Steam ≠ Larian

What do you want them to add that isn't already covered by the existing spells? Besides Dispel Magic, because that was removed for plot and sanity reasons.

Let me give you a simple example. Shadow Blade. There is a ring in this game with Shadow Blade bound spell. But we can't learn it for whatever reason.
Another huge miss is Tenser's Transformation. One of the Wizard's signature spells. Why is not in the game i have no idea. 5-6 circles in this game are really sparse on spells in BG3 in general.
Also cantrips like booming blade and green blade. Bards and Eldrich Knights favorite cantrips.

I am not a pro, but even intuitively there were more spells that i used in bg2. Remember how to defeat some dragon or a mage mummy, you had to understand the school of magic etc... for example the spell lower resistance is not in bg3.

Originally posted by jnn123:

... for example the spell lower resistance is not in bg3.

Spell resistance doesn't exist in D&D5

Originally posted by jnn123:

I am not a pro, but even intuitively there were more spells that i used in bg2. Remember how to defeat some dragon or a mage mummy, you had to understand the school of magic etc... for example the spell lower resistance is not in bg3.

this is simply not true? are you a troll by chance? ´BG3 has as many spells as BG2.... the modifictaor removals didnt count as spells in BG2... EDUCATE YOURSELF !

Originally posted by Marmottty:

Originally posted by jnn123:

... for example the spell lower resistance is not in bg3.

Spell resistance doesn't exist in D&D5

How dare Larian remove spells that were already removed by DnD5?!!!

Yeah they made the game simpler, instead of more complex. Good luck in DnD6 you'll have only a fireball and a frost nova ;)

Originally posted by bruh moment:

Originally posted by jnn123:

I am not a pro, but even intuitively there were more spells that i used in bg2. Remember how to defeat some dragon or a mage mummy, you had to understand the school of magic etc... for example the spell lower resistance is not in bg3.

this is simply not true? are you a troll by chance? ´BG3 has as many spells as BG2.... the modifictaor removals didnt count as spells in BG2... EDUCATE YOURSELF !

search for bg2 spells and bg3 spells and count the amount, bg2 has like 80 spells more, just by amount, am not speaking about usage of the spell, where remove a curse you need like only in a fight with gortash (and maybe near altar of Balthazar, thats it.)

BG2 also has spells that are just better versiosns of lower level spells that bloat the spell list, so that's not really indicative of anything.

I feel like I used a lot less of the spells in BG 2.


That game had a lot of basically useless spells.

Throw in the nearly identical spells for different classes and all the spells that are basically better versions of lower level spells that got replaced by the much more tactically interesting upcasting and you can see there's a lot more going on with BG 3 spells

Ok why not to add just new spells like for example, a spell that disables a "condition" for 2 rounds? Or a new thunder-lightening dmg aoe spell?

Originally posted by jnn123:

Ok why not to add just new spells like for example, a spell that disables a "condition" for 2 rounds? Or a new thunder-lightening dmg aoe spell?

Because they're using an established ruleset and there are already a ton of lightning aoe spells in assorted shapes (line, circle, second circle aoe, chaining) so it's hard to justify another.

Yeah its up to Larian to choose one ruleset over another as a game producer. Like in every game they tried much more spells etc. and removed them because some of them were too op, some of combinations were too op and they said, ok we cut it to this amount, we dont have time, nobody will complain anyways. Its only question of the demand.

Originally posted by jnn123:

Ok why not to add just new spells like for example, a spell that disables a "condition" for 2 rounds? Or a new thunder-lightening dmg aoe spell?

What conditions? Because we already have stuff like Calm Emotions, Protection from Evil and Good, Protection from Poison, Dispel Evil and Good as well as the ability to outright remove conditions with Lesser and Greater Restoration.

Also, what would make this theoretical mixed damage spell worth using over the already existing lighting and thunder spells of singular damage types?