Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Joined: Jan 2021
S
addict
Offline
addict
S
Joined: Jan 2021
Originally Posted by spectralhunter
There is some merit to the argument that spell levels are overly complicated for newbies.

The best argument i heard is, why can't spell levels match class level? Why can't a level 5 wizard cast level 5 spells? That would require 20 levels of spells and require some realignment but that might help in re-examining spells.

We have charts that track 20 levels. Why not for spells?

?

Because the charts DO track spell levels, its right there in the character creation when you select your class.

The problem is Larian isnt communicating that information. Its (again) not the fault of 5e, but Larian.

Joined: Dec 2020
S
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
S
Joined: Dec 2020
Originally Posted by Scribe
?

Because the charts DO track spell levels, its right there in the character creation when you select your class.

The problem is Larian isnt communicating that information. Its (again) not the fault of 5e, but Larian.

Pretty much. Larian historically struggles at designing their UI for whatever reason.

One of the most common complaints about BG3 is just how bad the UI is at conveying information to the player, and it's only gotten even more harsh since Solasta is a thing. Their UI is actually extremely easy to understand and use, even if the actual look of it doesn't really fit the game.

Functionality should always be prioritized higher than flash. That said, I wonder if BG3's UI can even be improved by that much, because the engine in use seems like it might not even support it (and several other things observed to be missing from the combat system). Larian seemingly continuing to prioritize cutscenes and whatnot seems to suggest something like this, because the longer they keep putting off a UI overhaul, it's only going to get harder to do so later.

It was, quite frankly, a very poor decision to base so much of BG3's programming off of the D:OS2 engine, for a game that is supposed to be AAA high budget. A game like this deserved an entirely new engine that is actually able to implement everything that needs to be done, not something cobbled together from a game in a different series.

Last edited by Saito Hikari; 19/02/21 06:58 PM.
Joined: Jan 2021
S
addict
Offline
addict
S
Joined: Jan 2021
Originally Posted by Saito Hikari
Originally Posted by Scribe
?

Because the charts DO track spell levels, its right there in the character creation when you select your class.

The problem is Larian isnt communicating that information. Its (again) not the fault of 5e, but Larian.

Pretty much. Larian historically struggles at designing their UI for whatever reason.

One of the most common complaints about BG3 is just how bad the UI is at conveying information to the player, and it's only gotten even more harsh since Solasta is a thing. Their UI is actually extremely easy to understand and use, even if the actual look of it doesn't really fit the game.

Functionality should always be prioritized higher than flash.

Yep, and that last line fundamentally explains the issues with this game.

Joined: Dec 2020
Location: CA
S
addict
Offline
addict
S
Joined: Dec 2020
Location: CA
Originally Posted by Scribe
?

Because the charts DO track spell levels, its right there in the character creation when you select your class.

The problem is Larian isnt communicating that information. Its (again) not the fault of 5e, but Larian.

What I am saying is, to a complete newbie to tabletop or D&D, I can see how spell levels can be confusing. It is somewhat unintuitive.

Why is fireball a level 3 spell when it can only be cast at level 5 and up? Because that’s how it’s always been. Always been doesn’t make it right.

But this is more of a D&D issue that cannot be resolved with 5e. So for a designer who may not be too familiar with spell levels, it’s kinda strange and equally strange to those who have no experience with D&D at all.

Joined: Jan 2017
G
enthusiast
Online Content
enthusiast
G
Joined: Jan 2017
Originally Posted by spectralhunter
Originally Posted by Scribe
?

Because the charts DO track spell levels, its right there in the character creation when you select your class.

The problem is Larian isnt communicating that information. Its (again) not the fault of 5e, but Larian.

What I am saying is, to a complete newbie to tabletop or D&D, I can see how spell levels can be confusing. It is somewhat unintuitive.

Why is fireball a level 3 spell when it can only be cast at level 5 and up? Because that’s how it’s always been. Always been doesn’t make it right.

But this is more of a D&D issue that cannot be resolved with 5e. So for a designer who may not be too familiar with spell levels, it’s kinda strange and equally strange to those who have no experience with D&D at all.
Character level, class level, and spell level don't line up. I agree that this could be a little bit confusing. I've never actually had it be an issue in a tabletop game, partially because it is explained relatively well in the Player's Handbook and partially because there is always another player or a DM to clear up any misunderstandings.

A videogame doesn't necessarily have a DM or other players around to clear things up. I think a tweak to the nomenclature could help a little bit (call less things "level"), but ultimately, Larian just needs to do a better job of explaining how things work. That might be something they're planning to add at some point, but right now it's non-existent.

Joined: Jun 2019
addict
OP Offline
addict
Joined: Jun 2019
Originally Posted by spectralhunter
We have charts that track 20 levels. Why not for spells?

Because manage spell slots for 20 different spell levels would become a nightmare...

3.5e warlock invocations are divided in Least, Lesser, Greater and Dark. Just give a name for each spell tier/level/circle/whatever; Tiered magical progression exists in TONS of games.

And being a mage is far more harder in other games. For eg, on Gothic 2 - returning(not vanilal g2), you don't start as a magician. Wanna be a necromancer? Ask Xardas for apprenticeship, wait until he decides, become a novice of darkness, train your spirit(mana) from expensive trainers and your INT by doing intellectual things like reading books, runemaking, alchemy, learning new languages and when you have high enough INT(which can't be trained like STR/DEX), you talk to Xardas and do the initiation into the circle of darkness. Go kill a novice of fire mages in a monastery full of powerful magicians, find a good way to assassinate the target and after it, you only need to learn the first circle of darkness, purchase the book with reagents requriement from Xardas and pay for him to teach how to make the Arrow of Darkness or Summon skeleton run. Get the reagents(black pearn, skeleton bone or wathever) and make the rune. To cast spear of darkness, you need circle 3 which can only be obtained on ch 3.

Talking about TT game, GURPS magic is not simple either. For eg, GURPS is not a game where you learn how to cast fireball. You first learn how to ignite fire, then create fire, then shape fire and only after you can create and shape the fire, you can learn how to make a fireball. All things that you can make with shape fire alone are near impossible to translate into a CRPG. Magical aptitude and magic costs is 100% tied to the DM world "settings", if is a no magical setting, you can't learn magic. If is a high magical setting, magic aptitude is easy to obtain.

Last edited by SorcererVictor; 19/02/21 07:46 PM.
Joined: Mar 2020
Location: Belfast
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Mar 2020
Location: Belfast
Originally Posted by SorcererVictor
Originally Posted by Wormerine
And, let's be fair, for uninitiated "why a level 4 Wizard can't cast a level 3 spell" is a legit question. Still, it is a problem of using same terms for different systems rather then th

HE said loud and clear complicated.
I heard what he said. I just am just not quite sure what he meant, aka. what is complicated about it. The only thing I can think of, is what I have pointed out but from all the things that confused me when I played BG2 for the first time, spell levels not being tied to wizard levels was not one of them.

Joined: Oct 2020
L
member
Offline
member
L
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Scribe
I'm not sure I understand the thread. What's complicated about spell levels?
Nothing, or at least nothing a simple statement couldn't clear up.

Joined: Dec 2020
Location: CA
S
addict
Offline
addict
S
Joined: Dec 2020
Location: CA
Originally Posted by Labayu
Originally Posted by Scribe
I'm not sure I understand the thread. What's complicated about spell levels?
Nothing, or at least nothing a simple statement couldn't clear up.

I mean for the majority of players, it’s not complicated.

I have a feeling it’s Swen’s pre-emptive excuse to mess around with spells and allowing access to them earlier than they should be. He’s making stuff up on other features. Spells are next.

Joined: Jun 2019
addict
OP Offline
addict
Joined: Jun 2019
Originally Posted by spectralhunter
Originally Posted by Labayu
Originally Posted by Scribe
I'm not sure I understand the thread. What's complicated about spell levels?
Nothing, or at least nothing a simple statement couldn't clear up.

I mean for the majority of players, it’s not complicated.

I have a feeling it’s Swen’s pre-emptive excuse to mess around with spells and allowing access to them earlier than they should be. He’s making stuff up on other features. Spells are next.

I hope that you are wrong, but you is probably right...

Page 2 of 2 1 2

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5