Well, this argument is invalid. I'm one that didn't get all the tadpole interactions on my first run, because I didn't take enough LRs to get them. Note: I have, and continue to, openly admit that it's because I didn't do what was required to get them. This is your disconnect; I never claimed everyone should get every possible interaction in every playthrough. That was your strawman, not mine. Then there's the issue that I raised in my very first post in this thread, talking about taking a long rest, fighting the hag, and then taking another long rest. Reading through your responses to points raised after this quoted post, your response to that query doesn't add up. You said, paraphrasing here "it's a boss fight, that's fine". How does that equate to your stated "1 LR per day"? So abusing long rests is ok, so long as it's done how you'd do it? I infer that from your stated position of "it's a boss fight, so it's fine".
And I explained that it's fine to have a long rest because it takes a whole day to fight a boss, or that it doesn't even need to grant a long rest, but a hefty number of points. This is not a problem with the consistency of my system. You may not personally like it, but I don't care what you like or not.
People raising legitimate concerns about your system aren't crying
*Other* people have pointed out legitimate concerns about this system for which I am grateful as it has allowed me to further refine it. You, on the other hand, have contributed absolutely nothing of any worth.
From the very start of this thread, your only concern seems to be how to force people into sleeping often enough so they don't miss out on stupid cut-scenes. For one, I don't care about forcing people to sleep or experience content, and for two, if one wanted to force players to sleep, my system is literally the best way to implement it. The fact that you don't see the connection between getting to a 100 each day and being able to force players to bed demonstrates a staggering cognitive impotence on your part, not a problem with my system.
No, it's a problem with your system. It's a problem because the people that are looking for that story, can easily be locked out of it. I didn't buy this game because it's 5e DnD, it just happens to follow that ruleset. I bought it because the first two games carried me through some very rough times, and I loved them. I didn't love, or hate, how the rules were implemented, I loved the stories. That's why people play story driven games, after all. There's a reason that "rules lawyer" has a negative connotation, after all, they suck all the fun out of games, trying to make sure that their vision is the only one that matters, even if they're not running the game they're lawyering in.
Actually, no. My first post in this thread points to a very funny flaw: Hey folks, even if that boss fight is over in a turn, it took all day. You double down on that in this post. You don't have to take my word for that, however. I copy/pasted your reply to my first post in the post you butchered here. I find it even more ironic that you don't see the irony of all the waffling you've done on your "final solution". Your opinion on story content is irrelevant. I'm sure I'm not the only person that sees Baldur's Gate 3, and wants this game to be successful because of the story, since stories are what brought me to the table in the first place. Dismissing them out of hand, as you do here, isn't doing you any favors, and isn't improving the game in any measurable way. Especially when "It doesn't matter how that boss fight actually goes, it took you all day" is one of your justifications. A "final solution" should cover every possible problem that could arise, and you not only fall short of doing that, you choose to claim that some parts of the game just don't matter, because you think they're stupid.
Whether you care or not, some people are going to want to play through the romances. Whether you care or not, some people are going to want to see the story arcs for their chosen companions, even if that's spread out over several playthroughs. Whether you care or not, some people are going to want to see the tadpole stuff play out. Your "final solution" doesn't do anything to provide for these reasonable expectations. I say they're reasonable, because it's expected that you're going to be able to see that content, since it's in the game, even if it does require multiple playthroughs. Your "final solution" can very easily lock players out. The original system locked me out, because I didn't realize how important LRs, or hanging out in camp, was going to be to advancing the story, tadpole or otherwise.
I mean, frankly, if we had a system that locked you out of LRs until you've taken both of your short rests, and a short rest started a 1 hour real time timer, it would be vastly superior to what you've suggested here. That's just off the top of my head, with no real thought into refining it. It may have even been suggested before, I haven't read every thread, let alone post, about resting that's come up. It could be as simple as a non-skippable tutorial on the rest system, that triggers after we get off the ship, with a timer on the rest button. It could even be tuned as such that it allows the first LR, and then explains how it works while you're "setting up camp" for the first LR. It prevents "spamming LRs", and makes it infinitely easier to get all the content you're supposed to get that's tied to the rest system. If they added some kind of message that a comp needs to talk to you in camp, as they did in swtor, for example, with an Icon on the NPC's portrait, it would be even better.
