Goodberry Buff

[Thomas]

In the next patch or hotfix could we get Goodberry to be brought in-line with the table top version, where: "Eating a berry restores 1 hit point, and the berry provides enough nourishment to sustain a creature for one day." Which would be 10 Camp Supplies in the context of this system.
The new camp supply system works really well, and the change to Goodberry would be, no pun intended, deliciously flavourful while playing as a Druid or Ranger and adds some real powerful utility to, what is in its current state, a pretty useless spell.

[Pan Darius Cassandra]

They ought to allow us to fee each character in our party individually (smaller parties shouldn't require as much food), and yes, Goodberry should be worth enough to feed one character for a day.

[Runic Tunic]

They might. I'd imagine it requires some looking into on their part to see if it wouldn't break any of the systems too early on for what they currently have in place. But theoretically it could work.

[asdf]

I mean, I think the camp system is entirely pointless either way so I guess I don't really care, but I really don't see what the point of it would be if it could be entirely circumvented by a level 1 spell.

[dolby]

With the amout of food in game it makes no difference one way or the other.. There is just to much food everywhere to even think about wasting a slot on it even if it gave me 200 food. Best thing right now would be to give combat buff or healing as healing potions.

[Pan Darius Cassandra]

Escrito originalmente por asdf:

I mean, I think the camp system is entirely pointless either way so I guess I don't really care, but I really don't see what the point of it would be if it could be entirely circumvented by a level 1 spell.

The point is that per/rest abilities, especially spells, are balanced around resting being a limited resource (whether that resource is time...which BG3 doesn't have since there is no clock or time sensitive content...or something else) and spell casting classes (such as the Warlock, who gets fewer spell slots, but recharges them on a short rest and also gets access to several at-will spell invocations) are balanced relative to other classes that get their spells back during a long rest.

Without any kind of limitation on resting there is no reason not to just take Wizards or Clerics over other spellcasters (aside from flavor and RP'ing) and use up all of your spell slots in every fight. In other words, there's absolutely no reason to conserve per/rest abilities whatsoever, and the entire mechanic might as well be thrown out and just have all abilities reset after an encounter (which doesn't solve the fact that classes are balanced relative to each other based on the rest system).

Furthermore, as far as Goodberry circumventing the rest system goes, I'd point out a couple of things - Goodberry is a spell and if you're going to use it then you're going to be down a spell slot every day. Furthermore, you have to bring either a Ranger or a Druid to get the spell, so if you have a party without one of those classes then it's not available to you.

The rest system is about trade offs - you can either forage in the wild for food (takes time and inventory space), or you can purchase rations from a vendor (costs gold), or you can dedicate a spell slot every day to obviating the issue (one less level 1 spell for you per day, and if you're a Ranger it also takes up one of your 'spells known' choices).

The only problem with camping right now is that food is so abundant it effectively still doesn't matter.

[asdf]

Escrito originalmente por pandariuskairos:

Escrito originalmente por asdf:

I mean, I think the camp system is entirely pointless either way so I guess I don't really care, but I really don't see what the point of it would be if it could be entirely circumvented by a level 1 spell.

The point is that per/rest abilities, especially spells, are balanced around resting being a limited resource (whether that resource is time...which BG3 doesn't have since there is no clock or time sensitive content) and spell casting classes (such as the Warlock, who gets fewer spell slots, but recharges them on a short rest and also gets access to several at-will spell invocations) are balanced relative to other classes that get their spells back during a long rest.

Without any kind of limitation on resting there is no reason not to just take Wizards or Clerics over other spellcasters (aside from flavor and RP'ing) and use up all of your spell slots in every fight. In other words, there's absolutely no reason to conserve per/rest abilities whatsoever, and the entire mechanic might as well be thrown out and just have all abilities reset after an encounter (which doesn't solve the fact that classes are balanced relative to each other based on the rest system).

Furthermore, as far as Goodberry circumventing the rest system goes, I'd point out a couple of things - Goodberry is a spell and if you're going to use it then you're going to be down a spell slot every day. Furthermore, you have to bring either a Ranger or a Druid to get the spell, so if you have a party without one of those classes then it's not available to you.

The rest system is about trade offs - you can either forage in the wild for food (takes time and inventory space), or you can purchase rations from a vendor (costs gold), or you can dedicate a spell slot every day to obviating the issue (one less level 1 spell for you per day, and if you're a Ranger it also takes up one of your 'spells known' choices).

The only problem with camping right now is that food is so abundant it effectively still doesn't matter.

I mean.. if people want to rest then they're already injured and almost certainly missing 1 or more spells otherwise there wouldn't really be any need to rest in the first place, so you're asking 'is it better to be missing 1 level 1 spell or 2 level 1 spells and a level 2 spell and be injured?' Gee, what a tradeoff, I have no idea how to tell which option is better than the other. There would be no strategic reason to not just use goodberries and rest after every fight, which completely removes any purpose to the camp limitations existing (which I guess is fine because I don't think it has any good purpose for existing anyway).

[Pan Darius Cassandra]

Escrito originalmente por asdf:

Escrito originalmente por pandariuskairos:

The point is that per/rest abilities, especially spells, are balanced around resting being a limited resource (whether that resource is time...which BG3 doesn't have since there is no clock or time sensitive content) and spell casting classes (such as the Warlock, who gets fewer spell slots, but recharges them on a short rest and also gets access to several at-will spell invocations) are balanced relative to other classes that get their spells back during a long rest.

Without any kind of limitation on resting there is no reason not to just take Wizards or Clerics over other spellcasters (aside from flavor and RP'ing) and use up all of your spell slots in every fight. In other words, there's absolutely no reason to conserve per/rest abilities whatsoever, and the entire mechanic might as well be thrown out and just have all abilities reset after an encounter (which doesn't solve the fact that classes are balanced relative to each other based on the rest system).

Furthermore, as far as Goodberry circumventing the rest system goes, I'd point out a couple of things - Goodberry is a spell and if you're going to use it then you're going to be down a spell slot every day. Furthermore, you have to bring either a Ranger or a Druid to get the spell, so if you have a party without one of those classes then it's not available to you.

The rest system is about trade offs - you can either forage in the wild for food (takes time and inventory space), or you can purchase rations from a vendor (costs gold), or you can dedicate a spell slot every day to obviating the issue (one less level 1 spell for you per day, and if you're a Ranger it also takes up one of your 'spells known' choices).

The only problem with camping right now is that food is so abundant it effectively still doesn't matter.

I mean.. if people want to rest then they're already injured and almost certainly missing 1 or more spells otherwise there wouldn't really be any need to rest in the first place, so you're asking 'is it better to be missing 1 level 1 spell or 2 level 1 spells and a level 2 spell and be injured?' Gee, what a tradeoff, I have no idea how to tell which option is better than the other. There would be no strategic reason to not just use goodberries and rest after every fight, which completely removes any purpose to the camp limitations existing (which I guess is fine because I don't think it has any good purpose for existing anyway).

And again - using Goodberry is a trade off as you would need to permanently dedicate one of your daily spell slots to using it, which means you have one less spell slot than those that choose to use food instead. And you also have to have a Ranger or Druid or you don't even get the spell.

[asdf]

Escrito originalmente por pandariuskairos:

Escrito originalmente por asdf:

I mean.. if people want to rest then they're already injured and almost certainly missing 1 or more spells otherwise there wouldn't really be any need to rest in the first place, so you're asking 'is it better to be missing 1 level 1 spell or 2 level 1 spells and a level 2 spell and be injured?' Gee, what a tradeoff, I have no idea how to tell which option is better than the other. There would be no strategic reason to not just use goodberries and rest after every fight, which completely removes any purpose to the camp limitations existing (which I guess is fine because I don't think it has any good purpose for existing anyway).

And again - using Goodberry is a trade off as you would need to permanently dedicate one of your daily spell slots to using it, which means you have one less spell slot than those that choose to use food instead. And you also have to have a Ranger or Druid or you don't even get the spell.

If you're going into fights unrested then you're missing that spell slot anyway though.. so there is no tradeoff, because you were already missing that spell slot. The only situation goodberries could ever be considered to have a cost is if you spent literally every spell you had in a single fight, but if combat was balanced around that then it makes no sense whatsoever to have the resting system in the game.. and if it isn't balanced around that, then goodberries functionally has no cost because you get back everything you spent as soon as you use it. It's like if there were an attack in the game that costed an action but also gave you an extra action afterwards - what's even the point?

And the whole 'if you don't have a druid or ranger argument' is just fluff because they would either make having a ranger/druid incredibly overpowered or they'd have to make food so abundant that resting was trivial either way which would still trivialize the entire system. Both outcomes are bad (one for the game's balance and the other because it just adds pointless tedium), so it makes no sense to use that as an argument in favor of it.

[Pan Darius Cassandra]

Escrito originalmente por asdf:

Escrito originalmente por pandariuskairos:

And again - using Goodberry is a trade off as you would need to permanently dedicate one of your daily spell slots to using it, which means you have one less spell slot than those that choose to use food instead. And you also have to have a Ranger or Druid or you don't even get the spell.

If you're going into fights unrested then you're missing that spell slot anyway though.. so there is no tradeoff, because you were already missing that spell slot. The only situation goodberries could ever be considered to have a cost is if you spent literally every spell you had in a single fight, but if combat was balanced around that then it makes no sense whatsoever to have the resting system in the game.. and if it isn't balanced around that, then goodberries functionally has no cost because you get back everything you spent as soon as you use it. It's like if there were an attack in the game that costed an action but also gave you an extra action afterwards - what's even the point?

And the whole 'if you don't have a druid or ranger argument' is just fluff because they would either make having a ranger/druid incredibly overpowered or they'd have to make food so abundant that resting was trivial either way which would still trivialize the entire system. Both outcomes are bad (one for the game's balance and the other because it just adds pointless tedium), so it makes no sense to use that as an argument in favor of it.

I think you are confused about how resting works in D&D.

You are expected to take 2 short rests and a long rest after approximately 6 encounters (give or take - this will obviously vary from group to group).

Which means you need to get through all 6 (or so) fights with the spell slots you have (unless you're a Warlock, in which case you get them back on a short rest).

If you save a spell slot for Goodberry, that's one spell slot you can't use in the 5th or 6th fight of the day.

At higher levels it doesn't matter quite as much because 1st level spells aren't as powerful, so they tend to get dedicated to utility buffs (like Longstrider) and other 'convenience' and QoL kind of stuff. Which is also perfect for Goodberry, since it's one spell slot to circumvent the food requirement for camping.

[asdf]

Escrito originalmente por pandariuskairos:

Escrito originalmente por asdf:

If you're going into fights unrested then you're missing that spell slot anyway though.. so there is no tradeoff, because you were already missing that spell slot. The only situation goodberries could ever be considered to have a cost is if you spent literally every spell you had in a single fight, but if combat was balanced around that then it makes no sense whatsoever to have the resting system in the game.. and if it isn't balanced around that, then goodberries functionally has no cost because you get back everything you spent as soon as you use it. It's like if there were an attack in the game that costed an action but also gave you an extra action afterwards - what's even the point?

And the whole 'if you don't have a druid or ranger argument' is just fluff because they would either make having a ranger/druid incredibly overpowered or they'd have to make food so abundant that resting was trivial either way which would still trivialize the entire system. Both outcomes are bad (one for the game's balance and the other because it just adds pointless tedium), so it makes no sense to use that as an argument in favor of it.

I think you are confused about how resting works in D&D.

You are expected to take 2 short rests and a long rest after approximately 6 encounters (give or take - this will obviously vary from group to group).

Which means you need to get through all 6 (or so) fights with the spell slots you have (unless you're a Warlock, in which case you get them back on a short rest).

If you save a spell slot for Goodberry, that's one spell slot you can't use in the 5th or 6th fight of the day.

At higher levels it doesn't matter quite as much because 1st level spells aren't as powerful, so they tend to get dedicated to utility buffs (like Longstrider) and other 'convenience' and QoL kind of stuff. Which is also perfect for Goodberry, since it's one spell slot to circumvent the food requirement for camping.

Why would I do that? I can just fight 1 battle, use goodberries and rest, then fight 1 more battle, use goodberries again and rest again etc.. What you're talking about would be objectively a terrible strategy to use.

[Izunyami]

Escrito originalmente por asdf:

Escrito originalmente por pandariuskairos:

I think you are confused about how resting works in D&D.

You are expected to take 2 short rests and a long rest after approximately 6 encounters (give or take - this will obviously vary from group to group).

Which means you need to get through all 6 (or so) fights with the spell slots you have (unless you're a Warlock, in which case you get them back on a short rest).

If you save a spell slot for Goodberry, that's one spell slot you can't use in the 5th or 6th fight of the day.

At higher levels it doesn't matter quite as much because 1st level spells aren't as powerful, so they tend to get dedicated to utility buffs (like Longstrider) and other 'convenience' and QoL kind of stuff. Which is also perfect for Goodberry, since it's one spell slot to circumvent the food requirement for camping.

Why would I do that? I can just fight 1 battle, use goodberries and rest, then fight 1 more battle, use goodberries again and rest again etc.. What you're talking about would be objectively a terrible strategy to use.

Don't bother. Panda is incapable of recognizing BG3 as a video game and keeps trying to bring tabletop elements into the game, even though tabletop elements can't be translated into the video game format; either by basic video-game limitations or literal technological limitations. Panda actually expects you to fight 6 times before long resting and anything other than that is "doing it wrong" or something.

It's pointless to carry on any argument; Panda will never cede a centimeter, even though you're correct in that the resting system is a completely meaningless system.

[dolby]

Escrito originalmente por Izunyami:

completely meaningless system.

yeah but they could limit the food drops by adding difficulty mode and then it wouldn't be meaningless...Right now i guess they are to scared to make it hard.

For those who would pick that option. I would be one of those... it should be hard. But as is, you are right! Way way to much food you can rest whenever you please so much food you can sell it and stop picking it up. So untill that is addressed the whole spell it's pointless as is.

[Izunyami]

Escrito originalmente por dolby:

Escrito originalmente por Izunyami:

completely meaningless system.

yeah but they could limit the food drops by adding difficulty mode and then it wouldn't be meaningless...Right now i guess they are to scared to make it hard.

For those who would pick that option. I would be one of those... it should be hard. But as is, you are right! Way way to much food you can rest whenever you please so much food you can sell it and stop picking it up. So untill that is addressed the whole spell it's pointless as is.

And then people get permanently stuck as they run out of food completely and have to restart the entire game. Which is just a ♥♥♥♥♥♥ version of Ironman Mode.
And if food is sold in stores, which would be illogical if it wasn't in a city as big as Baldur's Gate, then this "limited food" doesn't exist, making the system meaningless outside of potentially a ♥♥♥♥♥♥ money sink.

And as asdf pointed out, the existence of Goodberry (a level 1 spell at that) invalidates the whole thing to begin with. Just throw a single spell cast and you'll have your camp supplies. Worse yet for people who don't use Gale in their active party; just go back to camp, put gale in your party, cast Good Berry 1 to 3 times, have plenty of food for free. Pointless system.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkHapG6kXUg
^He sums it up well, it's an issue with 5E in general but it's made even worse in video game format.

[dolby]

Escrito originalmente por Izunyami:

Escrito originalmente por dolby:

yeah but they could limit the food drops by adding difficulty mode and then it wouldn't be meaningless...Right now i guess they are to scared to make it hard.

For those who would pick that option. I would be one of those... it should be hard. But as is, you are right! Way way to much food you can rest whenever you please so much food you can sell it and stop picking it up. So untill that is addressed the whole spell it's pointless as is.

And then people get permanently stuck as they run out of food completely and have to restart the entire game. Which is just a ♥♥♥♥♥♥ version of Ironman Mode.
And if food is sold in stores, which would be illogical if it wasn't in a city as big as Baldur's Gate, then this "limited food" doesn't exist, making the system meaningless outside of potentially a ♥♥♥♥♥♥ money sink.

And as asdf pointed out, the existence of Goodberry (a level 1 spell at that) invalidates the whole thing to begin with. Just throw a single spell cast and you'll have your camp supplies. Worse yet for people who don't use Gale in their active party; just go back to camp, put gale in your party, cast Good Berry 1 to 3 times, have plenty of food for free. Pointless system.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkHapG6kXUg
^He sums it up well, it's an issue with 5E in general but it's made even worse in video game format.

That's table top don't care about that...:)

For a Optinal hard mode it would be great and yes it would be a money sink as it should be!!.:)) God knows game needs more of those.... Cos the whole restocking unlimited potions and scrolls merchants are just blah... but i can live with that aslong as they fix pickpocketing.
Again for optional hard classic mode. I guess others can just not pick it that mode???... Or they can and after come cry on the forum how hard it is, that's fun as well.:)
I'm one of those people that drags along bedrolls and pots and pans in game. SO the day they added weight limit it was best patch ever for me...

[asdf]

Escrito originalmente por dolby:

Escrito originalmente por Izunyami:

completely meaningless system.

yeah but they could limit the food drops by adding difficulty mode and then it wouldn't be meaningless...Right now i guess they are to scared to make it hard.

For those who would pick that option. I would be one of those... it should be hard. But as is, you are right! Way way to much food you can rest whenever you please so much food you can sell it and stop picking it up. So untill that is addressed the whole spell it's pointless as is.

The problem ultimately comes down to you have to choose: Do you want a game that can be softlocked, or do you want a game where the camp system is meaningless? It's not impossible to make an interesting game out of the former, but most of the time the average player will find the latter more fun to play and I think that's the choice that Larian was always going to inevitably pick.

There isn't really a middle ground. If you want the rest system to be meaningful, then it needs to have real limits to how much you can rest, but if there are real limits to how much you can rest then that means it's possible to put yourself into a position where you can no longer rest (and the worst case is that you might waste too many rests many hours before you got softlocked and then have to reload a very old save to be able to continue), and if you can no longer rest then it becomes pretty easy for the game to become softlocked. The average new player will also end up softlocking their games long before an experienced player finds the rest system to be anything more than an inconvenience.

I think that those kinds of strict resting systems only have any kind of place in more procedurally generated games - in those kinds of games it can be okay because restarting the game isn't as boring since you'll still be experiencing different things, but in a very scripted game I don't think it makes much sense to have a strict resting system because it will always either do nothing or force people to redo the same content over and over again, neither of which is a good outcome.