Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General D20 mechanics -> save scumming?

My gf and I discussed BG3 a lot this weekend and we wonder if D20 mechanics will lead to save scumming.

In D:OS2 we already use one character for "all the civilian stuff" with permanent civil abilities rebuilding so we can maximize our playthrough, both in terms of XP AND gold.

Adding a random element now to story / XP source progression will probably inflate this to "ok, for max XP I need to roll a 20 here, lets quickload until I get that".

I like D20 mechanics in combat, of course - but for story progression we're not 100% sure if this is the best way to go.

What do you think? Any ideas?

Probably. Of course there is also the possibility of "ironman mode".

Then don't savescum.

Yep. Or use ironman proud mode.

I wonder if there will be some form of "taken 20"
Not exactly save scumming but the general idea that with enough time you will eventually be able to get it/be atleast able to retry.

Its not an MMORPG, you should be able to brea single player games, i mean youre only killing your own enjoyment.

That beeing said, breaking it shouldnt be so easy that you have to get out of your way to have a challenge

Also not ethat when going in blind, you probably wont be able to savescum stuff like perception checks because you dont know when you miss something

This comes down to a matter of personal taste. Failing a persuasion or perception check is a hallmark of D&D, and the fact that Larian made the game work whether you pass or fail is astounding to me. Failure forces players to find other, more creative options, to problem solve. To me, this is where the game will shine, so I will not be save scumming.

If, however, save scumming is your thing, more power to you. As Sordak said, it's not an MMO. You're not killing anyone else's enjoyment by save scumming.

I hope it works as well as it does in Disco Elysium. Thats a game that absolutely restored my faith in story based games and a developers ability to write good "negative" responses as in a failure continues the story and isnt just an end to a dialogue path.

This is problematic in DOS (i.e. being pigeon-holed into using certain characters to do certain things.) And as we've see, the solution has been to just make tons of abilities "shared" through mods and gift bag mods. They need to work out a better wayt o handle some of these in game interactions so that we're not stuck using one player to handle most things or shooting blindly about who talks to whom.

One thing they could do is have some options for other characters "interjecting" into conversations... where another character in close proximity could "take-over" the conversation or step in to make a particular roll.


They really need to build in some methods to reward *not* save-scumming and/or dissuade save-scumming in a voluntary manner.

There needs to be options other than:

1) Self Regulation (i.e. just don't do it!) This is difficult in a multi-player group. One person inevitably whines when we don't undo something or check out what would have happened if we did something else.
2) Honor Mode (i.e. you only get 1 save.)

For example, the best systems REWARD players for good behaviour or DISSUADE them from bad behaviour rather than being draconian or relying on pure altruism.

Options:

1) I'd love to see a more dynamic Honor Mode where the game tracked save-scumming. For example, there could be some kind of "mini Integrity Save" where only certain actions/event-choices/outcomes were recorded so that if you reload a save game it can cross reference whether you've actually done that *thing* before and are save-scumming. And then find ways to reward players that have high "Integrity" scores.

2) Fixed save times. For example, if you could set the save time to be only every 30 minutes (or some voluntary variable), then there would be many times that people wouldn't bother save-scumming because they'd lose too much progression. This would be a more passive way to dissuade them, while making it feel like something they are opting into. I know I couldn't get my multi-player group to play honour mode, but I could probably get them to accept a longer save window that would encourage them to be more careful and accept choices more readily rather than thinking that they can just redo everything.

Oh, the "pigeon hole" in D:OS 2, yes... that table with "which character class gets which civilian skill and talent" still gives me a headache, gladly I'm just one playthrough away from completing all the Steam achievements, then I will NEVER start a playthrough without Fort Joy respec mirror again, seriously.

If I could change ONE thing in D:OS 2 it would be to add the ability to fully build companions on recruitment (not as a mod, but as a non-achievement-relevant change in the game, because this terrible idea of wasting talents and civil ability points only hurts until Lady Vengeance anyway, but makes the first act more painful than necessary).

I mean, the BEST option to solve the unintended "to play properly you need to save scum, otherwise you will never see the whole game" fallacy would be to predetermine rolls as early as possible. So when you reload you get the same roll, this would take the save scumming away.

Well, they could make it so the dialogue checks are more about progression, or getting more info and less about the "exp", so the reasoning behind to save scum for exp is gone, so they could balance it that way.

I agree this is like socialism/communism for some reason you can be going about your day doing your own thing not interacting with any one else. For some reason someone somewhere wants to barge into your home and tell you how to play your video games and what color your walls need to be.

You are responsible for the choices you make. Maybe save scumming ruins your gaming experience. Get some self control and don't save scum. Accept it when you fail a roll it sometimes (and really devs need to do this more often) comes to unexpected and fun outcomes. What happens when playing DOS II and malady dies, but you win or lose the battle. You may have failed, but life moves on.

Good lord a semi decent point ruined by an irrelevant idiotic analogy put there just to sound smart.