"Baldur's Long & Short Rest" (Resting is ruining the flow of the game).

[Zephyx]

Divinity Original Sin was amazing! The combat was fluid, and I highly recommend sticking with that combat mechanic.

I loved the way you had a set number of action points each turn to attack cast spells, etc (as well as more powerful abilities that could only be used once or twice per combat). In Baulder's Gate however, you have zealously enforced D&D long/short rests as a mandatory mechanic which makes combat and resting feel VERY tedious.

I get that resting IS an important mechanic in tabletop D&D, but in a game it's just... boring.

You can keep the D&D flavor of the world and setting (which I love), and encourage visiting your camp for the story line elements already in the game, but go back to the Divinity Original Sin 2 action point system and eliminate "resting" all together.

We should still have a "Go to Camp" option to regroup, heal up, chat with companions, craft, etc, which would be voluntarily used, but it shouldn't be mandatory to regain your spells / abilities. It's much too tedious.

As it stands now, I would rename the game to "Baldur's Long & Short Rest".

You have the game mechanics perfect in Divinity Original Sin 2. Don't throw that system away. Take that combat, and throw it into the D&D universe, and pow! You've got yourself an amazing D&D game that has the Larian Studio's flavor that we all love!

[Razorblade]

Yeah, no. D:OS3 will come out eventually; just be patient. However, most people playing a DnD game want a DnD game. Not to mention, everything about the game would have to be redesigned from the ground up to fit an alien ruleset, so good luck seeing the release of BG3 within the next 5 years. You'd probably get D:OS3 sooner just waiting for Larian to make it, rather than trying to jury rig it into BG3.

[Long Journey]

I don't think that would be feasible or good idea to do at this juncture. Given how much Larian is trying to implement 5th Ed. D&D rules into the game and have marketed as being a true to life 5th Ed. game, doing an about face with the combat system would turn off a lot of players (likely myself included). That is not to disparage D:OS2, but Larian is trying to cater to those who play the TT game and their own fan base. They have taken a good deal of heat from many players (most of the complaints coming from forums like this) for being too much like D:OS2. The systems in place are, for better or worse, integral to D&D and people are expecting that to be present in this game. These systems make you think about what you can and cannot do, what fights you should/shouldn't take, etc. It, in essence, is BG3's identity.

Even that system was "right" for D:OS2, it does not mean it will be "right" for BG3. A lot has already been changed in BG3 in regards to the systems, but to replace the core mechanics with those from a different franchise would be the straw that broke the camel's back, so to speak. All the promises made and expectations held would fall apart, likely creating a worse product/experience (even if it works well) because of an identity crisis.

[Brandt Kane]

All I read was "I don't think D&D should be a D&D game."

[Elminster]

I hate DOS and love D&D, but resting should be implemented better. As it is right now you are compelled to take long rests after each combat, and that is stupid given the narrative (tadpole) and the PnP game mechanics.

[N/A]

Yeah, there's honestly no incentive not to rest whenever you feel like it.
Narratively you have the tadpole to get rid of, and I guess if you wanna keep falling for Gale's scam and feeding him, but the former doesn't really seem to do anything if you leave it alone and I haven't had Gale crater the place by leaving him hungry

In tabletop, resting whenever you feel like it might make you miss some important deadline, and if you just long rest in a lair of evil, you're more than likely gonna get caught by some patrol while you're in a state of weakness
None of those have really translated into the game so far and, despite having an illithid tadpole inside you that you oughta deal with quickly, the game actually encourages resting by making it seemingly the primary vehicle through which companion interactions take place. Then spells like Prayer of Healing which help with cutting downtime make a lot less sense

There's no implied cost to restoring all of your health, spell slots, and class features whenever. It's the kind of problem that requires a world that'll move on its own without the player being there, among other things, to fix. Least I think so

[Elminster]

Originally posted by N/A:

Yeah, there's honestly no incentive not to rest whenever you feel like it.
Narratively you have the tadpole to get rid of, and I guess if you wanna keep falling for Gale's scam and feeding him, but the former doesn't really seem to do anything if you leave it alone and I haven't had Gale crater the place by leaving him hungry

In tabletop, resting whenever you feel like it might make you miss some important deadline, and if you just long rest in a lair of evil, you're more than likely gonna get caught by some patrol while you're in a state of weakness
None of those have really translated into the game so far and, despite having an illithid tadpole inside you that you oughta deal with quickly, the game actually encourages resting by making it seemingly the primary vehicle through which companion interactions take place. Then spells like Prayer of Healing which help with cutting downtime make a lot less sense

There's no implied cost to restoring all of your health, spell slots, and class features whenever. It's the kind of problem that requires a world that'll move on its own without the player being there, among other things, to fix. Least I think so

I think there is something that Larian did not quite get right here. The difficulty in D&D is not in the single combat usually. That might be true once or twice per module when you are confronting the main evil. Usually the difficulty is in balancing your resources and getting things done in an hostile environment, when you have limited rations, no safe place to rest, and at least after the first time you get spotted, there is usually people (when you are lucky) looking actively for you.

If you push the difficulty of every encounter to the point where you need to exhaust you spell slots and possibly you have one or more characters injured, there is no way that you can go on with confidence in an hostile environment. There is a whole section of the DM guide based on this.

Now, I get what Larian is trying to do. Making combat interesting for them means pushing the players to make tactical choices because the encounter is at stake, and to do this they need to make every encounter at least challenging. I believe it is the wrong approach for the D&D ruleset. Solasta has a better approach, basically restricting long rests to safe spots in dungeons, that pushes you to manage your resources and not go all out on the first combat. Random encounters are also something that would limit your abuse of safe spots.

I am not a fan of time limits in CRPGs as they restrict the amount of content you can experience, but I believe a good mix of rest areas restrictions and random encounters would go a long way.

One big limit is that random encounter would make the game even slower and given TB combat I am not too keen spending another 10 mins on useless trash every 30 mins of gaming.

[Kadh2000]

Not feeding.

[Mosey]

You can't port the DOS2 options into this game because this game is based on 5th edition, and this is how 5th edition limits spell casters and makes other classes viable.

It doesn't translate well to video games though, that much is true. Normally there would be a GM to resolve those issues, but a computer is notoriously bad at it.

Either a caster is a drag for resting and plot progression reasons, or the caster is a god that makes the combat encounters a joke. I'm not sure what the middle ground really is with a game like this, but I'd say that balance isn't there yet. We certainly shouldn't need to memorize all the plot beats and angles and when resting would be appropriate for them.

I've thought that perhaps an actual game clock and exhaustion rules might help, but then the game is basically dictating your pacing. Maybe that level of dictation is a good thing, or a bad thing, but I think it might be better than eternal days where you can clear half a dozen encounters without a rest. Or rest for the night after each fight with a few goblins with no plot repercussions.

[Indure]

Weird ... I'm sure I posted to this thread before. Not sure if it got recreated.

The reason long/short rest are "boring" is because they currently have no limitations. You can use them freely, infinitely, anytime, anywhere, and with no consequences.

Resting should be tightly regulated to work harmoniously with spell slot consumption to provide the players with escalating tension and difficult decisions on when they should expand valuable resources. Infinite rests leads to infinite resources, which just creates gameplay that is Divinity 2, but now you have to spend 1 minute after battle in loading times; which is why you are finding it tedious.

Like others have mention, Solasta's system (can't really be done in BG3) works to create valuable and good tension in combat. For example you are stuck in a castle with 2 spell slots left and no idea when the next rest spot is. How you use your remaining resources can literally mean the difference between life and death. This can be a great and exciting experience for players.

[guard65]

Note that in the code, I saw an entry for a cool down period for long rest. For all I know it is related to cinema scene events.

I do think a long rest cool down period is a good idea for the game.

[Indure]

Originally posted by Mosey:

Either a caster is a drag for resting and plot progression reasons, or the caster is a god that makes the combat encounters a joke. I'm not sure what the middle ground really is with a game like this, but I'd say that balance isn't there yet. We certainly shouldn't need to memorize all the plot beats and angles and when resting would be appropriate for them.

You're right. This seems like the heart of the issue and I think it is a lot harder to solve then people on the forums make it out to be. I originally thought adding a ration system would be helpful to penalize people abusing the rest system, while having minimal intrusion on people resting naturally, but after seeing this issue discuss thoroughly I now think it would do very little to solve the actual problem.

I wonder if a potential solution is for Larian to expand on their "triggering" system for events. Currently there are some events that if you start a dialogue chain or walk by but don't interact with an event, it will auto resolve itself under the assumption the player is not going to engage in it. For example if you don't join with Shadowheart on the beach or don't even speak with her, she will end up at the Grove. If you scorn her again she will end up at your camp one night trying to kill you.

With this in mind, it could be possible for Larian to have instances of the map tagged with these triggers that once activated would auto resolve some events after a long rest. For example if you attack the hag and she retreats into her lair, it would trigger an event. If you for whatever reason long rest prior to dealing with her at the bottom of her lair, the event will auto resolve with her vanishing with the girl since you gave her ample time to escape.

[Streeja]

Originally posted by Elminster:

Now, I get what Larian is trying to do. Making combat interesting for them means pushing the players to make tactical choices because the encounter is at stake, and to do this they need to make every encounter at least challenging. I believe it is the wrong approach for the D&D ruleset. Solasta has a better approach, basically restricting long rests to safe spots in dungeons, that pushes you to manage your resources and not go all out on the first combat. Random encounters are also something that would limit your abuse of safe spots.
.

You can't compare to Solasta because they don't have hordes of super goblins running around. I recall them having 7 to 8 HP. But I get your point about resource management. But... I like the way BG3 does it. There I said it.

I like the rest when you want with the given difficulty. I don't rest after every fight, but I do after a lot of them. I go in guns blazing (swords as it were) with in your face melee. That is what I find fun. Not running for high ground and ranged attacks. And definitely no barrels.
So with current difficulty and goblins shooting me with bows, I use up a lot of my HP and support spells in each fight. I just find that way more fun in this game.

All I can say is that not everyone likes to play the same way. If you don't want to rest, then don't. But don't try tell Larian it needs to be fixed to take it away from others that enjoy a different play style.

[Ronin Gamer]

At first I wasn't a big fan of the long rest function, but honestly I've gotten used to it now and it doesn't bother me near as much as it did. The part that still bugs me is the spell slot system, but that's not leaving either so I'll have to just get used to it.

[Elminster]

Originally posted by Streeja:

Originally posted by Elminster:

Now, I get what Larian is trying to do. Making combat interesting for them means pushing the players to make tactical choices because the encounter is at stake, and to do this they need to make every encounter at least challenging. I believe it is the wrong approach for the D&D ruleset. Solasta has a better approach, basically restricting long rests to safe spots in dungeons, that pushes you to manage your resources and not go all out on the first combat. Random encounters are also something that would limit your abuse of safe spots.
.

You can't compare to Solasta because they don't have hordes of super goblins running around. I recall them having 7 to 8 HP. But I get your point about resource management. But... I like the way BG3 does it. There I said it.

I like the rest when you want with the given difficulty. I don't rest after every fight, but I do after a lot of them. I go in guns blazing (swords as it were) with in your face melee. That is what I find fun. Not running for high ground and ranged attacks. And definitely no barrels.
So with current difficulty and goblins shooting me with bows, I use up a lot of my HP and support spells in each fight. I just find that way more fun in this game.

All I can say is that not everyone likes to play the same way. If you don't want to rest, then don't. But don't try tell Larian it needs to be fixed to take it away from others that enjoy a different play style.

It is all about balance, if you are not supposed to spam a 1st/2nd level ( 3rd/5th level spell after EA) because you have unlimited rests, otherwise you are making every non caster very quickly obsolete. The whole game is balanced around having the caster resource manage their spells over several encounters, because spell are very powerful. I am all for less boring and quicker fights, but deviating too much from 5e baseline means you have a balancing mess in your hands, and the higher the levels the worse this is going to be.

Otherwise you roll a wiz/sorc and every encounter from lvl 5 on is you and Gale double fireball -> rest. You can leave the rest of the group at the camp

[Streeja]

I understand the balance issue. It is a fair point. But That is not an issue in BG3. It is not balanced around rest. It has other factors that really drive the balancing such as height advantage, hide, the action economy, etc.

If the game were balanced around rest and frequency of rest being optional, it is still a choice and would allow the player to "set their own level of difficulty" if that were true.

So again, let the player decide how they want to play and how hard they want to make it. More flexibility equals more unique playthroughs for re-playability.