Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Would the game be better if there were no minimum stat requirements for multi-classing?

The stat requirements are mostly there to protect players from making catastrophically useless characters. Removing them would not be a benefit to anyone. Now in terms of weapon proficiencies you can gain those without terrible multiclassing if you are hell bent on having a sword wielding wizard if you so wish. For example the Gythyanki come with +1 INT racial trait which lends itself well to Wizards whose abilities scale with intelligence but they also come with light and medium armor proficiency as well as weapon proficiencies for shortswords, longswords, and greatswords so you can be a well armored wizard wielding some decent weapons without giving up too much.

In addition it appears that BG3 also plays by at least some of the rules introduced by Tasha's Cauldron of Everything and it allows you to remove the racial points of every race and spend them as you wish. So take Githyanki for example...they normally have +1 INT and +2 STR...but let's say you want to play as a Githyanki Warlock and those stats don't do anything for Warlocks. Well you can remove those 3 points and spend them where you wish...in the case of a Warlock adding +2 CHA and +1 WIS would be much better. You can do that!

I don't see it as being unhinged, I see it as being deliberately
sarcastic.


While I understand the desire for inclusivity and allowing players to have more freedom in their character choices, it's important to maintain a balance between player agency and game mechanics. The rules in Dungeons and Dragons, including race and class restrictions, are designed to create a coherent and balanced gameplay experience.

Allowing a character with low intelligence to multi-class as a wizard may seem inclusive on the surface, but it goes against the core essence of the wizard class. Wizards rely heavily on their intelligence for spellcasting and arcane knowledge. Allowing a character with low intelligence to become a wizard would undermine the thematic and mechanical foundations of the class, resulting in a diminished experience for both the player and the group. I believe also by taking away racial strengths and multiclass rules we are doing the game and the players an injustice.

Similarly, the variation in weapon damage is an intentional part of the game's design. It adds depth and strategic choices to combat encounters. Equalizing all weapon damage would remove a significant aspect of the game's tactical gameplay, where players must consider the strengths and weaknesses of different weapon types.

In summary, while it's important to consider inclusivity, it's equally vital to maintain the integrity of the game's mechanics and thematic consistency. Striking a balance between player agency and maintaining the integrity of the rules leads to a more engaging and enjoyable gameplay experience for everyone involved.

I understand that Hasbro can and did create the work around for the removal of the inherent racial bonus, but I cant find any rule for removing multi class dipping 'OTHER than house rules'

Hopefully it won't be long before modders fix this and add in requirements for multiclassing and bring the pre-Tasha's Cauldron stats back.

Exactly my point. But it is only valid if we assume that people actually care for the coherency of the world they immerse themselves into. And with DnD, it is not universally the case. This is the game where an assassin can look like a colorful clown to abide by its individuality. In terms of common sense this is illogical, even blasphemous. If you've respected the world then you'd go for something less noticeable, which could hide you in the crowd after a successful murder. But if your main priority is to enjoy yourself, not the world you are operating within, then whatever? Same here. The wizard with 8 INT example I made earlier as well is purely hypothetical, @Darth_Trethon. It was to showcase yet another hole, another contradiction between the player, the character and the world they want to explore.

You know, I've never used a mod in any game I've played. Not because of some moral high ground blah blah, honestly I'm a little scared. Im afraid ill screw something up.

I have seen some mods for cloths and such, they look a lot better than what's in EA

Why would it need to be modded out?
We can simply choose to put 13s in the classes we are multi-classing into.
Nothing is stopping us from adhering to the D&D rules.

Technically, you are absolutely right. But there is one 'if', that I've briefly mentioned in another thread. By making the most non-restrictive option into a default one, they are cutting everyone who wants to stick with the core D&D rules from 90% of the content in forms of guides, builds and tips that'll be made about the game. Not a huge deal for some, but I know people who are fond of using interesting established builds from the internet and they'll be forced to either adapt to the new rules or adapt the builds to fit into the core ruleset. Not an end of the world, but it can be pretty annoying, I imagine.

That is an absolutely fair point.

That was something I hadn't considered and I can see that being annoying.
Thanks for getting me to look at the issue from another perspective.
I appreciate it!

When playing in single-player mode that's true. But when playing in multiplayer, especially with strangers, it is a different beast.

And as I hope for a core rules mod, modding the multiclass requirements and restoring the original stats are part of that.

I maybe wrong, wouldn't be the first time. If we are only getting +1 +2

Then my Shield dwarf loses a +1 which could be the difference of getting me to 20 in a stat, which is big. And assuming the rest of the points we get to aliquot
are the same Ill have no way of making that +1 up.

This decision may be in part why they'll allow infinite (?) complete resets. It will have to be viewed in the framework of this mechanic existing.

I'm personally much, much more concerned about the power boost... combined with the lack of requirements. If I got this right, Larian will make fireball available to every level 5 character, multi class or no. Depending on just how unhinged this implementation is, the lack of requirements can be varying levels of disastrous. Go 5 levels paladin, one level whatever for fireball...

We may be all able to agree this is crazy and "just don't use fireball?" facetious. The issue is when it becomes tolerable enough for some people to ask said question again.

This is a homebrew I've seen a few times. Some multiclass restrictions are awkward and end up forcing you to put points where they aren't useful to your build.

That said I'll personally probably still distribute the points as if the restriction was still there. I like my characters to line up with how I'd build them on the tabletop.

What really amazes me is the notion that WotC would agree to a change so likely to result in first time D&D players having a bad experience.

Oh yeah, lol. Players will start with the freedom of BG3, making all types of wacky-but-still-powerful multiclassed characters. This might encourage them to try PnP D&D 5.5e, expecting to basically understand the rules and create similar characters, and WHAM they'll be hit with tons of restrictions that severely limit their characters' strength, available actions, and flexibility.

It sounds more like they are implementing the multi-class spell slot progression, but then letting you cast spells with those slots from any of the classes you chose. So you would only have access to the full spell list of everything if you took at least one level in Cleric, Druid, Bard, Ranger, Paladin, Wizard, Wild Magic Sorcerer, and Warlock.

Those rules would also dictate that you would need to be one level of an arcane class and 8 levels of Paladin to get fireball. 1+8/2 for the spell level progression.

As has been pointed out, in the vast majority of cases, you're going to completely gimp your build if you don't get ay least a 13 into your new class. It's such a much ado about nothing, it's not going to make the game unbalanced in an exploitable way for the vast majority of times, rather the opposite. It's a recipe for newbies to gimp their characters.

Unless you are going to dip one or two levels, you would want absolute synergy in your multiclass. That means your main stats in one class are very useful in the other and feats and class features significantly meld well together. Easiest way to do this is find classes that share the same main stat and maximise that where possible.

If you're going for a dip, the vast majority of times, you get much more out of it by having at least 13 in the 2nd classes stat too, otherwise you're minimising the synergy. There's a few possible builds where you get something particular not related to the stat, like maybe channel divinity (storm sorc/tempest cleric). But the opportunity cost for that is giving up 2 high level sorc spells for a once per day ability and 2 first level spells prepared and armor prof. Rogue dips need finesse weapons to activate sneak attack and you might as well go dex then.

Two paladin then wizard would be tempting though, but you still give up 6th spells and are only attacking one and you really want to be using spells as much as possible from level 5 on, so it's still a big trade off.

I think a few people got the spell 'improvements' wrong though. He mentioned spell slots in the other thread, not spell levels Getting your caster level the same as your character level for multiclass is just downright broken. A paladin 6 who also casts as an 11th or 12th level sorcerer would just be insanely powerful even for tactician. At least I'm really hoping this isn't the case, I'm pretty relaxed about adding options, but this one would be too much even for me. Maybe only available in story mode

(Just to be clear I know the current rules add your spell slots together, but you only get the spells of the levels you have in each class, although you can upcast them. Gaining access to the higher level spells too is just too much imo)

Seriously though, table top gaming would be taking the hit here. Especially with how their new UAs keep making classes worse

Financially, they are doing that to maybe 5% of players to the benefit of 95% of players. That part makes sense. The problem is that it allows non-DnD players to make bad decisions.

That's slightly better. Still, 5 + 1 or 8 + 1, one singular level? Do you find that works out in practice?

Same. How are people cheering an orc wizard or a halfling barbarian. Goes against established lore going back 80 years.