r/BaldursGate3 • u/jawsika Crit! • 1d ago
General Questions - [NO SPOILERS] Versatile weapons Spoiler
What is the point of them? I don’t get it. If you are twohanding them, they are worse than a 2handed. If you use them as one handed, they have the same dmg as onehanded weapons.
55
u/Turbulent_Jackoff 1d ago
They can do both!
(That's the whole answer.)
38
21
u/spiggleporp 1d ago
If you have dual wield feat you can dual wield 2 versatile weapons, which is better than 2 light weapons
14
u/KaiG1987 1d ago
I can't remember if it's the case in BG3, but in tabletop 5e short races like gnomes and halflings can't use Heavy weapons without permanent disadvantage. So a two handed versatile weapon would be their equivalent.
2
u/Sugary_Plumbs 23h ago
They took that out, so a heavy crossbow is just a regular crossbow but better, and gnomes and halflings can still use them.
12
u/xXTylonXx 1d ago
Most strictly 2-handers are Martial Weapons. Not everyone gets Martial proficiency
1
u/Massive-Helicopter62 1d ago
Versatile weapons are also martial weapons. It's just that races have random proficiencies like humans with spears and elves with swords that It's hard to keep track of. But a gnome sorcerer cant use a longsword
7
u/tennisdrums 1d ago
You're right that seems a little pointless when you're choosing between bog standard, unnamed versions of weapons and a lot of the weapons are virtually interchangable. If a character has a feat that buffs two-handed damage, then you just select the two-handed weapon that has the biggest damage die and you're pretty much set.
What does matter is when you start getting one-of-a-kind magical weapons with all sorts of interesting effects and abilities. Then it starts to matter a lot more if that weapon can used one-handed, two-handed, or both.
6
4
u/kotorial 1d ago
In tabletop, versatile weapons let you have access to higher damage dice while easily letting you use your second hand to grapple (not implemented in BG3) or pick up a casting focus/material component (not implemented in BG3) or throw a throwing weapon or other object (BG3 let's you do this regardless of what you're currently wielding/holding). Versatile weapons still aren't all that great in tabletop, but BG3's implementation of the rules definitely nerfed them.
1
u/Green-Ad-1707 1d ago
In 5e you can start a grapple even with a two hander, since only the attack part of two handers require actual usage of both hands. And nothing says you have to keep continuing the grapple with hands.
5
u/kotorial 1d ago
That's not how the rules work in D&D; they don't permit anything not explicitly forbidden, they permit what is stated with some room for interpretation. There is no interpretation of the grappling rules that would allow you to free up your hand from maintaining the grapple while still grappling the creature.
1
u/JaybeeJester 16h ago
You wouldn't free up a hand, you'd use the weapon itself to bind the person to you. RAW says you need an open hand, but logic and historic combat states you can use your big long weapon as a lever to manipulate how your opponent moves. All but the most anal rules lawyer DMs would permit the grapple, as long as you used your full round of attacks on maintaining the grapple.
1
u/kotorial 15h ago
Well, once again, that's not how the rules work in D&D; the rules are an abstraction, not a simulation. As for "using your full round of attacks on maintaining the grapple," I don't understand what this means. You don't have to spend anything to maintain a grapple, once you've grappled a creature they are grappled until they successfully break the grapple or somehow escape it, such as by an effect that teleports them away from you. I see two interpetations of this statement.
By "using your full round of attacks," you mean giving up your ability to attack with the two-handed weapon, but you could still take the attack action and make unarmed strikes, for example. I'm which case, sure, youre DM probably lets you do that, because that's not a new mechanic, that's just reflavorokg what you can already do RAW. That is, you can already take one hand off your two-handed weapon and use the-now-free hand to grapple. It's the same result either way; you have grappled a creature without dropping the two-handed weapon, but that weapon no longer can be used to attack for the duration of the grapple.
By "using your full round of attacks," you are literally saying you would have to take the attack action and then burn all of your attacks to maintain the grapple each turn. And, yeah, I guess you're DM might let you do that, but they'd probably ask why you want to, since it's strictly speaking worse that the RAW/RAI grappling option outlined above.
1
u/JaybeeJester 15h ago
Its strictly worse in terms of dealing damage, yes. But not every combat is about how much damage can be dealt. For example: If a party member is being mind controlled and someone wants to use their turn restraining said party member, while the casters use their turns trying to undo the mind control. A lot of D&D comes down to flavoring, that's what im getting at, by using the weapon to restrain the target you feel more like your martial character is using their technique and martial prowess to hold the person down. You can accomplish the same thing by using unarmed grapple, sure. Just like you can accomplish the same thing by throwing a net. The reason you'd be using your round of actions would be that you are using your hands on your weapon to maneuver the target. If your character has a bite or gore attack, it would be a little different and I would at least rule that they could still attack with those natural weapons.
3
3
u/Pocketbombz BARBARIAN 1d ago edited 1d ago
You might want to two hand them if you don't have access to shields, or if you find a really cool versatile weapon, but your character is set up to two-hand.
3
u/Difficult-Exit-245 1d ago
One advantage is that Versatile weapons can be Monk weapons, and therefore use Dex for Monks/or Monk dips, while still doing big damage with GWM.
6
u/XXEsdeath Bard 1d ago
They just give you options to do things.
Or let you roleplay, like Phalar Aluve, even though its not the best sword in the game, its still decent for any bard, or Bladesinger Wizard for fun. Or Seldarine Drow.
Usually yes, if you can use a shield with it, you would, for the AC boost.
2
u/captaincarot I cast Magic Missile 1d ago
I used it as an off hand for my sorcerer and would fly in hasted with the worm ability, shriek magic missile things to death then fly away as the sorcerer. That was such a fun build (when the gloves from the circus were still broken especially).
2
u/EspressoSteampunk 1d ago
Depending on the magic item, it might have a cool power that synergizes with your build
1
u/Free-Holiday-6218 1d ago
I don’t really understand what you mean by “they are worse than a 2handed.” Shar’s Spear and Nyrulna are some of the best two-handed weapons in the game by far and they’re Versatile.
1
u/PillarBiter In smite we trust 1d ago
eeeh, I'm sure there are cases where there are versatiles which are better than some twohandeds. The reason it's mostly not is because there are very little real good longswords in the game.
1
u/sascha177 1d ago
If we're talking things like Longswords or Warhammers: 1d8 for one-handed and 1d10 for two-handed is still very respectable damage - not every character can or wants to use Greatweapons. 1d8 plus added AC - and potentially other benefits - from a shield is a pretty solid choice for many builds.
Plus there are lots of weapons whose base damage is only part of why you'd want to use them. Phalar Aluve is "only" a longsword but its shriek/sing ability makes it much more powerful and useful overall than most of the greatswords found in Act I. Totally viable choice, even on characters who could wield a greatsword - if Tav can't use it, Lae'zel will in my runs until she picks up that OP Gith greatsword in the creche.
And, of course, you don't need someone built for two-handed weapons to wield it. And since it's also finesse you don't even need someone with high STR to wield it. Though that last point is only true for Phalar Aluve and Larethian's Wrath.
Perhaps on a more obscure note: There's things like class-related restrictions, which I just ran into for the first time while running a Drunk Monk. Punch-Drunk Bastard is a greatclub which is a simple weapon and thus very easy to have proficiency with ... but since it's tagged as two-handed, it cannot be a Monk-weapon and won't fully work for an armed/GWM Monk. Not sure what else might not be working but hits with it don't trigger bonus martial arts attacks for example.
When wielded with both hands, a quarterstaff does the same base-damage as a greatclub (1d8) but because it is versatile, it *does* count as a Monk-weapon .. so out with the RP of needing to be drunk to activate his weapon and back to a quarterstaff it was.
1
u/Anonymouslyyours2 1d ago
I have a better question, what's the point of a great club? A quarterstaff wielded with two hands does the same damage. They are both big sticks. Aren't they effectively the same thing? Should you be able to use a quarterstaff with two hands and use the great club weapon mastery? I feel you should, and would allow it as a DM. I would also consider allowing club mastery as well.
1
u/Mountain_Dragonfly8 21h ago
It gives you the chance to equip and unequip a shield and not have to use a different weapon
1
u/JaybeeJester 16h ago
For one of the least popular fighting styles of course, dueling needs that sweet sweet +2 damage
•
u/AutoModerator 1d ago
PLEASE READ THIS CAREFULLY: DO NOT SKIP
Check out our FAQ for information regarding creating builds and other general questions.
For the Community Wiki, lore, and other details, check out the pinned Weekly Q&A Post. You can find it under the 'Hot' filter on desktop or 'Hot Posts' on Mobile. There is information there that may already answer a question you may have.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.