Starting characters in Baldur's Gate 3.

Jidokwon

I was just blown away reading how level one characters are described in the today's Dungeons and Dragons. Any level one fighter will likely have more training than most special forces veterans. Anyone taking the background of acolyte is high priest material. No inexperienced youths venturing out from Candlekeep! This isn't a criticism, but I'm finding that I'll really need to catch up to how D&D works for today's gaming.

Zaxares

Yeah, levels in 5E got pretty re-jigged. I'm not very familiar with 5E, so anyone with better knowledge can correct me, but I think that by level 20 you're already considered to be an epic character, rather than 21+ like in previous editions.

ThacoBell

5e is kind of a weird hodge podge. Parts of it feel like nods to 2e, other parts to 3.5. There's good ideas and bad ideas there. I've had fun with 5e tabletop, but there's definitely things that feel really, "Wait, what? Why did they think that was a good idea?"

elminster

ThacoBell wrote: »

5e is kind of a weird hodge podge. Parts of it feel like nods to 2e, other parts to 3.5. There's good ideas and bad ideas there. I've had fun with 5e tabletop, but there's definitely things that feel really, "Wait, what? Why did they think that was a good idea?"

One example (at least to me) is how one of the features of most of the wizard schools is that it takes less time and gold to learn a spell from your school.

Only, you also learn a few spells with each level (and 6 spells at level 1).

So, depending on how your DM handles getting access to other scrolls (and the existence of magic shops), you are better off taking spells not from your school when you level up. Since it saves you a ton of gold. Especially in cases where you aren't gaining any bonus from casting spells from your school until later levels (like with enchanters).

I'm not sure if they have this in BG3 though. I'd have to check.

Jidokwon

That's interesting. I haven't tried a wizard in BG3 yet, so I'm unsure what a level one wizard would be comparable to. If they start out with, at least, six spells, though, it wouldn't be too bad. Still not comparable to being better than special forces veterans, high priests, thief guildmasters, but starting with six spells would give some options.

Zaxares

elminster wrote: »

One example (at least to me) is how one of the features of most of the wizard schools is that it takes less time and gold to learn a spell from your school.

Wait, it takes time and gold to learn a spell now? (I'm assuming this isn't just "scribing a spell from a scroll to your spellbook" here.) I remember back in the day players could research their own new spells, which would cost them gold, time and possibly XP, but I don't recall having to actually pay to learn existing spells which are "common knowledge", so to speak, like Magic Missile or Fireball.

PsicoVic

Yeah, it takes time and gold. You also have to buy them, find them or copy another wizard´s spellbook while adventuring.
To be fair the wizards are the only casters that have a spellbook now. All the other classes learn their spells when they level up or pick a feat/class feature.

For each level of the spell, the process takes 2 hours and costs 50 gp. The cost represents material components you expend as you experiment with the spell to master it, as well as the fine inks you need to record it. Once you have spent this time and money, you can prepare the spell just like your other spells.

As setoff wizards can potentially learn any spell and could cast ritual spells directly from your spellbook, you do not have to memorize the spell. That means any wizard can cast any ritual spell (ritual spells take more time to cast but do not spend a spell slot) he knows any time, anywhere.

cookieinacup

Nice read! This thread is going to be outdated soon when the game releases but I still found helpful things here. Thanks!