Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Technical & Gameplay Problems Patch 9 druid bugs list

I suspect you're not grasping the nuance between "cannot be lower than 16" and "sets score to 16"; in english, these terms do not mean the same thing. Barkskin does not "set your score to 16" - it only makes it so that it "cannot be lower than 16". These phrases have very different meanings, but you seem to be thinking in a way that treats them as meaning the same thing. If there is a language barrier at work here, and you're not understanding the nuance of what is being said, let me know and I'll try again.

As per the written rules, in core 5e, quoted directly from the 5e Players Handbook (above), the spell works as the examples I've described. If you don't understand why that is the case, especially if english language is a hurdle, I can try to break it down into simpler language.

I don't know what kind of English you are useing.



You touch a willing creature. Until the spell ends, the target's skin has a rough, bark-like Appearance, and the target's AC can't be less than 16, regardless of what kind of armor it is wearing. but this means that its set the minimum ac to 16 and it dont matter what kind of armor its wearing it will be minimum 16. Thats mean if you wear armor class lesser then chain mail your armor class will be 16 .


If you don't like or don't want to understand that different ppl have different options thats sad. But i am not a forum warrior and i will not fight with y. If you finish early access Swen Vinke tell you to write you option about the game , and i am doing that. What i wanted to say if they use a different book . They should use a different description. And agan i want to point out that no matter what y are saying its written in the game that 16+ dexterity bonus and its not working.

I am using normal, every-day english, of the variety that most people in this section of the forum converse in. I apologise - your posts led me to suspect that english was not your primary language. If I'm mistaken, I do apologise for making that suggestion.

If it isn't a language barrier issue, and you still cannot understand that "the target's AC cannot be lower than 16" is not at all synonymous with "sets the target's base AC to 16", that these are two very different phrases, with very different meanings, and that one is not interchangeable with the other, then I'm not sure I can help you reach any better understanding. They aren't the same phrases, and they don't have the same meaning as one another. The spell ensures that your AC "cannot be lower than 16". It does not "set your base AC to 16". These are two different things; the spell does one of them. It does not do the other. They are different. Other spells do "Set your base AC" - Mage armour is one such spell, as its text clearly states. Barkskin is not. They are different effects. If you are not open to contemplating the possibility that your original interpretation might be in error, then, as you say, that's pretty sad.

Right now, it seems that the spell is working exactly as 5e phb core rules dictate - but that the tooltip that describes how you get to that AC number is often in error, and needs to be fixed - on that at least, it seems we can agree.

But 5e has only been around for 8 years! 25 years ago you would have been playing 3rd edition, and so Barkskin would have given you a natural AC bonus which stacked.

Also, only 25 years? Is that all?! Get off my lawn!

I am not sure this will help clear things up, but I don't think it has been said explicitly so I will give it a go ...

The Sage Advice Compendium does not change the rules stated in the core rulebook. What it does is clarify the potential ambiguity in the original rule as written that you identify, and make clear that the intention was always that Barkskin would not increase AC that was already 16 or above, only raise it to 16 if it was lower. The advice exists because others had interpreted the original rule in the way I think you had, and it was causing debate and confusion. The advice was issued to clear that up.

Which, of course, is not to say that any group of D&D players cannot homebrew to use the alternative interpretation of the rule, but a game like BG3 is probably better off sticking to the rules as written. Not that it always does!


Yes, I agree there is definitely a bug in the tooltips when Barkskin is applied to our party members with AC<16, as per the screenshot of Gale I posted somewhere above which says something like "Base AC 10, Barkskin +6, Dexterity +2", when either the dexterity bonus shouldn't be mentioned at all or the calculation of AC without Barkskin should be given and then the Barkskin increment given as the difference between that and 16. At the moment, it's really not helping given that there can easily be confusion about how Barkskin works already!

---

EDIT: And I should have said, you are of course right that your feedback was requested by Larian and it's also right that you post it here. I'm sure it is no-one's intention to make you feel that you cannot give your views, but we also try to help one another overcome any confusion about the way the game works. I know that there have been things in the past that I have thought were bugs, but turned out just to be my misunderstanding of what was intended behaviour or the 5e rules. Of course, I still might not like how they are intended to work and, if so, I'm entitled to say that too, but at that point it becomes feedback rather than a bug, and if other forum members disagree with my suggestions then they are of course as entitled to do so as I am to state them in the first place!

I think that, ideally, the tooltips should read in a way that displays whatever method of AC calculation you are using already, plus the difference between that and 16 attributed to Barkskin - so, an otherwise unarmoured draconic sorcerer, for example, the tooltip might read "AC 16 (Base AC 13, Dexterity +2, Barkskin +1)", and the extremely clumsy druid might have "AC 16 (Base AC 10, Dexterity -3, Barkskin +9)"

This would convey the function that Barkskin is actually fulfilling more clearly, I think.

That seems complicated to me (especially once you start having to both add and subtract for things like bracers of defense).

I'm not sure why you think "sets your AC to 16 if it is lower" is so hard to understand.

I don't think it's hard to understand... the poster of this thread seemed to have an exceptionally hard time understanding it though, and BG3 doesn't handle its tooltip explanations well.

A tooltip that shows up when you hover your AC should explain how that number is arrived at. If it 'just' says '16 because of barkskin' when you're under 16, then it's not giving information that may be relevant - such as how close to 16 you are without barkskin adjusting, and thus whether a particular buff would be worthwhile or not. That's why I suggested that ideally, the tooltip should show what your current best AC calculation method is, with enough information to show you what it would be before Barkskin bumps it up to 16. A player wondering whether they should cast Shield of Faith on an ally may be in a situation where casting the spell might raise their AC to 18 (if the target's Ac is 16 even without barkskin), or it might do nothing at all (if it is 14 or lower without Barkskin's adjustment) - and they should be able to tell based on information the game makes available to them which is the case with a quick hover check.

Yes, I think you're right. Though any change that actually had the numbers given actually adding up to 16 would be an improvement over now, as you say that particular option clearly shows what benefit is being gained from the spell.

[img]https://files.fm/u/prukkre7b[/img]
After shaped all items and bonuses are gone. In human form.
[img]https://files.fm/u/acqct4qfu[/img]

Before shape changing.


Btw this effect also happened with me with a ranger after resurrection. I noticed that i should be immune to web effect.
But all bonuses except the necklace what i reequiped where missing.
[img]https://files.fm/u/hg3c353hp[/img]

Quick update on the issue with the values on the AC tooltip not always adding up to 16 when Barkskin is taking effect. I reported this to Larian support who confirmed it was a known issue and was intended to be fixed for the full release, though they didn't say what the tooltip would display instead.

HUH? I tried using the sword of justice on a druid buddy who had barkskin and his AC was STILL 16. even though inspecting him said +2 AC from the spell. we tried it with him casting barkskin before AND after I used the sword on him.

Maybe the the spell from the sword is different from the one a cleric can cast? I might have to test that by having shadowheart cast her spell on the druid... (which spoils the whole idea of it just being me and my buddy)

edit: Nope, I tried the cleric spell too. Can not get my buddies bear shape over AC 16. If I inspect him the AC shows base 14 with +2 from barkskin. But he still DOES show being under affect of shield of faith.

I would focus on the description of the spell as per Niara’s explanations in this thread and the linked Sage Advice. I’m no 5e expert (unlike Niara) but as far as I’m aware all the spell functionally does is increase your AC to 16 if it’s not that already.

EDIT: So from your edit, it sounds as though BG3 is representing this as the bear’s base AC as its default 12, plus 2 from Shield of Faith. This is under 16, so when you add Barkskin it raises AC by 2 to 16. However, as Barkskin raises AC to 16 no matter what it was previously, the Shield of Faith isn’t doing anything useful here. If the bear had its base AC of 12 that I believe it has without Shield of Faith, then Barkskin would raise it to 16 anyway. I don’t have the game in front of me, so hope those numbers are correct.

EDIT2: You may want to look back in this post to see some screenshots I posted of Barkskin on Gale with Mage Armour. Unfortunately, that’s where the tooltip bug kicks in, but similarly to you’ve found with Shield of Faith, casting Barkskin and Mage Armour is pointless, as if Mage Armour doesn’t increase AC to 16 then Barkskin would have raised it to 16 anyway. Whereas if the AC is already 16 or more with Mage Armour but without Barkskin, Barkskin has no effect as all it does is guarantee a minimum.

The item wild shape bug is such a severe one it makes druid unplayable. I can't believe that it stayed for so long and hasn't been patched tbh. If someone has a workaround for this that doesn't involve reloading I'd be very grateful.

So item passives don't work in wildshape.
I guess it's because Rules.lsx sets it to disable equipment in wildshape form.
To fix you could change rules but then you could access equipment when changed.

I made a magic item that sets a boost when equipped and that works whilst wildshape.
Hopefully larian will fix for all items.

Sorry for not giving the whole context, I thoughts it was unnecessary because this thread covered it already.
The bug is not about items working during the wild shape. It is about items and their unique properties not working after dismissing a wild shape. I am talking about the items that provide bonuses seen on the 'character features' sheet. The only items that retain their properties as of now are Haste Helm and Spurred Band. The other ones need to be manually re equipped every time you dismiss a shape or else the game needs to be saved and reloaded.

This very annoying bug made it into the release version and it is as bad as ever. Ending polymorph abilities, wild shape included, results into the character (the one that comes out of the form) losing every passive feature granted by items. You now basically need to build your druid around items that grant Class Actions/Spells or items that grant passive non-feature bonuses such as +1 to saving throws or skill checks. This makes the shapeshifter ring useless too, which is kinda funny. Some items get completely broken like the light armor that grants ST advantage while obscured. If you use wild shape while being under its effect then your beasial form would have permanent advantage on all saving throws AND after you dismiss your character would have it all the same. Permanent ST advantage. This is a mess that needs a fix, please.