Hm. There you have it. Now you see how much I've actually forgotten about Baldur's Gate since my very last (vanilla) playthrough in 2007.

Are sorcs not based off of CHA in BG like they are in every other game?

If so your character stats are going to suck when you get higher level and cant cast any high level spells

Sorcerers in BG are odd in that they actually don't have any real 'required' stat. You can make a sorcerer with min INT and CHA, and he'll still be as good as one with maxed INT and CHA. This is probably because they (like the monk and barb) didn't actually exist in 2nd Ed.

1. BG came first so every other game is based on it.
2. Yes Cha is the stat that a sorcs will use for her spells.
3. No you don't need a min number to cast her spells... that system was added in after.

Well, that's not quite true.

1. BG is based off D&D rules, and there were plenty of RPGs, even ones based on D&D, before Baldur's Gate. Saying BG came first is like saying Doom was the first FPS, popularizing a genre is not the same as creating it.

2. & 3. Actually in BG a sorc uses no stat at all for their spells, contrary to a mage who uses int and a cleric or druid who uses wisdom.
And the system of needing a minimum stat to cast spells IS present in BG for mages (they need 17+ int to cast lvl 9 spells for instance) and characters need to have a pretty high wisdom to be a cleric or druid in the first place.

It's only sorcerers who can basically ignore any stat for their spellcasting (they still need wisdom for wish I guess), making them extremely powerful if you want to powergame and don't want to waste time rerolling stats.

Ah, it seems that monks and sorcs were added in BG2 and included in Tutu. It is interesting that they did not implement the stat restrictions.

How do monks fare in BG1? (not to derail the thread).

Give them a sling and some decent party members and they'll do fine.

In other words, they're pretty much useless in Baldur's Gate. In Shadows of Amn they will start showing their teeth and in Throne of Bhaal they are nearly overpowered, but at low levels you *really* need to babysit them through the fights.

Very similar to Bards. In BG 1 a Bard [or Blade if available] is a very weak character who takes a lot of coddling to get to higher levels. Their saving grace at lower levels is the fact that they can wear Chain [although losing the ability to cast spells] and that they can use the Long Bow. Later with Bracers of Defence, better spell casting and various other improvements, they can stand with the rest of the party, easily.

Also like Monks, a Bard, especially a Blade, becomes a *very* powerful character in BG 2.

But yeah, with "specialist" classes like these, there is going to be a fairly long period of time before they really shine.

I've tried playing BG1 a handful of times over the years AFTER I got/played the collector's edition of BG2 when it was released (and then ToB) and fell in love with the story and characters, but I could only get so far into BG1 without getting utterly frustrated at how much the monsters would re-spawn and having it kill any enjoyability for me. Finally, now, with the re-spawn mod with easytutu, I can enjoy it!!!!!! YAYAYAYAYYYYY

I don't recall having much of a problem with respawning monsters, except for in the firewine ruins (if I had done them sooner that is).

Interesting, I had respawn problems going from one side of a single map to another and back on every single location I played every time I played it.

Can be a problem if you wander astray early on but not so much later on I don't think. I do remember not being able to rest at all outside the temple outside of beregost though.