Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
#802815 01/12/21 12:30 AM
Joined: Nov 2021
M
apprentice
OP Offline
apprentice
M
Joined: Nov 2021
The hard difficulty should have a checkpoint style camping system where the player needs to delve through several encounters to find a safe place to camp and supplies that allow them to do so. This type of design would promote the resource management built into dnd dungeon crawling and would force development of a series of appropriately challenging encounters per rest.

Joined: Oct 2020
R
old hand
Offline
old hand
R
Joined: Oct 2020
The short answer is no.
I don't like the idea of ​​being able to save only when you rest, but let's leave it for now.

How would this work for you? Was the checkpoint disposable? If so, what would you do if the fight went wrong?
The simple answer is that the player will end up being blocked unless the game has been specially designed so that the clashes are trivial.
If they are not disposable, what will prevent the player from going back and resting?
Is the solution to respawning enemies like in dark souls?
Ok, this is a solution, but it doesn't fit narrative-based role-playing games at all.
One more question, how densely should they be distributed? Different classes have different rest requirements. In the case of DM, he can properly distribute the number of rests or the number of fights and opponents so that the group is able to cope.
We do not have DM in the game, which means that all fights will be identical for each group.
Groups can have very different compositions, which means that they can do differently in the game. Of course, you can say that the player can adjust the group as needed, but what about the coop? When 4 people are playing, they cannot change the team.
A simple example, one player has a cleric who can heal the team between fights and the other player plays without him (technically in 5e nothing prevents you from playing without cleric).
One group will need to rest more often than the other because of the damage they take.
Normally the DM would adjust the number of encounters and rests to suit the team, because after all, how many DMs are actively trying to kill players?

Now let's go back to saving while resting (unless you meant something else).
Of course, I can't say that this approach doesn't work for games, because in fact many games use this system.
The problem is that the game is 90% dice based, wrong throws can easily kill your team in no time, which will require you to load the game. As I mentioned before, you don't even have to lose, it's enough to end up in a situation where you can't beat the next fight.

Joined: Nov 2021
M
apprentice
OP Offline
apprentice
M
Joined: Nov 2021
You would find supplies as you complete encounters. The game would be designed to give you sufficient supplies when you reach a safe spot to camp. You can still save any time.

This would be for the hardest difficulty setting only. If you want a butchers Shoppe full of meat equivalent to 5 long rests after a goblin fight you can still have it on a lower difficulty setting.

The party composition problem is also resolved by simply turning down the difficulty to walking grocery bag mode.

Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by Rhobar121
A simple example, one player has a cleric who can heal the team between fights and the other player plays without him (technically in 5e nothing prevents you from playing without cleric).
One group will need to rest more often than the other because of the damage they take.
The second group can make use of: healing via hit dice during short rests (assuming Larian increases # of short rests), potions of healing, possible spell scrolls of healing depending on how Larian implement that mechanic, healing provided by any of: a bard, a druid, paladin, the fighter's second wind and/or monk's Wholeness of Body. Arguably many parties without a cleric will take less damage during combats because they'll be killing things faster.

Even if certain party compositions have to rest more and thus have a more difficult time, that's ~fine because it's for an optional ("realistic") difficulty setting.

That said, I don't see this working with the Base Camp in BG3; either you'd still be able to go to base camp between these campsites but for some reason be unable to rest, or you'd be locked into your chosen companions until the next camp location which would be frustrating.

Also, as @Rhobar mentions
Originally Posted by Rhobar121
Was the checkpoint disposable?
If so, what would you do if the fight went wrong?
If they are not disposable, what will prevent the player from going back and resting? Is the solution to respawning enemies like in dark souls?
there's the issue of checkpoint disposability. Either players can just walk back to a previous rest spot or every single campsite must be single use, which may be a bit much.

OP, I think your idea is good for select areas/dungeons, combined with the inability to teleport to safety. Like the Hag Lair - you shouldn't be able to long rest in the Hag Lair or teleport out, and if you manually leave then something happens. E.g., Mayrina gets sent off to the other hags, Ethel recruits more guards and prepares an ambush for you, etc. Change of content - not loss of content. For longer dungeons (again where you can't teleport out), it'd be reasonable to find a safe campsite within the dungeon and be temporarily unable to change your party while in that dungeon.

For regulating long rests throughout the entire game, simply regulating food required for long resting is probably sufficient. Perhaps combined with requiring players to manually walk to any teleportation sigil, which incentivizes but doesn't require pushing onward toward the next sigil.

Joined: Nov 2021
M
apprentice
OP Offline
apprentice
M
Joined: Nov 2021
I would be fine with a slightly softer system like this. I just want the dungeons to feel like I'm delving into them and managing my resources tactically. Parts of the world should feel unsafe. The hags lair is a good example. The goblin camp is what prompted me to post this idea. I don't think I should be able to infiltrate the lair via sazza to assassinate the drive leader and then immediately camp for 8 hours or fast travel out as though I weren't surrounded by a hostile goblin camp. It cheapens the experience and makes each encounter feel like a one off gladiatorial arena showdown.

Last edited by mystakai; 01/12/21 03:46 AM.
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
Originally Posted by mystakai
I just want the dungeons to feel like I'm delving into them and managing my resources tactically.
What is stoping you?


In the words of the senior NCO instructor at cadet battalion:
“If you ain’t cheating you ain’t trying. And if you got caught you didn’t try hard enough!”
Joined: Nov 2021
M
apprentice
OP Offline
apprentice
M
Joined: Nov 2021
Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD
Originally Posted by mystakai
I just want the dungeons to feel like I'm delving into them and managing my resources tactically.
What is stoping you?

If the game is designed with the idea that you can camp anywhere and fast travel to town at any time, then the encounters are not designed to be of the appropriate challenge level to tackle subsequently without rest. It is a design issue, not a player choice issue. I can choose not to rest as long as I want, but it doesn't make the game feel any better if the designers expect me to rest whenever i can. It affects the encounter design.

In fact, it's quite lazy and bombastic. It allows larian to build this skeletal world conjoining big playground-like set piece battles without consideration for player resources and pacing. It's why the game feels so empty and static.

Last edited by mystakai; 03/12/21 01:50 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
Originally Posted by mystakai
It affects the encounter design.
How? O_o

I mean ... i go through combat, i finish it ... i decide NOT go to rest yet ... i go through another combat, i finish it too ... i decide NOT go to rest yet ... i go through yet another combat, i finish it ... and now i decide to rest.

How the option for me to rest affected those two combats after first one, when i decided not to use them?
It would affect them if i would have decided to rest after first one, or second one ... yes ... but if i didnt?

Or even better wording for same question:

Combat 1 > Combat 2 > Combat 3 > Rest - I choosed to.
Combat 1 > Combat 2 > Combat 3 > Rest - Rules forced me to.

There is same outcome, where is difference?


In the words of the senior NCO instructor at cadet battalion:
“If you ain’t cheating you ain’t trying. And if you got caught you didn’t try hard enough!”
Joined: Nov 2021
M
apprentice
OP Offline
apprentice
M
Joined: Nov 2021
The difference is in the care that the developers have to take to crafted the encounters. Encounter design where rests are considered is superior to rests where the developer writes off their consideration.


Moderated by  Nicou 

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