Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 11 of 31 1 2 9 10 11 12 13 30 31
Joined: Oct 2020
R
old hand
Offline
old hand
R
Joined: Oct 2020
I think a fairly good compromise would be to introduce a PoE2 system with some modifications.
In PoE2, the spell slots automatically returned after the fight was over, while rest was needed for healing and also gave some bonuses.
One could try to introduce this system by making the classes based on a short rest regain their slots when the fight is over.
Characters based on a long rest to recover any slots normally.
While resting, you can use food that gives you various bonuses, the more powerful the rarer, of course.
When you rest again, you lose the bonus, which would encourage you not to rest (provided that it is powerful enough)).
The food itself could even be an optional item in such a situation.

Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
What I would like to see you for camping and resting is:

1. Make sure that dialogues do not get overwritten bye future dialogues. All dialogues should exist in some sort of order and triggered whenever you go to camp. Some exceptions may apply. For example, if you go for a long time without long resting you might still trigger the Raphael dialogue after meeting Netti so that you keep the story on track. However, you could then still trigger dialogues like Gale's Mirror Image dialogue after Raphael.
2. I would like to see more group dialogue where all the characters are discussing things together as a party whether it is a group of customized characters or origin characters. For example, when we first find out about Astarion's secret we should have an entire conversation between all party members together not just between the main and Astarion. The group dialogues should be more for discussing where characters are going to go next and how they are going to handle their current situations these are things they should be deciding as a team.
3. I would also like to see one-on-one dialogues in a more intimate setting such as down by the river when we are attempting to pursue romance options. Right now all dialogue at camp seem to be in front of everyone yet not really including everyone. So some dialogues should be more intimate where two people are alone.
4. I would like resting and camping to be more time sensitive. If a long rest is the end of a day then players should see things changing as each day passes. When I go to the Grove, for example, after long resting I should hear different conversations instead of always seeing the same people having the same conversations etc.
5. Along with number 4, events should occur that move the story along. If three days pass, and I haven't exposed Kahga or rescued Halsin, the druids should complete their ritual...or maybe four days or five days...whatever. The point is that some events should be triggered if you take too long, thus keeping players from spamming the use of Long Rests.
6. I would like a Day/Night Cycle, if possible, and this could be accomplished via 2 Short Rests or just giving a player the ability to do 2 Long Rests per day. Yes, a Long Rest is supposed to be ending your day, but if I want to trigger a Day/Night cycle, we could just make a Long Rest an 8 hour period instead. Thus, if I Long Rest once, it moves from Day to Night. If I Long Rest again, I move from Night to Day. Sure, it goes a bit against the D&D 5e rules, but the point is that you are offering players the ability to trigger Day/Night cycle.

Last edited by GM4Him; 23/04/21 10:30 PM.
Joined: Jan 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Jan 2020
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
Originally Posted by etonbears
<snip>The best way of moderating resting in the field remains the original idea of random encounters; but that gets boring quickly. The alternative is to do what Larian have, and assume that resting occurs often, and construct the game on that basis.
The issue is that Larian has only done ~half of what is needed to construct the game assuming resting occurs often.
Aspects that complement or encourage frequent resting
- Combat encounters seem to be constructed assuming you have ~full resources for each fight.
- Long resting is encouraged via the camp cutscenes (although Larian obviously needs to put more emphasis on this, given the # of players who don't rest and miss a significant chunk of cutscenes)
- You can fast travel from almost anywhere directly to camp and then back to where you teleported from, and resting doesn't require resources or provoke random encounters.

Aspects that aren't constructed for frequent long resting
- Balance between classes. Short v long rest-based classes are a big thing in 5e, and most of Larian's changes haven't addressed this. Long rest spellcasters are relatively much more powerful in BG3 because they can afford to use all of their spell slots each fight.
- Prevalence of consumables, food in particular. You would think that, since long resting fully restores HP, a 5e game with unlimited resting would have less healing consumables. However, there is a ton of food & potions in BG3 which discourages long resting because you can just heal by using these. There is also a ton of scrolls, flasks, etc which everyone can use (I suppose this actually helps to balance martials vs casters, but at the cost of class-uniformity), allowing you to do more fights before needing to rest.
Um, not sure what your trying to say here. The TT rules for resting are largely irrelevent, and always have been. You rest as much as you want and as often as you want. If this requires going somewhere safe, and you choose to do it, then you do it.

The cost to the player is exactly what the DM chooses. The standard trade-off used to be the chance of "wandering monsters" while asleep. But all this achieves is to ensure that resting occurs even more frequently to ensure you still have spells for attacks while resting.

One of the early sets of modules D1-D3 that introduced the Drow, actually denied arcane casters ANY spell recovery when in the Underdark. So guess what; when the arcane users ran out of spells ( or had used a certain portion ), the whole party trooped back to the surface to rest.

And yes, you have reasonably analysed where Larian sit as DM. They know there is no point in trying to force any particular resting cadence ( which would be wildly unpopular ), so they design on the assumption you will rest as needed. Typically, I find I get through 2-3 fights before needing a long rest, due to the choices I take. But if I needed ( or wanted ) to long rest after every fight, that's exactly what I would do.

The only thing I would disagree with is that there is any real or implied relationship between "balance" and the TT resting rules. Nothing in the resting rules forces any particular behaviour upon the player, so any intent to use the resting rules as a "tool" for class balance woud be an astonishly poor design choice. I suppose that is possible, but if so, I don't see that it should be Larian's responsibility to fix it.

Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by etonbears
Um, not sure what your trying to say here. The TT rules for resting are largely irrelevent, and always have been. You rest as much as you want and as often as you want. If this requires going somewhere safe, and you choose to do it, then you do it.

The cost to the player is exactly what the DM chooses. The standard trade-off used to be the chance of "wandering monsters" while asleep. But all this achieves is to ensure that resting occurs even more frequently to ensure you still have spells for attacks while resting.

One of the early sets of modules D1-D3 that introduced the Drow, actually denied arcane casters ANY spell recovery when in the Underdark. So guess what; when the arcane users ran out of spells ( or had used a certain portion ), the whole party trooped back to the surface to rest.

And yes, you have reasonably analysed where Larian sit as DM. They know there is no point in trying to force any particular resting cadence ( which would be wildly unpopular ), so they design on the assumption you will rest as needed. Typically, I find I get through 2-3 fights before needing a long rest, due to the choices I take. But if I needed ( or wanted ) to long rest after every fight, that's exactly what I would do.

The only thing I would disagree with is that there is any real or implied relationship between "balance" and the TT resting rules. Nothing in the resting rules forces any particular behaviour upon the player, so any intent to use the resting rules as a "tool" for class balance woud be an astonishly poor design choice. I suppose that is possible, but if so, I don't see that it should be Larian's responsibility to fix it.
My point is that Larian, if they want to allow unlimited resting and/or not implement a day/night cycle, should more fully commit to this.

They have achieved arguably the most important thing, which is balancing encounters assuming players will rest as often as possible.

But they need to do a lot more work on
1) the camp cutscenes that only occur during long rests and can be missed if you don't long rest frequently enough.
-Option A: More strongly encourage long resting. Companions could say "let's return to camp; I have something to talk about" instead of just saying "I'm tired." Alternatively, some sort of light penalty should apply when companions start saying they're tired. Maybe a -1 to skill checks...not enough to force a rest, but enough to more strongly encourage it
-Option B: Untie these long rest conversations from long rests, and allow them while traveling or while short resting

2) Consumables and Food could be reduced, so that it becomes more necessary to long rest frequently. This, again, encourages players to long rest without explicitly forcing it

3.) If we are expected to long rest frequently, then honestly it wouldn't be bad to make some class changes. Give warlocks more spell slots or wizards less. Maybe adjust abilities that recharge per short rest (e.g., Action Surge) to have more uses. This would have a similar effect as allowing wizards to use all their slots in 1 encounter.

And in PnP you can't always just rest whenever you want; as you say this is up to the DM who sometimes declares that you cannot long rest. Or you can, but the DM imposes some penalty, like enemy reinforcements arrive or you have to waste time in which brings you closer to some deadline. Larian as the DM is allowing unlimited long resting but rarely imposes corresponding penalty.

Last edited by mrfuji3; 23/04/21 11:07 PM.
Joined: Sep 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by etonbears
Yeah, they COULD put a day/night cycle in if they wanted, it certainly is not beyond their abilities; and that would accurately solve the "rest when you want" problem because long rests are ( at most ) once per 24 hrs. Actually having to wait in-game before you can rest would definitely promote the proper consideration of when you use per-day resources.

But there are 2 problems with doing this. First, Larian's co-op play model ( which is apparently very popular ) relies on time being an illusion. And second, most people that buy the game would hate being made to wait and, therefore, complain; this would be a valid complaint, since having no respect for wasting your customer's time is always a bad idea if you want them to buy your product.
An easy way to have this for multiplayer would be for all party members to have to agree to rest at the same time (maybe a voting system.) I am not sure what you mean about people complaining about being made to wait though, all the multiplayer games I have played require some sort of communication and agreements between players and this should be an expected thing here.

Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
Wouldn't even need to be a voting system. All they have to do is make it so that if one person selects End Day then a message pops up for all players saying that the person is waiting at camp to End Day. Only if all players select End Day will it actually end.

Joined: Jan 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Jan 2020

Originally Posted by mrfuji3
Originally Posted by etonbears
Um, not sure what your trying to say here. The TT rules for resting are largely irrelevent, and always have been. You rest as much as you want and as often as you want. If this requires going somewhere safe, and you choose to do it, then you do it.

The cost to the player is exactly what the DM chooses. The standard trade-off used to be the chance of "wandering monsters" while asleep. But all this achieves is to ensure that resting occurs even more frequently to ensure you still have spells for attacks while resting.

One of the early sets of modules D1-D3 that introduced the Drow, actually denied arcane casters ANY spell recovery when in the Underdark. So guess what; when the arcane users ran out of spells ( or had used a certain portion ), the whole party trooped back to the surface to rest.

And yes, you have reasonably analysed where Larian sit as DM. They know there is no point in trying to force any particular resting cadence ( which would be wildly unpopular ), so they design on the assumption you will rest as needed. Typically, I find I get through 2-3 fights before needing a long rest, due to the choices I take. But if I needed ( or wanted ) to long rest after every fight, that's exactly what I would do.

The only thing I would disagree with is that there is any real or implied relationship between "balance" and the TT resting rules. Nothing in the resting rules forces any particular behaviour upon the player, so any intent to use the resting rules as a "tool" for class balance woud be an astonishly poor design choice. I suppose that is possible, but if so, I don't see that it should be Larian's responsibility to fix it.
My point is that Larian, if they want to allow unlimited resting and/or not implement a day/night cycle, should more fully commit to this.

They have achieved arguably the most important thing, which is balancing encounters assuming players will rest as often as possible.

But they need to do a lot more work on
1) the camp cutscenes that only occur during long rests and can be missed if you don't long rest frequently enough.
-Option A: More strongly encourage long resting. Companions could say "let's return to camp; I have something to talk about" instead of just saying "I'm tired." Alternatively, some sort of light penalty should apply when companions start saying they're tired. Maybe a -1 to skill checks...not enough to force a rest, but enough to more strongly encourage it
-Option B: Untie these long rest conversations from long rests, and allow them while traveling or while short resting

2) Consumables and Food could be reduced, so that it becomes more necessary to long rest frequently. This, again, encourages players to long rest without explicitly forcing it

3.) If we are expected to long rest frequently, then honestly it wouldn't be bad to make some class changes. Give warlocks more spell slots or wizards less. Maybe adjust abilities that recharge per short rest (e.g., Action Surge) to have more uses. This would have a similar effect as allowing wizards to use all their slots in 1 encounter.

And in PnP you can't always just rest whenever you want; as you say this is up to the DM who sometimes declares that you cannot long rest. Or you can, but the DM imposes some penalty, like enemy reinforcements arrive or you have to waste time in which brings you closer to some deadline. Larian as the DM is allowing unlimited long resting but rarely imposes corresponding penalty.

1. Certainly agree the linkage between long-resting and plot-related party conversations is sub-optimal. This is particularly true as the (seemingly) very non-linear story leads to a difficult tangle of subsequent conversation triggers, some of which can invalidate earlier conversation triggers before they have a chance to activate.

I understand the production reasons for wanting an invariant camp backdrop when enacting these hi-res cut-scene conversations. As you say, it's usually better not to force players into any particular behaviour, so I would prefer they find a way to allow conversations to trigger "in the field" where possible, rather than contrived penalties, which tend not to be popular.

Of course, if Larian choose to add the passage of time to their game, the reasoning changes; but I don't think that is likely.

2. Quantity reduced, or heal values lowered or weight increased could all achieve the nudge towards long resting, but at the expense of reducing player choice. Can't say I care much one way or the other, but as with other player choice limitations, this can often prove unpopular. And, of course, not needed if you can trigger conversations in the field.

3. Yeah, why not ( apart from the fact it will induce apoplexy in some people ). I really don't care much about ability balance in games. As long as I can see upfront what I am going to be choosing between, I can make my choices from whatever the game maker offers. As with most design decisions, whether changes lke the ones you propose are necessary or desirable is probably a matter of personal opinion. Most BG3 players probably wouldn't care, and those that do would turn to mods.


As for BG3 long resting, I think Larian's current decision to allow long rest at will and with no penalty is fine. There isn't ( tadpole notwithstanding ) any obvious time pressure present in Act 1, which is more useful to gain experience,build up knowledge of the situation, and establish relationships with other actors in the story.

Later, the story may have time pressures or penalties that will cause players to think twice about a long rest. Or not. There shouldn't be contrived reasons that the story doesn't need.

Last edited by etonbears; 24/04/21 01:57 PM. Reason: bad tags
Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
No obvious time pressure in act one? You have Druids performing a ritual that will seal off The Grove, goblins have found at the Grove and are going to attack soon, and yeah you have a tadpole in your head that everyone is saying that you need to get out as soon as possible before you turn into a mind flayer. Even those who say that it is not acting normal will tell you that you could still at any moment. Add to that that Zorru saw Gith just recently and they ain't gonna logically wait around all week for you and Halsin was kidnapped and the goblins aren't gonna keep him alive forever and the cult is searching for you...

Sorry. I have to disagree when you say that the story is not time-sensitive. In fact one of the biggest things I have a problem with is that the story seems very time-sensitive. Everything about the story is you have to hurry before the tadpole takes you over, The Druids kick everybody out, the Goblins attack, Etc. Your party members even nag you a lot about getting your butt moving. Besides reminding you a lot about the tadpole Lae'zel also reminds you a lot that you need to find the Gith creche. Then, once you find out about Gale's condition you feel even more like you have to race against the clock before he explodes.

But then, the game designers make it so that you have unlimited rest. That doesn't make sense with the story then you should be able to just end day all the time. It is like The Druids are going to take 2 weeks or something to finish the ritual and everyone else is just waiting around for you to do what you need to do. So go ahead and take your time, that is what it seems to me that the designers have done. The game says hurry hurry hurry but the game designers say take your time it's okay. On top of that the game designers encourage you to rest a lot in order to get all the dialogues. It just makes no sense to me.

Last edited by GM4Him; 24/04/21 02:34 PM.
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
Originally Posted by GM4Him
No obvious time pressure in act one? You have Druids performing a ritual that will seal off The Grove, goblins have found at the Grove and are going to attack soon, and yeah you have a tadpole in your head that everyone is saying that you need to get out as soon as possible before you turn into a mind flayer. Even those who say that it is not acting normal will tell you that you could still at any moment. Add to that that Zorru saw Gith just recently and they ain't gonna logically wait around all week for you and Halsin was kidnapped and the goblins aren't gonna keep him alive forever and the cult is searching for you...

Sorry. I have to disagree when you say that the story is not time-sensitive. In fact one of the biggest things I have a problem with is that the story seems very time-sensitive. Everything about the story is you have to hurry before the tadpole takes you over, The Druids kick everybody out, the Goblins attack, Etc. Your party members even nag you a lot about getting your butt moving. Besides reminding you a lot about the tadpole Lae'zel also reminds you a lot that you need to find the Gith creche. Then, once you find out about Gale's condition you feel even more like you have to race against the clock before he explodes.

But then, the game designers make it so that you have unlimited rest. That doesn't make sense with the story then you should be able to just end day all the time. It is like The Druids are going to take 2 weeks or something to finish the ritual and everyone else is just waiting around for you to do what you need to do. So go ahead and take your time, that is what it seems to me that the designers have done. The game says hurry hurry hurry but the game designers say take your time it's okay. On top of that the game designers encourage you to rest a lot in order to get all the dialogues. It just makes no sense to me.

Totally agree with this.

There are a lot of inconsistencies between writing and game design. GM4 gave very good exemples related to the rest mechanic but it's something that is in many aspects of the game.

Last edited by Maximuuus; 24/04/21 03:50 PM.
Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
I'm just saying, there needs to be some measure of time in the game. They have some of this already in place. They just need more of it. For example, after I talk to the adventurers in the Grove, the next time I return to the Grove they are gone. We need more of this kind of thing related to Long Rests. The Druid Ritual, for example, should not be in a constant state of NOT happening, as if the Druids are waiting around forever for you to stop them. Even if you want to give players lots of time to stop them, you need to do something to have it make sense.

For example, let's say I arrive at the Grove and find out about the ritual. The game allows you 2 Long Rests after that before something happens. That means that 2 days go by after you arrive at the Grove. They are nearing the completion of the ritual. Someone even mentions this as you return to the Grove.

But then, (again, this is just an example), THAT is when Arabella steals the statue, forcing them to start the ritual all over again. Now you've been bought another 2 days at least. You take 2 more long rests, so another 2 days go by. The ritual has been interrupted AGAIN. Kagha is just not having good luck. This time, goblins attacked the Grove while you were out, and the Druids were forced to abandon the ritual just to help the Tieflings ward off the goblins.

These are the kinds of things Larian could do to make things time sensitive based on Long Rests used but still buy players enough time to explore the whole map and enjoy the game. Still, it provides players a sense that time exists and things aren't just waiting around forever for you to do whatever you like at whatever pace you like.

Similarly, Lae'zel might not nag you at first to get to Zorru and the creche, but then after maybe 2-3 Long Rests she starts getting antsy. She maybe even threatens to leave the group if you don't take her seriously. It may even be just a bluff and she isn't going to leave you even if you take forever, but at least you are experiencing negative repercussions for taking too long to do certain story things that should be time sensitive. It at least is consistent with the story to have certain events triggered if you are abusing the Long Rest system.

And we need some sort of log to tell us how many days we've actually triggered. That would help too. Instead of the Time Sensitive Dialogue Log, which makes no sense at all to me because some dialogues only take 2 minutes to do but the log makes it seem like 30 minutes went by, let's have a Day Log letting you know what basically happened to you and your party each Day. Day 0, escaped from Nautiloid and the Hells. Day 1, met Shadowheart, fought Devourers, met Astarion, met fishermen, met Gale. Day 2, fought rogue adventurers, discovered Dank Crypt, met Lae'zel and freed her. Day 3, entered Druid's Grove, lists everything I did there, fought Harpies, etc.

That is more helpful to me and even helps me have a better sense at how much time is passing in the game. Then use this log to manage Time Sensitive Events like I described above. If I entered the Grove on Day 3 and learned about the ritual, maybe on Day 5 something happens like Arabella stealing the statue and buying me more time. That kind of thing. If I freed Sazza on Day 3 and helped her get to the goblins, maybe on Day 6 the goblins attack and disrupt the ritual again because Sazza told them how to find the Grove. Instead of sending a full force, they underestimated the Tieflings and Druids and sent too few gobbos.

Then, to add to this, if I talk to "I care about our lives, our FUTURES," on Day 3, then maybe on Day 4+ they are discussing something different, like how they are going to help the Tieflings if the gobbos attack, or maybe discussing the hopelessness of their situation, or maybe discussing how they might disrupt the ritual to buy them more time. Things like that so I'm not hearing the same darn conversation 4 days after I first heard it every time I'm in the Grove. This would go for every other character in the darn Grove who says the same exact thing constantly and every darn character throughout the entire game who says the same darn thing constantly. Either they don't talk, and there's just ambiance mumbling in crowded areas, or they just don't talk at all, cause that repetitive chitchat is killing me.

I'm just saying, mix it up. As days go by, have different people be in different places having different convos or just not there anymore or something. Right now, I feel like BG3 is mostly Groundhog's Day until you trigger certain events.

I think these kinds of things would make the game SO much better.

Joined: Feb 2021
P
addict
Offline
addict
P
Joined: Feb 2021
Originally Posted by GM4Him
For example, let's say I arrive at the Grove and find out about the ritual. The game allows you 2 Long Rests after that before something happens. That means that 2 days go by after you arrive at the Grove. They are nearing the completion of the ritual. Someone even mentions this as you return to the Grove.

Again, you are talking about controlling the decision making and play time of the player and how they play their adventure. Honestly, what your asking for is a terrible idea, and is not even done in time sensitive games like XCOM (unless you actively choose to not participate in an emergency mission maybe, but besides that, there is NO play mechanic that limits or controls how events in game happen.

What your talking about is the classic definition of an amusement park "on rails" game, trying to demand in what order you play the game, and how . I seriously do not see Larian EVER doing something like you are describing, and more than likely it falls perfectly under the "You think you want it, but you don't" meme.

Last edited by Pandemonica; 24/04/21 04:53 PM.
Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
Originally Posted by Pandemonica
Originally Posted by GM4Him
For example, let's say I arrive at the Grove and find out about the ritual. The game allows you 2 Long Rests after that before something happens. That means that 2 days go by after you arrive at the Grove. They are nearing the completion of the ritual. Someone even mentions this as you return to the Grove.

Again, you are talking about controlling the decision making and play time of the player and how they play their adventure. Honestly, what your asking for is a terrible idea, and is not even done in time sensitive games like XCOM (unless you actively choose to not participate in an emergency mission maybe, but besides that, there is NO play mechanic that limits or controls how events in game happen.

What your talking about is the classic definition of an amusement park "on rails" game, trying to demand in what order you play the game, and how . I seriously do not see Larian EVER doing something like you are describing, and more than likely it falls perfectly under the "You think you want it, but you don't" meme.

I'm not trying to control decision making. Again, my point is that the world right now is very static. This is an RPG. It is supposed to be story driven and the story right now says hurry hurry hurry but the gameplay says chill. It makes no sense.

What I am suggesting is that Larian implement time sensitive changes. Make things less static. Have things happen to explain why the druids haven't finished the ritual if you've spent 7 days exploring the map. Tell me what happened to delay them. Maybe there was an argument between Rath and Kahga. Whatever. Just explain why things aren't happening when they logically should if you are wasting 7+ days completing act 1

Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
Originally Posted by Pandemonica
Again, you are talking about controlling the decision making and play time of the player and how they play their adventure. Honestly, what your asking for is a terrible idea
No, it's definitely NOT.
But setting the limit to "two long rests" may be pushing things too far.

We already argued that timed restrictions should suggest a pressure while being forgiving enough to leave to the player room to do side activities as long as he doesn't deliberately waste tons of times.
Asking to solve all the druids problems inside TWO long rests is basically punishing anyone but people going for an optimal path.

Even as someone who uses the rest as little as possible I'd be against it.

But I definitely wouldn't be against setting that limit to, say, ten full days. Once again, the ticking clock doesn't need to be there to actively punish a player, it just needs to set a limit to how indecent he can be with wasting time ignoring any remote sense of urgency.

I'd be fairly confident basically anyone could make to the goblin camp and back with Halsin inside a limit of 10 long rests, no matter how utterly incompetent with resource management... But at at least that would prevent a downright exploitative behavior like "Yeah, fuck it, I'm going to do a long rest every two goblin killed and blow my entire load of spells every single time".


Party control in Baldur's Gate 3 is a complete mess that begs to be addressed. SAY NO TO THE TOILET CHAIN
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
If we may not agree of timed quests... I think we could agree on timed "events".

I'm definitely with Nyloth and Pandemonica on this one - not on every words but on the idea (rare enough to say it).

I don't want timed quests and I hate that it can lead to a game over in Kingmaker. Really. I hate it and I hope it won't ever happen again in a game I like (because despite it I like kingmaker).
It was ok at chapter 1 because you had to go into a "dungeon" and kill the boss but it was terrible when it comes to kingdom management and the main quests. Idon't remember the name - the thing that could lead to a game over if you were not strong enough or if you're too far to come back before the end of the timer - the thing that can screw your 20 hours games because of THE random encounter or THE rest you would need...

On the other hand the lack of timed events looks a bit ridiculous in BG3.
Just re-read GM4's exemples... The writing ALWAYS throw you in the face that there's urgency... But notheing ever happen if you rest 500 nights because YOU haven't triggered the events.

It just doesn't works and there's a problem OR in the games mechanics OR the writing but both doesn't work well together at all.

Druids rituals ? Just let them end their ritual.
Finding Halsin ? He's litterally waiting for you before wildshaping in a mouse to escape...
Turning into a mindflayer in 7 days ? Just give all of us the information that it won't happen rather than this fake sense of urgency...

I really think there's solutions for anything. The easiest issues would only require story adjustement but other would require new quest lines.

I don't like saying this but honnestly I'm not sure coherence is something Larian really care about...
The games mechanics and the writing doesn't work together at all and you can literally jump like mario or dip your wooden bow (and flesh hands) in fire when it's time to fight and the next second the story try to be serious...
Larian syndrom.

Last edited by Maximuuus; 24/04/21 07:46 PM.
Joined: Jan 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Jan 2020
Originally Posted by Zarna
Originally Posted by etonbears
Yeah, they COULD put a day/night cycle in if they wanted, it certainly is not beyond their abilities; and that would accurately solve the "rest when you want" problem because long rests are ( at most ) once per 24 hrs. Actually having to wait in-game before you can rest would definitely promote the proper consideration of when you use per-day resources.

But there are 2 problems with doing this. First, Larian's co-op play model ( which is apparently very popular ) relies on time being an illusion. And second, most people that buy the game would hate being made to wait and, therefore, complain; this would be a valid complaint, since having no respect for wasting your customer's time is always a bad idea if you want them to buy your product.
An easy way to have this for multiplayer would be for all party members to have to agree to rest at the same time (maybe a voting system.) I am not sure what you mean about people complaining about being made to wait though, all the multiplayer games I have played require some sort of communication and agreements between players and this should be an expected thing here.

Oh, sorry. What I meant was that MP is the main reason why there is no concept of the passage of time in BG3 ( and D:OS games) because each player can go in and out of TB mode independently; as SP uses the same engine, it inherits this behaviour.

But, if the game did implement passage of time at, say, 5 real minutes per game hour, then per 5e rules you would need to wait 2hr real play time between long rests in SP, regardless of your situation or playstyle. That would definitely provide a barrier to frequent resting but it would not necessarily be popular to do nothing for that time, while waiting to recover your spells and abilities.

Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
A very sensible timed event in BG3 would be the raid on the grove. If you tell Minthara where it is and she leaves to go raid it, then long resting afterward should result in you missing the raid entirely. Or at very least the raid is already in progress when you arrive, with Minthara+goblins just having broken through the main gate.

This retains player agency by letting the player determine when/if they tell Minthara of the grove location. There is little risk of missing out on other things because the ~rest of the world remains the same whether you go to the grove immediately or long rest. But it also adds to the immersion of the world; things can and do continue without you and you should keep this in mind for future events.

The only downside is that players might be forced to go into a fight without full resources, which is fine. Aside from resource management being a generally good thing, BG3 offers more than enough consumables to make up for missing abilities/spell slots.

Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
I really do not want real time clock at this point. After some of the discussions out here I realized that real time clock would not make the game fun. I am not talking about unrealistic timing in the game. If you read my posts again I even said that I just want some sort of sense of time.

So say they give us 5 days to stop Kahga from the ritual and 7 days to stop the goblins and the Grove ritual, this being 5 and 7 days after you first arrive at the Grove. You long rest 2 times, so 2 days to by. It is then that Arabella steals the statue, buying you 3 more days before the ritual is done. You rest 2 more time, a Tiefling arrives at camp in the morning. "The Druids are going to complete the ritual. Help us." You decide. Kill Kahga and druids? Save Halsin real quick that day? Find the evidence that day to dethrone Kahga? See? Multiple endings to that 1 potential scenario. Not game over but multiple paths to choose based on time actually transpiring.

2 more long rests. Goblins gonna attack the grove. Again, you have a choice. Help fight gobbos or use it as an op to raid their base while they are away. Again, not game over. Just different results because time exists and is happening.

The exact timing is not the point make it 7 and 10 days. Whatever. The point is events are triggered and your decisions and how many days you spend make a difference in what paths you can take.

Joined: Jan 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Jan 2020

Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Originally Posted by GM4Him
No obvious time pressure in act one? You have Druids performing a ritual that will seal off The Grove, goblins have found at the Grove and are going to attack soon, and yeah you have a tadpole in your head that everyone is saying that you need to get out as soon as possible before you turn into a mind flayer. Even those who say that it is not acting normal will tell you that you could still at any moment. Add to that that Zorru saw Gith just recently and they ain't gonna logically wait around all week for you and Halsin was kidnapped and the goblins aren't gonna keep him alive forever and the cult is searching for you...

Sorry. I have to disagree when you say that the story is not time-sensitive. In fact one of the biggest things I have a problem with is that the story seems very time-sensitive. Everything about the story is you have to hurry before the tadpole takes you over, The Druids kick everybody out, the Goblins attack, Etc. Your party members even nag you a lot about getting your butt moving. Besides reminding you a lot about the tadpole Lae'zel also reminds you a lot that you need to find the Gith creche. Then, once you find out about Gale's condition you feel even more like you have to race against the clock before he explodes.

But then, the game designers make it so that you have unlimited rest. That doesn't make sense with the story then you should be able to just end day all the time. It is like The Druids are going to take 2 weeks or something to finish the ritual and everyone else is just waiting around for you to do what you need to do. So go ahead and take your time, that is what it seems to me that the designers have done. The game says hurry hurry hurry but the game designers say take your time it's okay. On top of that the game designers encourage you to rest a lot in order to get all the dialogues. It just makes no sense to me.

Totally agree with this.

There are a lot of inconsistencies between writing and game design. GM4 gave very good exemples related to the rest mechanic but it's something that is in many aspects of the game.
When I say there is no obvious time pressure, I mean that nothing ACTUALLY happens if you ignore the game's imperatives. Obvious time pressure is when you have a little countdown on screen somewhere and/or something horrible happens should you not follow the game's imperatives ( example, Garrus dies in ME2 if you don't follow the game imperatives ).

In common with many games, BG3 gives you the narrative reasons to behave in a particular way if you want to, but does not force you to play the game that way.

You can choose to feel time pressure in BG3, because there are many cues that you should, and play the game at speed by following only a main path, and feel satisfied for having resolved the narrative in a manner that appeals to you, and is "as designed", if that's what you like.

But not everyone wants to play games that way, and as a result, many games will allow you to work through them at the pace, and in the way you choose. Usually I play an RPG according to narrative cues on the first run, then in a different manner on subsequent playthroughs. More often than not, ignoring the narrative cues, to some degree, provides me with a more enjoyable game overall.

This isn't wrong, and isn't a design fault. It's a recognition that the potential audience has many different desires when buying and playing the game. Many of the aspects of the game that Larian are criticised for are like this. Their changes or additions are designed to appeal to the widest possible player base, often following industry common practice, while still providing their core game vision.

If anyone chooses to criticise Larian on the basis that there is only one "right" way for an aspect of the game to work, then honestly, that person has no understanding of the videogame industry.

Last edited by etonbears; 24/04/21 10:46 PM. Reason: spelling
Joined: Oct 2020
R
old hand
Offline
old hand
R
Joined: Oct 2020
Time limits are a bad idea. How many really do you remember the role-playing games that actually have them?
I also do not understand the complaint that the game is not consistent in this respect. I guess some people here have never played any role-playing game. There is something like this in practically every game.
No matter if you are stopping a rebellious specter / mad mage / darkspawn invasions / destructive god etc. you can always ignore it for some time and every time the game will wait for you.
This is practically an integral part of all RPGs for as long as I can remember.
The time limit that some people propose, the only thing that would bring to the game is that it would spoil the enjoyment of playing a huge crowd of players. How popular was Pathfinder with its limitations? I don't remember that it somehow stood out for sale.
I don't believe some people propose even more restrictive restrictions.
I don't feel like playing a game that practically forces you into a metagame.

Last edited by Rhobar121; 24/04/21 10:51 PM.
Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
The point is that a long rest is the end of a day. So time passes. I end day, 1 day is over. That is what they instituted.

I arrive at grove. Ritual is being performed already. They say its a big ritual and will take time. That's good. They don't say how long. Fine. So I just know I have some time.

But how long would a ritual like that realistically take? If I Long rest 10 times, making 10 days go by, does it really make sense that the ritual is STILL not done?

Same with the gobbos. They want to kill the grove. They now know where it is thanks to the adventurers. I long rest 15 times. Does it really make sense that the grove is never attacked?

The amount of times you have is not the point. I am NOT saying they should rush players through the game. Im saying that after maybe 2 long rests something happens to explain why you have more time. Again, Arabella being an example. Instead of her stealing the statue and disrupting the ritual right away, she steals it after 2 days, delaying the ritual. Then 3 days later, Rath disrupts it, getting in trouble with Kahga or something, delaying the ritual again. They have too start over. Just something that makes sense as to why they havent completed it and are STILL just chanting after Ive been roaming around for a week.

That's the kind of thing im talking about. Just add some flavor to the game and explain why, if you are spamming long rests, the world isnt ending like the story says it should.

And im talking about characters doing different things each day instead of always in the same spots having the same questions.

And yeah, if you take an obscene amount of time, SOMETHING should happen. It only makes sense that it should. Dont you think after 2 weeks at least the ritual should be completed?

Page 11 of 31 1 2 9 10 11 12 13 30 31

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