Originally Posted by GiantOctopodes
Just FYI:
Haste - Mostly BG3. In 5e Haste gives an extra action, the double speed, +2 AC, and is very strong. But the things you can do with the extra action are limited, including no spells if you've already cast one and only one attack even if you have multi attack from a feature. To be fair programming that special set of haste actions and limitations would be a nightmare, but BG3 takes an already strong spell and makes it much stronger.

I honestly don't think it would be *that* difficult. I don't want to make excuses for Larian completely throwing off the balance of the game.

Originally Posted by GiantOctopodes
Multi Hit Damage bonuses - Mostly 5E. In BG3 you get ability score damage bonus while in 5E you typically need a feat, fighting style or feature to get it, but *all other* damage bonuses apply, making that one carve out weird in the first place. Larian basically giving that bonus universally instead of it being a weird one off is actually an improvement, the problem exists either way and is inherent to 5E.

Yeah, but Larian added in a ton of equipment that adds more damage bonuses per hit or makes the ones you get even stronger. I don't think 5e deserves the blame for something that Larian made like 3x as strong as it is in 5e.

Originally Posted by GiantOctopodes
Maximizing Damage being too good - That's just like, your opinion, man. BG3 has an incredible variety of ways you can approach things, and I strongly disagree with your premise that it's objectively superior to maximize damage.

I wish that were true. I love being a controller caster. But on top of Larian heavily nerfing a bunch of crowd control spells (reducing 10-turn durations to 2, for example) a bunch of the crowd control effects are actually extremely bugged. (A spell like confusion basically has to overcome two save rolls to actually do *anything at all.*) Larian *absolutely* pushes people, through gear, nerfs and bugs, to dealing damage.

Originally Posted by GiantOctopodes
Concentration being arbitrary - Entirely 5E, as far as I can tell it's a straight lift. If it feels arbitrary, that's because it is, and that's solely on WotC not Larian.

Concentration is 5e's attempt to balance casters (who, in tabletop, are still wayyyy more powerful than martials as level progression goes on, despite the very heavy nerfs they've received from previous editions.) It's also a rebalance for the fact that spells actually just WORK more now (in previous editions spellcaster's power was balanced out by monsters being way more resistant to all magic than they generally are in 5e; in 5e, you can more or less guarantee a spell will work on something if you choose the right one to use.) I actually like 5e spellcasting way more than previous editions as it makes every individual spell you cast feel more meaningful (rather than like you're just dumping out your entire spellbook), but sometimes what gets dubbed a "concentration" spell seems weird.

Originally Posted by GiantOctopodes
"Attack Rolls" being better than "DC" - Again I disagree entirely; many DC based effects are incomparable in how good they are vs effects reliant on attack rolls. Even if I agreed (which again, I don't), DCs vs Attack Rolls are pretty much straight lifts from 5E.
See above comment about CC spells (as in, most often the "save" spells) being very bugged

Originally Posted by GiantOctopodes
- Long Rest Required too often - 5E entirely, nothing is different there; ostensibly casters should be using cantrips the majority of encounters but there's zero reason in PnP to not just long rest after every encounter in almost all situations.
No, there can be every reason not to just spam long rests in pnp; that's up to the DM (time limits on a quest, area unsafe to rest in, etc.) It's computer games in general that don't do good with rest systems; I have actually never seen a single computer game that actually does a rest mechanic well.

Originally Posted by GiantOctopodes
- Poor subclass balance - 5E, BG3 is actually far, far better about this than base 5E.
In the case of wizards, absolutely not; but to be fair this is not a BG3 thing but a computer thing (several wizard subclasses are defined by abilities that just don't translate well from pnp, including the ever-suffering illusionist.) Then again, Larian weirdly decided to tune the abilities of other wizard subclasses that frankly didn't need it, so I don't know why illusionist feels so neglected.


Originally Posted by GiantOctopodes
- Terrain is trivialized - Kinda a hilarious complaint to me; given that they're not really "obstacles" per se but moreso things to play with. Combat in BG3 often features terrain which is varied and interesting, compared to the majority of D&D 5E encounters at most tables I've seen having little to no terrain variance (and in fact in most games), because terrain is complex and hard. BG3's terrain is imho one of its best features. The ritual spells you refer to are all in 5E, but unlike in 5E, BG3 has them *actually be useful* because you have terrain to interact with in the first place.

Yeah, the one thing BG3 does excellently compared to tabletop is terrain (although I think they got a little too tickled by the whole 'shoving people into chasms' thing and put those chasms everywhere. It's fun every once in a while but I don't want shove to be a save-or-die move in like half my battles.)