Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Mega-threads and Guides Early Access gameplay feedback compendium

Yep. And just like that, I've lost interest.

I thought hip would make sense, since it really makes logical sense for people to sheath most weapons. But honestly, I don't care that much. Don't change it. It is one of the least important things in this game.

If you get what you want, Ragnarok, great. I'm all for it.

It does make sense ...
But that doesnt mean it have to be the only option, especialy since alternative is allready done.

Whatever. Like I said. If you get what you want. Great.

That's an easy one. It's nonsense to carry most weapons on the back and a game should not support nonsense and people who like nonsense, used to it or not. It's never too late to stop bowing to nonsense and to learn better stuff.

Sheaths are integral parts of weapons and are a must have in my opinion. Although I don't like Pathfinder, in the case of immersion (weapon carry, sheaths, visible shields, backpacks) that game is lightyears better than BG3. For me that's not a small thing as you look at your party all the time.

The fun fact is that even tho sheats on back were never a thing ... from historical perspective ... they are totally possible and shorter your weapon is, easier it gets.
Via.:

Aaanyway ...
If we want to talk about things that "doesnt make sense" ...
How about druid being able to create fire out of thin air and then hold it for 600 seconds without it burning or even warming anything his own hand in wich he holds it included?

That is okey we are used to that ... but weapon on back wich on the contrary to that fire dont break any laws of nature ... that is totally unacceptable. xD

I will never understand this kind of mindset ...
I dont care if you get what you want as long as i will KEEP (this is important bcs it means litteraly no additional work for devs) mine ...
So why exactly do you demand destruction of that what i like? Those things arent exclusive to each other.

Mindset ? Fantasy universes have their own realities.
In exemple, clothes are also burning in the reality of the FR. Someone able to cast (and eventually hold) a small ball of fire is not immune to fire. Shield does not dissapear if you put it on your back. You're not healed if you walk on healing liquid. That kind of things.

Yup ...
Mindset, i comented on several times in the past (PC Wizards learning all spells, presence of barells, possibility to long rest at will, ... things that exists only when we do them.) ... that can be described as "everything that dont fits MY prefferences must be eradicated!"

Im just litteraly physicaly unable to understand that. :-/

I totally get why people wants to adjust something they cant avoid ...
(high ground, wrong stats or abilities on mobs, bonus action shoving, ... things NPCs will use against you, no matter if you like it or not)
I cant understand why they are unable to simply do (or dont) what they want to do (or dont), without being forced to do (or dont) that.

Exactly ...
And if part of that reality are weapons sticking to the back somehow, its the reality we accept.

And that is the mindset i was talking about ...
Nitpicking wich parts of that fantastic reality fits to our own personal artistic feeling ... and therefore we would accept.
And wich dont ... and therefore must be eradicated, without any chance for someone else to keep them since they are fiting to their artistic feeling ... especialy since keeping them would cost nothing, since they are allready present for those other people ...

That is something im unable to understand.

And since there are many rules of wich many ... well, actualy most ... dont quite "make sense" in our universe ... i believe arguing with sense, doesnt quite make sense.

Why the hell are you talking about "artistic feeling" ?

Have you never read books, watch films or play other video games based on DnD ? Have you ever watch fantasy artwork ? Have you ever look at other fantasy or medieval films, series or video games ?
It looks like there's some kind of consensus on how many weapons were/are carried. (Now he's gonna try to find another video or artwork to say I'm absolutely wrong).

Ofc if Ragnarok's "artistic feeling" think it's better in the back, it's a waste of time to ask Larian to create something more realistic.
Guess what ? I'm absolutely 100% sure that they only did it because it's easier no matter their artistic feelings...

Some players, including myself find games more immersive if the visual fits the reality of the universe.
Larian has proven that they're very bad at this, based on objective observations and/or on facts.

All weapons in the back is a good exemple even is someone has said in a youtube video that it's technicaly possible to do so with shorter sword (tbh, I could personnaly live with that... Less with weapons/shield dissapearing).

I can put it into more simple words if you want to:
Dont give a fuck, i want my weapons on back! :P :P :P

Comprende?


Well, usualy its where autor finds them cooler.


I dont understand this sentence ...

But i dont think create something "closer to what we had in history" (since i simply refuse to speak about how is something "realistic" in game where 100kg Half-Orc can turn into 5kg cat in 1 second while keeping everything equipped ) ... all i want is to keep my prefference, beyond that, feel free to ask (and hopefully receive) whatever the hell you want.

By my guest to demand holding daggers in your teeths if you want to.

Same as with Barrels, same as with long rests, same as with freaking everything around here ... tune your game however you like, just dont mess with mine and we should all be happy.


Im not any swordsmen myself, nor have any real experience fighting with such weapon ...
But i believe i specificaly said that he is using Bastard ... wich is quite certainly NOT "shorter" sword. O_o


Agreed 100%
Dissapearing equipment is evil (except hiding capes, and daggers when sheated, that is divine! )

History is not a matter of "author" or "cooler" and most representations, even in fantasy settings are based on history.
Talking with you is really a loss of time.

This is not my game and this is not yours. Get the hell out of here if you're unable not to become a nuisance every time you read a suggestion you don't like.
You pollute and deviate all threads. It's really starting to get annoying.

If the only thing you have to say is "I like better weapons on back", just say "I like better weapons on back" then close your mouth.

I didnt know that fantasy games, books and movies are history ...
I live on Earth, we didnt have much fantasy things historicaly here. O_o

//Edit:
You mean like ... this? https://forums.larian.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=813335#Post813335

As far as i know, you come to debate ... i didnt talk alone. :P
How about you try to follow your own rules first? :P

Figured I'd post this here too


Selune Clerics should comment on Shadows glowing.

The bangs

The eyes.

The glowing around the destruction caused by Shar worshippers.

The bangs or the eyes sure may just be coincidence, all three though? You'd have to have flunked selune cleric school to not realize something is up with Shadow

That many people like weapons on back does not make it a valid method. And Shad does not proof anything with his video. Anyway, it's, like Bikini armor, seemingly to be accepted.

However, as even the greatest fans of back carry should admit, it's hardly possible without a sheath. So if we stay at back carrying, Larian should at least stand our heroes some sheaths, to avoid several small injuries as well as minimizing the insult to physics through the magical slings holding the weapons. I question myself, why did they care about showing the weapons at all if they give a s... to immersion concerning carrying anything? Why did the weapons not disappear at all, like in Fallout 4? Shields disappear, so why not be consequently dumb and do it for weapons too? BTW the amount of mods in Fallout 4 to make weapons visible while carried and create holsters should be a hint to devs what many people would like to see...

Amount of different mods is one thing ...
Amoung of Downloads of those mods will tell us something more interesting ... then we can compare it with total amount of sold copies of game ...

And usualy we get that aproximately 5-20% (usualy around 15 tho) uses the mod.
So ... not quite sure what were you trying to say, honestly. :-/

Anyway ...
If any dev needs some statistic to know that people likes options, especialy in graphic matters, that have zero impact on gameplay ... i dunno, seems like that person spend last few years in cave. :-/

I've done medieval fence and historical re-enhancement fest for a couple of years. No one would dare to put their weapons on the back, save for a bow, quiver or shield.
I can get behind it with fantasy greatsword, but for normal weapons is just absurd to be sheeted on the back. I just hope those animations are just placeholders and are going to be changed in the final version of the game.

The only thing I'm a bit "scared" about is the fact that DOS2 had the correct sheeting animations so, if they were searching for placeholders, why didn't they take those ones? Perhaps to avoid further fueling the controversy about BG3 looking too similar to DO2 (which I don't believe it does too much, but I certainly understand why some people think otherwise).

should'nt we have different positions on weapons depending on class, stat and race?, also, maybe an option to where you want it to be would be nice( seems like some want them in their rear apparently, but i feel it wrong on the back, i need it on the side, like for real immersion, there's pleeeeenty of media showing this ways, dont be afraid to follow traditions) and in these kind of games i think that the real end game it's all about aesthetics and at least 5 ppl parties1

I don't particularly care for complete, simulative realism.
I dislike the current visualization of "hanged" weapons mostly because "floating weapon magically glued to your back" looks stupid, ugly and cheap as a visual solution.

I'll take an "unrealistic" scabbard/sheath tied to your back as a compromise, if this is the alternative. Thanks.

I just watched the video with the sword on the back.
My two cents:
This guy shows it is possible to carry a sword on the back.
He says its good for adventuring when you do stuff like running, climbing or crawling.
But I think there is another point: Adventurers carry lots of stuff.
When you travel a lot you may need a sleeping bag or even a tent, lots of food and water, cooking equipment and so on.

I think it is easier to carry a big bag on your back and a sword on your belt instead of carrying the sword on your back and lots of smaller bags on your belt.

Of course, in computer games characters can carry lots of items without any visible bags.
And in BG3 we have our own pocket dimension for the camp, so no need to carry tents or pots.

I still think that whole argument about realism is invalid here ...
We are talking about swords that have hilt long as your whole arm ... and blade long as almost your whole body ... no matter where you will sheat it, you will never draw it the regular way.

Speaking of which, they should definitely deal that back a little.

Like, the current long sword for instance (which incidentally is one of my favorites in terms of visuals) is ALMOST the correct size to be the ideal 2hander and the current 2hander is way, WAY too big to look reasonable.

Also, as we are vaguely on topic, I'm definitely NOT A FAN of how the elemental effect for the flaming sword is visualized and I'm afraid the same would go for other elements in the future. Too much visual noise. I can already see the accumulation of magic items making the entire party look like a bunch of clowns over time.

I'd prefer if they took a page from Dragon's Dogma on how to make weapon buffs that look cool without overdoing it. I don't know how many here played that game but Saito Hikari for sure is familiar with it and can attest what I'm talking about.

For one, the weapon shouldn't be in flames when you put it away, only during its use.
And as second point it wouldn't need to literally "emit flames ten cm around the sword" as it does now, it should just make the blade look like incandescent red metal.