Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Why force we to have Range Weapon Slot?

I'm playing barbarian, using greataxe, but I also want to equip 1h axes in my belt, bows and xbows are for sneaky elves, great warrior like a dwarf barbarian don't want those. The range weapon slots are useless for me.

Agreed. For strength characters, ranged weapons are usually thrown weapons.

We should be able to equip any weapons in weapons slots.
The weapons slots restrictions doesn't make sense, reduce our freedom to play the game as we will and doesn't add anything interresting to the game.

Some classes or feats could also grant you more equipment slots like they do in BG1&2.

I would love that ...
But then we would DEFINIETLY need bigger hotbar.

How about weapon loadouts? We’re partway there with being able to toggle between torch and a weapon now.

This also should serve to remind Larian that we still can't equip a hand crossbow and a shield, or other similar combinations, due to the way they've designed the weapon slots currently - and we really should be able to.

Yes! My warlock has to run around with dual hand crossbows just to get my illegal bonus action attack each round.

I unapologetically love dual hand crossbows. Don't ask me why.

On a hexed enemy, EB then a shot from your hand crossbow ALMOST feels like fifth level lol.

Back on topic, I would love to see different loadouts, so you can quickly switch between a weapon and shield, dual weapons, torch, (lantern?) etc. Especially later on when you get a variety of special weapons that could be useful for different situations.

Okay... I'm gonna be *that* guy... This is Early Access...

Now I have that out of my system.... This is a really, really good point. Such a good point, in fact, I'm going to assume they just haven't gotten around to adding it yet.

Probably a combination of more flexible weapons slots and more weapons slots for certain classes. I'm guessing rangers, paladins, fighters and barbarians will all have more than two, eventually. Hopefully 4 for each of the warrior type classes. Clerics, rogues and druids maybe 3?

Well, that I'll have to be *this* person ...

• Most people here know very well that this is Early Access. This fact does not render any critism invalid in the slightest of ways. The majority of criticism expressed around here is implicitly of the form "I am bothered by [insert a player's problem here]. Please change this at some point (before release), in order to make the game better".
• The game has been in EA for over a year now. This simple, basic, fundamental problem with the equipment UI design has been there from the start. Since then, every other patch has brought improvements to the absolutely horrendous graphics that everyone is complaining about (just kidding). We've also had new character design options (like scales or piercing) that probably took half a day to implement. As well as the "addition" (revision) of the throwing mechanics. But we still haven't had a progress on the weapon slots.
• Larian's communication policy of "do not engage with the players' community, no matter what" means that we do not know if a) this criticism has even been registered by Larian, b) they have their reasons to want to keep weapon slots as they are, c) they are working on changing this. As a result, this criticism naturally keeps coming up. (This thread is far from the first time this issue is raised).

Now, as you said, you agree that the "Melee Weapon Slot/Range Weapon Slot" design is a problem. A problem so obvious, in fact, that Larian will surely understand that it is a problem. And fundamentally, you simply have faith that they just haven't gone around to fixing this.

Given the long list of similarly obvious problems, given the moderate time it would take to solve some of these problem (compared to the bigger time other changes must have taken), and given the long time these obvious have gone un-adressed (either in words, when Larian deigns communicating, or in actual changes, when new patchs come out), some people don't have the same level of faith as you. I'm one of those.

So I am, hm ... happy, in some "well, that's apparently the best I can expect" kinf of way, that other people keep bringing up this issue.

This is Early Access.. AND.. it's the right time to voice feedback, issues and concerns. Are we supposed to voiced out only once game is finished and shelved?
On topic, not familiar with dnd5e. Can we equip a light crossbow on left hand and say a dagger on the right? If it's allowed by the rules, can we shoot first then move to melee range and poke with a dagger? Or will we get an option that we can move to the target in melee range and poke the dagger twice? (If we have 2 actions)

Not familiar with 5e neither. Still, light xbow sounds like a 2h weapon similar to a rifle, unlike a hand xbow which similar to a pistol. So, I think in combat the dagger would be still sheathed and kept on one's belt.
The game's current user interaction mechanic in case of weapon skills is something like this:
1. see either the clicked weapon skill was range or melee;
2. see if the corresponded type(range skill or melee skill) leads to a correct equipped weapon type(range weapon or melee weapon);
3. switch the weapon set(range weapon/melee weapon) to the one that match the skill's type(range skill/melee skill).
So, the current mechanic can already satisfy your need: use light xbow as your main weapon, and when you want to melee attack with a dagger, it will automaticlly switch your weapon to a dagger and do the melee attack. I might also want is to have the game display a light xbow held in your main hand while using dagger in your off hand to melee attack on the enemy. Then it will conflict with the current mechanic(the melee weapon slots also has a "main hand" slot that need to display) and it is where I also think the game can improve.

Yes, the "loadouts" concept is the chanllege here if we want the game to handle weapon sets in a better manner. The "traditional loadouts solution" in cRPG usually have this problem: if I have a versitle weapon, such as a spear, placed in loadoutA's slot, then when I switch the loadout to loadoutB that has a shield for a rather defensive combat, then I won't be able to use that same spear.

I think the game can use a different innovative solution - locational slots system:
1. make each char to have 4 weapon slots to equip weapons: 1 right belt slot; 1 left belt slot; 1 right shoulder slot(for a shield); 1 left shoulder slot(for a 2h/versitile weapon).
2. belt slots for 1h weapons, while shoulder slots for 2h/versitle weapons or shield.
3. to draw(/put away) a 1h weapon from belt slot cost 1 bonus action; to draw(/put away) a weapon or a shield from a shoulder slot cost 1 action.
4. remove all weapon skill icons from the hotbar, and only display 2 expandable meta icons: a mainhand weapon icon and an offhand weapon icon along with each their own skill meta icon displayed beside. Click on mainhand weapon icon to expand it and allow select between left belt slot's weapon and right shoulder slot's weapon; click on offhand weapon slot to expand it and allow select between right belt slot's weapon and left shoulder slot's weapon.
5. by clicking the corresponded skill meta icon, display the available weapon skill icons similar to the current Throw icon display mechanic.
6. if currently using a 2h weapon or using a versitle weapon with offhand empty, then disable the offhand weapon skill icon. Meanwhile, if currently having a 2h weapon in mainhand with offhand also equipt with a weapon, then disable the mainhand weapon skill icon until the offhand weapon was put away.
The benefit of this sugguested system is, first, it makes the hotbar much cleaner; second, it's still very controller-friendly; third, it allows much more combination for combat.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And we can further improve this suggested system:
7. allow pouch/slingbag to be equiptable in belt/shoulder slots.
8. allow player to store potions and scrolls in pouch and slingbag in a non-stackable manner with a total-amount limitation.
9. treat the equipped pouch and slingbags similar to the weapons, that allow to switch to them by clicking the mainhand/offhand weapon icon mention above in point4 and access their content like mentioned above in point5.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. add a special pouch item to keep up to 2 or 3 1h axe or dagger and a special backpack to keep up to 4 or 5 javelin or spear for player to throw.
11. add a quiver item to keep up to 20 ammunitions that to be equipped in belt slot for easier and cleaner access.
12. make heavy stuff like a barrel or a caldron to be carried on a char's left shoulder slot if empty.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. forbit accessing the inventory during the battle.
14. merge the inventory for all companions' inventory into a "baggage train", the weight capacity of this "baggage train" depends on all companions/followers' strength.
15. when trading, directly display the "bagagge train" inventory.
By doing this, not only making inventory management and sell process much more convenient, more controller-friendly, but also adding a new layer of depth by enhancing the combat resources management(player shall no longer access unlimited options of potions and scrolls in party's inventory).

With the Crossbow Expert Feat, you can do this with a hand crossbow. The melee weapon can be any one handed weapon - it doesn't have to be a dagger specifically, or even light. But yes, you could shoot and then move into melee*. You can't do this with a Light Crossbow because it requires 2 hands to use.

If you have the Extra Attack ability (level 5 fighter-paladin-barbarian-ranger abilities) or something else that grants you an additional attack or action, then yes you can move then poke with the dagger twice. And you'll still be able to use your bonus action to fire your Hand Crossbow (again assuming you have that feat).

*I think the most technical possible reading of the rules implies you have to do the melee attack first, but eh in general, order of actions doesn't matter. Especially in BG3's likely implementation of the rules.

Dual hand crossbows does not work in 5e, nor does hand crossbow and shield.

thanks for the insights, the description mentioned:

"When you use the Attack action and attack with a one handed weapon, you can use a bonus action to attack with a hand crossbow you are holding."

does it means that you basically has to attack with the one handed weapon first, before you can use the bonus action with a hand crossbow? which doesn't make sense that you have to engage in melee first before you fire your hand crossbow. i'm familiar with the pathfinder ruleset not dnd5e. will that provoke an attack of opportunity? or is there an AoO in dnd5e? since the light crossbow is a 2-handed weapon, i guess using dart and a dagger will be a better analogy? if it's allowed by the rules, then i think it should be perfectly reasonable that you attack using your dart first before closing in using the dagger. or move in first for a poke before throwing the dart.

"When you use the Attack action and attack with a one handed weapon, you can use a bonus action to attack with a hand crossbow you are holding."
While there is no "after" in Crossbow Expert, the wording does imply that you must have attacked with your 1-H weapon before you get the Bonus Action. A lenient ruling would allow you to declare that you're taking the Attack Action and your BA attack, so you could BA crossbow attack first but then you'd be required to take an Attack Action that turn.

Performing a ranged attack while adjacent to an enemy means that attack is made at Disadvantage. It does not provoke an AoO.

Unfortunately, the phrasing for two-weapon fighting is the same:
Again, we're in this weird space where RAW isn't clear. The timing is not specified, but the Attack action is a prerequisite of the BA attack...
Imo most reasonable DMs would rule that yes, you can throw a dart first. But I'm not 100% sure that this is RAW.

5e rules are written so poorly...Even Lead Rules Designer Jeremy Crawford has given conflicting answers on these questions.

In 5e? Yes it does. You cannot do this in BG3 at the moment, but it's absolutely acceptable in normal 5e rules.

*Edit: though, I'll allow that you do, technically need the crossbow expert feat to dual wield hand crossbows and actually use a bonus action to fire the second. Without that, you need extra attack to fire both in one round ^.^

*Edit 2:


Law of unintended consequences comes into play here. You can't just say you're "going" to fulfil the requirement after you do thing that requires it because by the time that happens you May Not Be able To. If something says that you must do something in order to use the feature, then you must do that thing before you can use the feature.

Here are a couple of quick examples:

"I want to use the bonus action too shove with my shield, and then attack the prone character after!" - You need to take the attack action in order to access the bonus action shove here. Suppose you shove a creature first, knocking them prone... but seeing the creature fall prone is the trigger for another creature's readied action, which then goes off; this readied action may move you, or the creature, or change the situation in some other way that means you can no longer take the attack action - maybe you're incapacitated, or maybe you just have no targets to attack now and can't. Perhaps the creature saw it was getting surrounded by you and your friends, and decided "If I get knocked down, I'm not going to want to take advantage attacks from everyone there - if I get knocked down, I'll cast thunderstep and teleport away, and blast everyone around me in the process"... suddenly, when you shove them prone, you and your allies get hurt, and you have no target to attack any more. Either way, you've now benefited from the perk and not performed its prerequisite action, and can't - you've 'cheated'.

"I want to shoot my hand crossbow as bonus action first, and then stab with my dagger after" - Except, in shooting with your hand crossbow, you kill the last remaining target, and now cannot stab with your dagger as you'd planned. Once again, you've benefited from the perk without satisfying the conditional, and cannot do so.

It may seem a little pedantic, but there are situations where it genuinely matters, so, if a perk or feature says you can use it when you do something else, you *Must* do that something else before you can use the feature. This is the specified timing - compared with bonus actions (such as cunning action) which have no specified timing.

Can you? Hand Crossbows have the "Ammunition" property, which means you need a free hand to load them. You get one free-object interaction per turn, so:

Turn 1: Both crossbows are already loaded, so you can fire both. As a free object-interaction you stow one of them.
Turn 2: You fire your equipped hand crossbow (loading it with your free hand), then free-item-interaction draw the second. However, it is unloaded and you don't have a free hand to load it, so you can't fire it.

Similar with shield, but (de)equipping a shield is a full Action, so it works even less well.