Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback Weapon slots

I hate that we only have "melee" or "ranged" weapon slots. What if i as a fighter find great magical sword i want to use, but my main weapon is a glaive? why can't we have "weapon slot 1" and "weapon slot 2"

There was some recent discussion of this at https://forums.larian.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=840832&page=1.

I think the short answer from Larian's perspective is that they are giving you the option to freely switch between one melee and one ranged set, which is more than 5e allows, but are still making it cost a new action to swap in a different melee weapon or ranged weapon from your pack or the ground which is why that's handled differently.

There is also the fact that you should be able to map weapons to your custom slots and then use the number keys (by default) to swap between them, at the cost of an action. However, that functionality is currently very buggy if you want to map more than one weapon and the shortcut keys only seem to work if you have the custom toolbar open. I reported this to Larian support not that long ago and they confirmed these were bugs that should be fixed by full release.

However, if you merely want to swap between a sword and a glaive (and aren't worrying about a shield) then the functionality is good enough for that, buggy as it is. While equipping the sword, simply drag the glaive to your toolbar wherever you wish - near the beginning of the Items toolbar will keep it handy on your main view if this is something you want to do frequently. You can then use the icon on your toolbar to swap your sword for your glaive, and as long as you don't then swap your melee weapon again, you should then be able to use the same button to swap back to your sword. Each swap, correctly, costs an action though is still instantaneous outside combat.

Shields are reason ...
Since their AC bonus is counted if you have equipped one, rather than holding it in your hand.

So if you would have Weapon 1 (something + shield) and Weapon 2 (2h weapon) ...
You would have 2h weapon AND +2 AC ...

Not sure how hard it would be to fix this ...

But IF it would be fi... lets call it changed.
So IF it would be changed ... so your AC bonus from shield would only count if you are actively wielding it in your offhand ...

I would like to remind my old wish for Martial classes to have additional weapon slot(s) ...
I mean, even Fighter in player manual (im not sure if its even possible to get more official info than this picture)

CLEARLY have multiple weapons prepared for immediate use!

And it would feel really good if our Fighter, or Barbarian, could be prepared for several types of enemies. :3
Also ... this third (or even fourth?) slot can still be usefull for NON-martial classes ... my only suggested restriction here would be to not allow then to put weapons there ... only torches, candles, maybe shovel (its quite anoying if you accidentaly sell it from your inventory) ... and simmilar stuff.

//Edit:
On second thought tho, maybe let everyone equip mutiple sets of prepared weapons ... after all, casters would still need proficiency to make shield usefull ... and beyond that, rarely any weapon is more effective than spells.
So ... there would be no harm, i gues.

Larian support told me in a recent email that the AC bonus from a currently unused shield was intended to be removed for the full release, so I think we can dismiss this particular feature as a consideration for the future. Thankfully!

Interesting choice ...
Personaly i would certainly recomend adding this option to difficiulty settings, rather than just removing something people get used to ... /shrug ... well, i gues some new players will be a little confused at start.

But thanks for sharing this intel!

The fact that you have a "melee slot" and a "bow slot" is quite telling, actually.

It probably didn't even occur to them to allow two melee quick slots. This design choice reveals a preferred playstyle. Versatile melee+ranged is not the only playstyle or build by any margin but this is how Larian thinks everyone "should" play the game.

This is why Phase Spiders suddenly spit powerful poison. Why goblins have so many fire bombs and explosive arrows.

This is why everyone is highly mobile jumping, flying or burrowing around. Why there are haste and teleport items everywhere.

This is why tanking feels completely irrelevant in BG3, because the developer thinks only blitzkrieg style high mobility high DPS combat is fun. They probably can't even imagine a tanky melee build who would prefer a Greatsword and a Hammer+Shield setup. This is made even more frustrating by the fact that tanky low Dex builds can still use thrown weapons and that spellcasters use Cantrips instead of bows at range. The "bow slot" is already completely redundant and has been for the last two years, but it's still there. Because melee+bow is how you should play. It's more fun than anything else, for everyone.

Hmm, I think the fact that we can freely swap between one melee and one ranged set without using an action, and that characters can choose to switch to throwing weapons without penalty, is already quite powerful enough. The ability to temporarily swap between melee and ranged attacks and vice versa should enemies not be at the preferred distance for a character is something that it is often useful to have in combat and I think that making that always cost an action would be too severe (at least for a first swap), but extending that same approach to freely swap between various melee weapon configurations would be going too far for me and I think it's fair and right that this is handled differently.

I do agree that it shouldn't be as fiddly as now, but that seems largely to do with the fact that the custom slot setup in the game is buggy. If it weren't, then it would be much easier to set up different weapon configurations to swap to, though at the cost of an action per hand changed which I think is fair enough.

I agree that adding additional weapon slots would be great as a QoL improvement to the hot bar, in fact I think hot bar should be a lot wider, even wide enough cover the entire bottom of the screen so we don't have to pick and choose what things to put in it. In any case that spear/shield thing is not something you'd actually ever use, it would be awkward and basically useless, so I wouldn't consider it a ready weapon. It looks like the artist took a traditional Zulu shield and added a spear point because it looked cool but historically no one ever used a shield like it's depicted. The closest you'll get are warriors holding an extra spear or a javelin or two in their shield hand but even then you'd still have to sheath or drop your main hand weapon to use it.

The only times I am glad I have my mage’s bow slot fill is if they get hit with silence. That happens maybe once per play thru…

Good to hear. I think that's a good thing, too. I would have been very surprised if they didn't get it right. After all, increasing stats works by holding weapons, doesn't it?

https://baldursgate3.wiki.fextralife.com/Splinters+of+a+Giant's+Might

Then it should be easy to implement for shields as well.

I was actualy reffering those two daggers, that seems so long to be almost concidered short swords.

Anyway this fighter clearly have at least two sets of meele weapons prepared on him ...
Even if we left out that spear, since its artistic part of the shield.
And that is what i would really love to see.

I mean ...
It just make sense to me ... if all you can rely on is your weapon ... and you know (and as far as i know, this IS common knowledge in forgotten realms) that certain enemies are resistant/volnuable to certain damage type, aka certain weapons ...
It just dont make sense to me to equip just a sword and shield ... and feel perfectly prepared for anything.

Also, and this is just gamer talking ...
There is soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo much interesting magical items, so we can never use them all.
And i think that is a shame, that most of them will just rot in our camp, or be sold at first opourtunity. :-/
For example, i really like Paleoak for my druid ... i love the quest ... i love its effect ... etc. its a good staff.
BUT I also like Flytrap ... like a lot ... and it feels like 1000 times more effective in matter of damage output.
Now i simply have to put one aside.
Wich is usualy Paleoak, since lets be honest ... there is little to none chances to use imunity to druid roots in this game, after you get it. I would like to have both weapons "prepared" (imagine it however you like, i for one see them attached to backpack somewhere where its easy to reach it) and simply switch it with single click ... compared to opening inventory, search for it, and practicaly "waste" action to switch ... i rather simply attack with whatever i have on me. :-/

Same goes with other weapons ...
(Spooky Scarry) Sekeletons attack me ... i would like to grab my Mace, since i know they are volnuable to bludgeoning damage ... but since it means go to inventory > search for weapon > waste action to switch ... i usualy just take them down with my sword, its not "that" effective ... but it works and they are barely any threat anyway. :-/

Same goes with Torches ...
Yada yada.

Now when im writing this, it feels like this free switch of weapons had its effect on me.

No? O_o
Or at least as far as i know it doesnt ... maybe something changed since last time i tryed.

But last time i tryed, this stick you mentioned most certainly incerased your stats the whole time you had it equipped ... just as Shield incerase your AC the whole time you have it equipped ... meaning no matter wich weapon you hold, in both cases.

Wich is something that would certainly need to be changed, if multiple weapon slots would be possible ... OR if meele / ranged slots restrictions would be removed.

No, nothing should be equipped without an action cost. That said, you should get ONE free action per turn to switch between any equipped weapon, BEFORE you attack. So no equipping Shields after attacking, ever.

The point of my above post was that the whole Larian approach to combat is blind to anything but "high mobility, everyone needs ranged weapons" approach. That's why they are "giving" a bow slot to low dex tanks who don't want it. They don't understand the tank role - positioning, threatening and bottlenecking in tactical combat. Just jumping around, throwing bombs, spitting acid pools.

I agree that would be my preference, and in fact argued for it in another related thread. But if Larian aren’t going to change free toggling between equipped weapon sets it would only make the problem worse to allow two melee sets, and in fact I’m not convinced that a character should ever be able to have even one free swap between different melee weapon configurations, so unless someone changes my mind would be in favour of handling that differently than attacking at melee/range anyway.


High strength characters are free to ignore the ranged weapon slot and instead use the functionality that allows them to freely swap to use any thrown weapon in their inventory without penalty if they need to attack at range. All thrown weapons are basically treated by the game as equipped just by having them in your inventory. I suspect handling that differently and forcing us to equip them would only be a faff given we lose them from our inventory when thrown, so have no desire to change this, though as I’ve mentioned elsewhere I think characters should only get one free swap between held and thrown weapons, if that is limited for melee/ranged weapons as I’d like.

The game makes a distinction between slashing, piercing and blunt damage with associated vulnerabilities and resistances that are present on many targets. Yet it doesn't allow the same flexibility to swap between Greatsword / Maul compared to Longsword+Shield / Heavy Crossbow, which should be a much bigger effort to swap in the first place.

It's just bad design, a completely arbitrary limitation, and it should be corrected rather than ignored. "You can have a heavy crossbow stowed on your back, but not another sword." -Larian DM. It even sounds really stupid said out loud.

Well, sounds like we just need to agree to disagree on this one.

I think it’s a big enough concession to allow characters a free swap to handle attacking at a different range than normal, but one I can support given it’s something that all characters are likely to face, to some degree: a melee character could find themselves too far away to get within reach of an enemy at all or easily, just as much as a ranged character could find themselves uncomfortably close. Okay, hybrid characters that are good at both range and melee will benefit, but then many of them are already compromising by not specialising.

But freely being able to swap weapons in combat to deal different damage types, or to boost AC by swapping from a two handed melee weapon to weapon and shield, goes too far for me. Even if only one free swap were allowed. I’m happy to handwave any implausibility here in being more permissive about range than this other stuff, as I’d prioritise game balance.

Not a hill I’d die on, though, just a preference.

Balance is what I want. Treating melee and ranged characters evenly. I don't want a free swap. I want X amount of equipped quick slots you can swap once per turn before attack. Same as now, but locked after attacking. And I really don't want those slots to be randomly forced to be bow-only as that makes absolutely no sense. It just seems like a complete oversight of Larian devs not understanding why anyone would equip two melee weapons even though their game has different damage types.

Shields should cost an action no matter what. Anything else will allow cheese where you end your turn with a Shield and +2 AC even if you attacked with a two handed weapon. That's a blatant exploit and they should fix it.

Well, I’ve been trying to argue that the current approach does treat melee and ranged characters evenly, other than the AC from shield even when using a ranged weapon (which Larian have said they will fix) and the fact that a character can swap back to melee and shield after making an attack with a ranged weapon (which we agree shouldn’t be permitted). In my view, allowing a free swap between different melee weapon sets before attacking each turn would tip the balance too far towards melee characters, when added to the benefit they already share with all characters from being able to adjust the range of their attack when they need to.

But I suspect repeating myself on this point isn’t going to bring our preferences together, so I’ll stop doing it .

I think we do agree, though, that swapping between different melee weapon configurations should be made more convenient for players, even if I think it should always cost an action (or two if both hands are changed) and you don’t. I just think that Larian fixing the generic custom slots would achieve that well enough for my purposes, without requiring additional slots specifically for weapon sets. But can understand why folk might want something a bit more tailored.

definitely we need more weapon slots at least 1 more for Throwing weapons that way they would become more usefull and we can dip them... and we need charges for candles or somekind of consumables like poison just for other damage types dips... i'm so tired of having do the drop the candles gimmick all the time. ;p Torces could work as well for this, a few dips per Torches would be fine seeing as how they are useless now in combat.

I agree we should be able to dip throwing weapons, but am not convinced that forcing us to equip them is the best way to accomplish this. Given how we lose them every time we throw them, the current method of being easily able to choose any throwing weapon from our inventory via the Throw action seems way more convenient than having to move them to an equipped weapon slot.


Gets a nope from me, I’m afraid. I see dipping in candles we carry around (as opposed to ones that happen to be on the battlefield, which is dodgy enough) as an exploit and don’t think it should be made easier. It’s not as though we need to have flaming weapons to win fights.

Ok let's put it this way: if the slots were free to equip anything you want, how would this more flexible system make it worse than what the game has now?

Archers don't need two bows but they sometimes need a melee weapon so this system works perfectly for them. But melee characters do need different damage types, while a bow slot is absolutely useless for someone with a high Str and low Dex.

I still believe Larian are conditioned to a versatile mobile playstyle and the assumption that everyone has a bow is a byproduct of the same blind fixation how tactical combat is only fun one way.