Larian Studios
So I know we are limited to six classes during EA, which is completely understandable, but I'm just wondering what class/kit additions everyone else is most excited for?

Not going to go over kits, but if I'm understanding correctly the unimplemented classes so far are:

  • Paladin
  • Druid
  • Monk
  • Sorcerer
  • Bard
  • Barbarian


Personally, I'm most excited for a Paladin implementation. Will be interesting to see how they handle alignment and potentially fallen Paladins.
I'm looking forward to playing Bard and Sorcerer, but a part of me also wants to save them for the game's full release where I intend to pick one of those classes for my main character.
I am looking forward to Druid, but only if they end up adding the Circle of Spores option (published in Tasha's Cauldron of Everything and Guildmaster's Guide to Ravnica).
'Hulk smash' half-orc barbarian, and then maybe monk. Bard for roleplaying.
Halfling barbarian, half-orc bard
Half-orc sorcerer and drow paladin sound fun to me smile
Bard
Elementalist monk is my one meme spec and it is sacred to me.
So far barbarian. I'm thinking either human, half orc, or half wood elf. Recently though I've had this growing concern for the variety of attack animations for physical melee characters. I hope that they aren't just copy paste animations with different word appearing over their heads. If that turns out to be the case I'll fall back on my trusty half wood elf Eldritch Knight. Physical melee characters deserve good and varied animations too.
High Charisma classes is usually what I enjoy to RP the most, so naturally I am looking forward the most to Sorcerer, Bard and Paladin.
That said I played one of each now, so I will happily play anything new the game has to offer ^^
Druid and bard, definitely. They offer something that the classes that we have do not have.
I'm looking forward to playing a paladin, oath: vengeance or ancients.
8 cha half-orc bard who subjects their comrades to nothing but terrible cover versions on a downtuned lute
Sorcer. I love Metamagic and the sorcerer's concept of innate power. Every time I play BG2 I play as sorcerer, which - to me - feels most matching with the bhaalspawn "origin"^^
Originally Posted by alice_ashpool
8 cha half-orc bard who subjects their comrades to nothing but terrible cover versions on a downtuned lute


Give him flute.

That has surely got be deliberately bad. I mean, not every one can play the recorder well, but those who are not good will rarely video themselves doing it.
Sorcerer. Maybe druid, but this depends on how they are implemented.
probably paladin, but were prolly not getting conquest paladin so its a bit dampened
Not classes but subclasses. Specifically waiting for Assassin and Swashbuckler.
All about that sorcerer
Probably History or PE...
Originally Posted by Sordak
probably paladin, but were prolly not getting conquest paladin so its a bit dampened


Yeah, conquest pally best pally. Really hope they implement more subclasses from outside the PHB
Playing a shadow monk is going to feel so smooth with the shadow system in this game. You think darkness is your ally?
Im looking forward to seeing how they implement bards im hoping we can actually do things with instruments
1) Druid
2) Bard
Druid most definitely. I have several druid characters I wanna try.

Plus I am curious what sort of secrets in the grove I can find as a druid who can read druidic.
Honestly cannot wait to play a bard! I would love to have different instrument options too! (Maybe have the same layout of choosing an instrument on character creation like DOS2)
Paladin, paladin and paladin. Though I'm going by prior editions here; maybe I won't end up liking the 5e version as much.

Also druid and bard. Sorcerer might be interesting, depending on how the draconic bloodlines are implemented.
im hoping for bladesinger.
Halfling Monk. For reasons.
Originally Posted by CommissarChloe
Im looking forward to seeing how they implement bards im hoping we can actually do things with instruments


Same here - I wanted to Multiclass Warlock/bard and sing songs of the Great Old Ones. But this depends on how they implement Bards and how they implement multiclassing. At worse I'd have a healing word to pick up downed allies.
Posted By: guy Re: What class are you most looking forward too? - 14/11/20 01:48 PM
Sorceror.
Barbarian.
Psion.
Posted By: guy Re: What class are you most looking forward too? - 14/11/20 01:49 PM
Originally Posted by TheOtherTed
Halfling Monk. For reasons.


Halfling monk/pali multiclass wink
Originally Posted by alice_ashpool
Halfling barbarian, half-orc bard



Oh, you powergamer you.


For me, I want monks. I can't wait to see how many of their class features Larian has chosen not to include.
Monk, but....

Well I'm pessimistic about Larian's ability to implement monks period. They already gave step of the wind to everyone for free, patient defense (dodge) hasn't been implemented but I have little reason to believe it won't be a bonus action for everyone as well. I'm fairly certain that shadow step will be nerfed in the name of game balance, which makes shadow monks much worse. On the flip side they might actually fix four elements monks, but I won't be holding my breath.
Barbarian was an absolute badass in Baldur's Gate 2. Bards and druids are also great choices. In my youth I favoured the paladin, but I got better.
Necromancer Mage for sure. :3

Does 5E have the Pale Master or equivalent? I loved playing as in HotU.

Also regarding Paladins, given there is no alignments as such are Blackguard going to be a starting sub class or is it just the good/law aligned ones?
Originally Posted by Dee_MogII
Does 5E have the Pale Master or equivalent? I loved playing as in HotU.

No Pale Master, I'm afraid, but the Wizard's Necromancy specialism is pretty fun.
Druid laugh

To me its the best class, it can do anything.
Originally Posted by Khultak
Monk, but....

Well I'm pessimistic about Larian's ability to implement monks period. They already gave step of the wind to everyone for free, patient defense (dodge) hasn't been implemented but I have little reason to believe it won't be a bonus action for everyone as well. I'm fairly certain that shadow step will be nerfed in the name of game balance, which makes shadow monks much worse. On the flip side they might actually fix four elements monks, but I won't be holding my breath.


What makes you think that they are going to nerf shadowstep?
At most it gives you double the range of dash for movement speed for the cost of a bonus action. It's also already dependent on where shadows/dim light are located. Also, everyone already gets free advantage, so I doubt they'd remove that. I don't really see where there would be cause for nerfs.
this class :P

Temptress
Originally Posted by Evil_it_Self
this class :P

Temptress

i for one enjoy how unashamedly thirsty you are in every post, "Evil_it_Self"
We get a preview of the druid class when you choose to let halsin fight his way out of the sanctum with you. Unfortunately the healing & summon companion spells do not work when controlled directly.
Originally Posted by alice_ashpool
Originally Posted by Evil_it_Self
this class :P

Temptress

i for one enjoy how unashamedly thirsty you are in every post, "Evil_it_Self"



WELL, THANK YOU !!
I doubt that the devs will get permission to put in Unearthed Arcana classes but I would like to see a Theurgist. To me it always made sense that Mystra's clergy would have as many wizards as clerics as devotees and I prefer building caster clerics to martial clerics.

http://dnd5ed.wikidot.com/wizard:theurgy
Originally Posted by KillerRabbit
I doubt that the devs will get permission to put in Unearthed Arcana classes but I would like to see a Theurgist. To me it always made sense that Mystra's clergy would have as many wizards as clerics as devotees and I prefer building caster clerics to martial clerics.

http://dnd5ed.wikidot.com/wizard:theurgy

Arcane domain cleric is probably more likely as its already in the sword coast book
You're probably right. Still, here's hoping smile
Originally Posted by Evandir
Originally Posted by Khultak
Monk, but....

Well I'm pessimistic about Larian's ability to implement monks period. They already gave step of the wind to everyone for free, patient defense (dodge) hasn't been implemented but I have little reason to believe it won't be a bonus action for everyone as well. I'm fairly certain that shadow step will be nerfed in the name of game balance, which makes shadow monks much worse. On the flip side they might actually fix four elements monks, but I won't be holding my breath.


What makes you think that they are going to nerf shadowstep?
At most it gives you double the range of dash for movement speed for the cost of a bonus action. It's also already dependent on where shadows/dim light are located. Also, everyone already gets free advantage, so I doubt they'd remove that. I don't really see where there would be cause for nerfs.



Honestly shadowstep is far better than dash, it is a double ranged misty step (dash-disengage-fly) that has no cost other than a bonus action and the restriction that it begins and ends in an area of dim light or darkness that you can see. That little indicator shows just how prevalent dim light is in most environments. It is this way because the upper level shadow monk abilities are relatively weaker than most other monk subs and it fits thematically with the ninja-like fantasy. It is essentially the only real reason to play a shadow monk, IMO. But I honestly suspect they will add a limit to the ability to make it more in line with misty step, nerfing it into the ground. I honestly hope not, but I remain pessimistic at this point based on the action economy homebrew they are using.
Sorcerer, absolutely. Though which one, not sure? Depends on which they add in. If it'll be the base ones, Wild Magic will be super fun, I think! Otherwise I'm a big fan of Aberrant Mind which could be very fun with the Mindflayer themes
Gnome Dex Barbarian.
Shadow Monk for sure, if they eventually allow multiclassing, I start as Rogue, then go into Monk. I usually go halfling, but I don't like what they made halflings look like in early access. I hope they fix the halfling look.
Conjuration Wizard with Tasha's Summoning Spells
Will kineticist be added/are they a thing in DnD? My lightning kineticist in pathfinder satisfies the desire for unlimited power i never knew i had.
Bard
Bard, I am looking forward for the bard class !

I would also welcome Sorcerer smile
Multiclass Thief/Sorcerer! The potential is amazing depending on how they implement Metamagic.
Originally Posted by CommissarChloe
Im looking forward to seeing how they implement bards im hoping we can actually do things with instruments
This one time, at Bard Camp...
Sorcerer - my favorite class to be play IRL (tabletop). Love the idea of being magical, not simply using magic.
Bard
Looking most forward to the overpowered multiclass everyone keeps talking about to be honest wink

Beyond that, Bard...but subclasses will heavily influence my choice of class. So I'm thinking more along the lines of Hexblade, Gloom Stalker, Divine Soul, than Warlock, Ranger or Sorcerer.
Sorcerer and a multiclassed Sorcerer!
Sorcerer, if I am being traditionalist
First I'd like the Great Old One Warlock to be finished or revised, since what we have now feels more like a cookie-cutter default warlock. The Fiend pact Warlock has extra dialogue in the game too and might have extra options in Astarions and Wylls personal quests, so the half-finished feel of the GOOlock stands out all the more.

After that, Barbarian. And Half-orc. Also Gnome.

Then Sorcerer.
Hmm, probaby Paladin, Barbarian, Monk, and Sorcerer. These classes I rarely got to play back in my DnD days. I love wizard, but sorcerer always appealed to me. I am curious how they will roll with Bard though and understand why it is something they are taking their time on since it is the class that is literally the jack of all trades.

As far as races I'd like to see. Half-orc (although full Orc would be a nice touch, but half-orc will do), I know Gnome is coming so not too worried about not seeing them, but one of my favorites. Sorry halfling lovers, but gnomes do it better. wink Also would like to see the Planetouched (Aasimar, Genasi) and Githzerai added. Would be interesting to see how Laezal interacts with a Githzerai Monk since they have a shared foe, but fight in totally different manners and view points. Not that you asked for that opinion on that, but just something I'd like to see.
Originally Posted by fylimar
Bard

Bard Bard!
As many other I can not wait for Bard and Sorcerer.
I guess it's no surprise that no one has mentioned my favorite class. I'm not kidding when I say that for me it is the fighter class. If the level cap is high enough I will certainly mix in some second class, but fighter is the most fun class to play for me. In second place is ranger (just for the pet), and paladin third. I only have an interest in playing melee-martial classes, and will add in some spellcasting class only as a possible secondary class, for example fighter-sorcerer or ranger-cleric.
I got my druid! Still looking forward to paladin and bard.
I'm torn, I'm confident we will get Paladin. But, I want sorcerer.
Monk and Paladin, no doubts about that.
99% i can assure you its not going to happen. There is no such thing in DnD, they had a subclass like that in testing and scrapped it 3 Years ago because it was to strong.
Bard bard bard bard!
Sorceror...really want to mess around with meta magic

Assuming Karlach is a Paladin, I may not play one. It's awfully similar to a fighter/cleric and from a RP standpoint, I just have no interest in playing a cleric
monk, that sounds like its gonna be a ton of fun. just having a hard time figuring out RP and whether they would still believe in a certain deity or not
Gotta say, I can't wait to play a Bard.
Bard. Here's to hope that Larian doesn't butcher the class too much.
Originally Posted by Innateagle
Will kineticist be added/are they a thing in DnD? My lightning kineticist in pathfinder satisfies the desire for unlimited power i never knew i had.

Warlock is closest mechanically (but not really all that close) but the flavor is totally different.
I think Four Elements Monk is the closest, but it's not really the same either. Since that's probably the least liked of the Monk subclasses I'd say it's probably nowhere as ridiculously powerful as kineticists are either
I very much want to play a monk, unarmed combat is one of my favorite combat styles in games and I want to play it so badly in BG3 I am curious as to how they will handle the monk with all of its different abilities it gains at higher levels (such as running up walls) But that is something to look forward to when the game is out of EA.
I'm curious to see what Sorcerer subclass will make it in. I know they've been basically going with the Player Handbook's choices, but I can't help but feel like the recently published aberrant mind sorcerer would be perfect for this campaign.
Okay htis is an easy question to answer

Datamining/leaks indicate we will have 8 party members, A druid, wizard, warlock, ranger, paladin, cleric, fighter, rogue

So the classes I am looking forward to, are Bard, Sorcerer, Barbarian, and Monk.

Whatever class is not a companion will be my canonical class.

If they could spin Volo into a bard companion, that would be great because then I could eliminate that from the list.

(Karlach could in theory be a barbarian, or a paladin, either would fit her whole deal I think)

The more companions the better, so I can pick out my class easier XD
Bards and sorcerers.
Originally Posted by Dexai
I think Four Elements Monk is the closest, but it's not really the same either. Since that's probably the least liked of the Monk subclasses I'd say it's probably nowhere as ridiculously powerful as kineticists are either

Fair. I guess I was thinking of the 3.5E warlock, but in 5E its definitely the Four Elements Monk. But even there the similarity is mostly in flavor rather than power and ability.
I just realised that because of the relative lack of good heavy armour in the EA the Barb and Monk is going to have a relative power boost during it.

Also I hope they remember to give the Barbarian clothing instead of armour.
Definitely Sorcerer. Don't have any 5e acquaintance, 3.5 mostly, so looking forward to.
(Tried warlock, sort of fun, but didn't really fit me.)
For full classes, this game will feel incomplete to me without Artificer being an option.
"But it's not set in Eberron."
So? That doesn't matter. Just because there's not already a place full of people doing what artificer's do as a commonplace thing doesn't mean there can't be some people out there trying to do such things.
The only distinction would be that it doesn't look as advanced as you'd expect of an Eberron setting. Heck, you could even justify random enemy goblin artificer's where there creations would be jurry-rigged out of scrap.
The very class page for Artificers already states they're found throughought the entire DnD multiverse, not just the Eberron setting, which can easily include this game.
Honestly I don't rightly get where's there's so many people out there who think Artificer = Eberron only, thus causing me to add these extra sentences.
But maybe the people causing that aren't in the BG community anyway, idk.

Regarding subclasses, especially considering all the Illythid involvement, I would *really* want all the more "lovecraftian" subclasses. Aberrant mind being the first to come to mind, pun half intended.
Paladin

But I am also very nervous about how they may decide to handle Divine Smite
Bard, probably half wood elf lore bard.

I definitively want a class that uses charisma. Being a skill monkey would also be good. I (the main char) want to interact with others. But at the moment I talk with Wyll to everyone because he has highest cha.
A lore bard with criminal background and the right spells can replace a rogue, a healer and a wizard/sorcerer. This means I have maximum freedom in selecting the other party members.
Originally Posted by The Old Soul
For full classes, this game will feel incomplete to me without Artificer being an option.
"But it's not set in Eberron."
So? That doesn't matter. Just because there's not already a place full of people doing what artificer's do as a commonplace thing doesn't mean there can't be some people out there trying to do such things.
The only distinction would be that it doesn't look as advanced as you'd expect of an Eberron setting. Heck, you could even justify random enemy goblin artificer's where there creations would be jurry-rigged out of scrap.
The very class page for Artificers already states they're found throughought the entire DnD multiverse, not just the Eberron setting, which can easily include this game.
Honestly I don't rightly get where's there's so many people out there who think Artificer = Eberron only, thus causing me to add these extra sentences.
But maybe the people causing that aren't in the BG community anyway, idk.

Regarding subclasses, especially considering all the Illythid involvement, I would *really* want all the more "lovecraftian" subclasses. Aberrant mind being the first to come to mind, pun half intended.

Artificer is not eberron specific anymore, and even then wasn't really. Artificer is a full class that is meant to be adaptable to any setting with some flavor work.
Just had a thought regarding Paladins - I feel like based on the way mechanics have been implemented and the narrative direction of the campaign, I have a feeling that Oath of Devotion and Oath of the Ancients will be the Paladins implemented, while Oath of Vengeance will be left out.

I suspect Oathbreaker may be a dark-horse 3rd subclass for Paladin, maybe even as a NPC only class for a specific companion (only because of in-game books talking about it, and the backgrounds of certain datamined NPCs)

My rationale:

- Vow of Enmity loses quite a bit of value due to easy-advantage in BG3
- Relentless Avenger simply won't work without proper reactions - which BG3 doesn't seem to have right now (and we have no idea if it will be implemented)
- Not sure if we'll get to level 13, but Dimension Door doesn't gel well with BG3's game world set-up in general
- Devotion -> anti-fiend, Ancients -> Druid and Nature - just seem to fit so rightly with the current narrative
Originally Posted by CJMPinger
Originally Posted by The Old Soul
For full classes, this game will feel incomplete to me without Artificer being an option.
"But it's not set in Eberron."
So? That doesn't matter. Just because there's not already a place full of people doing what artificer's do as a commonplace thing doesn't mean there can't be some people out there trying to do such things.
The only distinction would be that it doesn't look as advanced as you'd expect of an Eberron setting. Heck, you could even justify random enemy goblin artificer's where there creations would be jurry-rigged out of scrap.
The very class page for Artificers already states they're found throughought the entire DnD multiverse, not just the Eberron setting, which can easily include this game.
Honestly I don't rightly get where's there's so many people out there who think Artificer = Eberron only, thus causing me to add these extra sentences.
But maybe the people causing that aren't in the BG community anyway, idk.

Regarding subclasses, especially considering all the Illythid involvement, I would *really* want all the more "lovecraftian" subclasses. Aberrant mind being the first to come to mind, pun half intended.

Artificer is not eberron specific anymore, and even then wasn't really. Artificer is a full class that is meant to be adaptable to any setting with some flavor work.

This is pretty true, Artificer was introduced in 3.5 eberron campaign setting. Along with Changeling, warforged, and whatever tattoos feats...i think they were called dragon marks, something like that. Artificer main stick was enchanting armor/weapons and crafting, including crafting homunculus pets. I can imagine it would go well with pretty much any setting with magic included in it.

Edit* that is 3.5 though, I can't imagine it changed much for 5e, could be wrong.
Bard would be my top choice, due to their flexible party role, but I am also looking forward to Sorcerer.

I prefer to play charisma classes in single player CRPGs so I can be the face of the party. Warlock has a very specific defining character flavor of having made a deal with a dangerous/evil/unknown entity, one that I don't always want to play (even though they are one of my favorite classes in TT).

I am really hoping they add Aberrant Sorcerer, though I realize it is not in the PHB. The psionic classes would fit really well with the plot thus far.
Originally Posted by fallenj
Originally Posted by CJMPinger
Originally Posted by The Old Soul
For full classes, this game will feel incomplete to me without Artificer being an option.
"But it's not set in Eberron."
So? That doesn't matter. Just because there's not already a place full of people doing what artificer's do as a commonplace thing doesn't mean there can't be some people out there trying to do such things.
The only distinction would be that it doesn't look as advanced as you'd expect of an Eberron setting. Heck, you could even justify random enemy goblin artificer's where there creations would be jurry-rigged out of scrap.
The very class page for Artificers already states they're found throughought the entire DnD multiverse, not just the Eberron setting, which can easily include this game.
Honestly I don't rightly get where's there's so many people out there who think Artificer = Eberron only, thus causing me to add these extra sentences.
But maybe the people causing that aren't in the BG community anyway, idk.

Regarding subclasses, especially considering all the Illythid involvement, I would *really* want all the more "lovecraftian" subclasses. Aberrant mind being the first to come to mind, pun half intended.

Artificer is not eberron specific anymore, and even then wasn't really. Artificer is a full class that is meant to be adaptable to any setting with some flavor work.

This is pretty true, Artificer was introduced in 3.5 eberron campaign setting. Along with Changeling, warforged, and whatever tattoos feats...i think they were called dragon marks, something like that. Artificer main stick was enchanting armor/weapons and crafting, including crafting homunculus pets. I can imagine it would go well with pretty much any setting with magic included in it.

Edit* that is 3.5 though, I can't imagine it changed much for 5e, could be wrong.

Same thing happened in 4e and 5e, but 5e also moved it into Tasha's to make it even more clear that Artificer is not exclusive to Eberron. And they also made it clear that flavor can be anything, an artillerist can use wands or guns, an alchemis magical or scientific brews, and a battlesmith can retheme their steel defender to be a rocky or iron golem that is more magical than mechanical.
Originally Posted by SunGuardian
Paladin

But I am also very nervous about how they may decide to handle Divine Smite

Same. I really want to build my half elf paladin but with the system in place now, I don't know how Larian is planning to implement Divine Smite. It's probably why we haven't seen them yet even though modders have seen the code.
Originally Posted by CJMPinger
Originally Posted by fallenj
Originally Posted by CJMPinger
Originally Posted by The Old Soul
For full classes, this game will feel incomplete to me without Artificer being an option.
"But it's not set in Eberron."
So? That doesn't matter. Just because there's not already a place full of people doing what artificer's do as a commonplace thing doesn't mean there can't be some people out there trying to do such things.
The only distinction would be that it doesn't look as advanced as you'd expect of an Eberron setting. Heck, you could even justify random enemy goblin artificer's where there creations would be jurry-rigged out of scrap.
The very class page for Artificers already states they're found throughought the entire DnD multiverse, not just the Eberron setting, which can easily include this game.
Honestly I don't rightly get where's there's so many people out there who think Artificer = Eberron only, thus causing me to add these extra sentences.
But maybe the people causing that aren't in the BG community anyway, idk.

Regarding subclasses, especially considering all the Illythid involvement, I would *really* want all the more "lovecraftian" subclasses. Aberrant mind being the first to come to mind, pun half intended.

Artificer is not eberron specific anymore, and even then wasn't really. Artificer is a full class that is meant to be adaptable to any setting with some flavor work.

This is pretty true, Artificer was introduced in 3.5 eberron campaign setting. Along with Changeling, warforged, and whatever tattoos feats...i think they were called dragon marks, something like that. Artificer main stick was enchanting armor/weapons and crafting, including crafting homunculus pets. I can imagine it would go well with pretty much any setting with magic included in it.

Edit* that is 3.5 though, I can't imagine it changed much for 5e, could be wrong.

Same thing happened in 4e and 5e, but 5e also moved it into Tasha's to make it even more clear that Artificer is not exclusive to Eberron. And they also made it clear that flavor can be anything, an artillerist can use wands or guns, an alchemis magical or scientific brews, and a battlesmith can retheme their steel defender to be a rocky or iron golem that is more magical than mechanical.

Presuming Artillerist, Alchemist, & Battlesmith are subclasses for the class?

Edit* NVM I found the info on a website, there is another subclass called Armorer and two unofficial subclasses called Forge Adept and Maverick

Edit2* Looks like they turned Artificer pet feat into a sublcass for battlesmith big shocker.

Edit3*Nice to see they can still make magic items though
Guess I got lucky but the class I most like to play was in the game from day one (Ranger).

If I had to choose another it would be the Paladin I guess. I prefer to play classes that are not that much into magic.

I look much more forward to new races than classes.
Paladin. Also hoping Aasimar make it into the game.
Originally Posted by The Old Soul
For full classes, this game will feel incomplete to me without Artificer being an option.
"But it's not set in Eberron."
So? That doesn't matter. Just because there's not already a place full of people doing what artificer's do as a commonplace thing doesn't mean there can't be some people out there trying to do such things.
The only distinction would be that it doesn't look as advanced as you'd expect of an Eberron setting. Heck, you could even justify random enemy goblin artificer's where there creations would be jurry-rigged out of scrap.
The very class page for Artificers already states they're found throughought the entire DnD multiverse, not just the Eberron setting, which can easily include this game.
Honestly I don't rightly get where's there's so many people out there who think Artificer = Eberron only, thus causing me to add these extra sentences.
But maybe the people causing that aren't in the BG community anyway, idk..

...maybe I'm alone, but outside the alchemist, I really don't like the artificer.
Originally Posted by Scribe
Originally Posted by The Old Soul
For full classes, this game will feel incomplete to me without Artificer being an option.
"But it's not set in Eberron."
So? That doesn't matter. Just because there's not already a place full of people doing what artificer's do as a commonplace thing doesn't mean there can't be some people out there trying to do such things.
The only distinction would be that it doesn't look as advanced as you'd expect of an Eberron setting. Heck, you could even justify random enemy goblin artificer's where there creations would be jurry-rigged out of scrap.
The very class page for Artificers already states they're found throughought the entire DnD multiverse, not just the Eberron setting, which can easily include this game.
Honestly I don't rightly get where's there's so many people out there who think Artificer = Eberron only, thus causing me to add these extra sentences.
But maybe the people causing that aren't in the BG community anyway, idk..

...maybe I'm alone, but outside the alchemist, I really don't like the artificer.

Any particular reason, like is it Balance or theming? Cause if former I got nothing to help on that, 5e balance is probably going to continue as it always has. If it is the latter, they are very very easy to retheme by nature even without the tasha's thing, cause Eldritch Cannons can just be wands so you are a wandmaker, and Battlesmith can just be a golemancer so their Steel Defender is less mechanical and more lumpy stone and metal. The armorer is arguably the hardist but it can pulled back in description to just runic enchantments and not the weird suits they describe now.
Regardless, not liking it is valid, even if it is just "Don't like it cause don't like it", though I tend to agree with Old Soul that it is a bit incomplete without it cause I want Artificer to be a mainstay.
(Then again, I am one of those that want Bloodhunter to finally be considered official at some point so we can have that weird not natural fighter but somewhat magical class niche filled.)
Have to be dragoon and dark knight for me!
Originally Posted by CJMPinger
Any particular reason, like is it Balance or theming? Cause if former I got nothing to help on that, 5e balance is probably going to continue as it always has. If it is the latter, they are very very easy to retheme by nature even without the tasha's thing, cause Eldritch Cannons can just be wands so you are a wandmaker, and Battlesmith can just be a golemancer so their Steel Defender is less mechanical and more lumpy stone and metal. The armorer is arguably the hardist but it can pulled back in description to just runic enchantments and not the weird suits they describe now.
Regardless, not liking it is valid, even if it is just "Don't like it cause don't like it", though I tend to agree with Old Soul that it is a bit incomplete without it cause I want Artificer to be a mainstay.
(Then again, I am one of those that want Bloodhunter to finally be considered official at some point so we can have that weird not natural fighter but somewhat magical class niche filled.)

Mostly because even if you reskin it, it's a highly magical class, that is not self contained.

A wizard is magical, but it's the wizard.
A paladin is magical, but it's the paladin.

Even if you reskin them (and I would have to, I don't like Eberron) you have a class making objects around them, Magical.

It's a deviation from the start.

Not sure if I'm explaining that well but, it's daylight savings time, and I'll be braindead today...
Just curious to see how they will implement Monk
Originally Posted by Scribe
Originally Posted by CJMPinger
Any particular reason, like is it Balance or theming? Cause if former I got nothing to help on that, 5e balance is probably going to continue as it always has. If it is the latter, they are very very easy to retheme by nature even without the tasha's thing, cause Eldritch Cannons can just be wands so you are a wandmaker, and Battlesmith can just be a golemancer so their Steel Defender is less mechanical and more lumpy stone and metal. The armorer is arguably the hardist but it can pulled back in description to just runic enchantments and not the weird suits they describe now.
Regardless, not liking it is valid, even if it is just "Don't like it cause don't like it", though I tend to agree with Old Soul that it is a bit incomplete without it cause I want Artificer to be a mainstay.
(Then again, I am one of those that want Bloodhunter to finally be considered official at some point so we can have that weird not natural fighter but somewhat magical class niche filled.)

Mostly because even if you reskin it, it's a highly magical class, that is not self contained.

A wizard is magical, but it's the wizard.
A paladin is magical, but it's the paladin.

Even if you reskin them (and I would have to, I don't like Eberron) you have a class making objects around them, Magical.

It's a deviation from the start.

Not sure if I'm explaining that well but, it's daylight savings time, and I'll be braindead today...

So your saying you don't like it cause its a support magic based class?
No, I don't like the class, because it can by existing raise the level of magic in the world, outside of itself.

It's a world building issue, and as a player class I don't like the concept.

Potions? Fine. However while yes we can reskin them, I have massive issues with the Iron Man, Blaster, and Pet versions.

They will never exist within my setting, that's for sure.
I am curious how Paladins and along with them smites will be implemented in the game
Originally Posted by Scribe
No, I don't like the class, because it can by existing raise the level of magic in the world, outside of itself.

It's a world building issue, and as a player class I don't like the concept.

Potions? Fine. However while yes we can reskin them, I have massive issues with the Iron Man, Blaster, and Pet versions.

They will never exist within my setting, that's for sure.

Not really, at least if they still follow the rules like in 3.5 Magic crafting. For a artificer to craft any item it would require XP, materials (gold cost), and something else don't remember. The construction though, would be at a reduced cost compared to say a wizard, because they are specialists in that field of study. Crafting should follow the same system the feat or ritual or whatever its called goes by. Crafting period always required a XP cost and you couldn't down grade your level, so there is a cap and a pretty big drawback in making stuff, gimping yourself in the long run if you over do it.

anyway you do you
Originally Posted by fallenj
Originally Posted by Scribe
No, I don't like the class, because it can by existing raise the level of magic in the world, outside of itself.

It's a world building issue, and as a player class I don't like the concept.

Potions? Fine. However while yes we can reskin them, I have massive issues with the Iron Man, Blaster, and Pet versions.

They will never exist within my setting, that's for sure.

Not really, at least if they still follow the rules like in 3.5 Magic crafting for a artificer still requires a XP cost but, at a reduced cost because of they are specialists in that field of study. Crafting should follow the same system the feat or ritual or whatever its called goes by. Crafting period always required a XP cost and you couldn't down grade your level, so there is a cap and a pretty big cost in making stuff.

anyway you do you

I'd have to look, but I'm almost positive 5e doesn't have those costs associated.
Originally Posted by Scribe
Originally Posted by fallenj
Originally Posted by Scribe
No, I don't like the class, because it can by existing raise the level of magic in the world, outside of itself.

It's a world building issue, and as a player class I don't like the concept.

Potions? Fine. However while yes we can reskin them, I have massive issues with the Iron Man, Blaster, and Pet versions.

They will never exist within my setting, that's for sure.

Not really, at least if they still follow the rules like in 3.5 Magic crafting for a artificer still requires a XP cost but, at a reduced cost because of they are specialists in that field of study. Crafting should follow the same system the feat or ritual or whatever its called goes by. Crafting period always required a XP cost and you couldn't down grade your level, so there is a cap and a pretty big cost in making stuff.

anyway you do you

I'd have to look, but I'm almost positive 5e doesn't have those costs associated.

I couldn't find it in the freebe & don't have the books, generally any spellcaster should be able to do what artificers do but not as good. Originally 3.5 had the feat in phb, in 4e they put the crafting feature under "Rituals" in phb.

Oh and if your right and they did away with xp, material, and whatever cost for crafting, it would be really broken.
I think (based on what I could find on my phone) that it's gold and rest time.

It's whatever. I don't particularly care for the concept, the Iron Man and Blaster subclasses are particularly egregious, but that's why we all have the ability to do what we like in our own games, take what we like, ignore the rest.
Originally Posted by Scribe
I think (based on what I could find on my phone) that it's gold and rest time.

It's whatever. I don't particularly care for the concept, the Iron Man and Blaster subclasses are particularly egregious, but that's why we all have the ability to do what we like in our own games, take what we like, ignore the rest.

Kind of sad & true true later scribe
Crafting in D&D 5e isn't very well defined, but it generally involves a material cost (usually half of the sale price in gold, unless it requires special ingredients or something like that) and time (downtime proportional to the amount of work that needs to be done). Some of this is described in the Player's Handbook and the DM Guide. There's a lot more in Xanathar's Guide to Everything, but much of it is still on the vague side. There are a lot of good homebrewed rules for crafting. I haven't seen any version that involves an XP cost.
As a mad scientist I want the artificer in the game, even if it would probably not be my first char.
I would probably play them as gnome, they are known for being nuts, think of Jan Jansen.

Since Larian makes the game, a robo pet or summoned cannons would probably not be the craziest stuff in the game.
I think artificers would be disappointing in a video game. Half of the fun is coming up with oddball contraptions and other nonsense that they could never accommodate in a video game. Following recipes is boring.
Berzerker Barbarian
Oathbreaker Paladin/Paladin of Vengence
Hexblade for Warlock
Champion for Fighter

I would say id like to see bard but unless they add the colledge of swords I highly doubt I would ever consider main playing a bard.

Sorcerer - Is the lowest on the list I am looking forward too and from looks of it lower on the list to be added. Sadly I expect it will be a while before we see monk as well.

I feel most probable next class to see added will be paladin barbarian or bard. With barbarian probably being the most likely which is a cheer as much as paladin or barbarian would both make me happy personally.
Originally Posted by Scribe
Originally Posted by CJMPinger
Any particular reason, like is it Balance or theming? Cause if former I got nothing to help on that, 5e balance is probably going to continue as it always has. If it is the latter, they are very very easy to retheme by nature even without the tasha's thing, cause Eldritch Cannons can just be wands so you are a wandmaker, and Battlesmith can just be a golemancer so their Steel Defender is less mechanical and more lumpy stone and metal. The armorer is arguably the hardist but it can pulled back in description to just runic enchantments and not the weird suits they describe now.
Regardless, not liking it is valid, even if it is just "Don't like it cause don't like it", though I tend to agree with Old Soul that it is a bit incomplete without it cause I want Artificer to be a mainstay.
(Then again, I am one of those that want Bloodhunter to finally be considered official at some point so we can have that weird not natural fighter but somewhat magical class niche filled.)

Mostly because even if you reskin it, it's a highly magical class, that is not self contained.

A wizard is magical, but it's the wizard.
A paladin is magical, but it's the paladin.

Even if you reskin them (and I would have to, I don't like Eberron) you have a class making objects around them, Magical.

It's a deviation from the start.

Not sure if I'm explaining that well but, it's daylight savings time, and I'll be braindead today...

Makes sense, I don't see it the same but I can see where you come from.
Sorry, but I see no reasons against adding artificers.

Yes, this is a magic world. But this does not mean that science does not exist.
Yes, a wizard can throw fireballs, but the average soldier cannot. So every army would be happy if they have someone who can build cannons.
I also see no fundamental difference between building a robot, creating a golem or summon an elemental.
Its just different ways to create a (more or less) loyal minion.

Unless you say that arcanum is the future of DnD ( magic causes science failure and vice versa) I see no reason to avoid a class that does a different form of magic.
I have no problems at all with alchemists in Kingmaker, even though their spells are technically potions.

If we put the "because its magic" argument to the extreme, someone could argue: Why does anybody use weapons when you can have magic?
That wasn't the argument.
Posted By: avahZ Darkwood Oath Breaker Paladins - 28/03/21 04:12 PM
Just tossing this out there. I want to be able to chose one =)
That's all! Good Night!
Posted By: Maximuuus Re: Oath Breaker Paladins - 28/03/21 04:52 PM
I really hope oath breaker will be something in BG3.

Not especially to choose one but to become one if you're not roleplaying a paladin how you should.
It could be really interresting.
Posted By: Sigi98 Do you want the Artificer in the game? - 29/03/21 08:26 AM
personally, Artificer is my soul class. And while I know that they said it will be only PHB classes at release, it would be a shame and a lost opportunity if they don't make a DLC later on that brings the Artificer to the game.
Think of the possibilities! The madness! eldritch cannons, infusions, power armor... sure, it would be difficult to implement it all, but worth it a thousand times!

I have, however, also seen opinions on this forum that argue that the artificer doesn't fit into the world (which I disagree with). So, whats your opinion? Who is hyped for the Artificer?
Posted By: Warlocke Re: Do you want the Artificer in the game? - 29/03/21 11:20 AM
I wouldn’t say no to the artificer class, but I have zero expectation to see it. All of their “spells” are supposed to be the results of various devices they build. That seems to be a pain in the ass to represent properly and if they just cast normal spells there wouldn’t be a point.
Posted By: fallenj Re: Do you want the Artificer in the game? - 29/03/21 11:39 AM
There was a thread where I talked about the artificer class for 5e. I am a fan, but a fan of the 3.5 class, sounded like they took features and split it between multiple versions.
Posted By: Argyle Re: Do you want the Artificer in the game? - 29/03/21 12:41 PM
I was watching a Discovery Channel documentary a while ago where they were showing an ancient Roman device, somewhat shaped like a hollow pencil, that was designed to remove cataracts from the human eye. The skill and precision of the instrument makers was incredible! But all things considered, if I had the option to have a magic spell do the same job, then I would much rather do that than have a pointy metal object jabbed into my eye.
Posted By: Aishaddai Re: Do you want the Artificer in the game? - 29/03/21 01:26 PM
I want all the classes and subclasses. Just say portals Mindflayers discovered did it. Boom done.
Posted By: acatlas Re: Do you want the Artificer in the game? - 30/03/21 02:24 AM
I expect artificer will be a DLC content release or would hope
Posted By: Ankou Re: Do you want the Artificer in the game? - 30/03/21 06:20 PM
I really want to multi-class sorcerer and warlock. Casting two eldritch blasts in one turn is my jam.
Posted By: Ankou Re: Do you want the Artificer in the game? - 30/03/21 06:21 PM
Originally Posted by Argyle
I was watching a Discovery Channel documentary a while ago where they were showing an ancient Roman device, somewhat shaped like a hollow pencil, that was designed to remove cataracts from the human eye. The skill and precision of the instrument makers was incredible! But all things considered, if I had the option to have a magic spell do the same job, then I would much rather do that than have a pointy metal object jabbed into my eye.

What's the point of removing a cataract if you can't replace the lens of the eye? In modern cataract surgery they basically slide out the old messed up lens and replace it with one that works.
Posted By: Merlex Re: Do you want the Artificer in the game? - 30/03/21 10:47 PM
Paladin is the class I hope they give us next. It's my favorite martial class. Currently I have a mod for that, but Larians version would be welcome. That is as long as they do smite correctly. As far as other subclasses, I'd really like to see Wizard schools of Enchantment, Necromancy, and Divination. Nothing says evil path like a Necromancer. It'd also be nice to give us other Cleric Domain like: War, Tempest, and Death.
Posted By: Ankou Re: Do you want the Artificer in the game? - 30/03/21 10:52 PM
If you're limited to one summon then I don't think necromancer is worth a damn.
My experience with D&D is limited to BG1/2 and NWN1/2, but in those and almost every other role-playing game I've played, I am a thief/rogue. I was assuming I would do that here as well.

I like the feeling of being able to waltz undetected through an area, satiate my curiousity of what's in every chest or closet, and take anything useful or interesting (especially books--forget the gold, my library is missing a volume!) without anyone being the wiser. I like to imagine the look on people's faces later when they realise their stuff is gone and they have no idea where it went, especially if they were rude to me in an earlier dialogue. I don't often steal money from poor people in games because it makes me feel guilty, and I often help them out with what I've stolen from those who can afford to lose it. Plus, I like the finesse involved in picking locks and persuading people. No muss, no fuss.

That said, I've purposely been trying other classes in EA, and I may end up deciding I'd like to do something different this time. I grew to like my tiefling warlock, so I may do something similar (bard? sorcerer?).
Paladin!
A class that fights within DnD rules would be my favorite but I doubt they make on in the game.
Probably sorcerer.

First it was druid, but the animal forms are so weak and 95% of spells are concentration, meaning you basically ignore all of them in favor of moonbeam/flame sphere 99% of the time. Huge disappointment with druid.

But then again, huge disappointment with warlock and the eldritch blast+hex spam gameplay.
Give me College of Valor Bard!

Mostly because I love Bards in general, but I suspect that Valor specifically will end up becoming hilariously broken within the context of BG3's mechanics. Martial weapon, double attack, shield and light/medium armor proficiency on a class with full spellcaster progression, ability to learn 2 spells of your choice from any other class at level 10, and high persuasion modifiers? Yes please!
Originally Posted by Zenith
Probably sorcerer.

First it was druid, but the animal forms are so weak and 95% of spells are concentration, meaning you basically ignore all of them in favor of moonbeam/flame sphere 99% of the time. Huge disappointment with druid.

But then again, huge disappointment with warlock and the eldritch blast+hex spam gameplay.

Druid I agree with. By limiting use of concentration spells in animal form, they utterly eviscerate any enjoyment in the class compared to the standard TT rules. Warlock though, that's what they do at lower levels. You get more interesting options as the game goes on, and frankly, if long resting weren't so easy, they'd also have some comparatively strong options over the course of an adventuring day.
I really hope for the bard class next.
Originally Posted by Ankou
If you're limited to one summon then I don't think necromancer is worth a damn.

Absolutely correct. But if they do that to the Necromancer, then it's not a Necromancer. It's their 6th level ability that makes them one, and that ability is multiple summons. Their 3rd level ability is very weak. Multiple summons is the whole point of a Necromancer, it's all they really got. If they stick to 1 summons even with subclass abilities, I'll have to wait for someone to mod a correction.
Posted By: Dez Re: What class are you most looking forward too? - 06/04/21 05:37 PM
Unfortunately, the class (or sub-class, rather) I am looking forward to is not included in BG3. frown Ever since PoE2, Arcane Archer has been the unrivaled favorite class for me - the combination of archery and magic just took my breath away. Both in how effective it was, how fun it was and how absolutely amazing the entire class-fantasy felt. 11/10 would play again!

Unfortunately, Arcane Archer seems to be a sub-class of Fighters accoring to 5e, and it does not seem to be included at all in BG3. q _ q Probably because it apparently belongs to Xanathar's Guide to Everything frown One can hope it will be included, someday.
Originally Posted by Dez
Unfortunately, Arcane Archer seems to be a sub-class of Fighters accoring to 5e, and it does not seem to be included at all in BG3. q _ q Probably because it apparently belongs to Xanathar's Guide to Everything frown One can hope it will be included, someday.

A modder discovered assets for a hexblade subclass, possible that it will be in the first expansion/dlc along with other subclasses such as arcane archer. Have hope smile xanathars sub classes a very popular, so I wouldnt be surprized to see them in before or just after release.
© Larian Studios forums