Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Savage North
addict
OP Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Savage North
Why we need restrictions on resting.

Simply put : balance. And before I get assimilated with a min-maxer : no, I'm not saying it should be absolutely impossible to find some objectively better builds or strategies. I would just like the game not to be so-obviously unbalanced that it's hard not to notice.

The skills available in DnD 5E have different levels of power. And 5E uses an age-old technique to balance these : skills have different costs, so that the most powerful skills can be used fewer times, before you get a "full refresh" (which, in DnD, takes the form of a Long Rest, and corresponds narratively to the end of a day, or at least an 8h period without danger or effort).

Putting no restrictions on Long Rests means nearly-completely removing the concept of resource cost, and this means players can use all the best skills all the time, rendering the low-cost skills obsolete (as well as messing with the balance between classes).

It would be possible to modify the 5E ruleset in such a way that Long Rest no longer exists (mechanically) and all skills are fully available at the beginning of each fight. You would "just" need to revise the power of each existing skill (spells included) to account for the increased availability of all of them. It would be a huge endeavour of course, but it would be theoretically possible.

However, Larian started BG3's Early Access with much fewer modifications than that, and nearly all of their modifications were breaking balance fairly hard. Also, from what I have heard about D:OS2, Larian is not simply good at balancing a ruleset, even when they create it. In view of this, I'd rather have them follow the "if it ain't broke, don't break it" philosophy and stick to the 5E blueprint as closely as possible.

So, like in 5E, Long Rest should be restricted in some way.



Current restrictions on Rests.

For Short Rest, that's already done well. We can take only 2 Short Rest before needing a Long Rest, as per the 5E recommendations.

For Long Rest, restrictions are still essentially non-existent.

(Note : strictly speaking, Larian made one change to Long Rest since the first Early Access version, with the addition of a food requirement. But it has contributed nothing to restricting long rest, while certainly making the UI interaction required to take a Long Rest more tedious. If Larian intends to limit our usage of Long Rest this way, then this is a case of balancing by Hostile/Unpleasant Design. Needless to say, it is a really, really poor design approach.)

So we mainly need to think about Long Rests.



The suggestion : Long Rest unavailable in dangerous areas.

One issue with the way Long Rest works in tabletop DnD is that it has narrative and time implications. An 8h period passes when you Long Rest. But BG3 is a (AAA) video game, and it struggles with the very concept of time (which negatively impacts immersion, but that's another issue). Also, the game world is utterly static : patrolling enemies will not react to finding bodies we left behind.

While these are genuine problems that will hopefully be addressed eventually, I think the following idea could go a long way to restricting access to Long Rest, and be effective immediately.

Mark some maps/areas as Dangerous. When the party is on such a Dangerous Area, they can't take a Long Rest. These maps are functionally the "dungeons". Examples include Ilyn Toth's cellar, the spider cavern, the goblin camp/fortress. And ideally, the party would also be prevented from taking a Short Rest if there is an enemy nearby.

From a Dangerous Area, the party can walk back (or fast-travel) to a previously visited safe area, to get a Long Rest. But doing this will repopulate the dangerous map with enemies. This way, the party has to beat the whole map in one go. Unless the map is built as a rather big area, and contains a few Safe Spots where Short/Long Rest is possible.

Why this is interesting :
  • It explicitly restricts Long Rest. So it respects balance between skills and classes. It forces players to think about whether to expand more resources now, or keep them for later.
  • It makes sense within the world. (You can't expect 8h of being left alone if there are Goblins patrolling in their fortress, or spiders hunting in their cavern.)



Difficulty considerations.

Of course, some players will not want to have to go through an entire dungeon/map without a Long Rest, and prefer an easier experience.

That's fine. All that's needed is a simple difficulty option : a parameter "Rest Is Possible In Dangerous Areas", which players could be set to "Yes" or "No".


Acknowledgements.

Credit should go where credit is due. This idea is not mine. Other RPGs use it, but I first heard it described by Nick Pechenin, Lead System Designer at Larian Studios. He was saying in July 2020 that this is how they were planning to do it. I'm not sure why they're not using this idea in the EA version, given that it was already implemented in an earlier version. (In this same interview, Nick was also explaining why Larian made the good choice of dropping team-based initiative and switching to creature-based initiative. I'm also not sure why Larian has stopped communicating on their design thoughts ever since Early Access started.)

Anyway, Larian, if somehow you receive this feedback, I wanted you to know that your initial idea isn't bad. Feel free to use the Early Access period to try on players (with a difficulty option to disable it, for those who don't want any restriction).


Note : I feel this post is about the restrictions on Long Rest. It doesn't really touch upon the myriad of ways the Pocket Dimension Camping is immersion-breaking. But if it's more appropriate to move the post to the Camping and Resting mega-thread, I'm fine with that.


Hoping we'll be able to create great assumptions-free Custom Characters and be given great roleplay options.
Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
As long as there is an option to toggle any restrictions off. I find combat boring if I am playing a caster and can’t cast spells.

Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
Sorry, OP. We've kinda discussed that one too. Not really new.

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by GM4Him
Sorry, OP. We've kinda discussed that one too. Not really new.

Yeah but this one is neatly formatted and not buried in pages of discussion. Let's hope they read this (again) and implement it this time.



Feel free to steal my profile pic if you feel the same way. Let's show some solidarity.
Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
Originally Posted by LukasPrism
Originally Posted by GM4Him
Sorry, OP. We've kinda discussed that one too. Not really new.

Yeah but this one is neatly formatted and not buried in pages of discussion. Let's hope they read this (again) and implement it this time.

Ok. True. Then I will add that they must rebalance certain dangerous areas so they CAN be beaten without a long rest regardless of whether you are level 2, 3 or 4. There needs to be some sort of auto-difficulty tweaking that occurs or something so you aren't totally stuck replaying whole sections over and over again.

Example: HAG'S LAIR. That entire area is HARD to beat in one fell swoop without gimmicks. First playthrough was a nightmare. When you don't know what to expect...

Last edited by GM4Him; 28/02/22 12:25 AM.
Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by GM4Him
Ok. True. Then I will add that they must rebalance certain dangerous areas so they CAN be beaten without a long rest regardless of whether you are level 2, 3 or 4. There needs to be some sort of auto-difficulty tweaking that occurs or something so you aren't totally stuck replaying whole sections over and over again.

Example: HAG'S LAIR. That entire area is HARD to beat in one fell swoop without gimmicks. First playthrough was a nightmare. When you don't know what to expect...
Disagree. There should be certain areas that are incredibly difficult if not impossible to beat at certain levels (e.g., Hag Lair at level 2). As OP said, in these areas you'd be able to walk back out to a safe area and long rest, so you'd be able to come back at higher levels. No reed to replay it over and over unless you actually want to for the challenge. I don't want enemies to auto-scale to my level.

Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
Originally Posted by GM4Him
Ok. True. Then I will add that they must rebalance certain dangerous areas so they CAN be beaten without a long rest regardless of whether you are level 2, 3 or 4. There needs to be some sort of auto-difficulty tweaking that occurs or something so you aren't totally stuck replaying whole sections over and over again.

Example: HAG'S LAIR. That entire area is HARD to beat in one fell swoop without gimmicks. First playthrough was a nightmare. When you don't know what to expect...
Disagree. There should be certain areas that are incredibly difficult if not impossible to beat at certain levels (e.g., Hag Lair at level 2). As OP said, in these areas you'd be able to walk back out to a safe area and long rest, so you'd be able to come back at higher levels. No reed to replay it over and over unless you actually want to for the challenge. I don't want enemies to auto-scale to my level.

Hmm. Ok. Good point.

Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
I still hope they'll improve the resting system (both for short and long rest)... But I don't think what's suggested here would be very good.

I'd like to rework it a bit...

The idea of dangerous area totally make sense but rather than banning long rest when you're in one of them, imo it would be better if you could LR but with a chance for a random encounter.

Safe area = no random encounter.
Dangerous area = possible random encounter in your mini camp (let's say 20%).

Random encounter are not a limitation but the result is exactly the same : players have to manage their ressources a bit more wisely.

Random encounter doesn't mean deadly encounter.
It only mean that you have to be carefull a bit more and think a bit more before burning all your spellslots and "features slots".

You could still travel to a safe area if you think it's necessary ofc. And some safe area could evebtually be in long dungeons when you have cleaned a specific area.

I love to have to manage my ressources a bit (spellslots, features,...) and that's really something I miss in BG3...
But I would not like to have to manage because if I dont, I'll have to walk/use the cheap fast travel system.
I need something that makes more sense.

Possible random encounters at mini camp would make a lot of sense and would achieve the same goal (the "why use it interresting").
Don't tell me that having 3 random encounters during the first act would be a pain.

Last edited by Maximuuus; 01/03/22 09:29 PM.
Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Random encounter doesn't mean deadly encounter.
It only mean that you have to be carefull a bit more and think a bit more before burning all your spellslots and "features slots"..
These sentences are somewhat contradictory. If a random encounter isn't deadly, then you don't need to save resources for it (besides to finish the encounter more quickly I suppose). It's just tedious and time wasting - which I don't necessarily disagree with as a disincentive to long rest, but this is now an entirely different motivation for these random encounters than "strategic use of resources."

If random encounters are implemented, they'd need to be deadly in order to encourage any kind of resource management. And if anything, they'd encourage more long resting. Players who typically long rest often would still long rest often because they'd worry about dying to the random encounter (or they'd more likely just set Random Encounters to "Off"). And players who don't long rest often would rest sooner to prevent a possible TPK to random encounter.

Designing a dungeon to require a full long rest's worth of resources, putting dedicated camping sites within the dungeon, and/or requiring that you spend limited rations to rest seem to me like a better way of encouraging resource management.

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Icelyn
As long as there is an option to toggle any restrictions off. I find combat boring if I am playing a caster and can’t cast spells.

No camping in dangerous areas = Restriction?? Man as RPGs nowdays become nice and fluffy and comfortable for the whole family.
uh, this is an cRPG not Diablo/Guild Wars?
I find it amazing fun and challenging to have RESTRICTIONS in that regard. The careful use of spells and abilities. This creates urgency, fear, planning etc...stuff I want in a Baldur's Gate D&D RPG.

I would even add to this, have a risk of random encounters if trying to camp in dangerous areas based on party number and skills check, versus if its daylight or night (if Larian implements those...which probalby wont happened since Fearun now is tidally locked with its star giving sunlight 24/7 unless you camp, from which you enter a dark alternate mirror dimension).

Last edited by mr_planescapist; 01/03/22 11:53 PM.
Joined: Dec 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Dec 2020
I'm totally cool with restricted resting, but I want to get all the camp scenes. I haven't seen the weave scene or the scene, where Lae'zel attacks you in a very long time. I think, Larian should make those scenes available in some other way ( maybe during short Rest or triggered by some events in the game).
Other than that, yeah I totally get, that you should not rest in a lair of a giant spider or in a camp of religious, bloodthirsty lunatics.

Last edited by fylimar; 02/03/22 06:34 PM.

"We are all stories in the end. Just make it a good one."

Doctor Who
Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
Directing this one to the Megathread on the Camping and Resting topic.

https://forums.larian.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=810599#Post810599

Check out the last few suggestions there. I'm hoping people like the idea.

Summed up concept is: Make Short Rests more appealing and Long Rests less. We're focusing too much on trying to limit Long Rests instead of trying to make Short Rests a more appealing option. So, I say, make Short Rests cost Camp Supplies, but are no longer limited to 2 per day. Cost is equal to the HP you need to regain to be full health, or something like that (maybe however many Camp Supplies you spend is spread out amongst the characters you want to heal - 1 HP restored per Camp Supply). YOU decide how much you want to Short Rest every day, thus encouraging people to Short Rest more and End Day less. Warlocks regain their spell slots every time they short rest, barbarians and fighters regain their special abilities, as do monks, and wizards SHOULD, based on 5e rules, only be able to use Arcane Recovery during Short Rests (so have a popup asking if a wizard wants to use Arcane Recovery during a Short Rest so players know it's even there and remember to use it). Thus, encouraging Short Resting to recover HP and abilities rather than the more expensive Camp Supply Cost Long Rest. Keeping in mind, also, that the higher the level, the more Arcane Recovery a wizard can do, so you spellcasters who like to be able to actually use your wizard spells, you will still have some ability to do that, but it's more limited than current because, you know, wizards be high DPSs especially at higher levels. AND you can still Long Rest spam if you want to, it just costs more.

I'll let you read the details, if you're interested, on that thread.

Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Random encounter doesn't mean deadly encounter.
It only mean that you have to be carefull a bit more and think a bit more before burning all your spellslots and "features slots"..
These sentences are somewhat contradictory. If a random encounter isn't deadly, then you don't need to save resources for it (besides to finish the encounter more quickly I suppose). It's just tedious and time wasting - which I don't necessarily disagree with as a disincentive to long rest, but this is now an entirely different motivation for these random encounters than "strategic use of resources."

If random encounters are implemented, they'd need to be deadly in order to encourage any kind of resource management. And if anything, they'd encourage more long resting. Players who typically long rest often would still long rest often because they'd worry about dying to the random encounter (or they'd more likely just set Random Encounters to "Off"). And players who don't long rest often would rest sooner to prevent a possible TPK to random encounter.

Designing a dungeon to require a full long rest's worth of resources, putting dedicated camping sites within the dungeon, and/or requiring that you spend limited rations to rest seem to me like a better way of encouraging resource management.

I wrote "deadly" because that's how it's written for "very hard/impossible encounter" in the DnD encounter calculator I use.

Maybe I should have writen "doesn't need to be extremely hard encounter".

Imo safe spots like in Solasta would not work in BG3.
"Dungeons" we have already seen are not builded like "classic" dungeons (more or less linear and pretty big).

I'd be fine with less food everywhere/more supply required per rest to "limit" a bit more as I already said in other thread, but area restrictions doesn't look very interresting imo, especially because you can just teleport back and forth.
It could eventually be used with random encounter in minicamp too ofc, but it would be a players choice rather than a mechanical requirement (fast travel or walking outside).

I may be wrong and maybe I'd like it as suggested. Really waiting something new about resting.

Last edited by Maximuuus; 02/03/22 09:20 AM.
Joined: Mar 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Mar 2020
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
I still hope they'll improve the resting system (both for short and long rest)... But I don't think what's suggested here would be very good.

I'd like to rework it a bit...

The idea of dangerous area totally make sense but rather than banning long rest when you're in one of them, imo it would be better if you could LR but with a chance for a random encounter.

Safe area = no random encounter.
Dangerous area = possible random encounter in your mini camp (let's say 20%).

Random encounter are not a limitation but the result is exactly the same : players have to manage their ressources a bit more wisely.

Random encounter doesn't mean deadly encounter.
It only mean that you have to be carefull a bit more and think a bit more before burning all your spellslots and "features slots".

You could still travel to a safe area if you think it's necessary ofc. And some safe area could evebtually be in long dungeons when you have cleaned a specific

area.

I love to have to manage my ressources a bit (spellslots, features,...) and that's really something I miss in BG3...
But I would not like to have to manage because if I dont, I'll have to walk/use the cheap fast travel system.
I need something that makes more sense.

Possible random encounters at mini camp would make a lot of sense and would achieve the same goal (the "why use it interresting").
Don't tell me that having 3 random encounters during the first act would be a pain.


+ 10!

If you try to long rest in the next room during a major battle: "Hey lookies! Day wants to take a nap" ....Sneak attack time!

No limit on short rests, save for how much you have cleared and the likelihood of a patrol...so also a chance for interruption.

Good places to rest should be able to be able to be barred and not high traffic (not the mead cellar for a busy restaurant).


Dialogue..."This looks like a good place for a short rest"
Short rests should be available after encounters.

Long rests should be available in highly secure areas, and still should get rolls.

Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
Perspective shift. If you think BG1 and 2, the resting system was actually very similar to BG3. It might not seem like it at first, but think about it.

1. You could rest at any time, even if it didn't really make sense. Long Rest in Irenicus' lair? Sure. Why not? There's a thief invasion and you're trying to escape, but you need your rest.
2. There was no real campsite on the map. A cutscene implied you were camping somewhere. If interrupted, you'd fight right where you hit the button, but there were no bedrolls, tents, nothing. What I mean is, you camped and resumed right where you left off when you hit the rest button. Only difference is random encounters.
3. If you wanted to safely rest, you had to annoyingly travel to a safe location. BG3 takes the annoying part away so you aren't just wasting minutes trying to get back to town. I remember many times in Icewind Dale, wasting so much time running back to Kuldahar to long rest because first playthrough, I sucked. It was annoying as heck and didn't deter me because I needed to long rest to continue. Wasn't a super pressing need, though, story wise, so why not?
4. Dialogues happened at any point, this is true, but many times right after a rest. No camp to do dialogues in, but it was usually you stopping right where you are until your Convo was done... Because there was no camp... Ever.

I still think boost people's desire to short rest and make long rest less appealing. That's about all that can be done. Unlimit the short rests so people will use them more, but give them a camp supply cost so they don't just use them forever. Make long rest more costly, so you won't want to spam it as much, and tie dialogues to both short or long rest, sending characters to camp during short rests as well as long.

Short rest allows characters to recover the following:

Warlock spell slots
Monk ki
Barbarian rage
Fighter action surge and second wind and maneuvers
Cleric channel divinity
Druid's wild shape uses
Wizard can use Arcane Recovery
HP can be restored
And more

I honestly don't see how anything else will work because too much potential to drive players crazy with walking boredom, random encounters that are pointless, and potentially locking players so they can't proceed.

Last edited by GM4Him; 03/03/22 03:31 AM.
Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by GM4Him
Perspective shift. If you think BG1 and 2, the resting system was actually very similar to BG3. It might not seem like it at first, but think about it.

1. You could rest at any time, even if it didn't really make sense.
👍

Joined: Mar 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Mar 2020
Originally Posted by Icelyn
Originally Posted by GM4Him
Perspective shift. If you think BG1 and 2, the resting system was actually very similar to BG3. It might not seem like it at first, but think about it.

1. You could rest at any time, even if it didn't really make sense.
👍

True enough, and its certainly not a deal breaker. Still its a good suggestion to bring the game closer to the pen and paper feel it is trying to capture.

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
If you dithered around too long in BG1 it screwed up your companion quests tho. Not sure about BG2



Feel free to steal my profile pic if you feel the same way. Let's show some solidarity.
Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by GM4Him
Perspective shift. If you think BG1 and 2, the resting system was actually very similar to BG3. It might not seem like it at first, but think about it.

1. You could rest at any time, even if it didn't really make sense.
You also have to consider the vast differences in mechanics and design philosophy between the 2 systems. In 5e, certain classes are short-rest classes and others are long rest classes; the game is designed and classes are balanced around assuming enough encounters for 2-4 short rests per long rest. Whereas 2e has no "short rests", and all classes got less resources so it makes sense to rest more often. A level-3 Wizard in 2e has 3 total spell slots per day, and no cantrips. Whereas in 5e, a level-3 Wizard has 6 spell slots per day and cantrips, so they can remain effective combatants for longer. But if they can use all their slots in the same combat...

Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
Originally Posted by Icelyn
Originally Posted by GM4Him
Perspective shift. If you think BG1 and 2, the resting system was actually very similar to BG3. It might not seem like it at first, but think about it.

1. You could rest at any time, even if it didn't really make sense.
👍

Um... Ya didn't read the rest.

Page 1 of 2 1 2

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5