Originally Posted by mrfuji3
Originally Posted by HustleCat
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
The problem in BG3 is the double-whammy: Decreasing AC indirectly nerfs saving-throw spells by making attack-roll spells better, and increasing HP directly nerfs all spells. So saving-throw spells are nerfed twice.

I think saving throw spells are only nerfed the one time. Martial actions and attack-roll spells would be affected the same by the new hp/ac values yes? If Larian made saving throw spells more likely to hit, would that bring everything back into balance? You'd still have the same amount length in fights, you'd be hitting more to counter the increased hp, therefore concentration spells would be maintained for about the same amount of time. With this more modified system there's more appeal to casual gamers that don't like to miss and it puts more weight on strategy rather than luck. Core rules can be brutal when the dice just decide you should die and your entire party does nothing for 4 rounds in a row. Doesn't happen often, but ooph not fun.

Not exactly. Martial atctions are easier to hit due to lowered AC (buff) but do less proportional damage from increased HP (nerf). BUT, the mechanics of height/backstabbing allow for easy increases to your to-hit chances, another (buff). Net=1 buff
Same for to-hit spells: easier to hit from lowered AC (buff), less proportional damage (nerf), and are benefitted by height/backtabbing (buff) = 1 buff
Saving Throw Spells/ HP spells: less proportional damage (nerf) and no effect from height/lowered AC= 1 net nerf.

The difference between 1 net nerf and 1 net buff is 2 levels of power.
In order to fix things, as you say, Larian needs to make saving throw spells more likely to hit. This would lead to them being still underpowered, but less so.

This would also immediately fix encounters where monsters are unchanged from 5e DMG. It is still easier to hit them using height/backstab, thus ST spells should be buffed.

Right, that makes sense when you put the new advantage sources into context. Which I agree with. I think the only argument for height advantage would be simplicity. It fits into the current UI with advantages going against disadvantages. In a future update with a new UI, it'd be nice to see height go from advantage to behaving like cover. You could even scale it from +1 AC and DEX saves to +5 based on the level of height difference between targets. Could possibly throw range extension in the formula as well. Picture attacking someone on the top of the steps versus attacking someone on top of a wall. Then backstabbing should at least require stealth or flanking. Definitely not the current sidestep or Anakin Skywalker hop we have.

In conclusion, taking away the extra advantage sources and increasing hit chance on saving throw spells would balance it right?

Originally Posted by Sludge Khalid

Again, you have also to add that considering that currently we can rest spam.
Even under that circumstances, martialists are better due to the advantage spree.

Oh I don't know about that. In my playthroughs, my casters were definitely outperforming my martials. Much stronger aoes, sleep, and magic missile spam was more than enough to deal with encounters. Now a solo rogue can cheese things because the AI won't search your last hiding spot(glowing dot) if it's too far away. So they can just shoot and hide forever. That's a different subject though