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

Hello,

If i am casting barkskin on any char it only gives flat 16 armor class . But on the tooltip its showing 16+ dex modifier +5 its supposed to be 21. It was bugged before patch 9 but now it even eraese the shild bonuses. So instead gettin 21 you get cursed with 16 ac.

Any time if i am shape changing , i loose all benefits from spells and buffs and from items. I understand that items i cannot wear and those i lose in animal form. But returning to humanoid form to get back all those item bonuses i need to reequip them. Shaped simply nullify all bonuses after turning to original form.

Oh yes, I can see that the AC tooltip is incorrect if my druid in her human form has less than 16 AC when I cast barkskin - it says that she has 10 base AC, plus 6 from barkskin, plus 1 from her (12) dexterity, implying it should be 17 whereas it's actually 16. I think the dexterity bonus shouldn't be mentioned if barkskin is taking effect as dex bonuses don't stack with the spell.

The spell seems actually to be working correctly for me, in the sense that it increases the AC of my druid's animal forms to 16, but doesn't impact the 17 AC of my druid when she's in human form wearing all her stuff (per RAW, I think barkskin just raises your AC to 16 if it's not that or higher already, and doesn't stack with any other bonuses). And if my druid has AC of 16 or above when she casts barkskin, the AC tooltip correctly doesn't mention any benefit from the spell.

I've not had any issues with bonuses from items failing to be reapplied when returning to human form, eg I have on Crusher's ring and so my human movement speed is 12m. When I transform to bear, I understandably lose the 3m movement speed benefit it gives me, but as soon as I return to human my speed is 12m again without needing to manually re-equip it. If you can mention any specific spells or items that you are seeing issues with, I can try them out (if I have them ) and see if I'm getting the same problem.

While we're on the topic of potentially incorrect druid tooltips, I don't understand the tooltips for my animal forms' attack moves. For example, if I hover over the "Attack roll" text on my bear's Claws attack it will say it's a strength attack with +9, rather than what actually seems to be correctly applied when I check the combat log which is the +4 from the bear's 19 STR plus the 3 proficiency bonus for my current level 5. I wondered if the game were incorrectly just giving the value of the animal's strength over the basic 10, but my wolf's Bite attack roll says it has +8 despite its 17 STR. Is the tooltip incorrect, or am I just misunderstanding what it is trying to tell me?

EDIT: Duh! Of course I can just hover over where it says Attack +9 to find out how this is being calculated (the fact we can drill down this way is very good, even if I sometimes forget I can do it ). I'm still puzzled though. Apparently, my bear's +9 is made up of +4 STR, +3 Proficiency and +2 High Ground. I don't understand what that latter is doing there, as I'm not attacking anyone from high ground, and in fact I'm on the lowest ground in the area. Is it just telling me that's what the bonus would be if I did happen to be on high ground? This does seem confusing, or maybe it's just me!

To barkskin in 5e its supposed to working with dexterity bonus and shield as welll.

After turning back to original form the following items are not working spellthief bow/ circilet of fire/ boots of aid and comfort. And this list is huge you should chek by your self ,cuz its so many items are not working that i can write a small novell.
I think all those items that have some icon on the character sheet.

This is incorrect, sorry. In 5e, Barkskin is a buff which ensures that your AC cannot be lower than 16 - that is, it gives you an AC calculation method that is "AC = 16". It is a calculation method - you can only use one calculation method at a time, and they don't add or compile with one another.

What this means is that if you have 8 dex and no armour and a shield, and you cast barkskin on yourself, your AC becomes 16, if you use Barkskin's AC calculation method. If you don't, your other Ac calculation method is the standard method, which is 10 +dex mod +possible shield, and would, in this case, be 11. 16 is higher than 11, so it makes sense to use Barkskin and have your Ac be 16.

If, on the other hand, you have 20 Dex, leather armour and a shield, you have the standard AC calculation method with leather armour, which would give you an AC of (AC = 11 + Dex (5) + Shield (2) = 18), OR you can use Barkskin, which gives you the calculation method (AC = 16 = 16).

You cannot say "I have Barkskin, and leather armour, and 20 dex, and a shield, so isn't that '16 (bark) + 1 (leather) + 5 (dex) + 2 (shield)'?" because that would be mixing different Ac calculation methods together, which you cannot do.

Edit: in case I've misunderstood, you are correct that Barkskin should *Not* force your AC to be 16, and thus lower it, if your existing AC would be higher - it should not make the second example character's AC BE 16 - that character's AC should remain 18, and Barkskin would have functionally no effect unless their AC would otherwise drop below 16 (such as if they took off their armour and shield). If the game is currently *reducing* your already-higher AC to 16, that is indeed a bug and should be reported.

==

For the rest though, yes, lots of things aren't working as they should revolving around druids and wildshape - basically, Larian's code says "You become bear now! You are Bear!!" and forgets literally everything else.

You hadn’t misunderstood! Or at least Barkskin isn’t touching my druid’s 17 AC when she’s wearing her armour and shield. It’s also not mentioned on the tooltip for her dire raven form AC which is naturally 16, whereas it is for the wolf with natural AC 14. This implies the game will only use Barkskin to calculate AC for a character whose AC is otherwise less than 16.

This is from an official core book of 5e dnd and the same description we have in baldurs gate 3.

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.

The important part it cannot be less than 16 that mean it can be more there is no description that forbid dexterity or shield.
I am playing dnd more than 25 years i know how much ts supposed to work.

The WoTC Sage Advice ruling confirming Barkskin doesn’t stack with other bonuses can be found on page 13 of the compendium at:

https://media.wizards.com/2016/downloads/DND/SA-Compendium.pdf

Honestly in the core book description i think its clear what it should do. I never considered those books as a main rule its just an option like a home rules .
But then i ask why the hell the shild of faith/ absolute shield is working with barkskin. And why the hell is a buff i whould like to cast on my enemys cuz in current fo its the biggest curse in the game.
Why the hell should a core class have a lvl2 spell what is a self curse. Like in the next addon book they are making blurr a petrify self buff.
Cuz its currently not working properly in both way.
I have 17 dex and mage armor + i wear a shield 3+3+2+10=18. After that i cast barkskin and i have 16.
Ft.... This class is a mess honestly i whould prefer that the spell should work as it was describing and if they are useing different books they should put that on the description.

Also if you cast mage armor on an animal compainion or a familiar and it have 1 natural armor class it tells you that .
10+1 natural armor +2 from mage armor +2 from dexterity .
Why this isnt working with barkskin i whould accept it like this .
Its a lvl 2 concentration spell . Not a lvl 1 24 h spell.


Also this so called home rule is nonsense. Specially cuz as a druid in bg3 you can wear all metal armors and weapons and shields . Thats a real bullsh...
I whoupd prefer to stick to the core book how the spell description is working . And stick to the core book how druid should work , and not be able to wear metal armor. Shield and weapons and look like Megatron.

Unfortunately, you are mistaken, and you don't. This is not an attack or a recrimination - many, many people have a decent understanding in general, and assume a lot of things from that, or get used to running things particular ways because that was how they or their friends first interpreted it. Running something incorrectly for 25 years does not make it any less incorrect, and if you have been assuming that all Ac calculation methods blend and stack, for the 15 year run of 5e, then please, take a moment; even if you continue to run it the way you choose to, or prefer to, it may still benefit you to know how the actual rules work, technically speaking.


Bolding is mine, for emphasis. Spells and features can give you alternate ways to calculate your AC - these include Mage Armour, Barkskin, Unarmoured Defence (Barbarian), Unarmoured Defence (Monk) and Draconic Bloodline Sorcery, just as a few. The thing to understand here is that each of these is a method of deriving your final AC - and you can only choose one of them to use at a time, to the exclusion of all others.

So, the Draconic bloodline sorcerer monk barbarian (let's assume 16 in all relevant scores) with a Ring of Protection, a Cloak of Protection, mage armour, shield of Faith, and barkskin cast on themselves, and a shield available, has the following options:

Mage Armour: "Base AC = 13 + Dex Mod" - If they use Mage Armour as their AC calculation method, their final AC will be (13 + 3 (Dex) + 2 (Shield of Faith) + 2 (Shield) + 2 (ring and cloak) = AC 22)
Draconic Bloodline: "Base AC = 13 + Dex Mod" - If they use their bloodline as their AC calculation method, their final AC will be (13 + 3 (Dex) + 2 (Shield of Faith) + 2 (Shield) + 2 (ring and cloak) = AC 22)
Unarmoured Defence (Monk): "Base AC = 10 + Dex + Wis" - If they use their Monk training as their Ac calculation method, their final AC will be (10 + 3 (Dex) + 3 (Wis) + 2 (Shield of Faith) + 2 (ring and cloak) = AC 20) (shields are not allowed, so we lose the extra +2)
Unarmoured Defence (Barbarian): "Base AC = 10 + Dex + Con" - If they use their Barbarian training as their Ac calculation method, their final AC will be (10 + 3 (Dex) + 3 (Wis) + 2 (Shield of Faith) + 2 (Shield) + 2 (ring and cloak) = AC 22)

Barkskin Alone: "Final AC cannot be less than 16; if final AC<16 then AC=16" - This doesn't change our base AC calculation - its caveat is only concerned with affecting our AC if it would otherwise be under a particular threshold... so just using Barkskin, their final AC would be reached using our standard, unaltered AC calculation method - (10 + 3 (Dex) + 2 (Shield of Faith) + 2 (Shield) + 2 (ring and cloak) = AC 19)

If you want to cross-check this, compare barkskin to other AC calculation methods - the others all tell you how to determine your Base Ac, and then offer caveats about things that negate them (such as using armour, or using a shield). Barkskin doesn't tell you that your Base AC is 16 - it just says that it cannot be lower than that number. Barkskin itself does not provide any actual bonus or increase to AC, with the exception of setting your final AC to 16 if it would be lower than that.

==

BG3 does not handle its maths well, it tells players incorrect information regarding how it gets to the numbers it displays and uses, and is generally a terrible guide for understanding anything about D&D.

The entire idea that Larian's combat log, or tooltips tell players "10+1 natural armor +2 from mage armor +2 from dexterity" as an explanation is utterly repugnant - because it's downright false! Your AC is 15 in this situation because it is "(mage armour) 13 + 2(dex)), and natural armour isn't a part of it because the mage armour calculation supersedes it!

Barkskin Alone: "Final AC cannot be less than 16; if final AC<16 then AC=16" - This doesn't change our base AC calculation - its caveat is only concerned with affecting our AC if it would otherwise be under a particular threshold... so just using Barkskin, their final AC would be reached using our standard, unaltered AC calculation method - (10 + 3 (Dex) + 2 (Shield of Faith) + 2 (Shield) + 2 (ring and cloak) = AC 19)


Sorry iam posting from phone.

This is also incorrect here cuz as i wrote before shield of fate can increase the already preset ac. 16 of the barksin spell to 18 on top of that if used haste potion increase it even more +2 on top of that mirror image increase it even more +9 and of course there is the electric robe and the push ring +2 .
Those spell are all listed as just giving + to ac this is nonsense like the hole book is is nonsense.
Do you understand what i mean.
In 5 e the is no dodge shield sacred etc.. ac bonus its all listed ad flat armor class bonus.

My question is why those are increase the preset 16 ac and .
Why dex is displayed as it whould increase it but its clearly not. And why carry a wood shield is not as well.

On side note i have not tested dual wield +1 armor bonus and the +3 profecy bonus from dueling.

But i think druid is the most bugged class. With a worste bugged feature and the worst illithid power.
And i still dont understand why the hell he can be a metal wearing transformer.


Good that 5 e dont have barkskin potion i whould trow to all of my enemys.

Apologies, I *don't* think I understand what you mean.

If you're saying that Barkskin isn't a fantastic spell given that it's no benefit to any character that already has AC 16 then I agree. As far as I can see, its main purpose is increasing the AC of wildshape forms and summons, which is by no means pointless but not universally helpful. And I guess it could also be useful for party members who can't wear medium armour or carry shields, but it is unlikely to be a spell that a druid would tend to cast on themself unless they're planning to fight in wild shape. But while Barkskin is not always helpful, it is never a debuff, as it won't reduce your AC if it's above 16.

If, on the other hand, you're saying that Niara's explanation of the spell was incorrect and Barkskin does stack with other bonuses then I'm afraid I don't follow your argument. I think it's pretty clear from the guidance from WotC that the implementation of Barkskin in BG3 is as per the 5e rules whether we like them or not.

I do agree there's a bug in the tooltip for a character's AC when they have Barkskin applied and a pre-Barkskin AC of less than 16, that incorrectly mentions their dex bonus. That will hopefully be fixed in a patch or by the full release.

I also agree that moon druids in particular are disproportionately hurt in Early Access by gameplay-affecting bugs compared to other classes. All we can do is report them and hope (or rather expect!) that Larian will fix them before the full release.

And I also agree that druids shouldn't be able to wear metal armour or shields. I assume that the Early Access version of BG3 has only been implemented with the ability to restrict proficiency by armour weight and the game doesn't yet have or take account of item material. I hope this will be changed before the full release too.

There may be some slight disconnect in discussion, so to be clear on my end: I'm not talking about how it currently works in BG3 or how the game claims it works - I was just posting initially to correct a mistake in the definition for how the spell is meant to work in core 5e rules. To Zozo, if you want to run Barkskin a different way in your games, and you prefer to run it differently at your tables, that's great, and it's fine; the rules are meant to be adapted by players in whatever ways their personal tables and groups find most enjoyable. Formally, however, in 5e rules, Barkskin works as I described, and that is not really open for debate - you can take it or leave it, I'm not trying to convince you; it is what it is, and I'm just sharing that information.

It has got its place, but it's niche - as many spells are.

Let's go back to our multiclass character example, and lets suppose that they also have some druid levels as well!

So, the Draconic bloodline sorcerer monk barbarian Druid (assuming 16 in all relevant scores) has to go deep under water, and possibly fight, and they've used their wildshape ability to shift into a sperm whale! Excellent tanky creature... 8 dex, and low AC. They now, as a whale, have the following options:

As a Sperm Whale, they cannot benefit from their shield or their magic items, but they have natural armour option: Base AC method (Natural Armour) = AC 13
Mage Armour (is still on them, so still available): "Base AC = 13 + Dex Mod" - If they use Mage Armour as their AC calculation method, their final AC will be (13 -1(Dex) + 2 (Shield of Faith) = AC 14)
Draconic Bloodline: "Base AC = 13 + Dex Mod" - If they use their bloodline as their AC calculation method, their final AC will be (13 -1(Dex) + 2 (Shield of Faith) = AC 14)
Unarmoured Defence (Monk): "Base AC = 10 + Dex + Wis" - If they use their Monk training as their Ac calculation method, their final AC will be (10 -1(Dex) +3 (Wis) + 2 (Shield of Faith) = AC 14)
Unarmoured Defence (Barbarian): "Base AC = 10 + Dex + Con" - If they use their Barbarian training as their Ac calculation method, their final AC will be (10 -1(Dex) +3 (Con) + 2 (Shield of Faith) = AC 14)

BUT! They have Barkskin on them: If AC>16 then AC=16!

So, as a sperm whale, they can now benefit from the 16 AC minimum that Barkskin grants, since none of their other available options take them to an AC higher than that in this form.

The spell definitely has a place - usually when defence is more important than using your concentration on an aggressive or offensive spell - protecting a low AC companion that you can't keep safe otherwise, or buffing the defence of a low AC wildshape. It could be stronger, yes, and it's niche, and not ideal or useful in many situations, and as a result it is a rarely used spell, compared to it being a staple in older editions.

All i am saying if we have a natural 10 armor class.
And we have armor example: mage armor ligth medium heavy armor unarmored armor bonus all those are added to our basic or natural armor class. As it is its fine non of them is addictive only shield bonus and buffs like haste and shield of fate and cover
But barkskin is raising the base armor class to 16 . And nobarmor modifier can raise it only change the base ac to higher according niaras explanition.
Thats mean no haste no cover no shild of fate and no shild bonuses as well protection ring and cloak. Until you have less ac then 16. But in bg3 you can have with barkskin base ac 16 + shield of fate haste and +2 more item bonuses and mirror image 31 ac how s that logical and correct tell me.

But really guys its so stupid there is a situation the druid is full cover. Behind a wall and he is stuck with 16 ac the aganst all logic . This Sa- Compedium is bull...
Also if its suppose to curse you with 16 ac the all haste and shield of fate mirror image ligthing charges and the shove ring should not give +15 bonus ac to Barksin . Wat is clearly a bug.

I'm really sorry, I still don't think I'm getting your point. I'm not quite sure whether you're (1) disagreeing that Barkskin's 5e rules as written work in the way Niara has explained, (2) complaining (correctly and understandably) that those 5e rules make Barkskin a far less useful spell than it would be if it stacked with other bonuses (3) saying you've found a bug in BG3 where AC isn't correctly calculated in accordance with 5e rules as written, or (4) pointing out that there is a bug in the way the AC tooltip displays the calculation when Barkskin is applied to a character with AC of less than 16. Or indeed making more than one of those points or some other one I've not understood.

If (3), then that's interesting and sounds like something that needs to be reported. I'm not seeing a problem myself, as the below screenshots may help illustrate. If (4) then I agree and have seen this bug too as the final screenshot of the three shows.

First, here's my druid who has an armour class of 17 made up of 14 AC chainmail (which she shouldn't be allowed per RAW, but is in BG3), +1 Dexterity and +2 from her Adamantine shield that RAW wouldn't allow her either, I believe. There is no mention of Barkskin despite the fact that, as you can see from the little icon to the left of her portrait, is cast on her. That is correctly having no impact on her AC as she's already above the minimum.




Second, here's Gale with Mage Armour and NO Barkskin. His AC is 15, and as per the tooltip made up of 10 Base Armour class, +3 Mage Armour, +2 from Dexterity. It's a slightly odd way of putting it, given that the Mage Armour description itself says that it raises base AC to 13, but at least the results are the same and I did check that when I cast Mage Armour on my druid's polar bear, which has a Base AC of 12, the tooltip then says it gets +1 from Mage Armour, so still taking it up to 13.




Third, my druid casts Barkskin on Gale, and as his AC is lower than 16, the spell correctly bumps it up to that minimum. However the AC tooltip is confusing, or possibly just plain wrong, as it mentions 10 Base Armour class, +6 from Barkskin, +2 from Dexterity, implying the total AC should be 18 ... which it shouldn't be, and isn't.





My apologies if that doesn't actually address your point.

I am playing on steam deck its a little bit complicated to load up screenshot but i will try.


Now try to do this . Cast on gale barkskin and shield of fate haste and mirror image. And then you will se my point. Its all stacking.

By the way on the first picture you posted your druid is after wild shape and the items you equiped are not showing on the tooltip bar thats mean they are not working.

Unfortunately I don't have those spells this playthrough. The best I could do was have Gale drink a potion of speed, which added +2 to his AC calculation using Mage Armour on top of the 15 in the screenshot above, for a total of 17. As that's now more than 16, Barkskin correctly ceases to have any effect as per screenshot below. The bug you're reporting, if I'm now understanding correctly, must be specific to the spells you mention or some other factor.

I'll leave Red Queen to handle the in-game side of the question, as she (please correct me if I'm mistaken) appears to have all the details marshalled and I don't at the moment... I'll just add on to the pen-and-paper side of the confusion. Again, this is said with the intention of helping to share information and clear up misunderstandings, not to argue or recriminate.


So, just talking in terms of how it Should work, if things are following 5e rules, you still sound like you're working with a little bit of a misunderstanding. I will try to be clearer.

Barkskin does not change your Base AC. You, as a character continue to use whatever the best method of AC calculation that you have available to you is to work out your AC. All Barkskin does is add the caveat that, if, after all working out, your AC would be lower than 16, then it is brought up to at least 16. It doesn't lock your AC at that number, or prevent it being raised.

So, here's another example of how it Should work, if everything works correctly and follows 5e rules:

Imagine an NPC that you are escorting. She has 10 in all ability scores and is wearing leather armour. She has no class levels or perks, and so the best she can do for her AC is the 'standard' method, which in leather armour is - "11 + Dex mod", so her AC is 11. The Druid thinks that this is too low and risky, and so casts Barkskin on her. As her current AC is 11, this means that her actual final AC is now 16, in accordance with Barkskin.

During the escort mission, danger ensues, and the Cleric immediately casts shield of Faith on the NPC, without thinking about it. Here's what happens: The NPC is calculating her AC using the normal method, which in leather armour is "11 + Dex mod", and with Shield of Faith, adding +2 to that, her AC would now be 13 - that's Still lower than 16, though, so her final Ac, if something were to attack her right now, would be 16.

As the danger heats up, the wizard tell the NPC to run and hide, and he casts Haste on her. So, now, The NPC is calculating her AC using the normal method, which in leather armour is "11 + Dex mod", and with Shield of Faith adding +2 to that and now Haste adding +2 to that, her AC would now be 15 - but that's Still lower than 16, though, so her final Ac, if something were to attack her right now, would be 16.

The NPC runs, at very fast speed, over to a conveniently shaped rock barricade, which grants her three-quarters cover from the hostile enemies: Now, the NPC is calculating her AC using the normal method, which in leather armour is "11 + Dex mod". With Shield of Faith adding +2 to that, Haste adding +2 to that, and now three-quarters cover granting her a +5 to that, her AC, if something were to attack her, would be 20 (11(leather) + 2(SoF) +2(Haste) +5(three-quarters cover)! This is now higher than 16 - Barksin is still on her, and active, but the situation it cares about is not applicable, and it is no longer relevant to her AC calculation - her AC, if she is shot at, is 20. If she moves out from the cover, however, and is shot at in the open, Barkskin ensures that her AC is at least 16, not the 15 it would be without Barkskin.

==

BG3 seems to be in a situation such that it allows you to rack up ridiculously high AC bonuses, almost like it was designed by people who don't really know D&d very well and just want to use its fame to pimp their brand... so if the fact that, in BG3, you can get some absurd +17 bonus to your existing AC (which might be as high as 17 on its own before those bonuses, leading to an AC over 30 at level 5) seems like a mistake or a silly outcome to you - it is, but there's a very good possibility that it's Larian's own decision-making and lack of understanding of the game that are at the root of it, not an inherent issue with the system.

Well if its should work like in sa-compendium and not like in the core book.

Then the barksin is working fine except that ist stating to add the dexterity bonus in tooltip.
I tested out all sources and it only owerlap the 16 ac, if you have more the 16 ac bonuses from buffs or equipment.
I think they changed it somewhere between patch 8-9 cuz i could not found anything in patch notes.

So regarding this i change the bug report but i cannot change
the original post . But i still not agree with this . I think according the core book it only set the minimum ac to 16 and it dont forbid to give on the top other bonuses.
Also i think the tooltip should work like in sa-compendium if Larian was designed barkskin according this book.