|
|
|
veteran
|
veteran
Joined: May 2019
|
My stomach turns at the thought of random encounters. Hate them on tabletop, and any video games, even in pokemon (I think the newer games are a huge improvement on that front. Give me the old games, but visible pokemon in the grass that I can walk around to skip, and I'd be a very happy nerd!).
I do think fast travel (and long rest) needs a major redesign in BG3 just because it makes a lot of other things redundant - If you can long rest all the time, why have spell slots at all. It also nerfs sorcerers and buffs Ki for monks.
Same with travel, but I don't currently have thoughts on alternatives. But random encounters is not a solution in any shape or form IMO. It's just annoying filler that doesn't drive the story. And if it's chance-based, I'd hit F5 before travel, travel, and reload if random encounter, and try travel again to avoid random combat :P I have talked about this in private message with GM4 and I think he has "scripted events that may occur randomly" in mind more than traditionnal (and often boring) random encounters. In exemple when you arrive at your camp there's a cinematic in which you see a pack of wolves looking for something to eat. You have 3 choices : wait for them to leave, you loose 20 food units. Try to distract them : skill check, if you suceed you loose 10 food units but if you fail you have to fight. Fight them : you loose 0 food but have to fight. I also think it could be very cool but I really don't think such events / encounters could apply to fast travelling. We're fast traveling too often and from too many locations to too many locations. Larian should create paths to recognise where players are passing through and create a very large pool of possible events so that they don't become redundant. A massive job for a result that may not be fully satisfying. It should be a part of the camping system redesign imo. This is what I was going to ask as well. What about "random" encounters that are not quite random, but rather are scripted encounters that appear to be random? I personally like this; a good balance between maintaining some appropriate tension during travel/camping but without the encounters being a boring chore.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
|
I believe i have read somewhere that something close is allready planned.
I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings.  Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!
|
|
|
|
|
|
apprentice
|
|
apprentice
Joined: Apr 2022
|
Voted for 4.
In my first playthrough, it seemed really odd to me that the party was able to talk its way to the heart of the goblin camp, murder three leaders, then simply dimension hop out of there. Sounds like a pretty deep security flaw in the goblin defenses. My intuition was that the party would need to sprint to the waypoint to teleport out of the camp, dodging goblin spells and arrows in a daring and thrilling escape. Fast travelling back to the grove felt a little anti-climactic. This is my biggest issue with the system, too - and it applies even with the waypoint system. In general, I think Fast Travel is a good option, as opposed to forcing players to retrace their steps over territory they've already cleared. (Allowing players to opt out of anything that's tedious is usually a good thing.) But there are cases where story dynamics suggest that there should be NEW challenges, and exiting the goblin camp is a good example of this. (I mean, I have other issues with that, too. All the partying goblins becoming suddenly aggressive feels...artificial...and the fact that the cursor still suggests that going through their stuff is 'stealing' makes it feel like you've done something you're not supposed to. But there ARE at least a couple of options for making your exit, even if, imho, there should be more, but climbing down to the outpost and magicking past them that way really SHOULDN'T be one of those choices.) ETA: While the suggestion of pre-scripted events for fast travel sounds interesting, I don't think fast travel should be generally *required* to access game content. This is particularly true of anything story-related: I shouldn't miss something important just because I try to avoid or minimize fast travel.
Last edited by NorthernHick; 26/04/22 03:52 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
|
My stomach turns at the thought of random encounters. Hate them on tabletop, and any video games, even in pokemon (I think the newer games are a huge improvement on that front. Give me the old games, but visible pokemon in the grass that I can walk around to skip, and I'd be a very happy nerd!).[...] But random encounters is not a solution in any shape or form IMO. It's just annoying filler that doesn't drive the story. And if it's chance-based, I'd hit F5 before travel, travel, and reload if random encounter, and try travel again to avoid random combat :P You do realise there's a certain irony in your statement that you hate random encounters because of how they're chance and not story driven in a discussion on a game that forces you to roll dice on literally everything in combat en often in dialogues too ? Why not let some world events be dice driven too? Like you first come on a crosspoint. Dice roll, d6 , anything between 0-3 bad luck, 3-6 good luck , the higher lower, the more beneficial or dangerous. How would that randomness differ from the randomness in attacks hitting or missing, or your charisma checks to succeed. If the issue is losing rolls (or losing to randomness), just add an option of few negative encounters, no random encounters, or story mode where you succeed any roll everywhere... ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
|
you can port to them from anywhere magically. Or! Maybe ... just maybe ... Larian didnt seen any reason for us to watch our party walking back to nearest Waypoint ... and just as with Long Rests whenever and wherever ... they simply decided to cut this awfull and boring walking out as QoL upgrade. No crap RagnakrokCzD, it's a QoL feature, I know the reason it's in the game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Doesnt exactly seems like you get what im talking about tho. :-/
I didnt say that "fast travel is QoL feature" ...
I said that the fact that you can "travel from anywhere" is QoL upgrade of Fast Travel Feature ...
Just think for a second ...
If we would need to return to last visited waystone every time we would feel the urge to fast travel, what would we get?
Answer: Walking.
Nothing else ... just boring, tedious walking through either empty, or wiped out zones ...
Who would want that? :-/ And why?
I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings. Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
|
We would get realism & immersion
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: May 2019
|
My stomach turns at the thought of random encounters. Hate them on tabletop, and any video games, even in pokemon (I think the newer games are a huge improvement on that front. Give me the old games, but visible pokemon in the grass that I can walk around to skip, and I'd be a very happy nerd!).[...] But random encounters is not a solution in any shape or form IMO. It's just annoying filler that doesn't drive the story. And if it's chance-based, I'd hit F5 before travel, travel, and reload if random encounter, and try travel again to avoid random combat :P You do realise there's a certain irony in your statement that you hate random encounters because of how they're chance and not story driven in a discussion on a game that forces you to roll dice on literally everything in combat en often in dialogues too ? Why not let some world events be dice driven too? Like you first come on a crosspoint. Dice roll, d6 , anything between 0-3 bad luck, 3-6 good luck , the higher lower, the more beneficial or dangerous. How would that randomness differ from the randomness in attacks hitting or missing, or your charisma checks to succeed. If the issue is losing rolls (or losing to randomness), just add an option of few negative encounters, no random encounters, or story mode where you succeed any roll everywhere... ? YES!! Exactly!! That literally everything in D&D is driven by the randomness of dice-rolling is what makes me so dislike D&D mechanics. Literally everything. Some dice-rolling would be okay, but in D&D all the choices you as the player make, up to and including character creation and development choices, are ultimately of little relevance because outcomes will ultimately be driven by a die roll. A truly egregious example is that even the healing power you get from drinking a healing potion is driven by a die roll. Ditto the healing received from a healing spell, which therefore says your God is choosing to play dice with your life and the lives of anyone depending on that God's spells. It's just plain silly: Player: "DM, my character needs to pee." DM rolls a D20: "Nope. Sorry. The die roll says you don't get to pee. Better luck next time."
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
|
My stomach turns at the thought of random encounters. Hate them on tabletop, and any video games, even in pokemon (I think the newer games are a huge improvement on that front. Give me the old games, but visible pokemon in the grass that I can walk around to skip, and I'd be a very happy nerd!).[...] But random encounters is not a solution in any shape or form IMO. It's just annoying filler that doesn't drive the story. And if it's chance-based, I'd hit F5 before travel, travel, and reload if random encounter, and try travel again to avoid random combat :P You do realise there's a certain irony in your statement that you hate random encounters because of how they're chance and not story driven in a discussion on a game that forces you to roll dice on literally everything in combat en often in dialogues too ? Why not let some world events be dice driven too? Like you first come on a crosspoint. Dice roll, d6 , anything between 0-3 bad luck, 3-6 good luck , the higher lower, the more beneficial or dangerous. How would that randomness differ from the randomness in attacks hitting or missing, or your charisma checks to succeed. If the issue is losing rolls (or losing to randomness), just add an option of few negative encounters, no random encounters, or story mode where you succeed any roll everywhere... ? YES!! Exactly!! That literally everything in D&D is driven by the randomness of dice-rolling is what makes me so dislike D&D mechanics. Literally everything. Some dice-rolling would be okay, but in D&D all the choices you as the player make, up to and including character creation and development choices, are ultimately of little relevance because outcomes will ultimately be driven by a die roll. A truly egregious example is that even the healing power you get from drinking a healing potion is driven by a die roll. Ditto the healing received from a healing spell, which therefore says your God is choosing to play dice with your life and the lives of anyone depending on that God's spells. It's just plain silly: Player: "DM, my character needs to pee." DM rolls a D20: "Nope. Sorry. The die roll says you don't get to pee. Better luck next time." Wow. What DMs do you play with. I don't make my players roll for everything. I only make them rule for important things. Shoot, even if they are trying to persuade someone and they give me a good, persuasive argument, I just run with it, rewarding them for good roleplaying. I make them roll for things when they're like, "I don't know what to say or do."
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
|
As far as past travel goes and Random Encounters, the idea is more to help people feel like the world is not just dead. You can't just travel from anywhere to anywhere without the potential of something happening.
I honestly don't want some mechanic where we are forced to manually walk around everywhere or manually walk up to the runes to use them when it doesn't really matter. That to me is boring. If I could click a button and fast travel to someplace with no threat of any kind, or I can walk there manually with no threat of any kind, I would rather be able to press the button and instantly travel there rather than waste a few minutes walking there manually. In that regard, just leave the game as is. If you aren't going to do something like Random Encounters, then the only other real limitation for fast travel should be certain restrictions based on locations and events occurring.
In other words, if they aren't going to build threat into fast travel at all, then the only time I want limitations on fast travel are in places like the goblin Camp after you've killed the leaders. Don't allow people to fast travel back to the Grove or something when there's an army of goblins outside wanting to kill you because you butchered their leaders.
Other than that though, I don't see a need for limiting fast travel if you aren't going to do something to create risk or threat. Don't just limit fast travel to annoy people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Mar 2020
|
Answer: Walking.
Nothing else ... just boring, tedious walking through either empty, or wiped out zones ...
Who would want that? :-/ And why? That’s where a wonderful thing called “a design” comes in. Put some thought into where you put your fast travel point and how you design areas and you don’t have such an issue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Sep 2017
|
I can see both sides of the coin. Though I'd never play Skyrim without fast travel 😅
Right now I'm almost fine with current fast travel system, but I'd make a couple of changes.
The issues:
Random unexplained rune portals embedded into locations, that are seemingly there as a mechanic, not part of the world.
Unlimited travel at no influence on gameplay. (In skyrim for example, time passes, events move on)
What I'd do:
Remove the portals entirely, and embed fast travel to being able to select key locations on the map that has already been discovered. Same function but is less "Why is there a random portal there?" feeling and more "I want to go here but skip the tedium" that is less unimmersive.
Due to no day/night function, I'd just add parity to long rest supplies system instead, and make fast travel cost a small amount of supplies based on distance from player location to destination. It adds some consideration for the player of cost vs outcome, and if they're close enough they might just decide to do the walking instead if it means saving supplies that they're short on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Answer: Walking.
Nothing else ... just boring, tedious walking through either empty, or wiped out zones ...
Who would want that? :-/ And why? That’s where a wonderful thing called “a design” comes in. Put some thought into where you put your fast travel point and how you design areas and you don’t have such an issue. This is something about Morrowind I really came to appreciate, especially the way they made the most out the space given by forcing you to travel in curved lines.
Last edited by Sozz; 27/04/22 05:46 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
|
I can see both sides of the coin. Though I'd never play Skyrim without fast travel 😅
Right now I'm almost fine with current fast travel system, but I'd make a couple of changes.
The issues:
Random unexplained rune portals embedded into locations, that are seemingly there as a mechanic, not part of the world.
Unlimited travel at no influence on gameplay. (In skyrim for example, time passes, events move on)
What I'd do:
Remove the portals entirely, and embed fast travel to being able to select key locations on the map that has already been discovered. Same function but is less "Why is there a random portal there?" feeling and more "I want to go here but skip the tedium" that is less unimmersive.
Due to no day/night function, I'd just add parity to long rest supplies system instead, and make fast travel cost a small amount of supplies based on distance from player location to destination. It adds some consideration for the player of cost vs outcome, and if they're close enough they might just decide to do the walking instead if it means saving supplies that they're short on. I'd rather avoid having to walk just to have food to rest afterwards. What is the point of introducing such mechanics? Fast travel is used to quickly move around previously visited locations to skip tedious backtracking and there is no point in limiting it in any way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
|
We would get realism & immersion Well its right there for you ... All you need to do is simply dont fast travel ... so ... where is the problem?  Put some thought into where you put your fast travel point and how you design areas and you don’t have such an issue. And this is how you pilot an airplane: You fly. Easy right? Seriously tho. To say "some thought" is coveniently vague to cover all ideas, while not providing any ... but truth be told it doesnt really matter what they would come up with ... bcs there allways is a group of people who would preffer THEIR solution and concider choosen one to be stupidest possible in the world. :-/ Just look around.
Last edited by RagnarokCzD; 27/04/22 06:29 AM.
I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings. Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Mar 2020
|
And this is how you pilot an airplane: You fly.
Easy right? No, but I am not flying a plane nor designing the game. But if you try flying a plane I hope you are competent enough to do it, There is crap ton of games that don’t have or limit fast travel system and don’t have the issue that you made up. I don’t think BG3 would even loose much by forcing players to reach fast travel point - Larian did design their areas rather well so far. Druid grove unlocks elevator for quick access from the end of spiral decent to the very top, underground dungeon has 3 separate exits, goblin hideout leads to underdark. On top of that there is little reason to visit once explored areas. It is not a game I. Which you will be traveling back and forth much. By [not] limiting fast travel game shoots itself in the foot by removing any tension or consequence for exploring. Just see recent Elden Ring and how compelling it can be to be thrown and locked in a difficult situation and be forced to find your way out. It is not a new idea, it’s classic RPG manouver, BG1&2 did it as well. Delving into dungeon or being trapped doesn’t quite have the same impact if one can teleport back into safety of a friendly town at a whim.
Last edited by Wormerine; 27/04/22 11:36 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
|
And this is how you pilot an airplane: You fly.
Easy right? No, but I am not flying a plane nor designing the game. But if you try flying a plane I hope you are competent enough to do it, There is crap ton of games that don’t have or limit fast travel system and don’t have the issue that you made up. I don’t think BG3 would even loose much by forcing players to reach fast travel point - Larian did design their areas rather well so far. Druid grove unlocks elevator for quick access from the end of spiral decent to the very top, underground dungeon has 3 separate exits, goblin hideout leads to underdark. On top of that there is little reason to visit once explored areas. It is not a game I. Which you will be traveling back and forth much. By limiting fast travel game shoots itself in the foot by removing any tension or consequence for exploring. Just see recent Elden Ring and how compelling it can be to be thrown and locked in a difficult situation and be forced to find your way out. It is not a new idea, it’s classic RPG manouver, BG1&2 did it as well. Delving into dungeon or being trapped doesn’t quite have the same impact if one can teleport back into safety of a friendly town at a whim. What? Elden ring is a very bad example to defend your point of view. In the game, you can teleport from most locations to any grace, it even applies to legacy dungeons, which means that when you have a problem with healing, you can safely evacuate. The only limitation applies to small dungeons, but they are actually quite small and usually don't have many enemies. Another thing is that elden ring is a slightly different type of game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
|
There is crap ton of games that don’t have or limit fast travel system and don’t have the issue that you made up. Wich is? O_o I have to ask since im not aware of mading anything ... especialy any issues ... :-/ I don’t think BG3 would even loose much by forcing players to reach fast travel point Yeah, it would actualy gain ... walking. Lots and lots of walking. underground dungeon has 3 separate exits, goblin hideout leads to underdark. Exactly! The only places wher we can talk about some kind of trap (so far) are either Cellar in Tollhouse (especialy if you break the ladder ) ... or Cellar in Blighted VIllage ... And other places (Goblin camp, Underdark, Gnoll Cave, etc.) have several entrances and they are NEVER ever all covered and guarded ... Therefore, quite logicaly imho, everytime you get to some tight situation, you HAVE at your disposal at least one way to get out without any major problems or danger. So, again, logicaly ... all you need to do to get exactly same result as you have when you teleport from middle of the zone, is walk for a while. On top of that there is little reason to visit once explored areas. It is not a game I. Which you will be traveling back and forth much. Agreed. By limiting fast travel game shoots itself in the foot by removing any tension or consequence for exploring. I dont understand this sentence ... Fist half is speaking against limiting fast travel ... but second part seems to be encouraging the limitation. O_o Delving into dungeon or being trapped doesn’t quite have the same impact if one can teleport back into safety of a friendly town at a whim. Cute ... i dint play Elden Ring ... it not my cup of beer ... I would rather hear any example of such situation in BG-3?
I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings. Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: May 2019
|
My stomach turns at the thought of random encounters. Hate them on tabletop, and any video games, even in pokemon (I think the newer games are a huge improvement on that front. Give me the old games, but visible pokemon in the grass that I can walk around to skip, and I'd be a very happy nerd!).[...] But random encounters is not a solution in any shape or form IMO. It's just annoying filler that doesn't drive the story. And if it's chance-based, I'd hit F5 before travel, travel, and reload if random encounter, and try travel again to avoid random combat :P You do realise there's a certain irony in your statement that you hate random encounters because of how they're chance and not story driven in a discussion on a game that forces you to roll dice on literally everything in combat en often in dialogues too ? Why not let some world events be dice driven too? Like you first come on a crosspoint. Dice roll, d6 , anything between 0-3 bad luck, 3-6 good luck , the higher lower, the more beneficial or dangerous. How would that randomness differ from the randomness in attacks hitting or missing, or your charisma checks to succeed. If the issue is losing rolls (or losing to randomness), just add an option of few negative encounters, no random encounters, or story mode where you succeed any roll everywhere... ? YES!! Exactly!! That literally everything in D&D is driven by the randomness of dice-rolling is what makes me so dislike D&D mechanics. Literally everything. Some dice-rolling would be okay, but in D&D all the choices you as the player make, up to and including character creation and development choices, are ultimately of little relevance because outcomes will ultimately be driven by a die roll. A truly egregious example is that even the healing power you get from drinking a healing potion is driven by a die roll. Ditto the healing received from a healing spell, which therefore says your God is choosing to play dice with your life and the lives of anyone depending on that God's spells. It's just plain silly: Player: "DM, my character needs to pee." DM rolls a D20: "Nope. Sorry. The die roll says you don't get to pee. Better luck next time." Wow. What DMs do you play with. I don't make my players roll for everything. I only make them rule for important things. Shoot, even if they are trying to persuade someone and they give me a good, persuasive argument, I just run with it, rewarding them for good roleplaying. I make them roll for things when they're like, "I don't know what to say or do." Oh come on, man. You couldn't tell I was kidding/exaggerating for effect? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
|
Lol. People legit feel that way. I can't tell if people are joking anymore. 🤪
|
|
|
|
|
