> And for you Wi1em. Not every game needs to be enjoyable by everyone. We were told by Wizards of the coast and Larians Studio that we're about the be given the first 5e D&D pc game. Let us have that please.
Right. So how do you balance resting? As other have said here, it's not strictly defined by the ruleset and as it currently is resting has no reason to exist at all (note: resting is not the same as party camp; you can have the camp but no resting mechanic to restore spell slots).
And then, on top of that, you get feedback from the absolute majority of players, which never played tabletop in their life and just expect a decent game, who will be annoyed by the 100%-ish dnd mechanics and, even though they might like the game in general, will be a bit disappointed by the end result.
And this is what I'm very curious about: how will Larian tackle the problem of pleasing the minority that came for dnd vs the majority that came for a fun, modern game, that is by default expected to take into account all the RPG development experience of past decades. The logic for those people is very simple:
1. I love RPGs
2. Larian makes great RPGs
3. Let's watch gameplay on YouTube
4. Wow, graphics, dialogues, fun combat! Take my money!
5. Get annoyed at dnd
Meanwhile, the minority that are dnd purists, and not even all of them, a subset of that minority, will rub their hands and say "Yes, correct dnd, we approve, thank you Larian".
Well. Let's start with the rest issue.
Now, in low levels, casters are bit weak and need more long rests than melee or be careful how they spend their spell slots and that's why they've got unlimited cantrips to not feel completely useless when those slots are used. But that's how the classes are balanced. Melee characters are stronger in the beginning and casters are stronger in the end game where enemies have high psychical damage reduction/AC. So, to balance early game, you design the encounters to be doable without having to burn up your spells slots in every fight. Right now it feels the combat is out of balance being harder than they should for a low level party. And that's because they are designed around mechanics like surfaces and bonus actions that is not normally implemented in D&D rules.
Let's take NWN for example(I know this is not NWN but it's a D&D game):
As a caster, I can rest pretty much everywhere, it takes like six seconds and restores all my spells and has absolutely no drawback to it what so ever. And because of that, I ofc rest whenever I feel that I'm low on spells making the whole rest mechanic feel tedious. Why not just give me unlimited spells and skip the whole rest mechanic so I can go on playing the game as the overpowered god that I am?
You can ofc argue that this decision is up to the player to make. But wouldn't not taking a rest make my character seem kinda stupid? Like, hey hero, lets rest up so you're not gimping yourself for the next fight. -NO, you weakling! I'm the HERO OF NEVERWINTER! I DON'T HAVE THOSE MORTAL WEAKNESSES LIKE THE NEED OF REST! Eh, ok. it was just a suggestion. -DON'T TALK BACK TO ME YOU SHRIMP!(5 minutes later the hero died because he was out of spells)
So, for the sake of immersion, which a rpg is very much about...I don't mind having unlimited long rests, if I don't have to take one after each encounter, and I don't mind making an encounter easier by blowing all my spells if I know that there will be a risk doing so. i e limits/hazards to a long rest. Simply put. there should always be a repercussion based on my actions.
As for the "majority of players"? I could just as easily advocate that since BG3 has been marketed as a 5e D&D game, the "majority of players" i. e the target audience, are those that look forward to a, as true as possible, rendition of the tabletop game to a crpg. And in my opinion, as the game is marketed, this game should target D&D fans, not the majority of pc players that never played the tabletop game before. Those players are more than welcome to try the game, and maybe they even find it to their liking so much that they get interested in tabletop D&D but the game should not be catering their interest in a more traditional rpg game.
I guess it's time for Larian studios to come clean with what their target audience is. D&D fans or the broad mass? Targeting a smaller audience(and D&D fans is not a small market btw) does not have to mean a failure in revenue. Dark Souls was marketed as a game for those players that wanted a hard challenge and was not meant for the majority of video game players. And I would like to say that the game series became a success
