Casters often feel at a massive disadvantage for casual fights. For a boss fight, casters are often the strongest, since you'll blow all your spell slots. But for smaller fights, you want to preserve your spell slots and cantrips simply cannot keep up with martials. I mean, a single attack roll for a spell cantrip vs getting 2-3 attack roles that also do more damage total? Heck, my strongest martials can usually do at least double the damage of a spell caster's cantrips.
Though at the same time, when I can blow the spell slot, no martial can outdo the AoE damage of reliable ol' fireball or the likes. Just I can't justify using my spell slots on a small number of weak enemies.
Relatable, but we really need a more elegant solution to vertical vs horizontal videos. I just measured, and that little square of video only used 15% of my screen.
Surprised monk rogue is so low. It's been the most brutal dps build I've experienced so far. Three levels of rogue with thief for bonus actions and two levels of fighter for action surge ( always use two levels of fighter almost every time) is devastating. My strenght build monk puts out twice the amount of damage my ranger does, hits 100%of the time and doesn't need any form of advantage apart from melee range. First turn usually means 8 attacks dealing 30+ damage each with the appropriate bonuses. That's over 240 on first turn then +/-180 for at least the nex two turns if you don't channel ki. Casual numbers right.
Edit: yeas it also needs tavern brawler which is a broken feat afaic.
Gloom stalker thief is broken as hell. 2 offhand attacks, 2 regular attacks, and then your dread ambusher attack during the first round of combat. Dual wield hand crossbows and get sharpshooter and you become a god of death
Cunning Action is a hell of a drug. I have to consciously stop myself from dipping Rogue 2 in my irl tabletop games too, bonus action dash or disengage is literally game changing. It redefines everything you can do within a turn.
If you’re finding that he’s doing fine in combat, then don’t worry about it. If you want him to do more, then multiclassing can improve that if you know what you want from the multiclass combo.
The main issue with Spore is that it's a conditional damage increase that is dependent on Temp HP. This makes it reliant on player knowledge of 5e's Temp HP mechanics and sources.
Compare that with Fighter and Thief multis and you see why it isn't taken by those without in-depth knowlege of 5e and BG3's implementation.
I did 12 monk originally, but just swapped to 9 monk 3 rogue since it's basically the same thing just losing like a single feat. But I gain an extra bonus action and some other nice passives instead.
Is there much of a fundamental difference between which class you start you multiclass on? Or is the Ranger-Rogue vs Rogue-Ranger disparity solely about point allocation?
Yeah i think thats right. If i went level 1 barb, then a level in fighter, then i wouldnt get heavy armor profiency, but reversed i would. (Just an example, not sure why a barb would really want heavy armor prof as it prevents rage bonuses i think)
Saves, starting skill proficiencies, and weapon/armor proficiencies in most cases. Some classes get those as special features though, such as heavy armor and martial weapons for war clerics, which complicates the rule.
I cant wait to join this group after I'm finished with the campaign. It's been hard to find time to finish it and not being able to watch any videos or read literally anything about the game is driving me crazy at this point. I haven't had this much enjoyment playing a game in a long time. What a masterpiece it's been.
That's the exact reason my friends and I decided we'd all do an initial run through solo before doing a group campaign. It took us years to finish DOS2, I imagine BG3 will be similar.
Wait, why does warlock’s extra attack stack with other source of extra attack? It isn’t meant to do that, and is almost a complete upgrade over fighter 6-10/ pretty much any martial’s tier 2 levels.