Originally Posted by Henry NYC
Originally Posted by geala
Originally Posted by Henry NYC
Control spells are good throughout the game. Later in the game, your casters can have spell DC => ~20. Enemies will need something like Legendary Resistances to effectively resist.

A good case is Trickery Cleric Shadowheart.
As long as you don't resec, Shadowheart is able to effectively "command" some of the toughest enemies in the game.
Examples:
. Act 0 Zhalk (big boss at the start of the game)
. Act 2 Biggest Boss
. Act 3 All (but one) Steel Watchers
At the climax of Shadowheart's quest line, if she is NOT respec'ed, she can effectively disarm/disable the huge army she may have to fight. She can also summon an ally who has an extremely potent (small radius, though) control spell.

I love Shadowheart.

I also love Shadowheart, in several ways. But why should she disable/disarm people? Why not nuke the wet crowd with her giant aoe spells she has as Thunder Cleric? It's over much faster and more reliably, mostly.

This is just a showcase of "control" spells.

If you turn Shadowheart into a follower of the thunder god in order to eventually have her deal out a guaranteed minimum amount of 80x2 = 160 damage either on the party's 1st turn or by her own 2nd turn, what's left for you to enjoy most of those well crafted battles in Act 3?

On a side note, the more burst damage (from abilities not from items like barrels) you do, the more frequent long rests you have to take, which breaks immersion. Every rest is a break. Also, killing a large group in Act 3 with burst damage (again not from items) most likely requires level 11-12.

On the other hand, throughout Act 1 to 3, once you have disabled/disarmed a few key opponents, you are almost guaranteed a victory with no sweat. You wouldn't have to take a rest (break!) before & after every fight. You would be able to explore many places without a single break. This would feel nice and natural (in terms of roleplay), or not?

One could argue that it's a bigger break of immersion if your party dies and you have to start again. Really, I think most players are going to be more concerned with winning the combat, because if they lose then they just have to start over. And doing damage is just more obviously reliable for that. In BG3 I find control spells feel like way more of a gamble when I have damage options handy. I tend to use them more in Solasta, but the tweaks in this game have it so that when I'm calculating what's the best way to not lose, reliably doing damage seems like the better option. I would imagine that people look at the calulation as less "if I go all out now I will have to rest" and more "I can go all out now because I can rest after." They want to win, and they approach in the way circmustances allow them to most reliably do that.