im pretty sure that even the way larian has been implementing the die role mechanic is different from traditional dnd 5e by reducing the ac rather than adding to your role - ive enjoyed ea so far, but still struggle considering this as bg3
Finding fault with this is just being unreasonable, and I clearly find fault with a lot with the current system. This is literally the difference between adding something to X versus subtracting it from Y, if we view this as "different" we've entered the ground of what being
equivalent even means.
[
I don't have a problem with the changes, I have a problem with how much the infringe on balance.
Yes because clearly auto-upcasting Wizards or literal Wizard-Rangers backed by Scorching/Fireball Paladins do not infringe on balance.
I just find it funny how Solasta is apparently our lord and savior, while BG3 is the devil. I currently do a Solasta run and it has plenty of its own stuff that is nowhere to be found in 5e, including environmental effects. Know why? Because it's a video game and video games need a bit more than RAW 5e.
It doesen't. Wizards with ranger spells aren't rangers, they don't get the features of a ranger otherwise including extra attack. Paladins with boomey spells likewise does not infringe on balance, because they lack the spell slots to really spam those spells. Heck, you can make a Paladin/Sorcerer that can do the same thing, at the same levels, and it's not broken at all.
Everything getting free disengage, on the otherhand, takes the balance out back and shoots it between the eyes in a shallow grave. It's almost impossible to control an area in the current rule-set, for instance, or to maintain concentration against fire effects, or to
survive against a trap with barrels. Every problem can also be solved by liberal application of barrels of smokepowder and oil in some combination to create the ideal fuel mixture and turn the map into a damned inferno.
