Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General P&P range for spells/bows(even if optional). PLS!!

I an ot saying to house rule everything. Only to make getting finger death scroll harder as getting a bow that can OHK enemies on a failed save... If you make scrolls easy to obtain and weapons hard, obvious those who rely on scrolls will be better than those who rely on weapons.

You are seeing D&D like a mmo, with DPS, tank, CC, healer, etc when that is not the case. When people don't like something about a game or wanna something new, people MOD it. For example, i love Gothic 2 but be unable to learn Magic from Xardas(the same guy who teaches circle 6 on G1) is a huge disappointment. So i downloaded a huge mod called returning that not only adds the option to be a necromancer/dark magician but also made the game far harder in almost all aspects; dragons for eg, you can use fear + shrink monster and punch then to death. On ret, they have health regen, summon army of enemies, cast circle 6 magic(highest in the game) like fire rain and storm, and only by being 300m near the fire/cold dragon lair, you take heat/cold damage.

Most people who play D&D games use home-brew stuff, so if having a pyromancer instead of wizard that can only learn spells with fire descriptor can be fun for you, play with that class. Dread necromancer class is a class only about necromancy and i loved to play nwn2(modded) with it.

And most D&D games use homebrew stuff too. Slayer form who exists on BG2 doesn't exist on P&P.
[img]https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net...nd.gif/revision/latest?cb=20170811120157[/img]

Anyway, i started to play Dark Sun(1993) today and casters are insanely harder than melee warriors. Because arcane magic is hated in that world. My fighter/cleric is lv 6 doing amazingly on melee and at range with almost 3x more hp than my "preserver wizard" and my wizard can throw on fireball per rest. I can pick few spells per level up and a color spray scroll could be sold for 3000 gold.

I have edited your post a bit to make a reply easier

Your ideas are good in principle but you have to implement this in a computer game.

1.) In BG2 the cowled wizards would come if you use magic in the city, at least until you pay them.
It was not a big problem as there were no difficult encounters outdoors in the city and the money was easy to get.

Many players would get upset if you cannot find some typical mage spells.
If you cannot find some scrolls, classes who learn new spells at lv up would become more powerful compared to wizards unless 4.)

2.) In PK you ruled over this city. You will probably not rule a city in BG3.
You get camp followers however. Maybe your camp merchant gets new items only when you make a deal with some groups in the game world and some groups are exclusive. For example you could help either the city guards or the thief guild and each one gives different items.

3.) It will be hard to prevent players from resting in a computer game, unless you add a time limit.
Maybe some quests progress automatically when you rest.
For example you get a quest that bandits want to attack a town. If you go there at once you find the bandits in their camp and deal with them before they attack the town. If you rest once the will attack the town when you arrive. If you rest twice or more they have occupied the town and killed or imprisoned most villagers.
This would lead to players resting every time before accepting a quest,
Unless you put a hard timer on every quest. But this would mean that fast players have to wait forever until an event starts while other players miss stuff without knowing why.

4.) You could progam that each magic subclass has only access to a limited amount of spells of their class.
But the way I understand 5E, subclasses add abilities to the base class, they do not remove stuff in general.


I like these ideas and a good GM could implement them in his game,
but I do not expect to find this stuff in a computer game.

A GM has to make a game interesting for a handful players in front of him.
A computer game dev has to make the game interesting for millions of people. I guess there are more casual players or min maxers than dedicated role players who consider role playing more importent than maximizing your power from a game mechanics point of view.

You can mod the game as much as you want.
But the devs have to create a game that works for most players when you just download and install it.
RPGs are already a niche genre and you want to make it even more niche.
It would be great if the devs include stuff created by modders later into the official game, but I would not bet that it happens.

He was talking about P&P but lets talk then about adaptations to D&D into PC.

There are ANY case of a change for the better?

Just one. Ignoring the completely destruction of D&D ruleset like neverwinter mmo and sword coast legends. In NWN2, did the changes that they made to warlock good? On NWN1, limiting you to one summon and not giving +caster level to pale master was a good idea? Or it killed the class? Anyone play as a specialized necromancer wizard? Knowing that stop time is from opposite school and you can only have one summon and most nuking spells like wail of the banshee has his range far more limited?

The most popular spell mod for NWN2 is Spell fixes and improvements who makes spells more p&p like.

And on nwn1? PRC. A mod who makes the game far more P&P like, even bring reagents to spells and adds newer classes like WLK.

Talking again about wizards on CRPG adaptations. In what they are OP? I an at lv 6 on dark sun and my wizard **** compared to my melee fighters.

>muh MMO
again, you cant fucking get away from it.

You meanwhile see DnD as your personal power fantasy with you who does everything and the others there to fawn about you.
you dont want a team game, you want a power fantasy. But thats a shit kind of game for multiple people.
From its inception DnD was a game about cooperation, calling that an "MMO" is the most disingenuous argument you can possibly make

And as for what i do.
Im the DM, so i dont let casters be all powerfull in my games, if they dont like it, sucks to be them, but as a result, my party is having a ton of fun. I force them to work together or else they fail miserably.
I challenge them as a team, i dont just challenge their spell slots.


But this is about a video game, i cant houseurle in a video game and thus , in said video game, i want casters to be toned down and martial characters to be elevated because i want to be on an equal footing with the other characters.
Playing a caster is not a fantasy i indulge in.
Its not the role in a story i wish to play, thus, i want the other options to be equal.

Wrong. I just like to use magic in high magical settings. On pf:km when i played as a silver dragon sorcerer, i din't picked a single fire based spell. Sirroco, Fire Snake, etc are amazing spells but makes no sense for someone who draws his power from a cold based bloodline to use those spells.



This is a SP RPG, not a MP RPG. Can be played on MP but most people will gonna play on MP.



D&D is a game about ROLE PLAYING. Simulating being in another "reality".



Again, i ask. NAME ONE, JUST ONE GAME WHO DID IT AND DIN'T RUINED THE CLASS
NWN1? Nobody plays as pale masters(one summon and no CL), as necromancers wizards(best shcool as opposite school), dragon disciple is only useful for melee guys, arcane archers being able to only infuse fire(the most resisted element) is also ruined.
NWN2? Nobody plays as warlock(most nerfed class on the game) and everyone who plays as arcane caster uses the spell fixes mod(the top rated mod on that category)

And note that both games feature 3.5e arcane on epic levels. A 5e game up to lv 10 will have far weaker arcane casters. On video games, dealing damage is far more important than on P&P. You can see by Kineticist who is not that big deal on P&P of Pathfinder but is the best damage dealer on PFKM

Even if Larian nerfs the spells to oblivion, i bet that people will mod spells to P&P and that mod will gonna be one of the most popular on nexus mods.

Necromancy for eg is trash on NWN2. But with spell fixes can be great





Is your taste. If i an playing in a high magical setting, i wanna use powerful magic. If i an playing in a sci-fi setting, i wanna use powerful sci-fy weaponry. I don't indulge in the fantasy of using melee weapons, mainly swords. I mean, spears, polleaxes and javaliens are cool but swords are just overrated weapons.

Anyway, try to create a party of only casters on any golden box games and lets see how well you will gonna be...

Sorry, but the game will not be if you want it to be.
If you want a role playing game with more emphasis on role playing than min maxing then you have to:
- Play PnP and find players/GM who share your idea of role playing
- Play a computer game and install whatever mod you want or restrict yourself that you do not select certain spells or you do not combine certain classes.

The game will not be as you want it to be.
If the devs implement all the stuff you want, many other people will complain just as much as you do.
There will be players who want to multi class a warlock who has a pact with a fiend with a paladin of Tyr. They want to have a sorcerer with the red dragon bloodline and cast ice spells all day long.
Nothing in the rule book forbids such things. If players want to role play they have to discuss what they consider acceptable because everybody has a different opinion about what role playing means and how it should be implemented.

Personally I do not use any mods except unofficial fan patches (some game are almost unplayable without) and things that bring back cut contend (KotoR2 or Bloodlines).
I do not use anything that changes game mechanics, this I consider cheating.
But in a single player game everybody can do whatever they want.

I played NWN1+2 without mods and they were good enough for me.
Once again, when I play a computer game I do not care if the rules are the same as PnP or not.
Computer game x has the rules of computer game x, thats it.
My favourite char in NWN2 was this white knight
It uses a bug that would not work in PnP (you can select cleric domains again and get the feats from more than 2 domains) and I do not care if this char fits your idea of role playing.
For me was importent: I liked it and it was done in accordance with the rules of the unmodded NWN2.

Wrong. I just need to NOT MIN MAX and build my character accordingly to the theme that i an building



I an not saying that the devs should prohibit characters that makes no sense. I an saying that i don't like creating min maxed character that makes no sense. If you have fun being a warlock with a pact with a succubus and a cleric of Tyr, how it is impacting on my game? Mainly in a SP game, if someone is playing with Pun-Pun characters and having fun on their SP games, why i should care?

On tabletop game, is up to the DM/Group. I prefer role playing groups but if a group is satisfied with their min maxing gameplay, how it affects me? Lets then have fun with their pun pun and let me have fun with my thematic coherent characters



Is not cheating. Do you realize that there are a lot of mods who makes the games far harder? Did you played Antitribu for VtMB? Did you played RETURNING for Gothic 2? Or played Gothic 3 with alternative balancing?

A dragon on original gothic 2 is a monster that can be defeated with a fear scroll that you don't even need to be a magician to use. On Gothic 2 returning, is a legendary creature with colossal health bars, summons army of minions, has high resistances, cast circle 6 magic(highest in the game and the PC on chap 4 will have only access to circle 4 magic), only by being 300m near the fire/ice dragon lair, you constant take fire/cold damage and your stamina is drained quickly. This not mentioning their deadly breath weapon and deadly melee strikes that are worst than any melee warrior.

Deadly dragons and deadly monsters on skyrim also makes the game far harder.



Then don't make a TTRPG adaptation. What is the point of licensing a game to NOT offer a similar experience in another media? Why make a D&D adaptation? Make another generic wow clone instead of promising a D&D adaptation and delivering a awful game like sword coast legends



So for you exploiting is ok, but using mods to make a D&D game more D&D like is cheating?

I also don't care if it fits your idea of "cheating", i wanna play with 3.5e version of warlock, not the NWN2 """""""balanced"""""""" (read - useless) version. And if someone took the time to UNnerf the warlock invokations, where the DC of eldricht blast is wrong and some invokations work more nerfed than arcane spells who are already nerfed compared to pnp, for example, sorcerer fire wall lasts caster level rounds. Warlock fire wall lasts 3 rounds.

If making fire wall more akin to P&P is "cheating", i will glad to cheat.


https://neverwintervault.org/project/nwn2/other/warlock-reworked-102g

>Roleplaying game
yes , a game about playing a role in a fantasy world.
Its not about simulating anhting. thats a fallacy that comes from third edition , but it wasnt true in third edition either.
The game is a game, the mechanics arent meant to simulate the physics of the fantasy world.
The rules are mechanical abstractions to make it easier to represent a fantasy world.

>Didnt ruin the class
because you need to be OP to have fun?
wizards worked well in the divintiy games :^)
Wizards work extremley well in 4e, they just have more defined niches.
Wizards work well in the Elderscrolls Games, especialy morrowind.

The best implementaiton would be in Dragons Dogma i guess.
Each class has a define drole, and the wizards role is to take a long time casting and then unleashing absolute hell on everyone, without stepping on everyone elses toes.

I also liked the classes in Everquest.
I played a necromancer there, holy shit it was breddy good. You coul do things no other class could. But you also didnt step on anyones toes.
You have a very special role, you eone of the few classes that can summon, in EQ1 you could even equip your skelingotns

I dont care about your necromancer dude. I dont wan tto nerf the ammount of Skeletons you can summon.
I LIKE it when you can summon an army of dudes.

I dont like it when you can summon an army o dudes AND fly AND open locks AND scry AND be invisible AND change the weather.

Role playing games do not enforce role playing, they just give the opportunity to do so. But its the player who choses if you care about playing a role and what kind of role you play.

The devs create the rules for the game and I have the this opinion:
Everything is allowed as long as it is possible to do such a thing and there is no rule that says its forbidden.
So yes, its totally OK when your paladin summons undead, the priest of light has darkness as his fovourite spell and the rogue backstabs enemies with a ballista.

In a computer game the devs program the rules and everything that is possible is also allowed.
In a PnP game the GM has the final word what is possible.
The devs should discuss with the players what rules make sense ( thats what this forum is good for), but in the end its the devs who make the rules however they want.
Its up to the player to decide what role to play and how to play it.

And now let me role play my warlock/paladin who uses charisma for spells and weapons and with his holy weapon he adds both radient and necrotic damage to his attacks while summoning undead as meat shield and having ultra high saves and immunity to several effects.

absoluteley not :^)

Lets have fireball dealing cold damage then. We don't need to care about inner consistency.

IMO 2e is the best one in therms of simulating living in other world. Not only because certain classes who are far more complicated than others require more XP to level up, and that the hit points aren't inflated past lv 10 like 3.5e but ALSO because for example plate armor is far better protecting you from slashes than blunt.

By other hands, 2e had a save rule that i particularly don't like ie - save vs death that means that resisting a finger of death from the strongest necromancer and from a lv 1 wizard with a scroll is the same save. 3.5e with DC has a better mechanic. But 3.5e is the edition who suffers more from pun-pun builds.



No, needs to not suck.On NWN1, a Wizard 5/Pale Master 10 will be efficiently a lv 5 wizard with only one weak summon. Even a lv 6 wizard is stronger than him. Caster level is so vital for arcane like BAB is for melee warriors,



No, the range is ultra limited, only one summon, cooldowns(...) and your progress is just by getting bigger number. Wanna see a game where is hard to be a wizard but also cool? See Gothic 1.

You don't start the game with magic, you need to find someone able and willing to teach you. Corristo only teaches you on mid of chapter 2. And finally after you become a magician, you need tons of Learning Points to learn each magical circles and increase your mana. Warriors can max out their one hand and strength at lv 15. But wizards even if they save up LP to when they become magician, will only be able to max out at around lv 30.

And Gothic 2 did magic far harder than G1 already was. Now not only you need to learn magical circles and mana, but also nobody sell magical runes to you. You need to learn how to make runes too. I NEVER did a pure magical run on any Gothic game(except Gothic 3) by a reason.



By not having cooldowns, they on DD are far better than Divinity BUT i prefer rangers and magick archers over wizards any time. I can output far more DPS with my magick archer



Yesterday i completed the first DArk Sun from golden box. My wizard had one tier 5 spell(Cone of cold) and 2 tier 4. Scrolls aren't easy to obtain in that game. The versatility of a wizard is proportional to how many spells he learned. You can nerf wizards without changing a single rule.



Have fun with your Pun Pun build; it is a single player game. On my group, if i an a DM, will only allow multiclass if there are a good story reason for that. Many servers on NWN1 ban multiclass by a reason; there are a lot of people who pick lv 1 cleric only for the Divine Shield.

- BG3 is not dark sun or Gothic.
I do not know dark sun, but Gothic 1 is set in a prison with hundrets of prisoners and only 13 of them are mages.
In the baldurs gate setting magic is allowed and it is something normal.
People using magic to fly or to cummunicate telepathically is as normal as we travel with a plane or talking through a mobile phone.

Unless you use magic to attack people or their property or you summon undead or demons in the middle of a town, nobody cares what magic you do.
Being a wizard is a normal job.

- In the real world people make a lot of things in order to get more power.
So it makes sense if characters in a fantasy world make choices that make them more powerful.
Training for another class to become profient with some skill or equipment or learning an ability that works good in combination with what you already have, sure why not.
Especially evil chars would do anything to increase their power, no matter what other people think about it.
This way you could also argue that min maxing is normal and you need a good role playing reason to restrict yourself from doing stuff that is posible.

- The IE games were very good, but a lot of things made little sense to me.
+ arbitrary restrictions, like only humans could be paladins or monks and only half elfs could be ranger/cleric
+ very unintuitive system. Some numbers are good when they go up (e.g. stats) other are good when they go down (thaco, AC, saves). Only extremely high or low stat values had an effect, no changes in a wide range. Only some classes could have a strengh between 18 and 19. Spells did not depend on anything but level, for many spells it makes no difference if they were cast by a lv1 wizard or a lv20 wizard with 25 int. Most classes could dumb 2 or 3 stats without any downside.

3E was more intuitive (higher numbers are always better) and you had more freedom, but creating a good char sometimes became complicated like rocket science.
In PK ( I consider Pathfinder as DnD 3.75 ) you had to look for every buff if it is a morale, luck, enhencemant or whatever bonus or if the AC is dodge, natural or deflection.

I know nothing about 4E and I have not played a 5E game so far, but from what I read I like the changes. You still have tons of options but they have simplyfied the rules. Now you have only (dis) advantage or not, there is only one AC and so on.

Madscientist, i agree with you. Baldur's Gate is a high magical setting. But Sodark seems to enjoy more low to mid magical setting. I mentioned Gothic and Dark Sun because both games are not high magical setting like Baldur's Gate(they are no low magical setting like Conan or GoT where magic is extremely rare, ritualistic and generally comes with a lot of costs for eg)

About G1, among the prisoners on the colony, only one of then mastered circle 6 magic(Xardas) and only 2 reached circle 5(Saturas and Y'Berion), Corristo reached circle 4 and was the strongest FIRE magician in the colony(outside of colony, you have like 3 fire magicians with circles 4/5/6 magic on the entire colony), magic in Gothic 1/2/3 represents mechanic wise well the game world. And that is why is good.

Arcania in other hands is trash. Rune magic should't even work post G3 and it not only work but have cooldowns... The unique point that i disagree is



The answer is simple. Powerful entities don't give power or teach you for free. Tyr will require that you follow the DOGMA of his church to give divine spells to you. At the same way, a powerful succubus will require that you serve her and do her bidding to TEACH his secrets to you(a lot of people confuse clerics with warlocks, but clerics are a conduit to the God's power, Warlocks are apprentices to his/her patron). How you can serve both?

Did you read about Oathbreaker Paladin?

i prefer adnd 2e to third edition. Foe all the reasons youve mentioned.
and idk, a spell is a spell, if ind it amusing that they are in theory not bound to the individual.

But no, its not a simulaiton, if it were, thered be rules for how a fireball interacts with the metal of your armor, and thats just autistic.

>necromacners
yeah and i didnt say necromancers need to be weak.
I said they need to be specialized

>divinity
>range is limited
Good.
nuking someone from orbit without him beeing able to react is bad game design in a video game.
>muh summons
consequence of DnD, the same reason summons work they do in 5e: action economy. Having multiple weak summons is always better than ahving a few stronger ones.
Id have liked mroe summons in Divintiy, but ultimaltey thats not what the wizard classes in divinity are about. and totems are fun.
>learning magic
yeah but thats because gothic essentialy got entire questlines about every class.

You cant make a DnD based game like that since you get class levels from... well from level 1.
DnD 4e had a rule for starting otu as level 0, but DnD just isnt made about the Hogwarts expirience, its about beeing in a dungeon or the wilderness and gainign expirience by leveling, not by beeing an aprentice or by joning a faction.


>Dark sun
well theres your answer.
Im talking about default DnD by which i mean FR, Points of Light, Greyhawk and whatever other newfangled critical role setting they got these days.
Something that is the average expirience when playing dnd.
Dark sun is actually a very well thought out setting and thats also why it makes the class balance into something more siginificant.
Saying "Wizards are fine because they are fine in dark sun" is proivng my point.

>Dragons dogma and dps
Well wizards arent the DPS class.
thats the point, they have a ROLE to play. And that role isnt DPS, its area of effect mass destruction.
If you want DPS you gotta be an arcane archer or an assasin.
but realy, wizard is almost never the DPS class, not in DnD either, the wizard solves problems without doing damage.

>multiclassing
im not banning multiclassing
but in order to be a character thats both a warlock AND has divine powers, well, quite frankly, in my setting you wouldnt get that.
i can see a warlock getting Psionic class levels because its kind of the same nature of Occult studies, but divine powers tend to get revoked in my setting if you dont follow the actual teachings of your god (doing deals with some unimaginable nightmare creatures doesnt realy line up with the divine beeings in my setting)

RPG's are all about immersion since they was concerted. GURPS tried to have very complex rulesets but most people prefer a more fast and simplistic but at the same time immersive game than having a chapter on a book only to how to walk in frozen lakes...





Wrong. ALL, i repeat ALL games who is considered to have great archery, doesn't matter if is turn based, real time or real time with pause allow you to hit enemies at extremely high distances.

Nobody consider the gameplay of guns or sorcery on Hellgate londom satisfying and the lack of recoil on firearms and the fact that your range is ultra limited to 15m, kills the game as a shooter. As a looter hunter diablo like experience, the game is fine but i can't play it as a gunner. Thief, Dark Messiah of Might & Magic, Elder Scrolls Morrowind and Skyrim, Mount & Blade, all of then allow you to hit enemies from far away.

When i played M&B as Rhodoks, i defended a city with only 200 soldiers from a communal force of 800 soldiers, thanks to the amazing marksmanship

But see this videos. This is how archery should be.








Not true. My animated skeletons can't even proper hit certain enemies and some enemies can one cleave kill then on end game of pathfinder kingmaker. Undead created by higher level spells in other hands, can sustain some rounds vs powerful enemies.



My point is that you don't need to change the game rules to make learning spells harder and honestly, i liked that each one of the few magical scrolls that i found was a significant thing, like getting a new powerful weapon for my melee characters.

>GURPS
a literal meme and basically showing why aiming for simulationism in a TTRPG is a mistake.
>Immersive sims
love em.
As video games.
As games that actually have the processing power to make that happen.

>Archery
and none of those games are compareable.
They arent party based CRPGs.
If you want to ahve t that way, you have to rewrite the rules and make mounted combat an action, so that archers can actually be countered, also you need to make combat more deadly and have an unarmoured archer die from one or two melee hits.

Basically you have to turn it into mount and blade.
Which im fine with, but then go all the damn way.

>pathfinder
theres yoru problem.
Pathfiner kingmaker notoriously inflates the stats of its enemies beyond what the monster manual says.

This is a Third edition problem.
In third edition (and pathfinder, make no mistake, is just third edition DnD) a weak character cannot hit a strong one outside of a critical hit.

So there you go. Another fault of the worlds worst system.

>make learning magic harder
But not in a forgotten realms campaign in which high powered wizards basically sprout out of the ground like mushrooms.
Learning wizardry is hard in Dark Sun because in dark sun, beeing a wizard is a fast track to getting lynched

Did you played ToEE(Temple of elemental Evil)? Without blasting the Noble Salamanders in the node of fire at greater range while you are protected from spells up to tier 3, i see no way to defeat then. They can deal 20d6 damage while they are immune to fire.

As for making the combat deadly, a lv 5 ranger with 13 CON will have probably have 39 hp(11+7+7+7+7 6 is the d10 average + 1 for con), a critical hit from a heavy crossbow(d10 + 1~5, lets assume 4) can deal 28 damage.

I agree with Sordak that you should not compare BG3 with Skyrim.

Skyrim is a single character action game, BG3 is party and turn based.
Skyrim is an open world were many enemies walk around, BG 3 will have hand crafted encounters, where every encounter is designed for exactly this place.
Yes, I played Skyrim and I killed enemies with an arrow from far away. I also played Fallout New Vegas and I used the sniper rifle to kill enemies from the distance.
But one big difference between those games is player skill vs character skill.
Shots in Skyrim or shooters are rewarding because you (the player) has to aim at a moving target. A deadly headshot is a reward for player skill.
In BG3 you just click on an enemy and its the character stats and dice rolls alone that decide the results.

You can have a follower in Skyrim or New Vegas, but I always played alone because those followers messed things up most of the time, especially when you play as sniper.
Usually they run after the first enemy they see and then they get killed or they disappear forever in the distance because there is always an enemy to chase.
BG3 is designed for a party, you control every char and each char has a different role to fulfil.
And there will be situations where it is a good idea to start combat with your sniper assassin one shotting an enemy from stealth.
The situation will get even better when your mage casts summons, web or stinking cloud to stop enemies from reaching your sniper.

Mages are not just damage dealers, they are the magic version of a swiss army knive, having the right spell for every situation.
In PnP this is limited by resting, but computer games are usually not very restrictive with resting, which makes casters much more powerful compared to other classes.

Well, enemies has dispel, dimensional door and etc. I rather face a enemy with good IA than having ultra limited range.

That said, on P&P one time, my DM trowed elf arcane archers assassins at night sniping our party at 120m while all casters of my party was out of spells. If wasen't by a single lucky row, we would get killed.

Temple of Elemental Evil has P&P ranges for spells, i can hit enemies very far away with my fireball. As for resting, resting on pathfinder kingmaker where times matters and take supplies is a good solution. On Might & Magic VI, you can't rest spam, at least not before mid game. Light magic can create food and supplies and water mage allow you to teleport. But until you get it, you need to manage your supplies.