Non DnD Changes to Multiclassing and racial stats

[Thespen]

Froma reddit post, based on an Italian interveiw given by a Larian Dev https://www.reddit.com/r/BaldursGate3/comments/14w221u/interview_at_the_lead_system_designer/jrfpx9l/ Which if true will totally screw class and racial balance and it will not be DnD anymore, just some game vaguely related to DnD.

I really wish they had made these changes during early access so they could have got more player feedback not some small sample size.

Unhappy of England (lol)

[Hobocop]

Which non-D&D changes are they referring to?

Because Tasha's Cauldron of Everything is right there.

[Blackdragon]

Already discussing it here:
https://steamcommunity.com/app/1086940/discussions/0/3802776599350054099/

Short version: multiclassing changes actually seem cool, and racial stats were already made fungible in Tasha (and frankly speaking it's to the best, personally I don't want to be tied to a specific "optimal" race if I want to play a particular class - especially in this game where character appearance matters so much).

[Thespen]

Added a link - 1) if you multiclass you will not lose spell progression ie 1 wizard and 4 priest would give you fireball.

ie The other thing we've changed is how magic users use spell slots, making it less punishing to level more than one magic class. One issue with multiclassing is that if you multiclass early in the game, you don't get strong abilities like "Fireball" at the same level as a "pure" class, but we wanted players to be able to multiclass from the start of the campaign, without having to necessarily wait for the advanced levels mainly you non no longer need minimum stats to multiclass

No minimum stats needed to multi-class (And that will be abused)

And the stat changes, unless all of Tash's changes are implimented will, for example, level humans much worse off with a +2/+1 but not the many perks ie darkvision, stealth other races get.

[RealDealBreaker]

Originally posted by Thespen:

Added a link - 1) if you multiclass you will not lose spell progression ie 1 wizard and 4 priest would give you fireball.

ie The other thing we've changed is how magic users use spell slots, making it less punishing to level more than one magic class. One issue with multiclassing is that if you multiclass early in the game, you don't get strong abilities like "Fireball" at the same level as a "pure" class, but we wanted players to be able to multiclass from the start of the campaign, without having to necessarily wait for the advanced levels mainly you non no longer need minimum stats to multiclass

No minimum stats needed to multi-class (And that will be abused)

And the stat changes, unless all of Tash's changes are implimented will, for example, level humans much worse off with a +2/+1 but not the many perks ie darkvision, stealth other races get.

That's not a change. That's how spell slot progression as a multiclass of two full casters works.

Edit: And the ability score requirements in 5e were already so minimal they are basically pointless. Just need 13 in the main ability score for the class you are and the class you want to be. Any remotely decent multiclass would already have the necessary ability scores because they need them to be functional. And what does it matter if it will be abused? It is a single player game. What Steve does in Steve's game has no effect on what Paul does in Paul's game.

Edit 2: And humans being able to go +2/+1 is actually not worse for the vast majority of builds than +1 to all scores. Most of the time you end up with odd numbered scores (i.e., no effective increase) and increases to a dump stat (e.g., intelligence for a barbarian) is a waste anyway.

[Hobocop]

I'm not convinced it'll be any worse than current tabletop balance, and the mutliclassing minimum requirements always felt like more of a formality than a true restriction because you're unlikely to get all that much use out of class features if you're sitting at 10 in a casting stat for example.

[Foolswalkin]

Originally posted by Thespen:

Added a link - 1) if you multiclass you will not lose spell progression ie 1 wizard and 4 priest would give you fireball.

I don't think that is necessarily what they are saying?

ie The other thing we've changed is how magic users use spell slots, making it less punishing to level more than one magic class. One issue with multiclassing is that if you multiclass early in the game, you don't get strong abilities like "Fireball" at the same level as a "pure" class, but we wanted players to be able to multiclass from the start of the campaign, without having to necessarily wait for the advanced levels mainly you non no longer need minimum stats to multiclass

It's unclear whether they are sayng what they changed or why you still might not want to multiclass in the middle of the paragraph.

[RealDealBreaker]

Originally posted by Recjawjind:

Originally posted by RealDealBreaker:

That's not a change. That's how spell slot progression as a multiclass of two full casters works.

No it's not? Spell slots don't depend on your *character* level, they are fully dependent on the class level, following the table. RAW a multiclassed 5th level character has no way of getting access to third level spellslots and thus, no way of accessing fireball (outside of magic items that cast fireball)

Umm a 5th level character that has access to a spell list with fireball (like wizard) DOES get 3rd level spell slots. If they are wiz1/cleric 4 they STILL get 3rd level spell slots which can be used to cast ANY spell on ANY of their classes spell lists. Such a muticlass character could copy fireball from a scroll into their spell book and then cast fireball.

Now if we had a wizard 4/fighter 1, that character would NOT have 3rd level spell slots and COULD NOT cast 3rd level spells.

[Hobocop]

Originally posted by Foolswalkin:

Originally posted by Thespen:

Added a link - 1) if you multiclass you will not lose spell progression ie 1 wizard and 4 priest would give you fireball.

I don't think that is necessarily what they are saying?

ie The other thing we've changed is how magic users use spell slots, making it less punishing to level more than one magic class. One issue with multiclassing is that if you multiclass early in the game, you don't get strong abilities like "Fireball" at the same level as a "pure" class, but we wanted players to be able to multiclass from the start of the campaign, without having to necessarily wait for the advanced levels mainly you non no longer need minimum stats to multiclass

It's unclear whether they are sayng what they changed or why you still might not want to multiclass in the middle of the paragraph.

It could very well be a translation issue. We'll have to see.

[Yojo0o]

Originally posted by RealDealBreaker:

Originally posted by Recjawjind:

No it's not? Spell slots don't depend on your *character* level, they are fully dependent on the class level, following the table. RAW a multiclassed 5th level character has no way of getting access to third level spellslots and thus, no way of accessing fireball (outside of magic items that cast fireball)

Umm a 5th level character that has access to a spell list with fireball (like wizard) DOES get 3rd level spell slots. If they are wiz1/cleric 4 they STILL get 3rd level spell slots which can be used to cast ANY spell on ANY of their classes spell lists. Such a muticlass character could copy fireball from a scroll into their spell book and then cast fireball.

Now if we had a wizard 4/fighter 1, that character would NOT have 3rd level spell slots and COULD NOT cast 3rd level spells.

That's very much not true. They get level 3 spell slots, but no access to level 3 spells until a single one of their classes would get them. The level 3 spell slots would only be usable for upcasting until that is the case.

[sirfuzzzy]

I mean... of course they were going to have change it from tabletop. 5e the ttrpg is a disaster completely dependent on the GM altering everything as they go to be playable. A video game needs some real balance and structure to function well.

[Foolswalkin]

Originally posted by Recjawjind:

Originally posted by RealDealBreaker:

That's not a change. That's how spell slot progression as a multiclass of two full casters works.

No it's not? Spell slots don't depend on your *character* level, they are fully dependent on the class level, following the table. RAW a multiclassed 5th level character has no way of getting access to third level spellslots and thus, no way of accessing fireball (outside of magic items that cast fireball)

In 5e, spell *slots* are summed from all your non-warlock caster levels, full caster 1:1, ranger and paladin 2:1, eldritch knight and arcane trickster 3:1. (Rounded down in all cases.)

Spells *known and prepared* are still handled on an individual class basis.

So a Ranger 5/Cleric 2 would have the same spell slots as a fourth level Cleric (or any other 4th level pure caster), but know and prepare spell lists for each class separately.

There's still no way to multiclass and know fireball at character level 5, though, because it only shows up at 5th level wizard (or light cleric) at the earliest, and you therefore can't be all three of multiclass, character level 5, and wizard level 5.

Unless Larian has decided to make all multiclasses secretly follow a free Mystic Theurge prestige class, but that seems surprising.

[Yojo0o]

Racial stat versatility is already in 5e, but if they enable multiclassed casters to thrive in this manner, that will WILDLY shift the balance of spellcasters in a potentially disastrous manner. I would be very much against this as a homebrew shift.

[Yojo0o]

Originally posted by sirfuzzzy:

I mean... of course they were going to have change it from tabletop. 5e the ttrpg is a disaster completely dependent on the GM altering everything as they go to be playable. A video game needs some real balance and structure to function well.

5e tabletop is wildly successful. It may not be perfect, but to suggest that it's fundamentally broken strikes me as very odd. Are we all playing wrong?

[sirfuzzzy]

Originally posted by Yojo0o:

Originally posted by sirfuzzzy:

I mean... of course they were going to have change it from tabletop. 5e the ttrpg is a disaster completely dependent on the GM altering everything as they go to be playable. A video game needs some real balance and structure to function well.

5e tabletop is wildly successful. It may not be perfect, but to suggest that it's fundamentally broken strikes me as very odd. Are we all playing wrong?

I don't think I said it's broken. It's working as intended. Players lives are very easy as the work is offloaded entirely to the GM. Having ran about 50 systems in the past it is definitely bottom 5 for GMing. That doesn't mean its bad to play obviously but it's not going to make for a good video game without some work!

[Foolswalkin]

Originally posted by sirfuzzzy:

Originally posted by Yojo0o:

5e tabletop is wildly successful. It may not be perfect, but to suggest that it's fundamentally broken strikes me as very odd. Are we all playing wrong?

I don't think I said it's broken. It's working as intended. Players lives are very easy as the work is offloaded entirely to the GM. Having ran about 50 systems in the past it is definitely bottom 5 for GMing. That doesn't mean its bad to play obviously but it's not going to make for a good video game without some work!

Have you, by any chance, GMed Pathfinder 2nd?