Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback HP bloat is the most hated homebew rule made by la

I suspect there is something odd going on with damage dice rolls. It's super anecdotal but my rolls seemed to be distributed lower than they should be. On targets with no resistance to force or necrotic damage it should be an average of 13 per hit. That should be mean, median, modal average. In contrast I rarely seen it hit for that much or more.

Like I said, super anecdotal.

The enemies later on in the early access are definitely...harder. Ive yet to beat the spectator and the phase spider matriarch, and the githyanki patrol required a couple rounds of save scumming until I got them. Ive also yet to beat the hook horror encounter.

Keep in mind though that, far as I am aware, we can only reach level 4. Once one hits level 5 they unlock the ability to make an extra attack, which will substantially improve your damage output. I feel like once we start getting into the higher levels it will mostly even out

I do agree though that at times a couple of the encounters feel as though they are a bit much. The githyanki patrol, for example, are all level 5 and can easily kill you due to their having extra attack. Poor Gale could only let off a single fireball before he was downed, but At least he served as a distraction for one of the githyanki, lol. The minatours are an encounter I have seen cited. I do think them getting 3 moves against a party of level 4 characters is a bit much.

I dont think anything should be nerfed though. If Larian does choose to address the current difficulty, I think they should just buff our XP gain so that we can reach level 5 easier during current early access. things like HP totals should not be mucked with until all the classes are integrated imo.

Even now, you should be able to unlock lvl 5 before harder encounters.
In the full game, this shouldn't be a problem.

Low level cap, hp bloat, spell nerfs... Is Larian trying to DESTROY casters???? Why even have casters as option in the game? Force everyone to be a boring human fighter like in a JRPG

At the same time there's a thread about wizard being too powerful. I would say mostly warlocks lack power now, since wizards can long rest whenever and always have full spell slots. Other than that, all classes seem powerful. Just maybe not in the way you'd expect. Not saying balance is great, I just think the overall power difference isn't that big between classes

Well, it's quite the opposite. I made a post about it yesterday. Wizards are so overpowered even at low level in the game that you don't even have any incentive to recruit party members. You can literally solo the entire act 1. No other class is as versatile and strong at the moment.

Casters and Wizards are two different things. When I mean casters, I mean any divine and arcane spell caster. Warlocks, Sorcerers, Clerics, Druids and Wizard. WLK unable to kill a goblin child with a eldritch blast is an example of ludicrous nerf.

And the main point of wizard is versitality.

You can argue that wizards are too versitile but destroying ALL other casters by it is not fair.

Yes, but your formulation wasn't right then. Because if you say 'Is Larian trying to DESTROY casters?' and I show you that one of them at least is kind of overpowered, it proves your assessment is wrong. Because wizards don't belong to the ones being destroyed, and they are casters.

They could have destroyed all casters except wizards. Casters in general still are destroyed. And I never played as a wizard on BG3.

But Wizards always was powerful on D&D.

Solasta has spells like Fireball and shock arcanist wizard subclass which is amazing. You can't compare BG3 wiz with Solasta Wiz.

Like @sorcerervictor I think the HP bloat nerfs casters. The offensive cleric cantrips should be roughly equal to the wizard cantrips but because one relies upon "to hit" and the other on "savings throw" the are nerfed. Do you find yourself using sacred flame often? Hold person?

Hold person should be a devastating spell that made the cleric a formidable foe. Lose a savings throw and then the enemies get free critical hits. But if missing "to hit" is rare the power of that spell goes away. The enemy has to: lose savings throw (1 round), get hit (second round) then gets another savings throw to get free in the third. Now if we were dealing with MM HP that critical hit would either kill or severely wound. But with bloated HP / lowered AC you are better advised to take the hit three times in a row than to take risk on two savings throws being lost in a row. Right? Whats better 3 near certain hits or a spell that may produce nothing on successful save with a payoff of the equivalent of two hits and a smaller chance (using Baysean probabilities) of getting to four hits in 3 rounds. Giving up three birds in the hand for a remote possibility of four in the bush is a bad gamble.

When Larian decided to change this rule I don't think they understood the waves it would produce.

Granted wizard cantrips are currently OP, they shouldn't have the surface effects. I want to see the 1d10 returned. Let them catch things on fire but don't give a guaranteed 1 point of damage. (In fact I've found that it's better to make a high elf cleric with a firebolt cantrip and a bow proficiency than to use sacred flame at all)

We will all notice the nerfing on higher level spells. Sleep is already nerfed only putting one or two enemies asleep. Fireball will be nerfed as well.

And yes, one or two eldritch blasts should take out a standard goblin.

NWN2 is a game which DESTROYED casters and hence, most people play with spell fixes/warlock reworked. In that game, an lv 4 warlock could OHK weaklings with eldritch blast. And could hit enemies at 250 feet with Eldritch Spear. Warlock fells so weak in BG3 that I fell like I an playing more as my party members...