Problem: only medium armor for paladin

[junk]

I just multiclassed into Paladin (Oath of the Ancients) and I only received Medium Armor proficiency instead of Heavy Armor. Why is this and how do I fix it?

[Hobocop]

Working as designed by 5e RAW. You don't get heavy armor proficiency just by multiclassing into a class that gets it at level 1. If you want that, you'll have to MC Ranger and take Ranger Knight or Cleric with certain domains (Life, Tempest, War, etc.)

[Lord Farquad]

Be a dragonborn. they seem to be able to use heavy armor by default

[Deri]

If Paladin was your first level 1 choice you would have heavy armor.

[Husker_85]

Just go see Withers and respec so you have Paladin as a 1st level pick. Then have Astarion pickpocket Withers

[LordOfTheBread]

Then take the feat for heavy armor. mnot that complex.

[アンジェル]

Originally posted by junk:

Problem: only medium armor for paladin
I just multiclassed into Paladin (Oath of the Ancients) and I only received Medium Armor proficiency instead of Heavy Armor. Why is this and how do I fix it?

You can mark Hobocop's answer as right answer for your thread
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3023798638

[MeltingPotOfFriendship]

Originally posted by LordOfTheBread:

Then take the feat for heavy armor. mnot that complex.

True. Wish there were more levels aside from 12. It still irks me that Larian did that to prevent OCDONUTSTEEL levels of Mary Sue/Gary Stu OP-ness. Hell NWN2 let you get to "Epic" and you could still get your rear handed to you if you were stupid with your choices in stats/feats.

[Anima Mundi]

Originally posted by Venom Chris:

Originally posted by LordOfTheBread:

Then take the feat for heavy armor. mnot that complex.

True. Wish there were more levels aside from 12. It still irks me that Larian did that to prevent OCDONUTSTEEL levels of Mary Sue/Gary Stu OP-ness. Hell NWN2 let you get to "Epic" and you could still get your rear handed to you if you were stupid with your choices in stats/feats.

It ain't about power level, we already get overpowered lvl 12 and overpowered Larian brewed Gear.
Its about how most of those Lvl 7 5e spells are extremely hard to properly represent in video game.
They said some of them would likely be impossible without major changes to the spell (take planeshift for instance) and others would simple increase so much workload on the development map, it would become unrealistic.

Think about Dispel magic. Its a lvl 3 Abjuration. The decision to not include it hinges on the fact it requires rewriting the whole game to account for it. Everything is magic, there's magic everywhere, every encounter, people, effects, objects in the world. They would have to fine comb the whole game just to account for one silly little spell. This was well explained by maybe Sven or game director, not sure.
But it goes to show that even something simple for a Table top like Dispel Magic, is hard to put into video game. Now imagine some of the crazy Lvl 7 spells (Lvl 13 Character) and higher level spells

[MeltingPotOfFriendship]

Originally posted by Anima Mundi:

Originally posted by Venom Chris:

True. Wish there were more levels aside from 12. It still irks me that Larian did that to prevent OCDONUTSTEEL levels of Mary Sue/Gary Stu OP-ness. Hell NWN2 let you get to "Epic" and you could still get your rear handed to you if you were stupid with your choices in stats/feats.

It ain't about power level, we already get overpowered lvl 12 and overpowered Larian brewed Gear.
Its about how most of those Lvl 7 5e spells are extremely hard to properly represent in video game.
They said some of them would likely be impossible without major changes to the spell (take planeshift for instance) and others would simple increase so much workload on the development map, it would become unrealistic.

Think about Dispel magic. Its a lvl 3 Abjuration. The decision to not include it hinges on the fact it requires rewriting the whole game to account for it. Everything is magic, there's magic everywhere, every encounter, people, effects, objects in the world. They would have to fine comb the whole game just to account for one silly little spell. This was well explained by maybe Sven or game director, not sure.
But it goes to show that even something simple for a Table top like Dispel Magic, is hard to put into video game. Now imagine some of the crazy Lvl 7 spells (Lvl 13 Character) and higher level spells

I think Larian did that due to balancing concerns as apparently with 5e, it's far easier to roflstomp enemies with the right spells(up-cast 5/6 hold person anyone?). Seem to recall they got interviewed about why they handled spells/feats the way they did. NWN2 had no issues with how spells were handled, though in Larians' defense, that was a much simpler game that got neutered by Atari as the devs intended to implement quite a bit more from the DnD 3.5e ruleset but had no time and had to make loads of cuts because Atari was being ♥♥♥♥♥. Larian I think had no such issues. At least it's not as bad as how the 40KTTG handles spell-casting.. :P

[アンジェル]

Originally posted by Venom Chris:

Originally posted by LordOfTheBread:

Then take the feat for heavy armor. mnot that complex.

True. Wish there were more levels aside from 12. It still irks me that Larian did that to prevent OCDONUTSTEEL levels of Mary Sue/Gary Stu OP-ness. Hell NWN2 let you get to "Epic" and you could still get your rear handed to you if you were stupid with your choices in stats/feats.

Long story short: the system is no good for levels beyond 12
A version of the long story you can find here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6off1fweR0

Think about dispel thoroughly and carefully. It is true that the game would have grown overproportionally in size if such would have been allowed.

[wendigo211]

5e spells are a lot weaker than 3e and 2e spells. Anyone who's played tabletop through multiple editions knows this. A 12th level 5e Wizard is about as powerful as a 7th level 2e or 3e Wizard and 5e doesn't have epic levels. That said, the NWNs and Owlcat Pathfinder games illustrate that there's a huge difference in effectiveness between high level characters in those systems and that seems to be something Larian was trying to avoid in BG3. I don't necessarily agree that it was impossible to balance the game past level 12, but it would have illuminated the issues that 5e has with high level gameplay. Those levels were seemingly never tested and poorly designed. There's a reason there's a dearth of high level official WotC modules and it's because 5e was never really designed for gameplay past intermediate levels the way that the earlier editions were.

[MeltingPotOfFriendship]

Originally posted by wendigo211:

5e spells are a lot weaker than 3e and 2e spells. Anyone who's played tabletop through multiple editions knows this. A 12th level 5e Wizard is about as powerful as a 7th level 2e or 3e Wizard and 5e doesn't have epic levels. That said, the NWNs and Owlcat Pathfinder games illustrate that there's a huge difference in effectiveness between high level characters in those systems and that seems to be something Larian was trying to avoid in BG3. I don't necessarily agree that it was impossible to balance the game past level 12, but it would have illuminated the issues that 5e has with high level gameplay. Those levels were seemingly never tested and poorly designed. There's a reason there's a dearth of high level official WotC modules and it's because 5e was never really designed for gameplay past intermediate levels the way that the earlier editions were.

The way I understand it, they chose not to employ "Epic" levels(anything after 20) because even in 5e, your party could effectively curbstomp anything. So the compromise was cap to level 12 in order to "balance" it out so that you and your party didn't nuke enemies and ruin everything. My sides still die on the way back to it's home planet when me and my friends took on a dragon in 3.5e and I rolled a nat 20 and had one arrow left with my wood elf sniper(forgot the prestige/sub-class but basically operator-tier sniper) that sapped it's DEX and brought it to 0 effectively perma-paralyzing it. We all laughed so hard that night because the CR of the dragon was WAY over our party's capabilities to effectively fight it and our DM intended it to be one of the hardest fights before the campaigns end and he was so bummed because we effective nuked a super-hard enemy that we had no chance to defeat . Mind you, it was me the sniper, a rogue, and an artificer, along with a paper doll stock fighter that one of my friends had made and also played because our fourth constantly was a goof. So our party was not very balanced to handle a dragon. Not related to this topic, but it's still a funny DnD story.

[Kyoukan]

Originally posted by Anima Mundi:

Originally posted by Venom Chris:

True. Wish there were more levels aside from 12. It still irks me that Larian did that to prevent OCDONUTSTEEL levels of Mary Sue/Gary Stu OP-ness. Hell NWN2 let you get to "Epic" and you could still get your rear handed to you if you were stupid with your choices in stats/feats.

It ain't about power level, we already get overpowered lvl 12 and overpowered Larian brewed Gear.
Its about how most of those Lvl 7 5e spells are extremely hard to properly represent in video game.
They said some of them would likely be impossible without major changes to the spell (take planeshift for instance) and others would simple increase so much workload on the development map, it would become unrealistic.

Think about Dispel magic. Its a lvl 3 Abjuration. The decision to not include it hinges on the fact it requires rewriting the whole game to account for it. Everything is magic, there's magic everywhere, every encounter, people, effects, objects in the world. They would have to fine comb the whole game just to account for one silly little spell. This was well explained by maybe Sven or game director, not sure.
But it goes to show that even something simple for a Table top like Dispel Magic, is hard to put into video game. Now imagine some of the crazy Lvl 7 spells (Lvl 13 Character) and higher level spells

The dispel magic spell in 5e actually is a lot weaker than what it was in previous editions. In 5e dispel magic can only end the effects of spells and nothing else. Unlike for example in 3.5e dispel magic could also suppress the magical properties of magic items.

Dispel magic (5e)
"Choose one creature, object, or magical effect within range. Any spell of 3rd level or lower on the target ends. For each spell of 4th level or higher on the target, make an ability check using your spellcasting ability. The DC equals 10 + the spell's level. On a successful check, the spell ends.

At Higher Levels. When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 4th level or higher, you automatically end the effects of a spell on the target if the spell's level is equal to or less than the level of the spell slot you used."

Dispel magic (3.5e)
"Because magic is so powerful, so too is the ability to dispel magic. You can use dispel magic to end ongoing spells that have been cast on a creature or object, to temporarily suppress the magical abilities of a magic item, to end ongoing spells (or at least their effects) within an area, or to counter another spellcaster's spell. A dispelled spell ends as if its duration had expired. Some spells, as detailed in their descriptions, can't be defeated by dispel magic. Dispel magic can dispel (but not counter) spell-like effects just as it does spells."

What it would boil down in BG3 when it comes to dispel magic, it would've worked as a way to dispel slow or other harmful effects affecting your party members, ending spell buffs (like haste) on enemies and ending area of effect spells that linger on the battlefield. I don't know why Larian thought the spell would work against anything magical...

[thufirhawat333]

You get the armor and weapon proficiencies from your initial class, so unless you are willing to respec and start as paladin at level 1, then unfortunately you have to rely on the feats.

[Anima Mundi]

Originally posted by Kyoukan:

Dispel magic (5e)
"Choose one creature, object, or magical effect within range. Any spell of 3rd level or lower on the target ends.

I've always read this as meaning spells that are applied as "magical effects". I think i remember people using it to dispel things like a symple glyph, or a magical lock on a door, that don't necessarily have a clear "spell" attached to such target.
My interpretation could be wrong or im misremembering though.
But it would seem to affect a lot of things in the game