Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Magic Items DnD vs DoS2

So I noticed when watching some youtube videos from various people that had the replays in the back ground that there was some magic items with descriptions. In one case Astarian is looting a sarcophagus and finds a dagger, well the image appears to be a dagger, but when moused over it says 2 handed sword (a minor thing that will probably be worked out by release) that has a chance to do "such n such" effect. So far so good, still pretty much DnD. But it also had a special ability/skill/spell tied to it just like some of the DoS2 items did, like "Magus" or "All In". This is where some will say hmmm lets not do that, that isn't DnD magic, that's DoS2 magic. DnD magic items typically give pluses to hit with the occasional effect, curse and in some cases are sentient (ultra rare) etc. i.e. +1 short sword of frost, +1 to hit and damage with d4 cold damage on a crit.

I bring this up because of those who really feel this is DoS3 and magic items like that don't quell their fear. It's minor and could be worked out long before release but was curious if anyone had feelings one way of the other?

The Watchers Guide
Two Handed Melee Weapon
1d6 piercing
Has a change to cast faerie fire on hit
Damage 1d6 piercing
Weapon Skill
"Rush"
Run to the target position, making weapons attacks against enemies
weight 1.35 cost 200gp

I cant do a screenshot but that's the weapon, found here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTsgcFOzSOc at the 17:30 mark. Too much DoS2 or a decent DnD fit?

+ 1 To damage and hit is boring. It doesn't offer any meaningful choice or open up new tactical options. It makes your numbers go up a little, but it doesn't make you think.

Yes, you need some boring items, especially at low levels but no one is going to get enthusiastic about the twelfth +1 Shortsword they've found. A "Rush to target position once per long rest" shortsword, on the other hand, makes you wonder and think about whether you want to use it, and even if you never do use it before your long rest, you'll probably be thinking about it every time your turn comes up. You can't say that about a simple +1.

Here you go:


One of the things I recall most fondly from BG2 were unique weapons. The more there are weapons equally useful, but with different application/bonus/trigger effect the better, the better in my book.

It isn't a two handed sword, it is a spear. And the ability doesn't seem to have anything to do with magic. It seems like just as in Divinity, all weapons will have a particular ability tied to each type regardless of whether or not it is magic. I am fine with this. Pillars of Eternity has something similar, too. It is good design, and if anything, DnD should adopt it into the table top.

I agree that +1/+2 damage and rolls is boring BUT having stat stickie itemization is also very boring. IMO a putting +1d4 sonic damage into a dagger, a 5% chance of summoning a creature when got hit and other affixes can be good. A boot which allow the user to use jump X times per long rest also can be interesting.

Or class specific items; imagine a item "when you cast Eldritch Blast, there are 25% chance of firing a aditional blast projectile" or "immunity to web" and so on.

But what i particularly hate is when your character becomes 100% irrelevant and everything is determined sole by his gear. Think on Diablo 3 and WoW on this aspect. Why not copy some items from BG1/2. Eg?



More items here https://imgur.com/a/8Uqzxue

Just be cautious to not copy the strongest BG2 items since BG2:SoA end about lv 15~22 depending the class and late chapters SoA items would destroy the challenge of a low level 5e campaign. The items needs to be toned down to 5e values.

Weapon skills are something that they added. It is not in the PnP.
Apparently all weapons have at least a skill, regardless whether they are magical or not. So in this case the special effect is just to cast faerie fire (which is one of the best lvl 1 spells btw).

I can't understand why weapon should give such ability (rush) for everyone.

I would be more then fine with it if those skills were linked to your weapon mastery level... (Don't really know if the D&D rules had changed about that but there is probably still something like that).

This would add way more complexity because we could imagine more than only 1 skill to discover for every weapon. This would also add lots of replay value because You won't be able to discover everything on one playthrough.

...But a skill for everyone whatever if you already hold that type of weapon in your hands or not is just another easy way to add a mecanic that has no consistent explanation.

I like the idea of BG1/2 items in BG3. It's a good link with the old games and they were generaly well balanced.

I cannot remember a single item from DOS1 or 2 and I think that's a problem. The itemization for general in those games didn't grab me at all, and the only thing I can remember about it was trying to just get a weapon that had the highest hit damage. I think in general the entire itemization for DOS2 was fundamentally wrong. It never felt good to get an item, it just seemed like you were waiting to get something with more dps the further you went through the game like "It's been 3 hours since my last weapon upgrade, I should be due for one soon".

The whole argument in Diablo 4 right now about itemization should be used as a good thesis on the subject. I feel like items should be complex enough to the point that you aren't really sure what's good and what isn't. "Double edge sword" items (+AC -Magic Restance type deal) give the player more to think about from a gearing sense. You really want to as much as possible veer away from the "I know this item is an upgrade, because it has more dps". If you can say that every time, then your itemization is bad and it needs to be changed.

I don't mind weapon skills. It's a way to differentiate different types of weapon. With Spear you can "Rush" i.e. charge forward with the spear. Two-handed sword could for example have cleave, hit X enemies in front of you with normal attack, two-handed hammer could have a "stunning blow" etc. Adding it as a skill to the weapon abilities despite it being weapon class feature makes it easier to read.

I like the principle of weapon skills to make each weapon type a bit different.

Good idea to have them tied to proficiency though, if they aren’t already. A well rounded warrior with lots of proficiencies could then use whatever weapon best suits the situation, whereas less martial characters or warriors specializing in a particular weapon would be better sticking to what they know. That should be more interesting than always using one type or just getting proficiency to use the best magic weapons. Hello, Flail of Ages.

Speaking of which, having some items return would be cool if it makes sense and they don’t overdo it. For instance finding an item in the possessions of a long dead companion character. I don’t think they’d need the stats and effects to be exactly the same, since the whole system has changed, but they should be recognizable as basically the same thing.



Nope. Not worried about it being like DOS3 at all. DOS games have leveled weapons and D&D doesn’t. That changes everything fundamentally.

In DOS games you can find a unique magic weapon with bonuses that completely complement your character, and it will be utterly outclassed not much later by a bog standard weapon of higher level. And to compensate for that, they gave you tonnes of magic weapons. It’s one of the problems I had with the system. For example in DOS2, you can get the Spear of Braccus Rex almost straight away in Fort Joy. You’d think that should be an absolutely legendary weapon, but it’s not, it’s just level 3. And of course managing your equipment to keep pace is a constant task that frankly gets a bit much.

That won’t be the case in BG3. In D&D, magic items give you bonuses and maybe other abilities, but you don’t need to keep upgrading. You’ll be able to find one you like and keep using for a long time, maybe the rest of the game. That also means magic items don’t have to be very common. I expect there will be plenty around, but probably not every time you kill something.

Whatever they do about bonuses and effects, it will feel and play very differently.

As written before, I like the DnD item system more than D:OS because I hate inflating numbers with totally random items.
In DnD unique magic items are rare, but when you find them they can be very powerful and you will probably keep them for a long time.

Somebody complained that in 5E you have very limited options for special attacks. You need to be a battle master or spend a feat to do some things at all, such as trip or disarm an enemy.
In this case special attacks for each weapon type might be good, such as damaging enemies with a spear when you dash to the enemy. This way the choice of your weapon type would be more importent and you can do something else than auto attack 90% of the time. In most games it makes no difference if you attack with a sword or an axe.

Does BG3 weapons have range? That was something that differentiates different weapons in other RPGs.

Overall, giving weapon types unique abilities tied to how this weapon is used is not bad by any means. It gives weapon types a bit more identity. I don't know if it's necessary but one would need to try the game first.

Dunno about BG3, but in 5e there are weapons that have farther reach (10ft) than usual (5ft) like whips, halberds, pikes, lances, etc.. but they´re usually heavy, besides whips. Bows and crossbows have larger killing range than javelins, etc.
I assume they will use those rules in bg3 too.
https://roll20.net/compendium/dnd5e/Weapons#content


I think it´s a great idea that you have combat moves that are tied to the weapon you are using, that would give more variety when you are in close combat quarters and you could have more tactical reasons to pick one weapon type over another.
It would be cool if they apply this to the PNP too.

The problem I have if a weapon were to have Cleave, that is a feat that classes strive for, I wouldn't just give it to a weapon.

I do understand "rush" with the spear weapon I originally posted, since now I know its a spear, that make sense.

There are many types of weapons and if you want to give an individual skill to each of them it will lead to some inconsistencies.
For example tell me an action that can be done with a longsword but not with a shortsword or a scimitar.
We have to accept that RPG rules are always always arbitrary and abstract to some degree and they are not a perfect simulation of reality, not even the fictional reality of the game.
Personally I am happy if weapon choice becomes more meaningfull, because else it makes no difference if you use an axe or a sword.

I did not find the cleave feat in 5E (but great weapon master lets you attack again if you crit) but it was a feat in 3E. The spear ability looks similar to the charger feat.
I agree that a weapon ability (which you get automatically by equipping a weapon) should not make a feat obsolete. But feats in 5E are usually a set af effects.
I think it would be OK if one weapon gives an ability, even when there is a feat as long as the feat gives this ability to several/all weapons or it has other effects as well.

Cleave is actually one of the Battlemaster's maneuvers.


Sweeping Attack
When you hit a creature with a melee weapon attack, you can expend one superiority die to attempt to damage another creature with the same attack. Choose another creature within 5 feet of the original target and within your reach. If the original attack roll would hit the second creature, it takes damage equal to the number you roll on your superiority die. The damage is of the same type dealt by the original attack.

"Cleave is actually one of the Battlemaster's maneuvers."

I stand corrected, I'm old and old school.

Anyway I'm not opposed to what I've seen and it won't make me not play. I was just was curious of others opinions.

"Prise de fer" maneouvers. Scimitars do not have point and shortswords are too light and short, usually.

but yeah, it's a good thing that your weapon choice means something. It´s not the same wield a longsword or an axe.



Not exactly, "Charger" lets you attack after you dash: I.E: you charge and lunge at the end. Rush as described lets you hit nearby enemies in the trajectory of your run.

I do not think that´s even a thing in 5e. Looks pretty cool.

When I close my eyes and think of DOS2...

I don't see the beautiful environments,
I don't see the awesome special effects,
I don't see the well crafted animations...

I see the inventory and vendor screens. They are PERMANENTLY ETCHED INTO MY BRAIN because I had to stare at them for hours and hours and hours.

DOS2 forced you to upgrade every item on every companion every level to remain competitive. I LOVED the game, but HATED the itemization.

I could care less how they do itemization in BGIII as long as they don't do it like DOS2.

I agree 100%. I love D:OS2, but I don't like when numbers are pure abstractions with no real world bearing. You start with a sword that does 5 damage and you end with a sword that does 700 damage, these numbers don't mean anything. It is just a game mechanic to keep you cycling out your gear. I love D&D because the numbers represent concrete. A normal longsword always does the same damage, no matter what level you find it at.

And D&D lacks BS mechanics like cooldowns.

Fallout New Vegas also did a amazing job with firearms.

Your starting clearly improvised bolt action 556 rifle in poor state is vastly inferior to the 556 semi automatic rifle which you can get on mid game BUT is extremely inferior in RoF, not in raw damage. I really miss old games. On Gothic 2, when i got the Beliar claw on chapter 2, i ended the game with Beliar's Claw. I call this type of itemization "stat stickie" itemization, where your character is nothing and stats makes the role of the character sheet.

That is so true.