Lackadaisical Leshy's page

I wonder how the wider gaming community feels about spell slots in Baldur’s Gate 3? The game is, by far, the best representation of what “mainstream” understanding of d20 games ends up looking like.

From my own limited experience interacting with BG3 communities online, I feel like people definitely don’t really care about with spell slots one way or the other, it’s mainly the already invested tabletop players who have strong opinions on the system. I will say that given that the fact that people seem to love Sorcerer, Paladin, and Warlock more than the rest of the magic using classes does potentially indicate that bespoke, narrowly themed abilities are more appealing to players than the versatility spell slots represent (and it’s not a power thing because spell slots are objectively pretty damn powerful). It’s just hard to draw that conclusion that it’s entirely possible people are just in love with the Charisma classes lol.

Speaking as someone who objectively spent too much time playing BG3 I think the popularity of Charisma based classes is probably at least partly due to them making you very good at intimidating, persuading and deceiving your way into and out of all kinds of trouble - a playstyle the game definitely encourages and rewards.

Thinking about what BG3 might be able to tell us about spell slots/attrition it might be worth to consider some of the following aspects (and I hope this isn't too off topic):

- By virtue of being a largely single player game spell slot attrition sort of is just party attrition - given you as the player control all party members equally in combat you are likely to either rest or switch out casters (except for your main character of course) once they have run out of slots. Any issues around martial players at a table not wanting to take a rest or the GM not giving you the chance to are non existent (I never encounter these in the TTRPG space either but others clearly have and that would definitely make caster attrition feel bad)

- Spells can be switched at will as long as you are out of combat (a fact I was completely unaware of all way through my first full playthrough as a bard - can't say I found that to be a bad experience though either). Obviously hugely increases versatility, theoretically really favours prepared casters. Wizard, Druid and Cleric being at the lower end of the popularity ranking might indicate that doesn't move the needle much - OR the fact that two of the earliest companions you find are a wizard and a cleric people might just avoid doubling up (not sure why the druid gets so little love they are really fun to play)

- Getting caster hirelings to cast all useful long term buffs on the party at camp so they can free up slots for combat spells or utility spells and buffs with shorter duration has become quite popular. Seems folks are gonna optimise even when they don't really need to if it means they'll get a few "free" spell slots for it. (This not meant to sound snarky by the way getting more of limited resource always feels great as a player)

- You will end up with more cash then you know what to do with so can stock up on potions and scrolls pretty liberally from relatively early on in the game (and we are talking high level spells here). I've been told that they are a very helpful addition to your parties power budget - can't comment personally as I am incapable of using consumables other than healing potions.

- Being a 5e derivative caster level overall is tuned very high (my personal favourite auto win button being Otto's Irresistible Dance) - great fun in a single player game not so fun at a TTRPG table. Probably related to that I found myself resting more often because the barbarian ran out of rages than because any of the casters ran out of spell slots. Casters with a few low level spells, cantrips and maybe even a scroll or two feels leaps and bounds ahead of the poor rageless barbarian.

I very much read it as the +1 circumstance bonus goes away once the albatross is attacked and dies. Although I have to admit rereading the spell just now that definitely is only implied rather than clearly stated.

The only reason I'm fairly certain the intention is for the +1 to go away after the albatross is killed is that if it doesn't the second part of the spell would be less likely to get triggered. Why would the target of the spell attack the albatross if the only effect is having to do a Will save and potentially incurring further penalties? (Obviously depends on whether the target knows the spell etc though it seems like a fairly recognisable spell if you have access to it)

Though even if my interpretation is correct, some clarifying language would be helpful as it definitely is not what the spell says strictly RAW.

Side note - I can't make up my mind whether the critical failure effect is meant to still end after the first Will save or last for a full hour. The former seems functionally the same as a failure and the latter would be incredibly powerful.