Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback Physical scale of some weapons

Title - some weapons are stupidly overgrown when displayed on the back of characters. Give Shadowheart a basic morningstar and you'll instantly see what I mean - it looks like a juvenile tree strapped to her back, not a weapon... No real world weapon would EVER have a grip/hilt that big, You'd just not be able to grip something that wide properly. It is a very minor and aesthetic "bug" but all the more jarring for it, to me it just looks like the 3D artists never cared to look how the weapon models scaled in relation to the character models.

Yes! This bugs me so much lol. If I'm keeping Shadowheart a cleric, the first upgrade for her is ALWAYS morningstar!

This sort of thing is very common among video games.

Part of it, especially in CRPG's, is trying to make a weapon actually visible at the distance and scale that a player will be looking at them. So their actual models are normally far bulkier than an actual real weapon would be.

This is of course, on top of silly "Weapons just float next to you while sheathed" things which further detract from any sense of realism.

It would be very nice (As someone who's a medieval weapon enthusiast) if we got more accurate models for weapons and actual systems for carrying them (Sheathes for blades, loops to hang axes/maces from, hooks to support bows/crossbows) - With of course, things positioned so that all equipped weapons are always visible.

Such things would go a long way in terms of aesthetics and overall design.

Yeah, it's annoying.
I wasn't exactly a fan of weapons being magically glued to your back and floating mid-air without scabbards, to begin with, but the fact that some of these weapons are also comically oversized AND to a degree where it's noticeable to the point of being distracting during cutscenes is the icing on the [mud] cake.
It's another small example of how at times it feels like BG3 is not sure of what it wants to be. Cartoony and caricatural like the DOS series or somewhat grounded and realistic.

A bit like the "falling animation" looking like something straight out of a Wil E. Coyote cartoon. Or the projectile trajectory for bows and crossbows looking like something borrowed by a Duffy Duck comedic sketch.

Yeah, that's SUPPOSED to be the design goal, but the result speaks for itself:

it clearly wasn't necessary in this case (given the overall level of detail) or at very least they decidedly over-tuned the effect to the point that it's more distracting than helpful.

Since I haven't started D:OS2 yet, I'm not sure how much of this is Larian and how much came from D&D. I guess one of my biggest peeves in this regard are great swords. They were introduced with 3rd edition D&D and seem to represent everything I hate about what the new owners did to the game. Overpowered, non-descriptive description, physically impossible to wield for a human-sized humanoid, but no explanation and no historical context, or in one word just silly. Well, two words. I suppose they were fan service for the Warhammer and Warcraft crowds where demanding these oversized weapons developed for reasons of visibility on miniature models - virtual or physical. When I saw them again in BG3, I found it hilarious that the scabbard-set would have to include a little roller-skate to prevent the tip from grinding on the ground. Historically, I think some of the longest swords were actually either ceremonial or anti-cavalry and anti-polearm infantry weapons that weren't used for actual fencing but used rather like a pike to stab horses or to chop the shafts of pikes. Kurgan's 50" longsword from the original Highlander movie (1986) is probably one of the longest and heaviest swords I've seen in non-CGI action and that would still not qualify as a great sword.

Greatswords were simply called two-handed swords in earlier editions of D&D, they were not new for 3rd edition. (But in 1st and 2nd ed AD&D damage was different vs Small/Medium creatures and vs Large - 1d10 vs 3d6). Historically two-handed swords were definitely used, primarily in the late medieval period. There are many accounts about the use of the weapons and the troops that used them. But oh yeah, they were definitely not primarily used for fencing as such, although there are preserved manuals on the subject. I believe the sometimes stupidly oversized representation in D&Dis more down to interpretations of the artists than an actual intent by the devs to have Final Fantasy type monstrosities in the game.

But since most weapons are upscaled in BG3 to some extent, I thought for a long while that the longswords my Tav and Laezel started with were greatswords. They still look somewhat right though, whereas the morningstar... Just no, gods.

Once you get a proper greatsword for Laezel it looks downright silly when on her back though - but I like how she often carries it in her hands leaning it on a shoulder when idling, makes it look like it actually has weight.

Actually, Landsknecht (German mercenaries) where known to favour greatswords (Zweihanders) due to the nature of... Well, people are less likely to mess with a mercenary who's carrying around a huge ass sword. But there were some treatise made with explicit usage of greatswords, wherein they were used in a way that enabled good area control (Which would likely be another reason why they favoured it).

I've seen more references to greatswords being used in this fashion than any battlefield use, where 2 handed swords were less used (At least until the renaissance when full plate was used and thus shields were less necessary. But even then, it's still mostly Longswords rather than Greatswords)


Which would be the closest most media gets to accurately representing a longsword...

Since Longswords ARE in fact, 2 handed swords. Yet, very commonly video games use "Longsword" while referring to a single handed sword which is wholly inaccurate (At best you could sometimes lump Bastard Swords (AKA Hand-and-a-Half Swords) in with Longswords while being very reasonable to utilize in just one hand - Though they're still longer than most typical "Longswords" and always have that extended handle to accomodate 2 handed usage).

Thus you could consider BG3's "Longsword" to actually mean "Bastard Sword" (Though D&D itself has Bastard Swords as its own separate category, with older editions having them as an Exotic class weapon with a 1d10 damage die contrasting the "Longsword's" 1d8) at which point being large enough to 2 hand would be reasonable.

I think you guys are arguing a bit beside the point.

This is not about deciding what correct label should be applied to the available weapons or what's supposed to be the upper limit of a greatsword (real-life zweihanders were pretty massive as well, incidentally, but as already pointed above they were hardly ever carried around on yourself and/or used for fencing).

The issue here is that ALL weapons in the game tend to be rather oversized, including the smaller ones.
Hell, if anything it's even MORE noticeable on the smaller ones.
Daggers are ridiculously large, to the point of looking like goofy short swords; maces have the size of a soccer ball, with handles that look like small tree trunks, longswords have the size of a two hander...
And so on.

I don't buy any argument about this being "a necessity to make the weapons more visible".
In fact I can pretty much guarantee you that if someone bothered to mod them to be closer in size to their real-life counterparts, they would simply look better in the game as well.

I absolutely hate them. I've never equipped a morning star precisely because of this. Greatswords are reserved for body type 2 characters on my playthrough as they otherwise look ridiculous. There are several staffs I have never used for the same reason. I can put up with a lot (the floating issue, lack of scabbard, glowing etc) when it comes to this but the comical size really annoys me.

I would love a mod that corrects this but I'm not surprised none exist, I think the current sizes are probably popular.

I don't think I would care much, provided the gigantic weapons never clipped into the avatar (or whatever we're wearing), but they do clip quite often - kinda all over the place.

I'm totally fine with Lae'zel having some absurdly gigantic sword, since she's from a crazy weightless plane, and who could really say how it all works out there for the soulbreakers? but it feels pretty off to me for everyone else. I guess if Minthara or Karlach have a 12 ft Halberd when smiting dead gods, I don't really care, but it's more like when they're just hanging out standing around with flaming swords to adorn their capes, or getting the hand crossbow acupuncture treatment while jogging around hehe.

I feel like the choice to have the Light cantrip or similar spells applying to weapons worn on the back was also not the best. Couple reasons there, but mainly because it results in a ton of scenes where the main character in frame is being backlit constantly. It's also a perma vfx thing that lasts all day when in use, so we're much more likely to see those lighting conditions up all the time. Has the effect of making everything look sorta like a soap on tv. Or I don't know, it's like the glowing mall photography aesthetic from the 80s, with the kicker just running so hot hehe. Maybe we're in a head and shoulders herbal essence commercial sometimes, sure, but again, when it's always on sorta overrides everything else that's happening. Meanwhile the lighting visuals for the surrounding environment is indicated by a lowered contrast across the entire frame. This stacks when there are multiple weapons lit up on the back, more light or more powerful light = lower contrast, so it will wash out the whole scene. As if we were in a smokey room at all times, or I guess maybe Gale is hotboxing like the entire camp? lol Not to do with the scale or size there per se, but clearly having a giant weapon lit up that way it's going to seem extra pronounced. I mean I suppose hair is a top priority for this game, clearly but I just wish there were a more options in the settings for how things are visualized. I thought the mods that did stuff to the lighting in the Underdark were awesome, and also that mod that made the Wolves smaller, but then having to bring in mods for that sort of stuff with weapons it just makes me wish there was a dropdown menu for some of this stuff, or a right click on the item. For example, a quick toggle on the item for stuff like vfx or exaggerated scale, or maybe even tints based on player 1, or player 2. I mean it has nothing to do with weapons, but how cool would it be if when playing as say a 'Blue wizard we might be able to select a flame color blue for our firebolts and fireballs? Hadouken!

They got that stuff in the spells mods, but I mean just as characterization type choice for the regular spells. Divine Smite Blue? Whatever

Maybe a firebrand druid with a Green flame scimitar or a Purple Draconic Sorcerer with a purple haze Cloud Kill? Stuff like that has legs for me. Little things like that would probably add a lot, but I could see it applied more generally. So being able to have a tinier sword on a whim, not just for Halflings but potentially any character, just to riff on. Minsc is a good example of a character who looks amusing when you give him some tiny short sword, or like all hulked out and packing steel, but with itsy bitsy dagger instead of a giant sword hehe.

Dying weapons might also add some flare. It works on the armor and a couple shields here and there, but that would be another entertaining customization, or perhaps a use for some off brand dye colors other than armor or camp clothing.

It'd be cool if we could name our weapons too, even and perhaps especially the mundane stuff.

Giving the player the choice between a cool looking custom creation with a name for RP flavor, vs an enchanted super item that just always looks the way it looks regardless, I think I would sometimes pick the weapon with a name/look I chose. It's why I wish we'd have had starting equipment from a shopkeep type menu. I mean I get it that in PnP is boring for the Dungeon Master, but like isn't that kinda the point of CRPG, that the downtime there is totally at the players discretion. Would have made sense in my view to frontload that, so giving the players their shopping cart adventures at the very beginning, you know when they're still in Char creation mode, as opposed to like Midcampaign when everything is already enchanted up, and the standard weapons are basically just gold that hasn't been converted yet.

There's all this stuff, all these wepaons in the game, but then whatever regular sword gets instantly eclipsed by some supped up version of itself. Say trying to be a cool Javelin throwing Fighter or Barbarian with a shield, but then once you got the Returning Pike ya know. But what if instead, the player could choose between some different looking regular Javelins and such or Tiny Halfling Javelins that don't hit the floor, just for the look. Gives a reason to hang onto to the normal stuff we come across all the time, if they had different visuals. Some goblin weapons or specialty enemy weapons have a fun look for certain character concepts. I kinda wish we had more like that going on, with more variety in how the standard stuff looks or a reason to hang onto it. In that case you could have some Greatswords that aren't quite so great, and it wouldn't matter as much, cause maybe there are like 6 different options and a dozen tints from there, but the player doesn't have that going on really. Like I guess the dungeon master might with the toolkit and mods, but I think for the player it would be fun to riff, if they'd have that kind of option. There's an invisible mace and I guess that's cool, but how an invisible everything? Cause I could see that as well, to just hide anything that's clashing or clipping or where it default to say a camp view for one clothing equipment slot, without having to do it for everything all at once. I don't really need full transmog I don't think, since I like an aesthetic progression, I prefer some form of progressive transmog and the same with dyes, but then if the equipment is standard/non enchanted stuff I feel like that should have more customization options since we're sacrificing some power in exchange for style or more control over the visual.

Comparing AD&D 2e and D&D 3e is a bit like comparing eggs with bacon as the combat systems are different. They dropped weapon speed and rules for close-quarter fighting, for instance. In 3rd edition, greatswords replaced two-handed swords in that sense that they'd be the next bigger sword from the longsword, while bastard swords (huge long-gripped longswords that could be fought with one and two-handed styles), claymores (shorter Scottish two-handed sword) and proper two-handed swords disappeared.

Since they didn't come from a plant, individual weapons differed widely, but your typical historical two-handed landsknecht Zweihänder swords often had a rather large ricasso, so you could grab the blade without cutting yourself. It would mainly see service against other unit types, like pikemen and cavalry after the first line had fallen. Shorter zweihanders could be strapped to the back of a tall mercenary, the really long ones were carried over the shoulder, like a polearm. The original description of the greatsword in the 3e Player's Handbook doesn't link it to any historical examples, give any description of how it looks or even state a length: "Adventurers recognize the greatsword as one of the best melee weapons available. It’s reliable and powerful." Perhaps it's my personal disdain for 3e, but the greatswords in BG3 look exactly as the caricature rubber clubs I always pictured.

Even when they don't clip, they simply look bad during dialogues.

As i said, they can be genuinely distracting.
You see -say- Shadowheart talking to you and on your eyes go on her back, where there's this mace/morning star/whatever that is CLEARLY oversized for her hand, with a handle as thick as a lapdancing pole.
It's ridiculous and what's worse is that it has no real reason to be this way. There would be literally no downside or technical challenge in simply doing this right.

This. Anytime there's a cutscene with with Shadowheart before she gets her hands on the moon spear or something else with a slightly more sensible scale, ALL I can see is that damn metal-crowned log hovering behind her back. It looks so utterly stupid. The morningstar is clearly the worst example, but most weapons are oversized to some degree - but not equally. Slapping on a mod that reduced weapons by say 20% across the board would leave some weapons too small instead. Anything dealing with the issue would require a fairly thorough look at the scale of each weapon model individually. It is pretty obvious that someone somewhere in the design team wasn't wearing their glasses when this was finalised.

I would welcome proper transmog, as long it was somewhat restricted - only being able to apply the appearance of other weapons of the same type, and only to another weapon you have acquired during that particular playthrough. Nothing like the giant transmog library of WoW where anything you ever found on any character can be used across the whole account. Works in an MMO, but BG3 is not that. I also feel there needs to be a visual progression, and lvl 1 freshies prancing around the Nautiloid with starting gear looking like end game legendaries would look more stupid than the gargantuan morning star...