Aasimar can have big fluffy wings, with the right feat in 3.5e your Aasimar got big fluffy wings, and AL allows you to choose an Aasimar version of the the Winged Tiefling, trading your subrace features for big fluffy wings.
You know this is 5E, not 3.5E right?
As for "AL allows", um, does it? That's wild. I can't find any evidence at all of a permanently winged "Winged Aasimar" subrace in any official products. Which is it in?
Plus the Fallen Aasimar's black feathered skeletal wings aren't "spectral" either
Or, more likely, that's not an Aasimar. I mean, most people seem to think it's not.
Serious the spectral wings thing isn't as important as folks think it is.
It's literally the only way Aasimar can have wings that's actually in an official WotC sourcebook that I'm aware of, so it kinda is.
The male voice is a villian of somekind, although their has been a datamined male narrator as well as origin character narration.
Interesting.
Having played Wrath of the Righteous and BG III EA, I could not disagree more. BG 3 in EA is much better to me than Wrath is in full so far.
While I enjoyed Wrath I have partially burnt out at act 5 and have yet to finish. BG III I have enjoyed going through multiple times and am anxious for the full game.
Despite having a better system in theory, the combat gameplay in BG3 is flatly worse than Wrath of the Righteous. The encounter design is far worse - in every possible way - particularly. BG3 is:
A) Far easier to cheese. Trivial even. Stealth is completely broken OP, let's not even start on barrels.
B) Far easier to break accidentally. Some of this is "EA" stuff but encounters that have been in since the start of EA still break all the time. I broke one of the most basic goblin encounters with a single cast of Cloud of Daggers just last week.
C) Less tactically interesting - in large part because enemy behaviour is seemingly randomized in a way that means you can't really predict anything and enemies often choose to do something profoundly dumb. Wrath is a lot more predictable but also more threatening.
D) Far less balanced and less interestingly designed in terms of anything but terrain.
BG3 also has far more "puzzle" encounters which just means an too-high-level encounter with an easy way to win from the terrain or the like. These are only ever interesting once.
The smaller party size really doesn't help here.
The writing in BG3 is also really variable. None of the companions so are far are particularly charming unless you're super-horny for English vampires who look, act and sound like Tory MPs. I mean I get the "I can fix him", but this dude looks and sounds an MP who was in cabinet for a couple of months but got kicked out because he was taking bribes and cocaine lol. Most of them are some species of "what a jerk", though I admit they've been toned down from the early releases where they were NUCLEAR jerks.
There are a lot of weird and annoying quirks with the rules. For example, Larian don't understand D&D's armour system. They seem to think Heavy armour is a "special reward" that's "just better" than other armour. They don't seem understand that all three armour types are approximately balanced. Therefore the only heavy armour from level 1 to level 5 is Ring Mail (AC14 heavy, no dex), whereas inexplicably Scale Mail is abundant (AC14 medium, +2 Dex), and the very first companion you meet is wearing Half-Plate (AC15 medium, +2 AC, the best medium armour in the game). And classes meant to start the game with Chainmail (AC16 heavy, no dex) start with Scale Mail instead.
Wrath certainly has flaws - the biggest of which is the war campaign, which is one of the worst annoying chores I've ever seen in an RPG - and putting it on "auto-win" could break the game last I played. It also doesn't allow as many or as interesting alternate solutions to stuff as BG3.
Of course now BG3 added Paladins and the way the oaths behave is hilariously bad. Oaths break instantly (explicitly not meant to happen in 5E), but can be fixed for 2000gp (just bribe your way out of it!), and they fail to break for really serious transgressions (murdering people, lying massively as Devotion, for example), but randomly insta-break for stuff like "defending yourself from a goblin who attacked you". I'm sure most of that will get fixed, but bloody hell, what a thing to add at the last possible minute. Larian also seem confused about the difference between Ancients and Devotion Paladins.
I will say I think BG3 has the potential to be vastly better than Wrath of the Righteous.
But the quality of Acts 2/3 will need to be stellar for that to be the case.
I think what'll actually happen is, based on DOS1/2, Acts 2/3 will be a bit of a mess on release, lacking content compared to act 1, full of bugs, and generally not great, but in like 2025 we'll get an Enhanced Edition that fixes everything to an acceptable degree. Hope I'm wrong but...
