them for my damage dealers to finish them off. In this scenario you can even have both in the party at the same time.

But this isn't what I'm seeing. I'm not against the Sorcerer being put in, I just don't see the point. Also bear in mind that - and no offence to Larian - modders usually do a better job of this sort of thing than game developers. After all, the Sorcerer class is already in the game. Wouldn't it be better for Larian to focus on releasing the full game rather than risking feature creep?

I will respectfully disagree with you.

The original TT rules does a lot to differentiate with Sorcerer and Wizard, in particular with Metamagic. They are big. Big enough that multiclassing into Sorcerer is a strategy to improve one's offensive casting abilities heavily. Also the TT rules work and as shown in the game that must not be mentioned, have been proven to work in a video game format. And metamagic is very very new player friendly, cause it allows them to mess around with the systems and experiment with little risk and a lot of reward.
to me, as a DnD enthusiast, there is a lot of reason to put sorcerer in as is, and even detatching my experience with 5e I feel the existing rules does a lot to make sorcerer feel completely different and in fact would fit even better in a videogame compared to the more broad but limited wizard.