Again (to Qoray), you're trading on a misinterpretation and a hold over stigma from earlier editions.
Casters are absolutely not stronger than martials, and that fallacy needs to die. It was true in earlier editions, but it's no longer the case in 5e. The best damage dealers in 5e are fighters and paladins... you don't get to a full caster for damage-dealing contribution until fourth or fifth position... and the best crowd-controllers are Monks. Control spells are powerful - but major targets have legendary resistances, and most major boss combats are over within five turns, which means that you can and often will be forced to waste most of those combats trying and failing to stick these spells, and contributing nothing, unless your DM is being exceptionally kind (because the creature can just pass the save, and often will, and only have to consider using a resist if they would fail). Conversely, creatures don't get a legendary "you don't hit" ability - and the way Larian are over-buffing attack rolls and weakening saves (as mentioned - several creatures so far have higher stats than they should, and as a result have better saving throws than they should have, as well as improper advantages), that becomes increasingly and overbearingly reliable and worthwhile, over deciding to do anything else.
Yeah, I have played enough 5e to know that that is not true. Around our current levels, there may be balance, but fighters get a couple more attacks and indomitable, but it compares in no way to the damage you can deal with summons, animate objects etc. Even Paladins only are really strong if you have a reliable way to crit, without the crit, smite is not particularily impressive. How do you do that? Hold person, hideous laughter, ...
As for monks being the best crowd controllers, I refer you back to Treantmonk:
Sleep, hideous laughter, ... all serve to critfish. One round of it is enough, it almost doubles damage from most classes, easily enough to quickly kill most enemies.
Originally Posted by Niara
I don't think anyone is saying that the attack roll spells themselves are too strong, or anything like that - the issue is that they've been made so much more reliable, buffable and favoured, while saves are substantially less effective than they should be in the current Ea, due to many factors, that players are feeling pressured into focusing on attack roll spells, because anything else is mostly a waste of a turn, in the current EA, and this isn't a good thing. There are not many attack roll spells; if players are feeling pressured into focusing on them to the near exclusion of other things, and are feeling like that's their only real option for being effective, compared to other things, then that's creating a pigeon-holed play-style that is really bad for players' flexibility, and will get worse as the game advances if it isn't addressed now.
saves are exactly the same as they are in 5e, no? They did not make saves harder... I would like enemies with higher AC and less HP more as well, but I don't think lowering save DC is a sotution to this. And what attack roll spells are you using so much? Sure, scorching ray is strong, but mostly in combination with the circlet of fire, or the hex spell. Chromatic orb mostly for the synergy with create water (I would give you disadvantage on making the save/ advantage on the attack roll with the wet condition, not giving vulnerability). Otherwise, most attack roll spells are ok, but in no way mandatory. I refer back to Aestus Guides here: https://www.aestusguides.com/guides/baldurs-gate-3-spell-tier-list
Originally Posted by Niara
Though it does rely on you getting a turn before the sleeping target is woken up... which, I'm going to be honest, happens a shockingly low percentage of the time, in most situations in EA; MOST of the time, in my experience at least, something or someone wakes the sleeping target up before a team mate can bop them, giving you effectively zero utility for the spell slot and your turn.
Probably just a difference in our playstyles or luck, but I had great success with sleep, especially in the earlier encounters. Btw while we are talking about sleep, in 5e is lasts 10 turns and the condition is weaker, yes, but more importantly, you have to ROLL for the hit point maximum. 5d8 is 22.5 on average, yes, but you can also roll a 5 and do nothing. In bg3, not only is sleep stronger (crits), but you also KNOW if your enemy has too many hit points to be effected!
Originally Posted by Lastman
No cover system = balanced moved to AC attacks
Yeah, agreed, that we need a cover system. But I think we will get that and they still are figuring that out. Probably why sharpshooter was not added yet (btw. hand crossbows are also contributing to why attacks are so strong right now, they basically give you crossbow expert for free)
