Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback What's the point of resting?

> If you dont sleep you build up fatigue which eventually results in death so not resting is not really an option.

I don't remember seeing an exhaustion indicator in BG3. And it's not clear how do you get tired? I.e., how can you predict how much "strength" you've got to spend before you absolutely have to sleep? Seems like an overcomplication in a story/combat-driven game. I mean, eating/drinking/sleeping is completely fine for a survival game, like ARK or Conan or somesuch, but why here? What good does it bring? Every complication must have a reason behind it to justify its existence.

> Perhaps because DnD isnt balanced around always blowing your most powerful abilities in every encounter?

Does D&D dictate difficulty of your encounters? How strong your opponents must hit, how much HP must they have, how many of them must there be? Or is that left up to the game designers / GMs ? In other words, I don't see anything wrong with being able to use all of your abilities in every single encounter, as you can compensate with throwing more/tougher enemies into the battle against the player. In some games, powerful abilities are limited by cooldowns. In other, by having a separate, slow-charging resource for ultimate casts. In BG3, you've got a limited amount of spell slots that you can't restore in-battle. Looks good enough to me. Just get rid of the rest entirely (not of the party camp, but of the rest mechanic) and restore it automatically and it becomes a much more enjoyable experience.

I dont know if its in bg3 or not. I was talking about dnd itself. Ihave had my npcs and my pc complain that they needed rest so I assume something is in place though.

> I dont know if its in bg3 or not. I was talking about dnd itself. Ihave had my npcs and my pc complain that they needed rest so I assume something is in place though.

Oh yes, absolutely they do complain. But it looks completely unpredictable. For example, after a long rest there was immediately an encounter afterwards, and when the fight was over (not very long one), one of the characters complained about being tired. Why? How? It's a mystery for now.

Resting is a pretty integral part of table top D&D, as is learning how and when to use your abilities efficiently. It's also intended to be limited to once a day. The issue (as other threads have pointed out) is that in it's current state, BG3 is not balanced for the resources the 4 player party has compared to the number of enemies and encounters in the game. In table top you should be able to go 6-8 fights during the day and take a few short rests and then a long rest. This does not seem to be the case for BG3, especially at the early levels.

I've only gone back to camp to rest three times in 15 hours, and based on how much character development I haven't seen, I've realized I'm also doing something other than what was intended.

I think a real fatigue system would help indicate the balance Larian intends players to be at. Status effects and all, just like the older games.

Unlimited resting has been a staple of Baldur's Gate, and more than that, is a core part of DnD. If you don't have a hard time limit, then you wait a day between fights and get all your power back. Whether it's good or bad can be argued infinitely, but it's what DnD is.

Of course, getting ambushed while resting in the wilderness should be a real possibility; if you blow all your resources every fight and then one night something decides to pick a fight with you before you've recovered, you could be in a real hard spot. And some quests should obviously have time limits so as to limit the amount of resting players can do. But in general, that's how DnD plays. Walk around until you get into a fight, go nova, and then nap for a day.

At low levels this is a problem due to the d20 mechanic & bounded accuracy.

Essentially, higher level characters have more options and 'get out of bad rolls' capabilities that just don't exist at lower level play.

The DMG pg 82. scaling is "Easy, Medium, Hard & Deadly" - There's only so much you can ratchet up the encounter before it becomes an insta-TPK.

This is easily seen in the mass combats - bad initiative & all the enemies going first with AoE == dead party.

I've actually noticed that, no, you cannot rest all the time. My game crashed before I had a chance of saving, but after doing 'Investigate the Beach' near Silvanus' Grove I tried to do a quick rest before actually talking to the tiefling child at the beach - because I had had the encounter previously without all my spells available - and when I came back I found that the quest had gone about its way and the harpies had killed the boy before I could intervene. The world will progress if you take a rest, basically. That being said - because I have been playing 3.5 and 5e for a while now - I was used to making use of my cantrips more often than anything else and bringing out the big spells for tough enemies or groups of weak enemies. But even then my cantrips were doing work - as they should be. Eldritch Blast, Ray of Frost, and Firebolt were all getting used frequently by my warlock and Gale - EB because it's a warlock's bread and butter, Ray of Frost to knock enemies prone occasionally, and Firebolt to set enemies on fire.

Really, the only spells I was making over-use of were Shadowheart's healing spells, because I'm bad about using food. Also, too often when I'd use Help to pick an ally up they'd immediately be dropped by an enemy again - but that's a different complaint.

And it immediately becomes not dnd. Keep rhe rest limit encounters not.every encounter is epic

Thats the exact opposite of how I and every group that ive played with plays it. You CAN blow all your resources at the first sight of trouble, and then you are useless for the rest of the day. Want to do a short rest because all (or part of) your abilities reset then? Well tough luck, the rest of the party is still fresh. Better keep up or be left behind.

Any DM who allows this shifty behaviour is also doing a disservice to his players. Its a unrealistic game-ified version of DnD and turns it more into ROLLplay then ROLEplay. Mind you thats just my opinion on it. If your group does it like that and has fun then you do you.

It just sounds more like murderhobo inc to me rather then dnd

Never played dnd in my life with every one having so many grenades

This. I refuse to use the barrels and all the other surface shenanigans, unfortunately my opponents do not return the favor. This calls for a menu option to turn off all surface damage for those that prefer to play without imo.

I'm ok with the resting but does every encounter have to be against the New England Patriots? Where the hell is Appalachian State on my schedule? (for Sven it may be a better analogy to say why am I on the pitch with Brazil every go? Where is Albania?). Encounter difficulty demands constant resting at this point. Big issue with that is there's got to be a consequence for it, and there doesn't seem to be. There's a time bomb in your skull here and from the RP perspective it doesn't make any sense to rest full, even if we're not on the regularly scheduled ceremorphosis.

Quite simply, the pacing of encounters and rest in no way matches up with what the motivations would be for a group of people infected with mind flayer parasites. It's almost comically stupid.

Inexperience is never advantageous.

If there was a hypothetical version of D&D between 3.5 and 5th Edition, would it play like that?

I mean, something like that can't be the reason why Pathfinder exists, right?

> And some quests should obviously have time limits so as to limit the amount of resting players can do.

That's part of the resting problem too: to be meaningful, you'd have to make quests timed, but timed quests are universally hated in every single RPG game, whatever system it's based on.

> And it immediately becomes not dnd.

First of all, whether a game is enjoyable or not is not defined by whether it's dnd.

Second, as other people who actually play real DnD (unlike me) pointed out, everyone's many groups got homebrew rules anyway and by your definition it means they're not playing DnD. But they still do, because those deviations make the game more enjoyable for them. I think BG3's end goal should be an enjoyable game, not a game that is 100% correct in adhering to DnD.

Yes, thats 100% my opinion, too.

It should be a smooth video game, which doesn't annoy the hell out of players with arbitrary complications which serve no purpose other than to just annoy the hell out of players. And the resting mechanic may be fun for tabletop players, but in a video game this just feels like "hey, you're having fun? here's another wall to run into so you don't have too much of that! because F*** Y**."

Playing a game the way the game mechanics encourage playing it is, to me, immersion and roleplaying. If I live in a world where I'm back to 100% after eight hours of kicking back and there are also really dangerous monsters I need to fight, then it only makes sense that I'm going to kick back and relax after every fight, and use everything I have at my disposal to win those fights. From my perspective, anyone who doesn't do that isn't roleplaying in a DnD game, they're roleplaying someone playing a DnD game. And since DnD was designed from its inception to be a game about breaking into other people's homes, stabbing them in the face, and taking their stuff, then honestly, Murderhobo Inc. and DnD sound like the same game to me.

But yeah, the important thing is that each group does what the group as a whole has agreed to and enjoys.