Larian Studios

I have experience in conditional programming, I certainly wouldn't volunteer to do it. And sure, you can call it an excuse, but I disagree with them throwing off the balance of the game because that implies it was a balanced product before they got their hands on it, when it wasn't. For example - bounded accuracy is a thing; but then let's throw in +3 swords! We have narrow number ranges; let's have Pass Without a Trace what, give advantage? Nah, let's make it a flat +10 bonus! Hey, we want weapons to be based on flavor and folks to use that which they want rather than getting into the nitty gritty of a falchion vs a scimitar. Let's have a feat though which gives an insanely massive +10 damage bonus though, and tie it to one specific class of weapons! I could go on and on of course, the point is, while Larian's decision on Haste certainly didn't help, let's not pretend like 5e would have been perfectly balanced if only it were more faithfully implemented.


Eh there's plenty of + damage items in 5e, bracers of archery are a straight lift, weapons give 4d4 damage (basically +10), the strength setting stuff? At least they don't have 5e's one setting it to 29! And so forth. Hard disagreeon it being "3x as strong as 5E"

Agree to disagree, has not been my experience, multiple fights have been trivialized by a web, much less hold person or hypnotic pattern. Confusion is like that in 5E too, it sucks. The things that are *actually* bad are for example battlemaster maneuvers that need a hit *and* a failed save; and the things that are best require neither, like Spike growth. 'Attack roll vs DC' is too context driven to be able to make a blanket generalization in either direction in my experience and in my opinion.

There can be and are reasons not to in BG3 as well; arguably more than 5e since you can't survival instead of spending rations. Timed quests? Yep BG3 has them. Areas too dangerous to rest? Yep it has those too. But in Tabletop try running every single quest as timed, or even the majority. You'll lose interest and players quickly, speaking from experience as player and DM alike. The issue with long rest spamming is 5E's unrealistic expectation of number of encounters and encounter pacing, I've *never* been in a campaign in D&D where the encounters actually match DMG expectations in number per day, in double digit adventures and campaigns run by half a dozen+ different people. BG3's resting mechanic, while handwavey, is actually extraordinarily well done for a computer game and is not more lenient than traditional tabletop.

Right but all Wizards are viable, so even if some options are more powerful than others, *none* of them result in a character which is just largely unimpactful and unenjoyable. Beastmaster Hunter in BG3 folks may argue 'feels unimpressive', but in base 5E it's an outright trap that in many ways is worse than no subclass at all, to say nothing of just buying a pet and taming and training it as literally any other class. What's the difference between a Druid with a tamed bear friend and a Ranger with one? The Ranger doesn't have to justify the training, and also, he spends his own actions to make the bear move. Yeah.... Is that a worse power disparity between say Divination Wizard and Beastmaster Ranger in 5E than it is in BG3, or than the disparity between Divination Wizard and Illusionist Wizard in BG3? In my opinion absolutely it is.



I do Or to be able to run around sanctuaried and plop down explosive barrels, or to be able to steal their weapons before we fight so they're left bare handed, or to be able to talk their leader into fighting against them, and so on and so forth. I like options, this is just one part of why I think the idea you're forced into raw damage is not even remotely true, at least not in my experience. Don't have a chasm? Create your own hazardous terrain, keep on shoving around enemies, it's a grand time. Just my opinion of course.