Why allow resting in dungeons at all?

[Rapscallion]

Brimsurfer, on 02 Apr 2015 - 10:06 AM, said:

Well if you don't want to camp, then don't......

 

I don't see a problem there. Don't buy or pick up any camping supplies, you can just play the game without camping.................

 

Why do you want to force others to play the game your way? just don't don't camp yourself and you problem is solved.

 

Another one who hasn't bothered to read the thread or understand the OP.

 

Here's the abridged version:

 

> Players complain about health/endurance system and spell uses/rest

> These mechanics are related to the rest system

> Game could have been balanced around a different system to avoid these issues

> Original design meant you could only rest in specific locations and made more sense - why was this idea abandoned?

[Zwiebelchen]

The only complaint I have about the resting mechanic is that 2 camping supplies is way too limited in PotD. Luckily, you can sometimes find new supplies inside the dungeons.

 

Other than that I found the system to be a ton of fun (at least if you fight the urge to go back to town once your supplies run out).

Edited April 2, 2015 by Zwiebelchen

[SeekDWay]

I have the perfect solution!

 

You have been waylaid by enemies and must defend yourself!

Edited April 2, 2015 by SeekDWay

[DocDoomII]

I have the perfect solution!

 

You have been waylaid by enemies and must defend yourself!

That could end up being tedious because monsters don't give experience, and would stop you from resting, thus wasting resting resources.

[SeekDWay]

Yes, but an average % chance to have your rest interrupted and supplies wasted might add bit more pressure. I do understand it's not a suggestion everyone will like.

[Vadász]

My question is this: why wasn't the game designed around a system that forbids resting in hostile locations such as dungeons? It took my characters around 3 days to invade Readrics Hold. Resting uninterrupted for 8 hours each time during a castle assault seems rather silly to me. In fact, with enough camping supplies you can spend weeks invading the castle. I also don't feel like I rest any more or less than I did during BG1 & BG2.

Well considering that taking a keep sometimes took even months i guess you should feel proud of taking it in three days.

[Kil3r]

Alot of RPGs in general add some type of limited resources mechanic to add another dynamic to the game. It's to increase difficulty(fairly) and increase the amount of thought that the player puts into the game. Alot of games now simply have mana potions and mana bar for spells but these old style cRPGs have rest + number of spell uses.

 

The only problem with the mechanic that I can see is balance. I am playing hard and my need to rest is barely ever. I have sat on 2 camping supplies and a only a few spells used for a while through my current dungeon(and the past few ones too). I think through almost ANY dungeon it should be a constant battle of managing your resources(spells, abilities, items, and rests). Atleast on hard, resource management isn't as important as I think it should be(BUT it is good enough to still be fun). The potential of this mechanic is DEFINITELY there.

[Brimsurfer]

 

Brimsurfer, on 02 Apr 2015 - 10:06 AM, said:

Well if you don't want to camp, then don't......

 

I don't see a problem there. Don't buy or pick up any camping supplies, you can just play the game without camping.................

 

Why do you want to force others to play the game your way? just don't don't camp yourself and you problem is solved.

 

Another one who hasn't bothered to read the thread or understand the OP.

 

Here's the abridged version:

 

> Players complain about health/endurance system and spell uses/rest

> These mechanics are related to the rest system

> Game could have been balanced around a different system to avoid these issues

> Original design meant you could only rest in specific locations and made more sense - why was this idea abandoned?

 

 

Another one who doesn't bother to use his head.

 

That is exactly what I am saying, why don't you do yourself what you are suggesting..... don't camp yourself or camp only a limited no. of times (which ever no. seems appropriate to you) and all these problems will be solved for you because this is exactly what you are suggesting. Why do you want everyone to suffer your opinions? 

[Volourn]

"Because you also can do it in normal D&D?"

 

Not with a smart DM doing things logically. Outside of large dungeons that have their own full fledge 'world ecosystem' like Undermountain and Undardark it should be impossible to rest in a dungeon. PERIOD.

[JadedWolf]

Quickly, someone go ask Tolkien's ghost to rewrite the Moria chapters!

Gandalf and co. rested in the dungeon a few times before getting out! Need to scrap that part!

 

To be fair, they kind of had to. They rolled really, really crappy characters.

 

And with all that resting, they still lost the mage.

[Hebruixe]

I was a little put off by the no-risk "rest anywhere, any time!" system. Though I approved of the new camping supplies restriction.

[Rapscallion]

 

 

Brimsurfer, on 02 Apr 2015 - 10:06 AM, said:

Well if you don't want to camp, then don't......

 

I don't see a problem there. Don't buy or pick up any camping supplies, you can just play the game without camping.................

 

Why do you want to force others to play the game your way? just don't don't camp yourself and you problem is solved.

 

Another one who hasn't bothered to read the thread or understand the OP.

 

Here's the abridged version:

 

> Players complain about health/endurance system and spell uses/rest

> These mechanics are related to the rest system

> Game could have been balanced around a different system to avoid these issues

> Original design meant you could only rest in specific locations and made more sense - why was this idea abandoned?

 

 

Another one who doesn't bother to use his head.

 

That is exactly what I am saying, why don't you do yourself what you are suggesting..... don't camp yourself or camp only a limited no. of times (which ever no. seems appropriate to you) and all these problems will be solved for you because this is exactly what you are suggesting. Why do you want everyone to suffer your opinions? 

 

 

I barely camp at all. Only in inns or a maximum of once in a dungeon if a trap goes off before I detect it and it takes out a party member.

 

You've still missed the point. The game is balanced around having the ability to rest anytime, anywhere to a limit of 4 (+ scavenged supplies) with zero penalty. This is completely contrary to the goals of Obsidian during the early design stages of this game.

 

You appear to not be a kickstarter backer, so perhaps you missed the developer commentary videos and forum discussions on how this game would aim to avoid these types of mechanics.

[Wulfram]

Removing mid dungeon camping wouldn't really change anything.  You'd just have people retracing their steps to somewhere they could rest.

 

Putting a time limit on quests would have been one way to really limit resting.  If the Prince gets eaten by the Dragon if 6 hours, then you can't hang around camping.  But that only works in quests that have a plausible time limit.

 

Though really limiting resting makes balancing the game quite a bit more difficult.  Can you make the boss fight fun and challenging for people on varying degrees of health?  If you make people effectively have to replay the whole dungeon because they're not going into the boss fight in good enough shape, doesn't that risk being rather frustrating?  Can the minor fights be at all interesting if you have to keep the challenge low enough that the party can defeat 10 or more of them without refreshing your resources?

[Rapscallion]

So how then do you balance the fights? Assume the player is rested and has full endurance and spell slots? In that case you would need to remove the limitation for resting.

 

It's such a difficult design process, and Obsidian knew it. This is why I think allowing a limited one-time rest at certain points through a dungeon is best. You know that the player has overcome X number of encounters to reach this point, and that they have Y number of encounters left. Allow a rest (and a save) before the player continues on.

 

In this case, the developer has a wider budget for encounters. You design the game such that the player will have full resources (health, endurance, spells) for a certain number of encounters. If the player chooses to spend all their spells on the first encounter to defeat the enemies quicker, then they may have taken so little damage that the lack of spells will not hurt them later on.

 

At worst they can just reload a few encounters earlier.

[Chillybean]

if you want to rest in dungeons they should make it so one party member must sacrifice their rest to keep watch... too roleplayey? x)

[Monte Carlo]

My question is this: why wasn't the game designed around a system that forbids resting in hostile locations such as dungeons?

 

 

 

And my question is this? Why do you care so much how other people play this game?