Larian Studios
So, I've finished a playthrough (as in done all possible quests I know of in EA), with my high half-elf sorcerer, who I buffed to 19 using AI at lvl 4, and then ate Ethel's yucky scalp to buff CHA to 20.

Question is, though.... while I assume I got a higher to hit chance (I got to lvl 4 and defeated Ethel before entering Underdark) from raising CHA to 20, I wonder if, come the full release, it won't be better to go with "just" 18 in ability and then add one of the many other lvl 4 feats. Obviously, when using CHA related skill checks, it was clear that that +5 in Persuasion and Deception I had helped alot... but so would a +4, I think. But just how large is the difference in "to hit" chance, and potentially amount of dmg or crit chance, between 18 and 20 in CHA?

Same question applies to the deep gnome wizard I've just rolled. I'll be able to gain 20 in int by lvl 4, adding in Ethels scalp. That should give me an extra spell, which - unlike with the high half-elf sorc - seems like a much clearer advantage, than maybe a slight % added hit chance... right? No?

And please, I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed when it comes to understanding mathematics. If you could, please explain the advantage/disadvantages to picking either buffing AI to 20 or the other feats, using math language as if I'm three years old... crazy
For spellcasters, the 1 point increase to your save DC is notably more valuable and powerful than the +1 to your attack bonus; when debating whether to raise your core ability score s a caster, think about your save DC, rather than your hit bonus, since save DC is much harder to raise, in general. Things like having advantage from various sources that can grant it, things like bless - there are numerous things that will give you an edge in hitting with attack rolls, but most of them do not also benefit your save DC, since that's not you rolling, but the target rolling to save.

As a simple maths consideration - sources of advantage mean you get two chances at hitting your target, which means that your actual odds of hitting with at least one of those rolls is substantially higher. by contrast, far fewer sources can give enemies disadvantage on their saving throws against your spells, in general, and after levle 5, you'll begin coming across more than a few things that have natural advantages with saves against your magic. As you gain levels as well, you'll find that most caster spells work through saving throws, rather than attack rolls - attack roll spells are in the extreme minority, in fact - though a larger proportion of cantrips have them - and so you'll be using your save Dc a lot as the game progresses, potentially far more than your spell attack bonus.

The increase from 15 to 16 for a spell save is worth more, as well, not just because of how much easier it is to boost the odds with attack rolls, but also because of the much reduced bracket for enemy saves, compared to the range of AC they might have; you'll be fighting enemies with AC ratings anywhere from 10 to 20, in the first ~8 levels of play, and a +1 measured against that scale is a smaller ratio than a +1 measured against a scale between 0 to 5, which will be the rough range of save bonuses that your targets might have in that same level bracket. So, the real question, for a caster, is more akin to "is raising my spell save DC to 16 at level 4 more valuable than [Appealing Feat]?"


When deciding if a feat is more valuable than the ability score increase... that's a much fuzzier question, and mostly comes down to how you want to play, and what benefits the feat will give you, and what value you personally put on those effects and benefits. I wish I could be more help with this part, but feats really are a personal thing of playstyle and preference; you'll never go wrong with capping out your core ability score first, definitely, but if you play a certain way, and find a particular feat appealing to you as a result, and think you'll be able to get and use its benefits regularly with your play style, then take it.
Originally Posted by Demothios
But just how large is the difference in "to hit" chance, and potentially amount of dmg or crit chance, between 18 and 20 in CHA?
On average, D&D assumes a 65% chance to hit. This stays constant as you level up, because enemy AC roughly increases with your attack bonus. With a 20 Cha, you're ahead of the curve and thus will have a 70% to hit (A d20 has 20 sides -> you have a 1/20 = 0.05 = 5% chance to roll each value).

If you roll normally, your 20 Cha character, compared to an 18 Cha character, will hit 70/65=1.08 = 8% more often.
If you roll with advantage, the formula for chance-to-hit is 1-(1-0.70)^2. 100% minus the chance you'll miss with both rolls, and the chance that you'll miss twice is (1 minus your chance to hit with one roll)^2. Correspondingly, a 20 Cha character hits [1-(1-0.70)^2] divided by [1-(1-0.65)^2] = 1.04 = 4% more often.

This also applies to your saving throw spells, although I think the average success rate is a bit less than 65%, so it might be closer to the below...?

This also applies to any Charisma skill checks, although a bit better since many of your persuasion checks won't have Proficiency. At level 5, your 20 Cha Sorcerer will have a 70% success with Proficient skills, but only a 55% chance of success with non-proficient skills.
- Rolling normally, your 20 Cha character will succeed on non-proficient skill checks 55/50=1.1 = 10% more often
- Rolling with Advantage, your 20 Cha character will succeed [1-(1-0.55)^2] divided by [1-(1-0.5)^2] = 1.06 = 6% more often.

Overall, your 20 Cha character will be about ~7-8% more effective.

Originally Posted by Demothios
Same question applies to the deep gnome wizard I've just rolled. I'll be able to gain 20 in int by lvl 4, adding in Ethels scalp. That should give me an extra spell, which - unlike with the high half-elf sorc - seems like a much clearer advantage, than maybe a slight % added hit chance... right? No?
Eh. Prepared spells are much more important in tabletop, where you have to wait until night to prepare different spells. In BG3, you can re-prepare spells (and long rest) whenever, so as long as you're out of combat you can just prepare it. At level 4+, you're getting to the point where you probably don't need any more prepared combat spells.

There are too many feats to analyze in detail. If you have a specific feat you're wondering about, I could maybe comment.
Hope this helps!
Not beaten, just giving different pieces of the puzzle. You shared the maths that my 1am brain didn't want to deal with ^.^
Seeing as the feat choice is "fuzzier" without providing details (that's not me criticizing or being sarcastic, I can appreciate that it indeed does) , I'm considering either "Lightly Armored" (LA profiency) or "Skilled" (points in 3 skills of ones choice - in my case, I want to add Medicine, Nature and Religion, to make them a super scholar in skill checks). But I also wonder about going in a different direction.... Does it make sense to give a sorcerer the weapon profiency feat? Anyone reading this ever built a "melee sorcerer" in BG3?

And mrfuji3, thanks so much for colorizing which parts of your equation answers my question. I'm still left with deciding, but at least now I have some good data to make a more educated guess... thanks to others more educated. :hihi: As for my wizard, don't i get an extra spell slot/point with which I can cast a spell, pr. each round number of int (like 16, 18, 20)?
Originally Posted by Demothios
As for my wizard, don't i get an extra spell slot/point with which I can cast a spell, pr. each round number of int (like 16, 18, 20)?
You don't learn an extra spell with higher int. You get to prepare an extra spell, so you'll have 1 more of your spells known available for immediate casting.
You can't cast any more spells per day either - you'll have the same number of spell slots regardless of your Int.

As for the feats you mentioned:

Lightly Armored: Not Terrible, but Not Great.
- I would say you'd be better off using the Mage Armor spell (1st level spell; sets AC=13+dex) over Light Armor (Studded Leather sets AC=12+Dex) since it gives more AC.
- However, BG3 has plentiful magical armor, and Studded Leather +1 (or +2, or +3) would provide equal or better protection than Mage Armor.
- Additionally, some helmets require Light Armor proficiency, although honestly as a spellcaster you probably wouldn't be wearing those anyway...

Skilled: A fine choice, until/unless Larian changes BG3 so that party members can join in on dialogue checks
- Your sorcerer, with their high Charisma (and because they're your PC), is likely to be the Party Face and do most of the talking. Thus, it'll be good for them to be proficient in more skills.

Weapon Master. Would Not Recommend.
- I assume your sorcerer has a 12, maximum, in strength? Or a 14 maximum in dex? These are relatively low scores and will remain so throughout the game. Thus, you won't be especially effective with weapon attacks.
- Using melee weapons would put your (low health and low armor) sorcerer in combat adjacent to enemies, resulting in them getting hit often and going to zero HP and/or losing concentration on spells.
- The few spells that DO work well with melee weapons are probably not going to be added to BG3. Additionally, there's a 2nd level Sorcerer Spell (Flame Blade) that creates a blade that deals 3d6 fire damage - more than a normal weapon attack.
- Ranged spell attacks are just better than ranged weapon attacks. Your cantrips will surpass any longbow/crossbow attack you can make at level 5+, and your leveled-spells are always strictly better than a bow attack.
Light Armor for a sorcerer:

Depends. Are you a wild magic sorcerer or a dragon blood sorcerer? If you're a dragon blood sorcerer then you're probably going to lose AC from light armor. A dragon blood sorcerer gets an AC of 13 plus Dex. That's a point higher than a suit of plus one leather.

But if you're a wild magic sorcerer then you don't have that natural armor class. In which case, I could see someone wanting the feat to get Minthara's armor. It gives a plus one to stealth and, more importantly, advantage on Con saving throws.



There's no real combat value unless you take something like Acrobatics or Athletics.

It's a roleplaying choice. If it makes you enjoy your character more then it can't be wrong.


Weapon Master:

I think a case can be made for this feat if it's for early access with a level cap of four. After the level cap is removed, I think the feat will probably be less valuable for a sorcerer.

Right now, it probably depends a bit on your race and stats.

For instance, if you have a high Dex then you might get some benefit from taking a proficiency in hand crossbow and maybe some other finesse weapons like rapier and/or scimitar.

Let's say you have a character with a Dex of 15. You can take the weapon master feat and add a point of Dex, bringing you up to a 16 and then take your proficiencies.

Suddenly, you can have a bonus attack with an offhand ranged weapon that has a decent bonus to hit.

(Also, just to mention, if you're playing a half-elf with a Cha of 17 and a Dex of 16 then you can get an extra point of Dex from this feat, get an additional extra point of Dex from the Hag's hair, and then get your extra point of Cha from Volo's eye... giving you an 18 in both Cha and Dex.)


As for having a sorcerer that gets into melee, I think that's reasonable in early access. It's fun every now and then to play a githyanki sorcerer, at least for me.

High strength, gets to wear armor, can use greatswords, and you get magic on top.

You can even make a theme out of it, creating a githyanki with red dragon blood that specializes in fire spells and starts out using the Everburn blade. Later you can pick up the Ring of Fire and the Circlet of Fire and the Gloves of Flint and Steel.

The character can be vicious in early access.
I allways find it strange when people try to get Light Armoured feat on their casters ...
I mean just by casting Mage Armor, you get the same ... often even better AC ... while you keep robes that usualy actualy benefits casters ... O_o

And even if you dont wish to take Mage Armor yourself, you can either cast it from scroll (and there is lots of those around) ... or simply use Gale to buff you and then switch him out of your party. laugh
they don't matter unless they do
for a sorcercer that likes Magic Missile a +4 is fine, you can use the feat to grab a Worlock hex and cantrip [assuming you don't carry Will] but one that likes debuffs \ stuns will want the +5 because then the bad guys get a save and you want them to fail it... overall Cleric and Bard are the classes that normally debuff and Sorcerer is a damage class but you get the idea
Regarding armor:
- Some armors do have extra effects on top of AC.
- Wearing an armor cannot be dispelled.
- You do not consume a spell slot or a scroll for wearing armor.
- Mage armor equals leather+3 or studded leather+2

I do not speak for or against something, just presenting some facts.

about the gith sorcerer:
- They get medium armor profiency. Do they also get shield profiency and do shields stack with mage armor or dragon bloodline bonus?
- In the final release I would re roll the stats until I have high str and cha for this char if I want a melee sorc.
Int can be dumped, but I would not dump dex, con and wis.
Originally Posted by Madscientist
Mage armor equals leather+3 or studded leather+2
leather+*2* or studded leather+*1*

To my knowledge, githyanki do not get shield proficiency, but shields should stack with mage armor and Draconic Bloodline armor
You are right.
I was confusing 5E (mage armor is +3 bonus) with 3E (mage armor is +4 bonus)

Mage armor and dragon bloodline armor should not stack?
Does it mean they should also not stack with barbarian (con) and monk (wis) bonus?
So there can be only one effect for wearing armor or using "when not wearing armor you get a bonus"?
That's correct - none of those 'stack'

What each of them are doing is giving you an AC calculation method; a way of calculating your AC. You choose ONE way of calculating your AC, and that is what your AC will be. So, if you are a Multiclass Barbarian/Monk/Dragon-Blood-Sorcerer with barkskin and mage armour on yourself, you have a number of different way that you can calculate your AC - you could use Monk Unarmoured Defence, and your AC would be (10 + Dex + Wisdom), OR you could use your Barbarian Unarmoured Defence (which it would have been less confusing for them to name something different), to have an AC of (10 + Con + Dex, shield permitted), OR you could use your draconic bloodline method, being (13 +Dex), OR you could use Barkskin's method, which would make your Ac (16, flat, if and only if your final AC would be lower than 16). Mage Armour, too, gives you another option for how to calculate your ac - (13 + Dex), even though that's the same as the sorcerous bloodline method.

Each of the methods are independent ways of getting an AC; they cannot be added together. You can have lots of different ways of calculating your Ac, you just pick which one you use - generally speaking, you'll always use whichever yields the highest AC at the time.

(Edit for clarity: Shields are usually a separate thing, and add their Ac bonus onto whatever base method for calculating that you choose, the same as any other discrete Ac bonus, such as a cloak of protection. Some base AC calculation methods specifically call out not being allowed shields, however (Monk's unarmoured defence is like this, while Barbarina's is not). Shields are wielded equipment, not armour, so they don't interfere with Mage Armour.
© Larian Studios forums