Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Chromatic Orb question

So in description it says the orb does 3d8 damage of my chosen element, but when you click to choose orb they all do 2d8 damage except the Thuinder one which does 3d8. Is this intentional because the others create a surface? Kinda makes the 3d8 description wrong though?

I guess it's intentional because every other create a surface.
Even Swen did not use the others during the live... I guess he don't like surfaces that much !

Here we go with Larian's surface obsession again! Didn't we already do this with Cantrips? I want to do DAMAGE with my damage spells to drop opponents so they don't attack me anymore.

I DON'T want to trade 1d8 acid damage for some lame gamey -2 AC acid "debuff" surface that doesn't make any sense to begin with. Acid is generally less resisted and this spell is for damage, not some nonsensical temporary corrosion debuff.

I want to use Lightning Orbs against wet Lightning vulnerable opponents for high damage. I DON'T want my Lightning Orbs to lose 1d8 damage and create a water surface. I can already cast Create Water and then electrify the pool with a 3d8 Lightning Orb if I want an AoE.

A big part of Chromatic Orb is to do great damage against opponents who are vulnerable against a certain element or when you can auto crit. And now that damage has been neutered just to get even more surfaces on the battlefield.

I'm so annoyed at Larian's gameplay design and their blind obsession with this kind of stuff. And not understanding why spells are good in the first place.

I have to admit that I agree with varangian.

Spells could eventually create a surface (or interract with an element) if we were asking for it but I also want to use all orbs depending the ennemies resistance OR my draconic lineage rather than using the only RAW chromatic orb each time because it ise more powerfull.

I really think that surfaces are a great idea but I really don't like how often it's a thing in BG3 and I particularly fear even more than before level 3 spells.

I really find cool that you can electrify or freeze water surface, that some things can explode or burn... But I'd find more interresting if it was a bit more subtle than "some spells always create surfaces".

To me this things with chromatic orb is a big no.

Eventually as some had already suggested before, let us choose for all spells :
- to target an ennemy = damage but no surface
- to target the ground = surface (to interract with a surface that is already in the environnement, to block a path, to reduce their AC,...).

This would be very cool IMO, increasing the player agency rather than forcing things.

I believe they decided to do this not bcs of their "obsession with surface effects" ... but more like "bcs Extended Spell would otherwise do litteraly nothing in most cases" :-/

But i agree, it was not best decision. :-/

This indeed sounds really interesting!!!

I think it's fine orb adds a surface but at the expense of a whole 1d8 damage is too much IMO. It's rarely or never going to be worth the trade off.

As are all surface additions in BG3, it will be very good for breaking caster's concentration, with the multiple sources of damage direct+surface. This is not a good thing, keeping concentration is already difficult enough using base 5e rules.
...what
Just...why?

+1 to allow you to target the ground to create a surface OR target an enemy for direct damage only. But not both.

I'm not going to go 100% behind this argument, but doesn't the surface ensure that the damage formula becomes 2d8+1d4+1d4?

In next two turns, if i remember corectly ...
Lot of time to rip Tavs head off with last 7HP monster would not have if spell had proper damage rolls.

It's also annoying if you want to target an enemy that is engaged in melee with one of your allies. The surface will most likely also hit them, making thunder the only viable option in this case unless you don't care about hitting your teammates.

I'm not certain but I believe the first 1d4 is applied immediately on the creation of the surface and the next one on the target's next round beginning.



Evocation specialisation should mean your surfaces don't damage allies, really. I wonder if it does.

Exactly ... me neither.
Its possible, but still ... me want my big number.

It does, or at least so far i didnt notice otherwise ... but Evocation Specialisation is Wizard-only thing ...
I mean Sorcerers also have carefull casting (or something like that) but who would bother with such trivialities, when you can do twinned spell instead?

Bigger problem:

Chromatic Orb is an attack roll spell... this menas it is a Precision spell.

However,

Other than thunder, you CANNOT use it as a precision spell, to ping a hostile enemy that your allies are in melee with - because it creates a splash puddle that will electrocute/burn/melt/prone your friends as well. They've functionally undermined the entire niche purpose of the spell.

I'm just wondering how they can't see this after several years of BG3 development behind them. Someone over there is incredibly hard headed with getting more surfaces in by any means necessary and can't see it's doing more harm than good.

And then, for the surface inclined, there's the obvious solution of allowing us to target the ground instead of a creature to create a surface. That would allow the spells to remain as they are in 5e but create a cool extra functionality. E.g. Chromatic Orb: Fire: deal 3d8 fire damage to target, OR create a fire surface that does 1d4+1d4 AoE, and also won't ever miss which can be very useful at times. If the surface AoE version would hit 3 creatures that would be 6d4 damage which would also be slightly more than 3d8 so quite viable.

Lightning orb and other non-thunder orbs don't simply lose 1d8 damage. They gain a small AoE that auto-hits(?) everyone one "square" around the center for 1d4 (?) damage. They also gain a surface that auto-hits (?) everyone in that AoE for another 1d4 (?) damage on their turn. Finally they gain a status effect.

The single-target damage remains identical, while gaining a small AoE damage and status effect (debuff?). Lightning orb causes targets in the AoE(s) to be electrocuted, which can mean they lose an action on their turn perhaps? Poison orb causes the poisoned status effect that according to the BG3 wiki causes disadvantage on attack rolls and ability checks. Assuming this is correct, the spell is now as much a debuff/control as it is a damage spell for these are potentially some very strong effects! Add to this; despite the AoE compartment, Chromatic Orb is considered single-target - which makes a sorcerer able to twin it and inflict 2 mini-AoEs. This is in breach of D&D rules that excludes AoE from twin metamagic.

All in all an interesting change I think. Perhaps even good...if balance isn't much of a concern, which it clearly isn't for Larian and the many uncritical fans who just want the lols. Given homebrew implementations such as the Sapphire Spark magic item that strongly buffs Magic Missile (making it a much better alternative for pure damage) and permissive rest mechanics, balancing issues quickly become kind of moot. Martial classes, in particular melee, have been buffed in several ways already including bonus action shove, throw, dip, weapon special attacks, jump, etc). At least surface effects on actual spells, makes the DOS2 shenanigans less consistently in your face than they were with the ever-present cantrips.

I agree to the idea:
- targeting enemy = single target damage
- targeting ground = AoE

I think Larian goes too far with their obsession of AoE effects.
My opinion:
- Abilities that target one or several individual targets should not cause AoE or ground effects at all.
Only exception is when the target stands in a special place (e.g. you use a single target electric spell against an enemy who stands in the water).
- Abilities that target one or several individual targets should do nothing if they miss. (e.g. fire arrows)
- Abilities that target an area can cause ground effects.
- All abilities with AoE effects should show the size of the AoE effect. Of course the effect can get bigger, like when you use fireball on an oil lake, but at least you should see the area that gets definitely affected.
- There must be ways to cause elemental damage to enemies without damaging nearby allies. Normally a fire arrow or a chromatic orb should only damage the target if it hits, nothing else.

In DOS2 it was annoying for me that it was almost impossible for me to damage the enemy without setting the whole screen on fire.
Some AoE effects and chain reactions are fine, but we also need to be able to do some "boring" stuff that only deals damage or a status effect, nothing else.

I would rather simply add Another spell ... Chromatic Orb with AoE, and Chromatic Orb without AoE ...

Or even easier, implement Homebrew Metamatic that will reduce damage by dice (useable only for spells that have at least 2dX, logicaly) to AoE effect. :P
Make it cost nothing ... and make it useable with any other metamagic.
Voila! Everyone happy.

+1000
I would just like to add that tooltip should also state that there is AoE effect, and how much damage that effect will do.

This is the ideal solution, and the only acceptable one, if they want to retain the AoE and surface-spawning effects.

An attack roll spell targeted on a creature or object should strike only that target, and hit nothing else. If it misses, it should have no effect unless it is a spell like Acid Arrow which still only affects the specified target for half on a miss.

Having the spell able to target a ground spot instead of a creature, and having it function differently if you do so is a more or less perfect solution that allows both parties to have what they want. A ground targeted attack makes no attack roll, and simply creates the small AoE surface puddle where you place it.

An external but related rule that needs to be fixed: Any surface that would inflict a debilitating or debuffing status effect MUST offer a save against its negative effects before applying. ONE unavoidable tap of minor damage is acceptable (Either on application OR at start of turn if starting in area, OR at end of turn if ending in area) - TWO is not, THREE is right out.

1. Chromatic Orb is not a Sorcerer-only spell.

2. Even if it was, that would be an awful hack of a "carpet cover" solution to something that could be fixed on level of the spell and it's attributes to begin with.



This is something I would really like to see them add to their design-book. It's what saves are for.

I agree with a lot of the comments already posted, I'd much prefer the 5e implementation of the spell than how it works in BG3. I can understand tweaks for the sake of a video game, but Chromatic Orb is just frustrating when your party members are in melee combat and I don't see how this change makes the spell any better.

Also I didn't notice the new spells to be available to Gale, Wizards should have access to any spell a sorcerer can cast.