So you would favour the penalising the vast majority of traditionally offence caster's spell kits, and well over half of the usual play-styles, because one particular play-style is not (very) negatively affected? You would say that casters 'should' focus on this play-style in order to avoid the penalty? That doesn't seem like a very balanced or fair opinion to me.
I'll further note... All saving throw spells are suffering this relative penalty by proxy of the increased efficacy of attack roll spells. Enemies have not had their statistics reduced (and in several cases they are higher, in fact); they are not relatively worse at various saves in the same way that they are relatively worse at avoiding being hit. There are numerous extra ways to buff attack roll spells, and numerous benefits they get on top of these things, none of which apply to saves. There are several cases where enemies are getting advantage on saves from spells that they should not be getting, other Larian design elements hinder, negate or interrupt control spells, or those control spells have had their durations neutered, and overall the balance trend is that Larian's design really loves and wants to pressure players into favouring attack rolls, because that is how their base engine is designed and that's what they 'know'... to the vast detriment of saves, which are actually the majority of spells in D&D, offence or otherwise.
Bear in mind, of the ~210 spells that Sorcerers (traditionally offence casters) have access to, only 18 of them are attack rolls - and 6 of those are cantrips. Less than 10%. Larian's design choice here is pushing casters hard away from using save spells at all, and pressuring them to adopt play-styles that focuses heavily on just those specific attack roll spells... so balance aside, it's a terrible choice just for player freedom and versatility, and actively discourages differing play-styles and ways of enjoying the game.
Last edited by Niara; 28/11/22 12:46 AM.
