Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Mega-threads and Guides Camping and resting.

Actually yours feels like it creates hard time limits on everything, and on reading it I immediately imagined a route I would have to do to be able to do everything the game is offering. And the enjoyable part is subjective cause some people likely will despise those limits and you'd find one of the most popular mods would be "remove quest timers". Under your suggestion players have 2 days to resolve one of the biggest conflicts for example, that means you have to avoid nearly every fight in between finding the note and dealing with the shadow druids to get the Karlach redeemed ending. That to say the least is difficult and honestly way too little. With the events you set, there would be no redeeming her cause she'd meet the druids before the ritual is done, and now she is set on her path.

For me, wanting no time limits has nothing to do with managing resources, as I tend to be pretty strict with them (and unsympathetic to my spellcasters) anyway.

But if I see something interesting, I want to be able to investigate it at that time, not try to remember to come back later after a timed quest is over. I ended up exploring all of the Underdark before rescuing Halsin on my first play through because I got side-tracked when I was exploring the goblin priestess' quarters. I loved that I could do that. I like the flexibility that no time limits offers. It allows me to truly get lost in the world and not miss anything.

I do agree that a dynamic world where people change what they're doing as you come and go could be interesting in some ways, but I hate feeling like I'm missing out on something. I have mixed feelings about that. I rarely play a game of this scope more than once, so it would have to be interesting enough to redo all the non-dynamic parts over. However, that could also tie in with giving the player greater flexibility in overcoming obstacles. So even if you do encounter some of the same obstacles the second time around you can get around them in very different ways. But, maybe I'm getting too off track here, as this started about camping and resting.

Regardless, I think everyone would agree that the companion interaction timing with resting issues need to be resolved.

quoting GM4Him and CJMPinger: 2 days is way too short. Something like 7-10 days for the tadpole is much more reasonable. And perhaps the timer could be extended via Nettie/Hag/Halsin/etc, maybe 1 day each. Something like 5 days until the ritual happens, beginning the first time you talk to the druids. A time component shouldn't force you to skip content, but instead give you a sense of urgency while still allowing to you to complete most if not all of the content with proper time management.
This type of timer would be based on long resting so (assuming cutscenes stop being tied to long-resting) you can always just not long rest. Use any of the ~infinite scrolls, potions, food, grenades to keep your party in fighting shape. As long as investigating an area doesn't deeply cut into your long rests, then you can investigate away! There's no in-game or real time clock that's ticking down.

@Miandra and CJMPinger.

You seem to still be missing the entire concept of what I'm saying.

I'm not suggesting that players only have 2 Long Rests to complete ANY quest. The game already suggests that you should only have that. It should not take any ritual more than a few days to complete. So the story itself is already setting everything up as being on a time table.

So, the story is already telling players that they:

1. Have 7 days to get cured, and that's 7 days after they escape the nautiloid. Yes. They find out that's not necessarily true, but you still think it's true to begin with. So the story is telling you that you have a time limit.
2. Have MAYBE 2 days before the ritual is completed to stop it.
3. Have MAYBE a week at best before the goblins return and destroy the grove.
4. Have MAYBE a day or two to get to the Gith before they might not be there anymore.

So the story is putting time limits on players. I'm not suggesting that they put these same time limits on players. What I'm saying is that the game gives us explanations and story pathways to explain WHY these limits aren't taking place when they logically should be taking place according to the story.

So let's just take the ritual as an example. Since we would expect, based on the story, that the ritual should probably be concluded in 2 days-ish...because we don't REALLY know when it is going to end... if I Long Rest 2 times, SOMETHING should happen to explain why the Druid Ritual is not concluded yet.

So, let me make sure I'm clear here, because I am often not clear, so I'm not saying anything against anyone else, but I'm just wanting to make sure I'm clear because it's a problem I have. I am NOT putting a time limit on the game. I am merely putting a time sensitive event onto the game to explain why I DON'T have a time limit on the game. The story puts the time limit on the game already, but I'm suggesting that we have a time sensitive event to explain why that story time limit isn't happening.

So, again, just the Druid Ritual situation. What I'm suggesting is that instead of meeting Arabella and her parents when we first arrive at the grove, after 2 days, rescuing Arabella becomes a time sensitive event that occurs. We could even be introduced to Arabella and her parents when we first arrive, but maybe we're just talking to them and getting to know them. Then after the 2 Long Rests, 2 days have gone by, the parents come to my camp when I wake up the next morning, and they tell me that Arabella is in trouble. She stole the idol and interrupted the ritual. Now a bunch of angry druids who hate them are going to judge whether she lives or dies. Now you have a choice, the same choice you had before, mind you, whether you are going to help Arabella or not. If not, it doesn't matter in terms of the entire plot of the entire side quest. Arabella still disrupted the ritual. It's starting all over again, so you're good. You just keep going on with whatever you were doing before.

So, you can explore the entire map, ignore the ritual, etc. for days upon days.

But, again, if you take an obscene number of Long Rests, then yes. Eventually, Larian is going to run out of ideas on how to make it plausible that you didn't do something to stop the Druids from sealing the grove. But they SHOULD do something like that. Why?

Because if you have infinite Long Rests, like you do now, there is nothing to stop players from Long Resting after every battle and gaining back all their health and spell slots. Thus, potions, food, and especially short rests are completely and utterly useless except for emergency healing purposes during really tough combat situations. If you have a really good cleric in your group, even Shadowheart, you don't even really need that.

But I'm talking an obscene number of Long Rests. Naturally, I'm not suggesting that Larian try to force players to rush through the game and not explore everything. I want to explore the entire map too; every little detail and trigger every little dialogue and so forth. But like mrfuji3 said, you can do this by managing your items well and not long resting so much. The game right now gives you a million potions, food, etc. that you can use to heal and recover. They give you lots of magic scrolls so that if you have run out, you can use a scroll.

Right now, I hardly EVER use scrolls for spells, and I sell most of my potions and ALL food, because food is so heavy, doesn't heal much, it's unrealistic to use during combat for healing, and it's senseless. I keep a few healing potions on hand for each character just in case a big boss like the spider queen wails on a character, and I Long Rest infinitely after every battle so that I fully recover. I never need Short Rests at all. Why? Because why Short Rest and just get back a few HP when I can Long Rest without restraint and get back all HP and spell slots?

So NOT limiting Long Resting in some way, makes all these other things pointless and stupid. Why even have to pick up all the senseless junk the game gives you if you're just going to sell it all anyway and not use any of it? Why not just give the player's character money instead of useless junk to micromanage in the inventory? But then, what do you need money for if you aren't going to spend it on items that you will need for your adventure? And what else is there to buy right now but potions, scrolls, etc.? Oh sure, you can get some armor +1 and weapons +1. Yep. That's nice, but that's not very fun or diverse. No. A person should be spending their money on buying potions because they need them to get through the game AND weapons +1 and armor +1 and scrolls and so forth because the entire point is that you need to have said items in order to complete your quests. If you don't need those items to complete your quests than why have them in the game at all?

But, again, I'm not saying that Larian should put hard limits on anything. What I'm suggesting is that they make things happen when you use Long Rests too much. So, with the ritual, after 2 days, Arabella steals the idol. After another 2 days, maybe goblins attack the Grove, causing the Druids to stop their ritual to help defend it. After another 2 days, maybe Rath does something like disobeys Kahga and stops the ritual. This could even be a new side quest for players. Rath disobyes Kahga and she has him locked up. Now you can sneak in and free Rath from the cell. Then he'll help you find a way to dethrone Kahga.

THAT'S the kinds of things I'm talking about. Larian could even implement new and fun side quests because you took more Long Rests. Maybe if you take too long, Lae'zel leaves to go to the Gith herself. Later, as you are exploring, you find her down by the river bleeding to death. Just as you arrive, the Gith have found her. "My kin are trying to kill me. This is all your fault. You will now assist me in recovering so that I can take their heads and lay them at Vlaakith's feet." Then you can take her back in the party or leave her. Your choice.

Or maybe Wyll leaves your group because you Long Rested too much. But then you find him amidst a bunch of gobbos. They are taunting and mocking him, like with the gnome guy. So you now have to rescue Wyll. A new side quest and story element because you Long Rested more than it makes sense to in the story.

So, again, not hard limits. Not game over if you don't stop the ritual in 2 days. Not killing off all the tieflings in a week if you don't kill the gobbos. Just story elements getting triggered and maybe even providing new side quests and events and such because you did take too many Long Rests.

This solves a lot of issues. If you use too many Long Rests, negative things happen. Arabella gets arrested and you have to rescue her. Then some Tieflings die because gobbos attacked the grove. Maybe Larian could even make this an optional side quest too where you help defend the grove from an initial attack. Then Rath is captured and locked up. Negative consequences that can actually even create more fun side quests, but the point is that they are consequences for not using your items and short rests more wisely and spamming Long Rest. If you don't use too many Long Rests, and you use your items and short rests wisely instead of spamming Long Rest, then you are able to prevent Arabella from getting arrested, Tieflings from dying and Rath getting locked up. Maybe Larian could even reward players who do use less Long Rests because they succeeded in using their other items and short rests more wisely. Those who actually manage to do certain tasks in the time frame that is originally laid out get an extra magic item or something because they DIDN'T spam Long Rest. That way if you don't spam Long Rests, you don't feel penalized but you feel rewarded, because the whole point in giving potions and such is that you should use them. If no one ever gets rewarded for using potions and such instead of Long Rests, then Long Rest away because there is no reward for not Long Resting and there's no penalty for Long Resting.

See what I'm saying?

I don’t know if this would be even possible or if anyone else thought of this idea first but i thought i should throw this suggestion out there to see what anyone else thinks about it.

What if short rests were mandatory before taking a long rest as to put more importance on short rests, however the caveat would be that you now can get all level 1 spell slots back after a short rest, so that way you can keep going through dungeons with at least a minimal amount of utility and power without taking away the importance of high level spells and abilities?
I believe this would make the resting problem disappear yet still have the dnd vibe people crave for. This would also buff cleric and other somewhat lackluster spellcasters as they would no longer feel as though they have to go through the whole camp scene just to be able to fight on even terms (damage wise) with melee combatants. And cantrips would be less spammy turn wasters and more of a last resort to finish off an enemy who just barely lived your best spells. It would also allow more freedom in choosing between healing or damage, as it currently stands healing feels like a waste if your party isn’t near/already dead!! And if the changes make the game too easy for some of the more hardcore dnd players out there you could add the OPTION of no long rests in hostile areas without clearing out the enemies first!

So only casters would have timed quests since other classes don't need to rest!!!

Essentially, yes. In D&D, the whole entire purpose for scrolls is to help provide magic users a supplement for spell slots. They are vital to a magic user so that they can continue to use magic even after they have used up spell slots. The whole point of this is to balance spell casters so they are not carrying the entire party. If you do not limit Long Rest at all in any way, shape or form, Spellcasters wind up becoming an OP member of the team especially at higher levels.

Again, you have to think about all this from a long term perspective. Once the spell caster is able to hurl fireballs and chain lightning all over the map, you NEED to have restrictions in place so that they aren't AOE'ing every enemy in a battle, Long Resting, AOE'ing every enemy in the next battle, Long Resting, AOE'ing every enemy in the next battle, Long Resting, AOE'ing every enemy in the next battle, etc.

Larian has to has to has to correct Long Rest abuse. If they don't, wizards become the MVP's of the game and all other classes become almost obsolete.

So besides it making sense from a story perspective to limit tons and tons of Long Resting, it is vital to game balance to limit Long Resting. The wizard has always, traditionally, been weaker than all the other classes at Level 1-4-ish. As they increase in level and gain more spell slots and such, they become WAY more powerful and WAY more essential to defeating more powerful enemies.

In previous D&D games, my party was carrying the wizard for some time. Then, as the game continued to progress, the wizard was the ONLY way we could defeat enemies. While most of the party was trying to just keep the enemy off of the wizard, the wizard would pummel the enemy with spells.

THAT'S how D&D is supposed to be played. The wizard is a tactically valuable class. You need to wisely use their spells and manage them carefully so that you save your best spells for your worst enemies. You aren't supposed to spam spells every battle on every pathetic minion. The wizard is supposed to help support the other members of the party when fighting minions, but then they go all out on bosses.

So, again, spamming Long Rests just throws all that out the window. Wizards can just spam Magic Missile every battle and always hit and always wipe the floor with enemies. Especially at Level 4, where my characters are right now, I get more slots, so I can have Gale just blast this enemy and that enemy and the battle is over much quicker. Then I can Long Rest, and Gale has all his spells back and on to the next battle. Gale can then spam his spells again and wipe the floor with enemies and Long Rest and so on.

I'm telling you, once you are able to get Fireball, massive groups of enemies will be wiped out like they are nothing, and if there is no limit to the wizard for Long Resting, the game is going to get REAL boring REAL fast. You'll start a battle, Fireball a massive number of foes, clean up the rest with the other party members, and the battle is over. Long Rest, rinse and repeat.

I know this post is not about Solasta, but again, Solasta does this well. You have ONLY select areas where you can Long Rest. So if you spam Fireball and you run out of spell slots, you have to try to get back to some place where you can Long Rest, and Solasta limits your ability to fast travel to Long Rest areas so that you are forced to press on without recovering spell slots. Your fault for using up all of your spell slots, but ultimately the point is that the wizard isn't blasting the crap out of everything every battle. You have to plan out and carefully determine when is the best time to use your spells. The whole point is that you have to carefully manage your resources.

And that's one of the fundamental points of the entire D&D game. You need to carefully balance your resources. That's part of the fun and balance of the game. The point is that you are meant to gather many different types of items for the whole purpose of using them to help you manage everything carefully. Potions, scrolls, magic weapons, etc. are all additional ways that you manage all that you need to get through the quest. You are not supposed to Long Rest after every battle or even all that frequently.

When playing normal D&D, DM's do not typically allow players to fight a battle in a dungeon and then shut the door and Long Rest for the remainder of the day. They fight a battle, if they need it they take a short rest to recover a little, then they move on to the next room in the dungeon. They fight another enemy, take damage, use potions, and move on to the next room. They fight another set of enemies, use spells, heal using potions, etc. and fight the next room full of foes. Ultimately, the entire concept is that you shouldn't actually Long Rest until AFTER you have completed an entire dungeon, and if the DM is a good DM they will build the dungeon in a way so that you don't need to Long Rest until you have completed it. If he sees that you really need a Long Rest, because a battle went particularly wrong, he might create a way to provide you with a Long Rest opportunity at some point just so that he/she can make sure that the characters don't die.

In a video game, this can be done, just as Solasta has proven. As the characters are dungeon crawling, they find an area that is designated as a Long Rest zone. At that point, the characters can Long Rest and recover and then continue. Larian could do something like this as well, but then they'd have to do away with the whole Fast Travel to Camp and Long Rest wherever you feel like it and whenever you feel like it mechanic. This would be harder for them to do because unlike Solasta, BG3 is much more open-world. You can go anywhere whenever you want, which is much more fun to me.

But the tradeoff for having a more open-world is that you need a whole new way to limit Long Rests. The only way I can see that they can limit Long Rests is to have SOMEthing happen if you use too many Long Rests. This brings me right back to the whole concept of the Time Sensitive Long Rest Mechanic that I proposed. You can still Long Rest as much as you want, and explore at your own pace. But the more you Long Rest, which is ending an entire day, the more things move on without you in the world. Things will happen if you Long Rest too much, and negative consequences may occur if you take too many days to complete certain quests.

Honestly, I can't see any other alternative to limit Long Rests, and even in my suggestion I am not truly limiting Long Rests. I am simply proposing that different things happen if you Long Rest more. The fewer the Long Rests you use, maybe the more rewards you get, but if you Long Rest a lot, you may get new side quests and complications in your quests because you took longer to complete them.

So with my suggestion, the idea is that you are technically rewarded either way. If you complete quests with fewer Long Rests, managing your resources more carefully, then you get bigger rewards. If you use more Long Rests and don't manage your resources as well, you get maybe some more fun quest options and see some different events triggered that maybe you wouldn't have gotten if you Long Rested less. In other words, less Long Rests, more rewards like better weapons and armor while more Long Rests things happen like now you need to save Rath from being executed by Kahga, or now you have to help defend the Grove Gate against an attack from goblins or now you have to try to save Wyll from goblins because he foolishly tried to complete his quest without you, or whatever.

In this way, people can still play the game however they want, and they will have different results based on how they play. If they long rest more, they get more complications that they have to solve. If they long rest less, they get more cool items. Either way, the game has WAY more replayability and it is fun either way AND you provide more value to items and short rests and so forth.

So, in my first playthrough, I might try to really go for the no Long Rest approach. In that playthrough, I would get a lot more cool items, but in my next playthrough I might spam Long Rest more and get more fun story quests, because my spamming Long Rest created more story complications...like it should.

This is how the classes are balanced in D&D, yes. Long-rest casters are not expected to be able to use all their spells every fight. Depending on their difficulty, you should get through 3-6 fights per long rest. Part of playing a caster is making judgements about what spells you can risk using during a given fight that you then won't have for later fights.

Right! Exactly! And again, the whole point of scrolls DEPENDS on spell management and limited Long Resting. Same with potions and many other items.

Thanks mrfuji3 for summing up what I was trying to say.

That's why I hate DnD system... Why be a mage if you can't do magic? Ugh. Seriously, I went through PoE2 and then PoE1 and it was a nightmare for me. Omg how quickly I got bored of playing as a mage because of skill slot system. It was a real disappointment for me.. :< I'm willing to accept it, but I'll never consider it as plus. In my understanding, support and mages classes should do magic, not swing a sword or shoot a bow. Otherwise, how do they differ from archer or warrior in the gameplay? I almost don't see the difference because "oh yes, I have skills, but I can't use them, I need to wait for a special battle!!!".

AMEN! Precisely. People are lazy and they want all things to be so damn easy, but the truth is stuff like that gets old real fast. There has to be challenges and you have to learn to prioritize and manage, it's part of what makes overcoming challenges FUN!

That's a somewhat fair criticism but definitely exaggerated. You always have access to cantrips so your mage should really never have to swing a sword or shoot a bow. Especially since cantrips deal more damage than non-magic weapons at 5th+ levels. Additionally, past 4th level I've found that it's rare to actually run out of spell slots before a day ends. Sure, sometimes you have to be conservative, but in most fights you'll be able to cast at least 1 of each level of spell.

A cooldown-based system might work better for D&D video games; it'd at the very least be easier to balance resting, the classes, encounters, basically everything. But, BG3 clearly doesn't have a cooldown-based spellcasting system and not enough effort has been put in to account for fact that D&D classes are based around resting. Although...I guess Fighters' Menacing strike has been made OP and everyone can use spell scrolls?? But the latter doesn't increase the effectiveness of the Fighter class, it just makes all classes more like wizards.

There's a fairly active Mega-thread about camping and resting here if you wanted to suggest your idea there https://forums.larian.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=752528

While some people have suggested making short rests mandatory, I don't think anyone in that thread has thought of your "1st-level spells restore after short rest" idea. I don't particularly like it, as it seems like a band-aid fix that also significantly changes how spellcasters work. These types of fixes are the sources of a lot of the issues with BG3. But I also don't hate it; it's a compromise between unlimited resting and 5e restrictions on resting.

The former aspect would require untying camp cutscenes from long rests, but that should be done anyway. I'm not sure how frustrating it'd be to need to short rest twice before long resting though...

Just thought i might toss this idea out there and see what everyone thinks about it.

What if shorts rests were mandatory, and yes i know that sounds annoying given how useless they currently are, but the caveat would be that they now give all level 1 spell slots back so that way you wouldn’t be inclined to just use them all up to long rest instead. This would make short rests have value while also putting stipulations to long resting without forcing one or the other to be wasted. As it currently stands long resting is just broken due to the fact there are no downsides or stipulations that make it less frequently used. I would also put in an OPTION to make long resting only available in either safe areas or cleared out hostile zones. This would help the hardcore dnd players get that same feeling from tabletop dnd without forcing annoying mechanics on some of the more casual players. I also believe this would buff some underwhelming classes such as cleric and arcane trickster. It would also allow for some more utility and damage from spellcasters without the need to constantly long rest and would incentivize saving those long rests and high end spells for the tough fights. It would also make cantrips feel less like spammy (i ran outta spells) spells that are basically pointless (and you would probably prefer to just to use a melee attack instead). This would make level 1 spells a lot more common and easier to obtain and maintain but i also think that it gives more value to high end spells and cantrips allowing cantrips to be what I personally think they are for “finishers”, and high end spells would be much more difficult to keep around unless you waste all your short rests which would be pointless given that most fights don’t require you to use level 2 or higher spells as most enemies in EA are quite easy if you play your cards right. And because spamming through short rests can be mildly annoying, you could implement a system that allows long resting in safe areas (non-hostile areas even if the enemies are cleared out it wouldn’t work in a hostile environment) without using all of your short rests!

I agree it would definitely change spellcasters, but i think overall they would still have the same relative strength but would allow more flexibility and utility in a fight. I personally don’t like wizards and stuff due to 2 reasons, one would be that they are usually hard targeted by the AI of the game (which i think the developers know and will probably fix), and the second reason is because they require all lot of micromanaging and resting to recover which heavily hinders their utility (part of which makes the cantrips in the game your only constant source of dps), it also makes healing way more important in a party as you don’t feel like you should only heal if someone is in dire need otherwise your wasting your spell slots which could’ve been used for more important burst damage against tough enemies and bosses.

Our (@XxAnonymousxX) Convo from other thread: I agree with you about the healing. Healing is already pretty weak in 5e: basically the only time it's worth expending a spell slot is for Healing Word on an unconscious party member. Allowing casters to feel more free to cast healing spells without worry about wasting slots isn't a bad idea.

This would also enable casters to be more liberal with the cool but risky level 1 spells such as Command. RAW I'd almost never use this spell, because if the enemy passes their ST I lose both a turn and a valuable spell slot.

@Nyloth

I'm glad you bought BG3 and all, but if you hate D&D, why did you buy a D&D game? I mean, why are you playing a D&D game and then upset that they made it based on D&D rules?

Support and mages classes do magic, but they also need to swing weapons and shoot with crossbows. They differ from archer or warrior in the gameplay because they aren't as good at these things AND their magic makes them more potent when handling bigger enemies. As you gain levels and become more powerful, they become VERY powerful especially as AOE and Damage Mongers. They need to be limited so that they aren't overpowering the rest of the classes.

You know what's fun? I never knew this was a DnD game. Unlike the others, I didn't follow the game, I was just looking for a new RPG, I had played DOS2 before, but I didn't know that Larian had a new project. When I found out, I immediately tried it and liked it. At that time, I did not read interview or detailed description of game.

I love RPGs, unfortunately (for me) many rpg games (like PoE1) use DnD system for skills. I don't drop games because just cuz they use this system, I say I can accept it, but I will never consider it as plus. This makes their gameplay similar to that of other classes. Yes, of course, you have "normal" skills that do not need slots, but, for example, Cleric skills at this moment in BG3 are simply terrible. I don't see the point of using them, because it's much more profitable to shoot a bow. This makes my experience on cleric exactly the same as my experience on ranger. I just shoot bow until there's a boss or something like that. What I really love about DOS2 is that every battle you fight (unless you're a barrel fan) is magical, literally.

But like I said, I accept it. Because I love story and role-playing moments more than gameplay.

@Nyloth.

You know, I can not only respect that, but I get it. Taking a step back, if you aren't familiar with D&D, and you are only familiar with other fantasy RPG's, D&D will totally seem too limited and such. I'm used to all sorts of RPG's. I've grown up on them, so for me, D&D is still probably the best RPG ruleset out there. I've played Star Wars from West End Games, Lord of the Rings from Decipher, Star Wars from WOTC, Star Wars from Fantasy Flights, Legend of the Five Rings from Fantasy Flights, Battletech, Mechwarrior...I've played lots of tabeltop miniature battles games, and so forth. So I'm used to all this stuff, and seeing Larian not put the rules of 5e in place more accurately is driving me crazy because I'm playing 5e now with others, and I find it more fun than past D&D rulesets. I like that wizards have Cantrips now, for example, that they can use without limit. It used to be that you only had a certain number of Cantrip spellslots too in order versions. I like that they simplified a lot of things so that I don't have to memorize all sorts of feats and abilities to make sure that I use them and play my characters correctly.

But thinking about other fantasy RPG's, even games like Baldur's Gate Dark Alliance 1 and 2, wizards and clerics spam spells, even having Mana Points that they use to be able to cast them. They can drink Mana Potions to regenerate their spells, and so forth, so that they can keep running around hacking/slashing everything. The gameplay is more video game oriented and so on.

That said, I was most excited about BG3 being a true D&D 5e experience because NO ONE has really ever made a true D&D video game that abided by the rules of D&D; at least not very well. I have always wanted a D&D game where they truly took the D&D ruleset and implemented it well into a video game format so I could play D&D as a player, not a DM, and the computer would do all the painful calculations and such for me. So I was really hoping BG3 would be that game, and my disappointment has to do with the fact that it isn't. They are not really implementing the 5e rules very well.

Solasta, on the other hand, has satisfied this for me, but Solasta is in no way as exciting and epic as BG3 seems like it is going to be. I enjoy BG3 so much more than Solasta, not because of the combat and gameplay, but because of the story and characters and dialogue and the replayability and the graphics and the fact that Solasta is more linear while BG3 is more dynamic and open-world. I get a whole different emotional feel for BG3 than Solasta, and I want it to be the best game it can possibly be.

That said, I still hope they do a 5e Core Difficulty Mode or something. I still hope they have something to limit Long Rests because it truly ruins the entire experience and balance of the game to be able to spam Long Rests after every battle. It also just doesn't make sense from a story perspective. They set up all these timed quests, for that's what the story truly does, which is exciting and all, but then they don't follow through with it. Very disappointing!

If you want to put a better balance to camping and resting a more effective way to do it might it you really wanted to make it not always work out the way you want it might be to have random encounters happen when attempting to return to camp maybe adding several mini encounter maps where a random assortment of npcs may spawn with like a random chance of getting one of those encounters when going to camp. This would give an opportunity for random loot encounters as well but that is just an idea. Not something i could see in early access but it would be a good idea for long version of the game a semi random encounter chance. This could carry over long term in the game to a reasonable value incentive to characters even after the parasite is removed assuming it happens before the end of chapter 2 or along those lines. It could be like a 5% chance of an encounter like that occuring but it would make for an interesting situation where using your short rests and long rests matter more and planning your thoughts on when to do so meaning more. But its just a thought.