The Current State of the Wizard in BG3

[Jonny Boy]

Lets face it they have been royally mishandled in this game.

In table top the way the Wizard works is they dont get the raw power that the sorcerer gets with meta-magic but they instead get access to more powerfull spells. This is simply not the case in BG3.

Wizards are missing So many spells from the Players handbook that are not in the game.

The only significant spells that Wizards have access too that Sorcerers dont are:

- Animate Dead
- Conjure minor Elemental
- Conjure Elemental
- Create Undead

So Larian have basically decided that summons are the only real difference between Wizards and Sorcerers in BG3.

So a Wizard in BG3 is essentially a summoner and a Sorcerer is essentially a super-powered Wizard that can cast 2 spells per turn (quicken) and is also a far better battlefield controller (heightened) and (extend)

The absurdity of this doesn't end here.

To further desecrate the Wizard larian decided too:

- Nerf Hypnotic Pattern heavily compared to table top
- Nerf Polymorph compared to tabletop
- Nerf Banishment compared to table top.
- Nerf Confusion compared to table top (confusion is not operating correctly)

The bizare thing is that Sorcerers also get access to these above 4 spells in BG3, this leads me to believe that Larian Nerfed these spells because they would have been far to powerfull when combined with the Sorcerers meta-magic.

So Wizard spells are now being nerfed to balance the Sorcerer?

[Psychotic_Frog]

Wizards can use scrolls, sorcerers cannot.
Wizards can prepare 17 spells at level 12 with 20 int, sorcerers are limited to 13.
Wizards can swap their prepared spells at any time outside combat, sorcerers are limited to their small list.
Ignoring spells they can have access to, wizards are infinitely more useful.

And Wizards do needed to be nerfed, wizards are a game killer. Ever played Baldur's Gate 2, where you can melt absolutely any encounter with Time Stop + Improved Alacrity + Chain of contingency + Spell Trigger? Cool when used once, but after that it's game-breakingly boring as ♥♥♥♥.

Especially since in BG3 you can literally go sleep after every encounter and recover all your spell slots, there's no GM to tell you "Nope, that's stupid buddy"

[Flexus2004]

Originally posted by Bloodartist:

Originally posted by Orion invictus:

It's been this way for as long as I can remember. If there are martials and casters in the same game, casters get HEAVILY nerfed compared to what they should be (according to the lore) so martials feel powerful.

Casters are often relegated to support roles and such, where they don't really do any direct damage (even though they should), and when they're not, any damage they actually do is outshined by martials (even though it shouldn't).

While there may be some truth in your words, its worth remembering that most RPGs happen at early levels, where ALL wizards have always been weak. They come to their own at later levels when the amount of spellslots increases and the spells become more powerful. From the very beginning of D&D the wizard journey was always from flimsy, barely useful nerds to invincible war gods.

Example: Wrath of the righteous, where you go all the way to mythic levels. My lich in it was the strongest spellcaster Ive ever played.

I've played D&D for ages. Does anyone remember D&D 1, 2, or 3rd ed? Yes, I'm old. My problem with most of the RP video games, as long as I can remember, is their inconsistent and incoherent D&D adaptation. In the early times, in the 70s - early 80s, the games were text-based and more or less tried to follow the actual D&D rule books. OK, you needed some fantasy, but it worked. Those were close to the table game experience, minus the beer and pizzas for the party. Zork, say something to anyone? Then started the era of CGA, EGA, VGA games. More and more visuals, less and less D&D. Let there be no mistake about quality; some of these were, and still are, really big fun. Actually, these can remind the D&D from afar, but these twist the D&D rules. They do this for a reason, like a DM, which I can understand if this happens for the sake of the game's play quality and/or if it has a well-interpreted reason.

Let's talk about BG3. Wizards, sorcerers, or any mage user class are modified. On one hand, in D&D, these classes are relatively weak at the lover levels. OK, understood. The guys at Larion tried to counterbalance this with some tricks, such as scrolls. But hang on a minute. You can use scrolls as a fighter. and you can use any number of scrolls. What?

On the other hand, they limited the levelling to 11th. Why? I reached 11th when I arrived at BG, after I'd gained tonnes of experience for nothing. Would the character be too strong for the final battle? Maybe, but then there is another problem. The world's existence is at stake, and I jovially chatting with a level 20 mage about why the god thinks that it is a good idea to send a level 5 or 11 (deepen on the Act.) wizard against the Netherbrain. Like we entrust a bunch of elementary school students to solve the problem of an Earth killer asteroid, which will hit within a year. It would be a great trial for them. Oh, great.

[Jonny Boy]

Originally posted by Psychotic_Frog:

Wizards can use scrolls, sorcerers cannot.
Wizards can prepare 17 spells at level 12 with 20 int, sorcerers are limited to 13.
Wizards can swap their prepared spells at any time outside combat, sorcerers are limited to their small list.
Ignoring spells they can have access to, wizards are infinitely more useful.

And Wizards do needed to be nerfed, wizards are a game killer. Ever played Baldur's Gate 2, where you can melt absolutely any encounter with Time Stop + Improved Alacrity + Chain of contingency + Spell Trigger? Cool when used once, but after that it's game-breakingly boring as ♥♥♥♥.

Especially since in BG3 you can literally go sleep after every encounter and recover all your spell slots, there's no GM to tell you "Nope, that's stupid buddy"

You only need 13 Spells you dont need 17, lol that is only 4 more anyway.

You dont need to swap your spells outside combat in bg3.

BG2 isnt BG3 man. There is no timestop or any of the other spells you mentioned. Sorcerers get this basically anyway with quickened.

[Bloodartist]

Originally posted by Psychotic_Frog:

Especially since in BG3 you can literally go sleep after every encounter and recover all your spell slots, there's no GM to tell you "Nope, that's stupid buddy"

Technically "resting after every encounter" is limited by your supplies. Especially at higher difficulties where each group member requires their own food.

[balls]

Originally posted by Flexus2004:

Originally posted by Bloodartist:

While there may be some truth in your words, its worth remembering that most RPGs happen at early levels, where ALL wizards have always been weak. They come to their own at later levels when the amount of spellslots increases and the spells become more powerful. From the very beginning of D&D the wizard journey was always from flimsy, barely useful nerds to invincible war gods.

Example: Wrath of the righteous, where you go all the way to mythic levels. My lich in it was the strongest spellcaster Ive ever played.

On the other hand, they limited the levelling to 11th. Why? I reached 11th when I arrived at BG, after I'd gained tonnes of experience for nothing. Would the character be too strong for the final battle? Maybe, but then there is another problem. The world's existence is at stake, and I jovially chatting with a level 20 mage about why the god thinks that it is a good idea to send a level 5 or 11 (deepen on the Act.) wizard against the Netherbrain. Like we entrust a bunch of elementary school students to solve the problem of an Earth killer asteroid, which will hit within a year. It would be a great trial for them. Oh, great.

If you are as old and expirenced as you claim, you must remember that a level 11 character is nowhere near a school student level. Fighter of this level is a champion and likely a landlord with a castle, a feuf and lots of followers. Cleric is an abbot with a monastery and followers as well. And Druid of level 11 (or was it 12?) is supervising the whole region.

[Slav Mcgopnik]

Wizard is fine

Yeah Sorc is stronger assuming you’ve optimized and are trying to squeeze out maximum DPR, but Wizard is totally fine, even one higher difficulties.

Plus wizard gets the bonus of additional flexibility of spell choice over sorc, and some of the wizard bonuses are quite strong.

[FunkyMonkey]

Originally posted by Slav Mcgopnik:

Wizard is fine

Yeah Sorc is stronger assuming you’ve optimized and are trying to squeeze out maximum DPR, but Wizard is totally fine, even one higher difficulties.

Plus wizard gets the bonus of additional flexibility of spell choice over sorc, and some of the wizard bonuses are quite strong.

I would also argue that the more familiar you come with the game and the fights in it, the better Sorcerer looks over Wizard, because you can handpick the spells that you know will matter. If someone is playing through the game the first time, Wizard is better for the simple fact you can change your spells on the fly, without having to respec.

[Popsicles]

I love 5e, but hate 5e wizard. Wizard is meh because so many classes in 5e can cast wizard spells through subclasses and feats. My major criticism of 5e is the homogeny of classes and wizards suffer the most.

[FunkyMonkey]

Originally posted by 󠀡󠀡:

Also keep in mind that INT is worse than CHA because there are no items that boosts INT except the warped headband of intelect (which is bad). There are however good items that boost CHA.

If you take the INT buff from Mirror of loss, you can get max 22 INT and with items you can max at 24 CHA, but then you aren't using the best headpiece for a caster, which is Hood of the weave because it increases your spell DC by 2. With 22 INT and Hood of the Weave you have better spell DC than someone with 24 CHA because they need to be using Birthright for that.

[FunkyMonkey]

Originally posted by 󠀡󠀡:

Originally posted by FunkyMonkey:

If you take the INT buff from Mirror of loss, you can get max 22 INT and with items you can max at 24 CHA, but then you aren't using the best headpiece for a caster, which is Hood of the weave because it increases your spell DC by 2. With 22 INT and Hood of the Weave you have better spell DC than someone with 24 CHA because they need to be using Birthright for that.

You are right. The birtright hat is not worth it. Check out the arcane arcuity headgear (up to +10 to attack rolls and spell save dc), it's better than the weave headgear.

That it is. I mentioned Birthright since you were talking how CHA casters have better gear, but maybe you were talking about something else? Because those arcane acuity headpieces can be used by anyone, so there is no difference in terms of effectiveness if it's on a Wizard or Sorcerer, they both end up with 22 INT or CHA and Arcane acuity stacks. Though, personally, I like Weave gear better because they have better DC on round 1, which is the most important combat round.

[Jonny Boy]

Originally posted by Popsicles:

I love 5e, but hate 5e wizard. Wizard is meh because so many classes in 5e can cast wizard spells through subclasses and feats. My major criticism of 5e is the homogeny of classes and wizards suffer the most.

Yeah and the Cleric has been ruined to.

Main reason i took cleric in BG2 was to cast healing and restoration spells to remove debuffs.

Litterally never had to cast one restoration spell in BG3 and dont need healing spells because potions grow on trees and you can use them with bonus action

[Slav Mcgopnik]

Originally posted by Jonny Boy:

Originally posted by Popsicles:

I love 5e, but hate 5e wizard. Wizard is meh because so many classes in 5e can cast wizard spells through subclasses and feats. My major criticism of 5e is the homogeny of classes and wizards suffer the most.

Yeah and the Cleric has been ruined to.

Main reason i took cleric in BG2 was to cast healing and restoration spells to remove debuffs.

Litterally never had to cast one restoration spell in BG3 and dont need healing spells because potions grow on trees and you can use them with bonus action

Cleric is amazing in 5e and BG3. Plus, their healing is still potent when needed.Restoration also definitely comes into play.

[Hobocop]

Originally posted by Slav Mcgopnik:

Cleric is amazing in 5e and BG3. Plus, their healing is still potent when needed.Restoration also definitely comes into play.

I guess it makes sense if one believes that Clerics are only there to be healbots. Good thing even Life Clerics are more than that.

[Flexus2004]

Originally posted by balls:

Originally posted by Flexus2004:

On the other hand, they limited the levelling to 11th. Why? I reached 11th when I arrived at BG, after I'd gained tonnes of experience for nothing. Would the character be too strong for the final battle? Maybe, but then there is another problem. The world's existence is at stake, and I jovially chatting with a level 20 mage about why the god thinks that it is a good idea to send a level 5 or 11 (deepen on the Act.) wizard against the Netherbrain. Like we entrust a bunch of elementary school students to solve the problem of an Earth killer asteroid, which will hit within a year. It would be a great trial for them. Oh, great.

If you are as old and expirenced as you claim, you must remember that a level 11 character is nowhere near a school student level. Fighter of this level is a champion and likely a landlord with a castle, a feuf and lots of followers. Cleric is an abbot with a monastery and followers as well. And Druid of level 11 (or was it 12?) is supervising the whole region.

Yes, level 11 is the first level of tier 3. But the problem is not smaller if I change the elementary school to a university freshman. Why are we stuck on level 11? This is the "technical" question. And why not solve the Netherbrain problem of a group of level 20? Do they exist? Yes, because we spoke with at least one of them. Are they busy with other things? Maybe, but what is the bigger problem than saving the world? This is the "logical" question. But my question is still that: why can't we step up to the next levels? The balance between the game's quests system, which gifts you a big bunch of exp long after you reach the max level and the character-building and the game length isn't good. If you can reach, for example, level 17, will you be too strong for the Netherbrain? It is possible, but then the Netherbrain fight is a badly developed finish. I think they closed the development somewhere halfway.

[Morvana]

I prefer the Wizard over the Sorcerer.

The sorcerer is more powerful and use charisma as it's main stat, but the Wizard is just so much more agreable to play.
-No stress to select your spells, you can change them at will and you can have all the utility you want or just focus on combat spells.
-The subclass of the Wizard gives different ways to make them uselfull for the party depending of what you need.

Wizard > Sorcerer