Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General POLL: Which non-PHB subclasses do you want to see in game?

I personally go for multiclassing within the first 3-4 levels simply because I like the mixes more than optimized builds. But This still isn't true for most players.

I would love to see the hexblade for warlocks.

The Archfey would be great and also the Celestial

Agreed -- especially if you have a legitimate cantrip attack. Cantrips gain the benefit of level 5 despite multiclassing. Especially, if you're only doing a 1 level dip for proficiencies/level 1 abilities. Something that is kind of a bummer is that I suspect you won't be able to multiclass the first level of companions. For example, I think starting Shadowheart as a rogue to pick up more proficiencies/expertise is a good idea.

It's the class specific dialogues that lead me to suspect multiclassing will be axed. They feel quite - mutually exclusive.

If that happens, so again one of the most basic Baldur's Gate elements for me is not given, then it would be one more reason that this game is DoS 3 with D&D setting for me and not BG 3.... On the other hand, I can't imagine that Larian didn't consider this with foresight and hope that it comes as announced.

Considering how rabit this community can be on things Larian didn't announce, I really doubt they would dare pulling a 180° on something they explicitely annouced. They are know for their "promise little, do much" mentality.

Oath of Vengeance for Paladin class. First some overoptimistic people thought 100% sure every subclass in Players Handbook will be included- likely n other subclasses from other DnD 5 books. Now when they do understand that the game will be released in August 2023 it has changed the tune to MAYBE include stuff in Players Handbook. Well and we know that there is list of example Paladin class spells to level 3. Paladin will get level 4 spells when they are level 13.

Do you understand that perhaps max level will be level 12 and not even 13 eat it and accept it. Of course an expansion might later increase level to 20. Of course it is possible that level 13 would be but then they must do level 4 spells to Paladin. Why I am happy for not very high level 13? Well I dislike slightly very high level in DnD5 though I will not cry if maximum level would be example level 15 and they do level 4 spells to Paladin if that happen then so it will happen I accept that.


Perhaps I do not know what will happen. However perhaps max level is 12. That said they can do expansion say in 2025 and then maybe max level would be 20.

What outside of PHB? Twilight Domain (Cleric), That said I would they do PHB,,, This is so much overoptimistic.

I'd like to see Larian's take on Bladesinging now there's a an updated version, native to the Forgotten Realms and plays into things like Performance which have already been coded in.

Futher down the line the new Lunar Sorceror (based around Selune perhaps) would be cool.

Oath of Vengeance is 100% in game. Go fight Minthara -- she will use Vow of Enmity against you.

As a choice in character creation it is not currently. With that logic you could say flying in the game with Dragons is in the game. True but I am thinking of player choises and without any mods. The only mods I could be interested are graphics example full nude mods.

Personally, I would rather they didn't add the most horribly broken subclass in the game!

Multiclassing in the original Baldur's Gate games was based on 2nd edition rules, and therefore will inevitably be very very different in BG3, even if it is included.

For the record - I don't think we should condone calling "Expecting the company to deliver on the things they said they would" to be 'overly optimistic'. That breeds the idea that it's okay for companies to promise things and then not deliver them and still expect to be paid for their product, because expecting them to do otherwise is 'overly optimistic' - which it isn't.

If BG3 doesn't release with the things they said it would have, without an official statement before-hand to explain that they aren't able to, then I'd expect that it should be rightly panned for this.

I'd like to see Storm Sorcery and Zealot Barbarian.

Anyone who knows about the realities of coding and what is actually in the PHB knew it was overly optimistic (AKA impossible) the instant it was said. Fore those in the know, it was clearly hyperbole. But in the internet age it was an unwise thing to say, as we know that there are people who take everything you say literally, and ignore all attempts to backpedal.

Firstly I'm with Niara as far as the principle that we shouldn't get used to the idea that expecting companies to deliver on a thing they quite clearly said they would deliver on is 'overly optimistic.' It wasn't a statement made in exaggeration or hyperbole, it was simply a statement, one that sounds pretty reasonable and so it's reasonable to hold Larian to it. Especially since they have not tried to backpedal at all. So if they do fail to deliver, it's on them for making the promise and people who expected them to live up to the promise will be rightfully upset.

Secondly, the vast majority of players won't be 'in the know' on either one or both subjects anyway. I'm certainly not in the know when it comes to coding and only vaguely familiar with what's in the PHB.

I am already aware of that. I didn't say that it should be exactly the same as in the predecessors. According to the current rule system, I think it's even better, because you can add another x-any class from the first level up, the old system was rather limited to certain combos.

One thing - if you look at the deities listed for PC clerics to choose from, several of them (Mykul, Kelemvor, Bhaal) canonically require the Death domain (DMG).

Mutliclassing in 5e is a half baked optional rule, the land of broken (mostly very underpowered) combos. One good reason for Larian to avoid it is it gives players without 5e system mastery a whole lot of trap options to fall into.

Your counter example is preposterous and you know it. You're comparing a character with a complete set of combat abilities for which *the code already exists in game* to action from a cinematic scene by which no game mechanics apply and no additional code is required beyond use of the cinematic graphics engine. That's top-tier intentionally obtuse nonsense. If the abilities are in the game and already useable in combat, they don't need to do much more than create a few buttons in the Tav creation GUI. Larian has repeatedly said they were intentionally holding things back for release so the experience would still feel new for people. Given that they've clearly shown their hand by including a NPC with the necessary code for the subclass, you are being willfully blind to suggest any possibility that the subclass will not be available to players.

Avoiding multiclassing sounds more like a cop-out for not wanting to deal with it. I can only agree with that to a certain point. Sure, it's hard for newbies at first, but only at first. The BG series has always required a certain degree of self-reliance and learning ability. I also never played the DnD TT but learned the 5e rules as far as possible on my own via homepages like http://dnd5e.wikidot.com/ There are dozens of helpful threads on the net to prepare. After all, you can use the waiting time for BG 3. Someone had also mentioned a respec possibility, so I don't see any difficulties here if one has made a mistake. And even without that, so what. No one will have a perfect playthrough from the very beginning.I guess we will have a level cap between 10-12. High end level 20 spells etc. pp will not exist yet. So I counter argue that it can be worth multiclassing especially in the capped level section. Multiclassing remains an essential game component of the BG series, not only in terms of gameplay, but also in terms of rp for me.