Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback Long Rests, Health, and Death Mechanics

I wanted to list a couple of pretty significant concerns I have about some of the Game mechanics surrounding Health, Dying, and Resting. I love the game, but right as I am about to feel like I'm playing D&D, these game mechanics wrench me right out of it, and make some of the things that make D&D particularly challenging and immersive in a FUN way nonexistent or severely hamstrung.

-Long Rests
Long Rests right now are able to be done at any time, which completely eliminates the resource management aspect of going through a "day" in the game. After any instance where you use a couple spell slots or lose some health, you can just pop into a long rest and come right back to where you were with all of your health and resources available again. Every D&D campaign is run slightly differently, but I believe most operate under an understanding that a Long Rest can only be done after a reasonable amount of in-game 'time' has passed. No DM I have played with would, for example, have the players go through the the first enemy encounter or action encounter of the day, and then allow the group to long rest if they had just long rested before the event took place. This is supposed to emphasize the players' abilities to manage their resources while fighting, and adds the drama of risk/reward when sacrificing potential health now for a valuable spell slot you may need for a boss later. Right now, that does not exist. There is no risk for throwing all my spell slots at every encounter, there is no penalty for charging into the enemy without planning (besides death, which I will be getting to shortly), and the feeling of dungeon delving and fearing taking risks that D&D provides is totally neutered by long rests not being limited in some way.

-Possible Solutions:
First off, if the game is balanced with unlimited full-party replenishment after every event, I understand that balancing will need to be changed to account for this adjustment.
The easiest way to solve this issue is to have some invisible timer behind the scenes, making a certain amount of time to have to pass before the players' group can long rest. Real-time could be a reasonable amount of time the player spends playing the game (having the timer stop when the game is paused or when in dialogue) before they are notified they should long rest.
Other than this, it could be after a certain amount of XP gained or at certain set up milestones throughout the campaign. Certain areas could be granted asylum status, such as a city from where the players will set out on another journey or quest, and thus would allow the players to take a long rest whenever they want. This would be ok because it would represent the players possibly taking a few days off at an inn to gather supplies, which commonly happens between "chapters" or bug milestones in real-life campaigns.
I suggest an invisible timer because then the players can focus on in-game cues, like the characters expressing exhaustion verbally, which they already do in the game, except those interactions don't really demonstrate anything important to the player right now. Obviously a visible timer would also be fine, but it might have the result of having players stare at the timer when they are in dire straights instead of focusing on the actual game in front of them and how they can still complete their goals.


-Dying
Having dying work the way it does in this iteration of the game is antithetical to the goal of transferring D&D rules into video game format. Death in D&D is, depending on how you play, always a threat, but rare in 5e. Obviously some campaigns are more intense than others, and death will be more expected, but death in real-life campaigns results in players making new characters that are then woven into the story, NOT an expectation of being revived. But most characters in real-life D&D will NEVER DIE during a campaign. They will be knocked unconscious or even be at death's door, but there are few characters that will be resurrected dozens and dozens of times before the end of their campaign. At much higher levels, death becomes easier to thwart with spells and powerful allies, but even then it is considered something rare and sometimes miraculous. In the game, we are not rolling new characters each time we die, and I would never expect that to be the case. You want your players to play as the character they created and the companions you created. By making death permanent until a player can find 200 gold or a resurrection scroll, you are just placing an annoying obstacle in front of the player and the goal of the game. It is not a fun mechanic, puzzle, or a fun challenge to get players revived, and it has the possibility of even being impossible at times with the finite resources available in the world. The difficulty and brutality of the game is in one part enjoyable, but completely sours the experience with the addition of soft perma-death. The DM in the real world can account for these unfortunate circumstances on the fly, making sure the players won't end up too frustrated or blocked in the campaign to want to play anymore, but since this game has only its programming to depend on, you have to ensure that these situations cannot be reached by the players by making sure the mechanics support the overall goal for the game. We are limited to a certain number of companions, with a certain number of revivication scrolls available to purchase, as a limited amount of gold to shell out to the talkative skeleton who can revive people back at camp. But if the intention is to never have to lose a companion forever, why make death a mechanic to begin with? Death does nothing in this game but make the player potentially have to run around after a battle to try and find a scroll or enough money to revive the fallen companion. Dying in BG3 is easy, but without the freedom and fluidity of the real-life game to allow for the making of new characters on the fly, it makes no sense for death to be incorporated into this game. This is a story about THESE specific characters, so having them die defeats the purpose. The drama in death for games like D&D is that the character you have grown to love is gone forever. But in this game they are not gone forever; in fact the player is actively encouraged not to leave their companions dead, with several avenues to resurrect them. But then, why is death dramatic or exciting or FUN in that instance? What happens if the character I created, my main character, is killed and I don't have any way to revive them? I continue the story without them until I can afford to bring them back? That doesn't seem like a cool, fun game mechanic, it sounds like a harsh punishment for getting crit by a big boss that makes me want to save scum to get a more enjoyable experience than playing it as-is.
Also, the enemies focus down downed characters over dangerous combatants who are fighting, which just adds to how easy it is to die in this game. It's a valid combat strategy for the enemy to take, but it will make people focus more on making it through the fight without having to burn too many res scrolls than to just win the fight, which is what it should be all about.

-Possible Solutions:
Death should be taken out of the game and replaced with a Downed/Unconscious mode instead. Downed players go through the same saving throws to see if they can stabilize to be healed or helped, or if they will fall UNCONSCIOUS and be unable to take part in the rest of the battle. Then if the rest of the party is knocked unconscious or downed all at once, the player reaches a Game Over, and must reload, the same way as if all of them had died. But now, the unconscious players can be revived at the end of battle if they were unable to be revived while they were downed during the fight, and the adventure can continue immediately, the difference being that the player did not have to expend a finite resource to ensure one of the companions would be able to continue with them. They will still have their burned spell slots and abilities, as well as low health, which adds the same challenge as reviving any dead companion. It's a very small change to the mechanic, ultimately, but it eliminates revivication scrolls as being a possible soft-lock for progression through the game. It also helps from an immersion standpoint; if there are these scrolls that can bring people back from THE DEAD, then why isn't EVERYONE using them? Why aren't enemies using them? Why can't I use it on people who aren't my allies? It makes it clear these are items made expressly to solve the 'problem' of death, but death is something you can just remove from the game without having to sacrifice the difficulty or consequences of handling a fight poorly or just getting unlucky.

-Food and Health
Food heals more than my potions sometimes, and seeing as how potions and healing spells are expensive and a huge part of D&D quests, it throws the balance of health resources way off.

Firstly, lets look at DURING battles. Food can be used in place of a potion to heal a character. The amount of health gained, depending on the food, can be enormous, and more than a potion of healing even at a full roll of 12 (or around that). If food wasn't so much cheaper, or had some sort of downside like making you slow or some type of debuff, it would be more acceptable, but as it is now it just makes healing during battle easier in a game that should be emphasizing good limited resource management. This is not super egregious, but it is a little odd and makes potions not feel really worth it to buy, and healers a little less important in battle. If my cure wounds spell does about as much healing as a pie I found in a cart, but costs an action instead of a bonus action, I definitely feel less like using cure wounds and more like focusing on offensive spells all the time. The additions of these resources also do not sufficiently balance out the intensity of battles, and do not stop the constant onset of death, so I am being careful not to appear hypocritical here by saying it is very easy to die in one section and then complaining about an increase to health boosters in another. Death doesn't come as a result of no ability to heal when it is your turn, it comes out of a merciless, cold onslaught of AI characters programmed to show no mercy, which may be different than what some D&D players experience.

Secondly, there is OUT OF battles. Characters can chow down on apples and raw chicken until they are full health, which goes back to my argument about Long Rests and the importance of balancing resource management. Usually, adventurers have to carefully consider and prepare healing spells and healing items like potions, which either extinguish a very valuable resource that could be used for other things (prepared spells, spell slots) or cost a significant amount of money (regular potions in D&D cost 50gp each, since they are considered magical alchemical creations) and then there are short rests at certain intervals of play, which of course right now is 2 at any time. If I can stock up on apples and save my spell slots and money in exchange, then there is really no risk or punishment to being lazy or reckless with my health bar. Part of the challenge is figuring out when to press on and when to turn back; health is precious and adventurers will often travel around bouncing between 40-80% health as they decide to use spell slots and items outside of battle.

-Possible Solutions
Food could just be eliminated as a health source, or could heal significantly less, even being capped at a percentage of the players health before it stops healing altogether.

I would suggest something like a combination of a lowered effectiveness and some sort of debuff that accompanies it. They would have to be debuffs that didn't just disappear in 6 seconds to avoid there being virtually no consequences outside of battle for just spamming food. There could be a food limit between long rests, debuffs that only go away after a long rest or short rest, or debuffs that last for a certain number of battle encounters/until a long rest, whichever comes first.



*Activision Employee My Views are My Own*

+1 I share these concerns especially the two around the spammable long rest eliminating the resource aspect and the food heals hp one. The game has so much potential but i think these mechanics (which im sure will be tweaked as Larian usually listens to feedback and a couple of people already raised these) take away tactical depth and challenge (although im okay if they keep these as a separate game mode for people who like these as is). Regarding dying im not sure if i remember well but i think in Pathfinder KM you had a toggle in options to choose if you and companions would die during battle or just be downed when hp is 0.

Hello,

Your concern are goods and be sure you're not alone. We already discussed all this a lot and many of us (me included) totally agree with your statement.


About resting, the problem of your suggestion is that players could be stucked.
You don't have ressources anymore... You don't have anything to do except fighting the 4th goblins group inside the dungeon... But it's not time to long rest and you already use your 2 short rests of the day.
What happen ? Do we have to wait for the invisible timer ?

This is a very complicated issue especially because Larian decided that long rest could only happen at night and because the story happen during those rests.

The only solution I think about that could solve this ressources management issue are random encounter while travelling at camp... But
1) this is not a popular opinion
2) if you're really stuck and can't deal with 1 more combats, you'll probably have to reload not to encounter a random group of ennemies... That's fine to me, but it won't to everyone.
And that won't solve the unlimited rest thing.


About Death...
I really don't like those cheap scrolls and feath is not enough punishing to me.
Dying less often but with heavier conséquences is what I'd like.


About food...
This is completely silly. Food doesn't heal wounds even in the FR... That's why we can use healing potions and spells. Can't understand someone at Larian had this idea...

I like this idea a lot, players who want to play safe could take time and those willing to take more risks could try to keep moving without waiting for the long rest to be "recharged".


Totally agree with this.

Death/healing: To me, the issue isn't that there's a death mechanic, it's that you're instantly thrust into "epic" encounters that can easily kill you. For example, should you happen to pick the lock on the crypt when you first meet Shadowheart and encounter the skeletons, rather them being generic skeletons with like 8 hp each, they can all cast spells or have a ton of hp. Even if you gather all four companions somebody could go down easily just with one magic missile barrage. Besides that encounter, there's the goblins. Back when I played PnP, goblins were another starter monster that you fought when 1st or 2nd level. Unless you fought like 20 at once, they weren't much of a threat as they couldn't hit the broad side of a bar and fell pretty easily. Now they're super buff and have things like fire arrows and bombs to ruin your day. Tone things down a little and death will be less of a problem.
Another issue with death is that the AI always seems to pick out the softest target in the group, downs them and keeps pounding on them until they're dead. Ok, after seeing Gale fire off some magic missiles, maybe they target him but why right off the bat? How do they know he's a spell caster, just because he's got a robe and a walking staff? I'd think they'd aim first for the people up front with the big weapons who are hewing their comrades down. Once they've downed someone, why keep targeting them? They're no longer a threat at that point, take out someone who is.
If they adjusted the encounters a little and adjusted the AI a little, I think we'd find the whole healing and some of the issues with resting solved. I wouldn't feel the need to go all in with offensive spells (and certainly wouldn't be expending a lot of healing spells) if the monsters targeted the tank in the group rather than constantly knocking out the mage/warlock.

Resting: Maybe some of this will be sorted out once the full game is released. Right now the pacing of using your mind powers, interacting with companions requires you to long rest. With as compressed as it feels right now in EA, I feel you need to rest after every encounter just to make progression in those areas. Maybe in actual play that'll be spread out and I won't feel compelled to rest all the time. Solasta puts in some limits on resting like needing a safe place (for short rests there can't be enemies too close by and long rests require a specific camp area). It also tends to yell at you if you try to long rest too soon, but does let you override it if needed. However, you also need to lug around a lot of food (or have spell casters who can conjure it up) as each time you long rest you use up a ration.

I don’t rest often in the game - makes it more challenging but realistic for me. I do use the food but outside of combat should be added - I just self police this.

The game is pretty easy due to Larian combat mechanics. I can reach the end of EA with about four long rests, less if I heavily use food to heal myself. I can clear up to the blighted village except the ogres and spiders without resting at all. The only time I use a long rest is after a big fight (ie hag, matriarch, gith, minotaurs...etc) but even some of those, I can muscle my way through. Healing food, height advantage, lots of special arrows, tons of scrolls, and explosives really break the game.

Why not do long rests like they do in Solasta???

This would be very interresting... Especially because resting is not just a click on a button. It's a gameplay mechanics during which players have choices to make and things to do, exactly like in D&D... (hit dice, features, spells, level up,...).

Unfortunately Larian decided that long rest were a part of the story instead of a gameplay mechanic. Short rests are also very dissapointing at the moment...

The point about using long rest and "The Camp" as a vehicle for story delivery is a good one, because I can certainly imagine how it might have been used differently with more gameplay elements, or similar to how Strongholds or a House might be used in some games.

One thing I definitely notice, is how the centralized base Camp has removed a proper place for stuff like Inns, which were stock feature of D&D campaigns. This has an impact on how the "town" environment is structured visually and on the mini map. So for example, rather than having inns or temples or barracks or shops, it feels like we just have various merchant NPCs kinda scattered about. Rather than having a shopfront or a wagon or a tent, that actually looks like a spot where merchants would be hocking their wares, we just have merchants standing on sidewalks pulling swords and armor out of their pockets I guess. Granted some of this comes from having all the action in the early game centered around a makeshift refugee settlement and a goblin camp (and where everything else is either overrun, or in ruins, or on fire) but I think it impacts the vibe for sure.

That brings up another thing I noticed, which isn't directly related but feels still somehow relevant... How all the named areas on the map are pretty generic.

Aside from Waukeen's Rest, which sounds like it might be an Inn of note, everywhere we go feels like it might just as well be located anywhere in Faerun, rather than in a specific place.

We have area names like Ravaged Beach, or Blighted Village, or Sunlit Wetlands for example. These don't sound like actual place-names but rather generic descriptions or impressions of the environment.

Like where are we exactly? "Well look around, seems like a Shattered Sanctum or a Defiled Temple or a Risen Road." But those don't have that sense of place in the same way that like Nashkell, or Beregost, or the Cloakwood Forrest do.

Part of the appeal of BG1/2 was that the games began in a specific place, Candlekeep, with other specific places looming large in the background, and where progressing through the game basically made the player feel like they were fleshing out a mental atlas or actually becoming acquainted with a real world (even if a fantastical one.) They do throw a few names at us in BG3, like Elturel or Menzoberranzan or I guess the Moonrise Towers. But NPCs don't seem to talk about the place where they're standing in the way that real people might, in a real place, with actual place-names.

I just don't feel like the game is building out the World of Faerun in a way that might serve as a point of reference to get a grasp on the broader geography or sense of place.
Like when Volo recounts these tales, is he just going to be drawing blanks for place-names?
Its going to sound like he made everything up and never actually visited.

Resting at Inns or in towns, you have things like signposts and pub rumor mills, and other nuance building elements, that you're just not going to get from a generic pocket plane camp. So it seems kind of unfortunate. BG1/2 used resting to advance aspects of the story as well, but it could happen anywhere and felt somehow more natural for that reason I think. Whereas here its kind of like, well "better head back to the camp, so we can hear the next part of the story." Its just kind of an odd narrative departure handling it that way. The idea that we can't travel and experience these environments at night also strikes me as a really bizarre choice for a D&D game.

They could still fix a lot of this stuff, its not like there is a hard release date they have to meet yet, and presumably EA was a nice payday that seemed to surpass their expectations. I'd be happy to wait while they figure out what they want to do with Time, or the resting mechanics, or having an actual Moon and Sun or even weather. I kind of expected it to be able to rain in Baldur's Gate sometimes for the clutch lightning strike, since they managed that in 1998. By 2020 I thought we'd be at like flash floods sometimes, or snow, or taking some of these environmental effects they already had in place for surfaces and using them that way, rather than as spells or bucket blasts, using them for dynamic environments over time.

Or if they want to break with real time completely, it would be cool if the whole campaign really leaned into it. With that integrated into the story, and making time part of the gameplay. More like BG terminator?

Like how cool would it be if Larian said, ok lets really lean into the sequential Time thing.

Instead of ignoring it, they could have done a badass temporal angle on all kinds of stuff.

Maybe that's what those netherese portals are really about?

Make this a more temporal campaign that plays with time in different ways, instead of just kind of eliminating it?

Then maybe they actually could find cool ways to link this story with the earlier BG stories?

Or like how cool would this campaign took place over several seasons. In the winter if water froze, and maybe we can cross Chionthir into different areas. Go all Zelda level with it, or Darkside of Xeen style. Returning to the same environment but experience it differently. Give the world itself an artistic sense of time, such that the same environment might change and have new ways to interact with it. Day or Night feels like it would be the first place to start. But winter and summer would be cool too.

That's just a riff, they probably wouldn't go for it. But I think that would be cool and fit the whole out from the Astral plane angle.

They could do much more with the prologue too that way, if the mind flayer worm was actually like a memory or time flaying worm. Things like origins or backgrounds could then be handled in specific tutorials, at the start where the flayer first puts the worm in your mind. As if you are living out the memory. This could be a way also to integrate the NPCs or companions in different ways too. Were we learn about that backgrounds through gameplay, rather than just cinematics or dialogue.

Once the worm is in your eye, after the first 10 seconds of the game, from that point on you could insert breaks in the game's temporal reality to explore different stuff and make Time really a part of the gameplay. Pillars used a similar device with ghosts, but its not as compelling as time travel to me.

Even just as a device for the EA, it would be cool. Like the idea that the environments or characters or whatever are split realities and the more we use the netherese portals the more the fabric of fearuns space time is deteriorating. So that we can get Bhaal back in on it? Franchises splitting chronology is always kind of fun, allows some freedom to explore or then dial it back if it goes off the rails. That's more planescape angle I guess, but the franchises have always been connected up BG and City of Doors. If we can go to the Underdark and be rolling with Gith from the get go, I'd like to see them try something ambitious like that. And really work up how that could be strung into the Camp and the dreams and whatever other game devices might be fun. I mean could EA Faerun pull a Majoras Mask on us for the EA? I'd buy in, but it would have to be set up more from outset. Like this is what's happening you're going to retreat the same environments over and over, bouncing across time and different pcs, while the story and dynamic environment is changing. Sorry just spitballing. Right now the camp does have a weird groundhogs day vibe to it heheh

Flash! Back at the Nautiloid! Again! But why? hehe