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

I actually think the game would be better with both solution 1 and 2, though for solution 2 I'm not saying it has to be those prerequisites. Im just saying some sort of prerequisites so that characters are not using rests unless they are truly needing it.

So maybe it isn't half health but maybe 3/4 health. Maybe not both food and drink are required but just food or drink. Maybe not all spell slots but more than half. Just something so that characters are urging players to NOT rest unless it makes mote sense to rest...both short and long.

And then, if they'd use too many, the story triggers an event that explains why goblins arent attacking or druids kicking people out, etc. And maybe even providing additional story quests, etc.

I agree that it is weird that the story doesn’t progress, and an explanation would be of great help (idk about the quests because it depends on the implications and impacts on the combat of the story quests themselves if you choose to ignore it), but i think maybe just food or drink and then make short rests mandatory before long rests would be more than plenty to steer the player away from spamming the long rest button.

Hmmm...I would agree with you there.

I give some level 5 spellcaster stats in the spider lair thread if interested. You'll see just how powerful a mage can be at level 5 with just the Dragon's Breath spell. I didn't even have her use lightning bolt or fireball. 😁

The higher the levels, the tougher they get. If you don't limit long rests, they become OP.

Prepare to be disappointed because so far all signs indicate that Larian is not going to do this.
If you look at all of the most popular D&D games, none of them had limited rest, and for no reason.
The game is clearly not designed for limited rest along with the fast travel system, camp, talks or even the balance of fights.
It is unlikely that they would suddenly change direction by 180 degrees.
Players do not like to manage resources in rpg games for a long time and if it were not for the fact that the presence of rest is the core mechanic of D&D, it would most likely be removed.
The fact that the game will not be balanced, really hardly anyone cares as long as the game is fun and there will be no situation when the character will be useless.
The D&D balance actually died when they decided to make the AAA game.

Ah whatever. I'm out here to give suggestions that I think would make the game better. Do I think they'll listen to me and even do a small portion of what Im suggesting, probably not.

I mean, the whole point of EA and a suggestion forum is to allow players to offer advice and suggestions on what they think will make the game better.

So here I am making suggestions because I am an experienced DM and I hope they listen to my advice and I love the game and think it could be even better. If they don't, that's up to them and Im not here to get all upset if they don't. They have to make money in the end and if they think they will without implementing my advice, I respect that.

Ok. Check out my posts on the spider lair thread for how a short rest is supposed to work on 5e. See how the actual 5e system limits their use. It could easily be implemented for BG3.

Do maybe if Larian does short rest like they should and then implements more of the prerequisites for long rest, that might really fix the broken system.

I'm not sure limiting the rests in the way you've described would work. If my companions have to be at half health, I'll just beat them up until they're ready for bed. It's still cheese, but with extra steps.

Def should limit it by area. It's kind of silly that I can just leave the goblin fort and go back to camp, especially when the front door is goblin is guarded by hostiles. Maybe guest rights are sacred in Faerun?

I think it should definitely be limited by resources. The problem then comes at later levels, when characters are absolutely loaded. If they have the money, what's to stop them from spamming long rests?

You could have things cost more in the city. Even the cheapest room would cost more than a night in the wilderness, and cheaper rooms could be less effective

That leaves an awkward spot in the middle game, where you're not too poor to worry about resting too often, and you're still in the wilderness where camping is the norm.

Larian has their work cut out for them if they hope to balance the game.

And on that note, cutting players off from content because of in game time restrictions is stupid. If you want to feel the pressures of limited time, suspend your disbelief and pretend they're there, like in most other games. Earth may be under attack by Reapers, but they'll wait until you're ready to commence the final battle. No need to worry about being cut off from certain missions just because you wanted to goof around.

I mean this is pretty much the perfect comment for me. You make a perfect point about the Reapers, it is that way in EVERY RPG game pretty much, there is. That is why I think it is so strange when people carry on about the tadpole etc. Every RPG game has some time sensitive, save the world mission. Through story, and the creative use of drama, they relay the feeling it is some rush to save the world, but hey, here are 2 companion missions you have to do first before your compatriots will fight effectively or even survive the battle.

The sense of urgency in every story RPG is always basically the same. With pretty much cookie cutter similarity. Mass Effect, DA, CP2077, Red Dead Redemption and so on and so on. So why do I see people posting confusion about the way this game plays out in regards to the tadpole not immediately taking over your body. Or put some time crunch on events in the game....It is called Plot Armor for a reason. It is the same in all of these games in one way or another.

People have a fetish for realism. If they're going to put on time limit for the sake of realism, why stop there? What if your party is arrested for vigilante heroism, charged as felons, and forced to work as desk clerk's because their felon status prevents them from getting a better job? Don't like it? Tough, that's life bitches.

Nah. I want the game to be fun. I also want the game to stand out.

You are right about how so many video games just let players do whatever they want and the story just waits for them to finally get around to doing something about it.

That's, again, only 1 small part of this. The true issue is around mechanics. In order for the game to work, you have to provide some sort of consequences for long resting all the time. BG1 and 2 and IWD used random encounters with no fast travel. NWN 1 and 2 didn't really limit it took much, and it hurt the gameplay considerably. Good game, mind you, but being able to heal after every battle had the same effect as BG3. I didn't need potions and healing spells as much, and when I got tougher I could spam really powerful spells like crazy.

But yes. I like stories that make sense. I don't like reading books where the story is flawed, I don't like movies with plot holes, as much anyway, and I don't like when video games just don't make sense. I would LOVE for someone to start creating video games where they actually make sense and maybe, just maybe, I could play through on the first time through without having to save scum my way through the whole game. You know, a game where I could actually BE the character and try to make it without dying the first time through without knowing where all the bad guys are and tricks and gimmicks just like a genuine, real RPG. Because in a true RPG, you only get 1 shot to get through the story. You cant save and reload.

But instead, we keep getting these same old gimmick games with impossible encounters that you cant beat unless you know your enemies' weaknesses and the game gimmicks by fighting them 10 times save scumming each boss fight.

100%.


This game can be played to the end without dying, even on the first run. My first run I died once. I don't even remember how, lol. I take a very cautious approach to new encounters. I take my time during my turns, weighing all my options, considering what I want other characters to do on their turns, noting who's turn comes when, both mine and my enemy's. Maybe I got lucky. I encountered the hag at level 4, so I was as prepared as a could be. The beholder almost killed me, but I pulled out some cheese. I cast fog and hid in the cloud. Most of the enemies durped out, and I was able to pop out, shoot 'em, then hide again. The phase spider matriarch I encountered at level 3. She almost wiped me out, but I was able to get away. It was an epic battle of inching further towards the exit while being swarmed by her children. It's sad that they don't respawn. What should be an epic encounter is made simpler with cheese. Oh well. That's the spider queen in a nutshell, I guess.

OMG, man. You think I didn't play this game carefully when I first played it? I was trying so hard to play it in a way where whatever happened to my character happened. If people died, they died. If I failed rolls, I failed. I wanted the full blown experience of being immersed in this world and pretending like I was actually my character. For better or worse, I was going to play through without game over and whatever happened happened.

That's why I used as few Long Rests as possible, I collected and stored all the food and water and such so I could steadily use them to survive because I thought I had to. I was afraid if I used long rests the tadpole was going to turn me and/or goblins were going to attack the grove and/or the druids were going to kick the tieflings out any day and/or Lae'zel or Wyll were going to leave the party. Based on how the story went, as a First Time Player, I was playing this game thinking everything WAS timed and if I long rested too much I was going to fail everyone.

Yeah. Then I read some of the posts and realized that there was no time limit. It was all an illusion. You can long rest as much as you want. In fact, I missed out on all sorts of dialogue because I DIDN'T long rest a lot which is totally contrary to the whole story. So I was a bit pissed that that was the case. Not only was there no real time limits but the game encourages using lots of long rests. It's dumb and makes all potions and scrolls and pretty much EVERY item you pick up utterly pointless. There is NO strategy in that. This game is supposed to be about trying to manage your resources and use them wisely in strategic ways and such. Not limiting long rests and such just utterly destroys that. Why even bother making us pick up all the items we do if we're just going to sell them all anyway because we don't really need any of them because they're all only good for gold so maybe I can buy some +1 weapon or armor? I've gotten to the point in the game that I literally have to stop myself from just selling all the stuff I pick up so I can buy the best armor and weapons because it's all junk anyway. I can long rest whenever I want, so I don't need scrolls, EVER, and I only need a few potions for emergency healing during fights like the spider queen or hag, but hardly ever for any other fights. So why bother with food or drinks or potions or scrolls or anything?

All you need in this game is to learn how to cheese it. You don't need anything else, and that's what frustrates me so much. That's why I fight for the limits and consequences. I know some players are like, "We don't want limits because we want to roam the map and carefully explore everything and if you put limits on my long rests I can't do that," but that's simply not true. You can have realistic limits and timed events and such without inhibiting the game so much that you can't explore all the fun and incredible places on the map. There is an in between. I gave plenty of examples of what they could do. I even gave examples of them giving players like 15 long rests or more to complete certain quests. How many long rests do you guys need? If you are using that many long rests, I'm sorry but that's excessive. You need to learn to use items and short rests more if you are using that many long rests to complete the EA. On my first playthrough, I was able to save Halsin and do all the side quests on the map prior to going to the Underdark in 7 long rests (days), and I didn't even know all the Larian homebrew cheeses and such. I had to save scum a few times because of fights that were ridiculously hard like the spider lair, but I did it.

How did random encounters in BG limit resting? It's not like you could have skipped all of them just by using the simple in-game load save function.
All the random encounters did was make the game more irritating.

You've inspired me to complete the game using as few long rests as possible.

And so begins the run of Lady Tryhard.

Lol. Go for it.

I've been doing pretty much the same thing again. I'm working through the game and monitoring how many Long Rests I've used. Here are my results so far:

Day 1: Got through the Dank Crypt. End Day after Dank Crypt was over.
Day 2: Got through the Grove and even the Harpies fight and all the events in the Grove.
Day 3: I met Scratch, Ed's siblings, the Owlbear Cave. Ended Day just before going into the Bog.
Day 4: Beat the Hag and the Bog and dethroned Kahga. So 2 long rests after the Grove, I stopped the Ritual.
Day 5: Explored Bogrot and saved the gnome at the windmill. This leads to Wyll's quest, so it would maybe be reasonable that Wyll is feeling like we're doing his quest. So, by doing this, he probably wouldn't feel like he needs to threaten to leave if we don't beat the goblins anytime soon. Lae'zel, though, might be getting antsy. Since I have a Drow in the party, I didn't have to fight the goblins, and I also paid the ogres to serve me. So I might have had to do a long rest after all this if I was doing a different playthrough. Since I used my Drow, I was able to go into the Spider Lair and complete it. End Day.
Day 6: I get to the Tyrites and do that whole side quest and defeat the gnolls. Haven't ended day yet. This is where I am currently.

So, since I found out about the ritual and the future goblin attack on Day 2, so far I've used 4 Long Rests since then if you include Day 2's long rest. That means, in truth, it has only been maybe 3, almost 4, 24 hour days since I entered the Grove. So let's say I didn't dethrone Kahga on Day 4. Maybe on Day 5, someone does something to delay the ritual. So, like I said in a previous example, maybe Rath stops the ritual and gets thrown into a cell. Kahga is thinking about executing him for treason against the Grove. You can either sneak in and free him, and maybe even get him to join your party, OR you can ignore it and let him get executed, OR you could hurry to do something to dethrone Kahga. Either way, maybe you get another 3 days to complete this quest that you should have been able to realistically complete in 2-3 days. So, instead of only having like 3 days or something, you get like 6.

Honestly, I'm doing everything in the game, and I'm almost done with all the side quests on the surface. I have to do Waukeen's Rest and the Gith. Then it's straight to the gobbo camp. I'm fully anticipating doing Waukeen's Rest and then maybe Long Resting and ending Day 6. Then do the Gith on Day 7 and move on to the gobbo base. I might, maybe Long Rest just before going to the Gobbo Base, which would put me to Day 8. I should then be able to complete the Gobbo Base on Day 8, and if I can't then they clearly need to rework the Gobbo Base so people can beat it without having to do Long Rests because once you enter the Gobbo Base you shouldn't be able to Fast Travel out, Long Rest after you kill one of the leaders, Fast Travel back, kill one of the leaders, Long Rest, etc. It doesn't make sense to allow people to spend more than a day killing the leaders. It should be an epic, challenging battle that you do in one pass. After you kill one of the leaders, the place should be on full alert and ready to kill any outsiders.

But even all that aside, if I can beat the entire upper surface of EA in 7-10 days, then the maximum time frames that players should get should be something like 14-15 days. This gives players almost twice as many Long Rests as they should need.

Oh, and I did this run using as much of the D&D 5e rules as I could, limiting myself so I didn't use potions as bonus actions or shove as bonus actions, and I tried really hard not to use backstab and height advantage etc. So if I can do that with all these non-cheese rules, avoiding Larian's homebrew, then certainly new players could do it and still not feel rushed and so forth.

Again, my suggestion isn't so much to give hard limits as it is to provide SOME sort of events to happen as Long Rests are used, and SOME sort of better rewards for those who do the game in less time. Thus, rewarding those who play the game in less long rests by giving them better stuff while those who take longer still get a prize. It just might not be as awesome as those who beat it using less Long Rests.

Not EVERYONE can be the Gold Medalist in the Olympics, and that's probably the best way to explain this suggestion. Everyone still gets a medal, but the one who bits it using less Long Rests gets the Gold. Those who take forever, get the Bronze. SOMETHING to push players to challenge themselves more, but still offering an option for those players who just want to play the game casually and don't care about pushing themselves.

You're thinking of 2e, 3e, and 3.5. The only way in 5e Sorcerers can get more spell slots, than the table allows per long rest, is by trading in Spell Points. Not a good trade once you hit 3rd level and gain Meta-Magics. All full casters, except the Warlock, have the same base spell slots. Wizards can recover some of these slots per long rest as well.

Sorcerers don't need to prepare their spells, and have all of their spells available. But they are very limited in spells known 1 + level. Wizards can prepare a number of spells equal to their level + Intelligence modifier. Clerics have the best prep list in the game, they prepare level + Wisdom modifier + Domain spells. But Sorcerers have Meta-Magics which make up for their deficiencies.


I'm partial to # 2. Out of Short Rests, plus 1 food item per party member. I'm not opposed to random encounters, though I'm not sure how that is supposed to discourage long rests.

Random encounters never discouraged long rests according to me. Random encounters encourage the ressources management which is a core mechanic of D&D.
As a consequence you usually have to rest less often because you're less likely to burn your ressources.

You can still do it but at your own risks because you may need something to travel to your camp or resting in a dangerous area.
It's up to the player to think about and to manage the risks/benefits rate. No one like dying and reload, players have to be carrefull.

On the other hand it's never the end of anything because you can eventually reload if necessary and players that don't like random encounters can usually disable them in every games these days.

Ofc I'm talking about random encounters when resting or fast travelling (i.e BG1/2)
Not random encounters when "real time" moving on a worldmap (i.e Pathfinder/Solasta)

Yeah, I personally don't like random encounters. I prefer reasonable timed events. They make more sense and provide more in game dynamics and variety. Plus, as a DM, that's what you do. You urge players via story to do things.

But maybe a mix of story and prerequisite would be best because it doesn't really make sense to end day if you still have a lot of fight left in you. So maybe some prerequisites and also some timed events.

Just way way way too many cutscenes...I thought I had bought a game but it's turning into a movie...