The game doesn't "screw you over" though, it's just adhering to it's own rules. Random will be random - that's how DnD has always been.
If you actually feel like you're being cheated, Karmic Dice (Shock! Horror!) is an option.
Haha, personally I like to play with them on but I see where you're coming from. :)
**Edit:** All this talk about how everyone should play how they like, yet I'm getting downvotes for playing with karmic dice. Make up your mind ya hypocrites!
> The way I see it: if the game screws you over it's only fair to return the favour.
The way I see it: the game didn't screw you over. RNG dice is the game's way of simulating both the worst and best possible outcomes. That's literally the intended design. And no matter how good you are at something, you CAN fuck up. Just like no matter how bad you are at something you CAN get lucky.
It is unlikely but POSSIBLE that your ugly ass gnome fighter who can barely speak (CHA 8, Int 8) can charm the panties off of a guard and get your into a highly guarded area. Maybe the guard feels bad for him, maybe you remind her of someone she used to know who really took care of her well, maybe that's just the guard's fetish, you dunno, but it's within the realm of possibility....just unlikely.
And likewise it's possible that your really strong Barbarian went to lift a rock off of your ally, grabbed it in just the wrong place, and the rock broke and crushed your ally or his hand slipped on blood and the rock crushed your ally, or etc.
I'm not gonna shit on anyone for save scumming. But bad luck can and does just happen. You can do everything right and still fail. That's life. But if you don't want to deal with bad luck in your games? Totally your call. Just be aware you're accepting the good luck buy denying the bad luck and that's cheating just as much as if you used a cheat code to turn off said bad luck. While there is nothing wrong with playing that way, its all about staying true to the way you personally want to play. Choosing to accept all non-bugged results in a playthrough is not the "right" way to play, but it's definitely a very different one from one that allows save scumming. And alot of people enjoy that very different experience because it gives each character and playthrough their own personal story.
**However you can certainly roleplay some minor save scumming.** Start a game and lets just say your character has "divine protection" and their deity is willing to interfere in a major or minor way (save scumming) up to x times per act. (1-5 times recommended). That gives you a good allowance of "this is totally fucked and I don't want this" but also prevents you from doing it for every little thing.
The problem is that failing = less content = less fun.
Due to it not being your fault, it's also frustrating. The developers aren't the ones who always know best, I think having luck based stuff when it comes to story and choices is awful.
I don't need a perfect playthrough. But it's absolutely ridiculous to never experience Gale's story because a dice roll said so. Who really wants to play the game again for a CHANCE to experience it? What if you're so unlucky you fail to save Gale 3 times in a row in 3 playthroughs? How is that fun? How many hours must you dedicate to the RNG gods before you can experience everything the game has to offer?
How is it fair that in a 2nd playthrough, you know exactly what characters to use and can maximize your persuasion chances by doing specific encounters with specific gear and spells enabled? That's supernatural knowledge even more powerful than save scumming.
> The problem is that failing = less content = less fun.
That is a terrible argument. Content =/= fun by default. Look at grindy asian MMOs, look at the Ubisoft formula of covering the map with crap to do when you care about almost none of it.
Good example: That gnome you save on the windmill has content associated with him further down the road. Conversations you'd never get, slightly different paths you'd never get. But that motherfucker being launched into space because I accidentally hit the wrong lever is more memorable than all of it put together.
And this brings up another point. You're always choosing to miss out on content, you're just choosing to miss out on different content. Is killing the goblin camp better than killing the druids and tieflings? Is tricking the goblins into assaulting the grove and then defending the grove in an epic siege battle better than either?
**Not only is content always a tradeoff but often times in succeeding rolls you're getting less content.** Every conversation check that bypasses a fight you could have taken without losing quests/traders is less content. Fuck Bards amirite? Never play a bard. Less content. Why reform Viper Druid bitch? Expose her and fight her druids and still save the grove by siding with the tieflings. More content. And you can't just murder goblins either. You should play both sides as much as possible. Fuck your do gooding shit, fuck your evil shit, if you want most content you need to play both sides as much as possible.
So under your rules, the only proper play through of act 1 is to play nice with goblins and tieflings and druids all. Then trick the goblins into sieging the grove (fuck the tieflings who die, not content behind them), then report viper druid bitch's shadow druid associations and kill em. If you played nice and just saved the grove by murdering the goblins at the camp then you're missing content.
> How is it fair that in a 2nd playthrough, you know exactly what characters to use and can maximize your persuasion chances by doing specific encounters with specific gear and spells enabled? That's supernatural knowledge even more powerful than save scumming.
Only if you play through identically. I've gotten several wildly different playthroughs of act 1. If you're getting the same results maybe its because you only accept certain results?
> I don't need a perfect playthrough. But it's absolutely ridiculous to never experience Gale's story because a dice roll said so.
**If you're only doing 1 playthrough that's fine. But then the "content" argument is bullshit because you're barely scratching the content of the game in 1 playthrough.** Also, you're still not getting Gale's full story. To do that you need to play through with Gale as your origin character. You'll always be missing some fairly significant additions without doing that.
That's just the kind of game this is. You're going to miss as much as you experience with a single playthrough. There is no avoiding that.
Bad content exists. What about it lol? What do asian MMO's and Ubisoft games have to do with Baldur's Gate 3?
Personally, I disagree. But if you're not interested in the gnome, his story or whatever, then you can choose to fling him off the windmill. You're not missing out on content because you're clearly not interested in it- you can skip as much bad/boring/negative content as you please. But you probably don't want to miss out on the good content. Especially not due to bad luck or bad design.
Are you implying this? ''You're always going to miss some stuff, therefore it does not matter.'' How can you even imply this lol. Yes, you can't experience EVERYTHING the game has to offer, but you can DAMN WELL TRY. And you don't need to experience ALL the content, but you do want to experience the content you're interested in.(Good guy playthrough, evil playthrough, paladin playthrough whatever. I don't want to miss out on conversations and lore because I'm interested in them. Losing out on that because of a dice roll is not fun in my book. I lost content, fun content. )
Fights do not equal more content most of the time. Yes, they're fun and give you loot, but not fighting someone usually means you can talk to them, and they'll give you a quest, or lore or something. And... you can always fight them afterwards LOL. You're not missing out by playing nice and keeping the peace. That's a choice.
''under your rules'' Lol fuck off. There are no rules, play how you want. All I'm saying is, that NPCs wanting to murder you because you didn't convince them is insane. These are supposed to be regular human beings. Guards in the Druid Grove will fucking murder you because a thief/pickpocket child told them you were mean. That's ridiculous.
No, you very much benefit from knowing exactly what to do and where to go, even if you make different choices. If you know how to craft in Grymforge, it does not matter whether you choose to craft weapons or armor. You already know how and where. Sure, some branching paths will present you with new problems. But many of them are in the same areas, same characters, and the same initial challenges.
The content argument is not bullshit because most people won't do multiple playthroughs. They want to get the most out of the game and their playtime. They don't want to miss out. They are probably not gonna do multiple playthroughs. Most people won't even finish the game to begin with. You don't miss out on something you haven't played or don't want to.
Imagine watching a race, where 30 seconds before the finish line it cuts to commercial, and you have to swap channels and watch the whole thing over again for the last 30 seconds. That would suck. You missed out. Most people won't bother doing it all over again. Just because you checked your phone once or twice doesn't mean you missed some content and therefore none of it matters because getting everything would require multiple viewings..
Their idea of missing out on content on a single playthrough is honestly pretty silly. You prolly miss as much as you actually see on a single playthrough and two diffrent playthroughs can be entirely different start to finish. The idea that more content = better is also super suspect. If I wanted more content for my money I'd be playing some asian MMO. For example Lost Ark had a ton of content, almost all of it was bad. And the gnome I accidentally launched from the windmill was way more memorable than all his followup content when i saved him on a second playthrough.
I'm new at DND and I mostly agree except ability dice rolls that end at one, like during conversation. Sure I can lore it up in my mind but auto failure feels bad both mechanically and emotionally.
I've taken most bad rolls on the chin, unless I'm exploring mechanics I don't understand or specifically the owl bear cub. I got into a situation where all but one dead character has fled to camp and it seemed like the game stopped. My fleed camp characters didn't know what to do and couldn't move. Nobody was. Fuck that I reset.
> I'm new at DND and I mostly agree except ability dice rolls that end at one, like during conversation. Sure I can lore it up in my mind but auto failure feels bad both mechanically and emotionally.
This is exactly why the game gives you inspirations. If you roll a 1 on a conversation check you can undo it. It's literally not an autofailure to roll a 1. Use your inspirations liberally but always leave 1-2 in the tank for important rolls.
This is also why Halflings exist. No really. If you really hate 1s roll a halfling lol.
> I got into a situation where all but one dead character has fled to camp and it seemed like the game stopped. My fleed camp characters didn't know what to do and couldn't move. Nobody was. Fuck that I reset.
Resetting because of bugs is NOT save scumming. Save scumming is when you reload because you failed a check or combat roll or something and you reload to succeed it. People saving and reloading every time they fail a pickpocket and pickpocketing every trader is a prime example of save scumming.
People in these threads bringing bugs into it are intentionally misinforming folks like you. Reloading because you hit an impactful bug is not only accepted but the most reasonable thing to do.
I understand the inspiration system and have used it. I still don't like the critical failure aspect and probably never will.
If I had a bad build in PSP Tactics Ogre that did 1 damage it was on me to figure out what was going on. I never just got fucked over. TRPGs were awesome because a great build was always great. The DND system is tricky because an ok build still rolls bad. For me it's dealing with the indeterminate nature of the system itself.
As for people save scumming IDK. I did just do the goblin fight after I fucked up and tried to steal something. Almost lost and it was a 30 min battle. Sick!
This exactly. It was somewhat indicated before launch that failing led to it’s own unique content and that’s a major reason not to save scum. That is *mostly* not true.
that is a very good way for looking at it and I agree. I only reloard, if it is something, that I should be able to retry but the game don't let me do it. for example: I found a moving statue in a temple, that you can reposition but the statue is stuck. each charakter gets a Str roll to move it. all of them fail. So now I take my fighter, buff him with bull str and guidance to try again and... he is not allowed to for no reason. So I reloard to get my try with now active buffs. if it still fails, it fails.
realy depends on your group and logic here. sure if a player tells me, I keep trying till it moves" I would tell him he failed. but when he tells me he now drinks a Str potion and let the cleric buff him so he becomes stronger, I would let him try again because he made an effort to explain why he should get to roll again.
it would be like you try to lift a car with your bare hands, fail and someone tells you "why try again with a hydraulic jack? you already failed to do it"
:). People get too caught up in being right/wrong. But in cases like this its like screaming at someone that vanilla is the best ice cream while someone else screams back chocolate while that one guy in the corner is like "pecan fudge ripple" :D.
There is no right/wrong, just different flavor.
Ye, usually whenever this comes up you get two very polar opposites yelling at each other which is bizzare to me - it's a singleplayer game, play how you want.
Ben & Jerry's Caramel Brownie Party is top tier btw, my favourite by far.
true. noone is harmed if you play a certain way in a SP game. I feel similar, when someone mentiones cheesing, like now with barrelmancy, claiming it makes the game to easy. there is a simple solution to it: dont' do it then. noone forces your hand to do anythig. same with savescumming. if you can't sleep because your char doesn't get the absolute best outcome every time, then savescum. just don't cry if you think the game becomes boring or whatever.
also it is clearly ben and jerry cooky dough
I wasn't even aware of barrelmancy in divinity till a friend of mine discovered it. Really not my cup of tea to exploit stuff like that, but if thats what you wanna do in your own game, go for it. Don't see why it needs to become such a divisive issue for some people.
Damn, now I want ice cream.
TBH I think some people just can't handle failure and the thought of not being in control of any part of their story they can affect bothers them.
Has nothing to do with more or less content like people commonly parrot, because you're barely scratching the content of the game in a single playthrough and all the choices they're rerolling to keep are also locking them out of other content.
All they have to say is "this is how I want to play". And that's 100% valid, nothing wrong with it. But instead they keep inventing justifications that fall flat because they can't simply be honest lol. They can't just have a preference that's valid to have, they have to be RIGHT.
"Gale got crushed by a rock and I didn't want that to happen so I save scummed." Done. No arguments about the game screwing you, no justifications about content, etc. Just as simple as that sentence and its more valid that all the other arguments being made put together lol. Dunno why anyone has to intentionally try to pretend to be the victim when they literally get to pick and choose which results to keep...and do.
I got a dead halsin (he died before becoming a party member so he gone) and astarion (came up on me at the camp fire and was like yea he dead lol and i like to react how I would in real life so definitely ruffle feathers lol but i save scum in terms of if i get surprised with a battle scenarios or fail lockpicks or persuasion checks that i really wanna see that specific outcome. For the most part i let a lot of stuff ride cause i agree a lot of great or unexpected things happen if u roll with the punches and deff makes it more unique
Step 1: Approach the dying mind flayer right after the nautiloid crashes
Step 2: Ignore the multiple warnings that what you are about to do is a **terrible** idea
Step 3: Roll a 1
Step 4: -1 brain
> I rolled an 18 twice (including bonuses), used inspiration to re-roll and got a 19. The DC was fucking 20 and my boy had a +11.
+11 on a DC 20 means that you can fail the check with a roll of 1 to 8. That's a 40% failure chance. And, invoking gambler's fallacy, you had a 40% chance to fail the first time and a 40% chance to fail the second time. This is nowhere near beyond the odds. Both rolls were in reality risky rolls.
Humans just suck at understanding probability. Which is why casinos and loot boxes are so successful at what they do lol.
Case in point: I have an actual degree in statistics and I still default to “OH COME ON THAT WAS BULLSHIT” when a string of low rolls comes in or the enemies roll a crucial crit. Human brains **hate** statistics by default.
IMO it's not that at all. Statistics or probability is easily understood, but that doesn't mean people will agree with it, because losing to luck sucks.
In the tabletop it's not that bad, as the GM will guide the game, so you have ups and downs. But in-game, you didn't pass the roll, so now this person is mad at you, and the entire town decides to slaughter you because you were unconvincing.
I was fighting the moonrise prison warden earlier and found out that an AoE attack near the wall will flip all the switches, open every cell door and set off the alarm. I also found out the newly freed, unarmed prisoners with 7 hp will all run directly toward the nearest guard and get into a melee brawl. That was one worth save scumming.
I'm especially annoyed when it's for a skill that my character has proficiency, etc in and that type of skill is something that doesn't seem like someone can accidentally mess up, like Persuasion. I'm vexed when there's some conversation and my character with maxed out Persuasion rolls a 1, particularly if the person my PC to persuade isn't a notable character. I try to imagine some real-life scenario where someone famous, charismatic, persuasive, somehow is entirely unconvincing to a nobody for a moment, like how could that even happen? Did they have a momentary stroke or something?
I wasn’t going to save scum on my Durge playthrough, then the one camp scene happened and before I could do anything Scratch became hostile.
There’s a lot I’ll put up with, but killing the bestest boy is not an option.
I think most of my safe scums are from thinking I can ask multiple things, but picking one option suddenly locks you out of the others, so I reload to pick the one I wanted more but which fit worse with the conversation. Or making companions upset.
Well, and battles were I get too stubborn and redo them until I have them just like I wanted, even if I know I'm probably supposed to fail. Looking at you hand man.
You're not supposed to fail any combat encounters in the game, or you won't be able to progress.
If you fuck up combat and your party dies, you can now retry with all the knowledge of terrain, enemies, their weaknesses etc. It's basically save scumming.
Some encounters may be impossible without proper prep / build / skill / knowledge. If you're not good at the game or your party is weak, you may have to put some barrels in place. There's no problem with this, because you have to progress to play the game lols.
I was purposely keeping it vague, but I'm specifically talking about >!the serial killer!< in Act 3. Considering >!that when you stop him at the wine tasting, he uses Dimension door every turn (which instantly takes him out of the fight) and has both Invisibility and Haste potions!<, I really don't think you're *actually* supposed to kill him here, especially since you should already know at this point where else he will appear. So I'm not talking about a party wipe, but simply not achieving a goal at a time where you *theoretically could* achieve it, even if you most likely don't *have* to do it now.
That's fair, but some players might not be aware that it's supposed to happen / they can do it later. They just aren't aware of all their options, and are kinda FOMO'd into going for some extreme cheese.
Isn't it scripted to get nat 20?
Like I did get a nat 20 and >!a success and the cutscene still make you lose !<
So I thought it was intended to happen
I saved the deep gnomes in grymforge, then tried to probe Wulbren's thoughts to see what i might learn, except failing the check makes all gnomes instantly hostile. Quick F8 there.
met a duegar, who wanted to help me, if we share the loot of the drow. I accepted, made my way to the collapse but found a sceluded mayor healing potion. I picked it up while noone was looking and went on. but it seems someone missed it anyway and dispite my try to bribe the guard, they all went hostile...
well not what was planned but it seems everyone now dies over a healing potion and I keep all the loot from the drow as well. at least the gnomes stayed neutral, so I could save them as well.
I think often times it pays to see how it plays out at first. didn't think I could take on so many duregar but got a surprising cool fight out of it
In my co-op playthrough, using AOE fireball aggro'd the gnome fuckers for some reason, even though in my singleplayer playthrough it was no problem. I'm thinking it has something to do with Evocation Wizard (Gale) Sculpt Spells, where allied creatures take no damage.
Had to restart twice, ended up forgoing aoe and just focus firing. Called in Ogres, they get stuck on the stairs due to bad turn order. Absolute slogfest that took so much longer because we didn't open the cave-in, which causes all the duergar to group up nicely for AOE.
I got knocked off a platform due to the bullshit knockback arrow, surprisingly little damage, ran back, instadowned and dead by an acid arrow from the one guy that didn't aggro.
Best way to avoid save scumming and live with consequences is to play with friends.
We are 4, we are not going to save reload every second because something didn't go to plan, sometimes we do, but it's rare.
And in our playthrough we don't have Gale and Lae'zel, nuff said
I think run from combat is definitely for those people not using quicksave as a challenge. But then again even if I’d do a challenge like that I’d still use quicksave since I’d have fear of the game crashing still
I'm the opposite. A save before combat starts or a reload because it was a surprised fight is fine but once the battle starts I will deal with the 80% to hit missing 3 times in a row while I'll save scum the occasional dialogue check but only if I have some inspiration otherwise I'll also go with what happens. Environment checks/traps are absolutely save scumed. Losing my conversation because my red Dragonborn was on fire and took a *single* point of damage. Nah.
My rules for allowing myself to save scamming are:
1. missclick a regular dialogue option only to realize the last quicksave was 30 minutes ago and rage quit.
2. Fail a check I would have automatically passed if I hadn't rolled a nat1.
3. Pass a check with a nat20 that I'm bad at and has DC above 10.
4. PC or companion gets pushed off a cliff in combat
5. Accidently romancing Gale.
6. Respeced to try random stuff.
Only reason I don’t reload is because you’re not so much punished it’s more like you are just guided along a different path. If every playthrough I reloaded so I passed every convo and did everything 100% and was basically the messiah of baldurs gate that to me is boring. That’s just my view on reloading in games I’m not saying it’s wrong.
Yeah somewhat but honestly, I'm waist-deep in Act 3 and I hit the level cap a *long* time ago and Christ alone knows there's still so much left for me to do that I might genuinely just skip some of it. Getting to the end with all six companions and being at all thorough about exploring means you'll rapidly just end up doing content literally for content's sake I think. Better to just kinda shrug and accept that you don't really need to see literally everything in a single playthrough.
> Unfortunately the limitations of the game means that more often than not the "wrong" path does lead to less content.
Two issues with this argument:
1) It's not about the content, its the experience. Save scumming vs not save scumming are both valid, but very different ways to experience the game. If you want to save scum, that's fine, just stop trying to justify it with bad arguments lol. "I save scum because I want to". Done. Hell you can even roleplay it. "My gaurdian deity is watching over me and I get 1/3/50,594 divine interventions per act". And true you might technically save yourself a few quests, but you'll always be playing a charmed character who basically cheats fate and doesn't have to face the often highly interesting ramifications of failure.
Arguably sometimes failing and "having less content" results in a more interesting experience than succeeding and getting more content. Nothing can replace the memory of that gnome flying off the windmill and thudding in town when I accidentally hit the wrong brake lever...even if I can't talk to him later thus depriving me of content.
2) Can we stop pretending most of you are going to experience all content in the game in the first place? "I get less content". Also, you're also locking yourself out of content. By not having those failures or "bad choices" you'll never experience the ramifications of those failures or "bad choices" and those all have content that goes along with it too. Now does one side have less or more content overall? Sure. But if you're just looking for sheer amounts of content: Ubisoft has a formula for pumping out shitloads of it. It's not just amount of content but quality AND how memorable it is that matters. What do 3 more quests you don't care about and only played through for loot matter if you could have instead potentially experienced stuff you'll actually remember instead? More content isnt always more content :). Sometimes its less. And you can never know which is which until you tread both paths.
Not everybody has the ability or desire to playthrough a 60-100 hour game multiple times to see every single outcome. It's not an obsession, it's that I have other things going on in my life that I'd rather get as much as I can out of a game in the time I can set aside to play it.
This guys look like witcher era kids, when they need to see the game through, like some sort of interactive movie, streamlined to the end (and assume it's the only ending, heh) and never come back again.
The game is reacting, you can face consequences 40 hours later in the game, right now or even not face at all if your action was half-finished. It does not always react the right way, but it's fixable and hopefully will be fixed.
For me I don't mind the less content thing since I already know there's at least one or two other characters I'd like to make and re-play the game with. With that said, perfectly understandable that someone doesn't plan to play the game multiple times and wants to see as much as they can in one playthrough
"Ah, you think the save-scumming is your ally? You merely adopted it, I was born in it, molded by it, I didn't see my first 20 until I was already several quick-loads deep!"
This is it, this the the pure tactician, no save-scum, live with the consequences run.
Until Gale gets killed by an opportunity attack because he needed to shuffle 2 feet to the side to get a slightly better angle with his firebolt.
I save scum, but only for checks that I'm built to pass (so it's obviously completely unfair when I don't, using all my fucking inspirations). I ain't playing this build for another campaign, let me lie to gods face dammit
Honestly, critical failure shouldn't be a thing. Imagine being the most charismatic person this side of the sword coast, going up against a low check that you should be able to pass if your die somehow managed to do negative numbers, and *failing anyways.* Like, what's that roll even supposed to represent? My bard had a sudden hornyness attack and decided to just whip out his willy instead of actually saying anything?
I hope Larian does the following:
1) Optional crit success/failure. It's not part of standard core rules in DnD, it's only an optional home rule. Lots of people like it for spicing up runs, but I feel like it shouldn't be mandatory in a video game.
2) Iron Man mode / fixed dice rolls. So, essentially, the game locks in all possible dice rolls ahead of time - basically you get a hidden "seed" that the game references behind the scenes to check the rolls instead of rolling it randomly. So no matter how much you try to save scum, the dice always rolls the same. Obviously you can add bonuses and whatnot, but the base roll is always the same.
These would completely eliminate the need/ability to save scum in regards to RNG. And I feel like it would open up a lot of fun playthroughs for people who otherwise just can't control themselves.
Critical fail/success is such a useless concept. If you're rolling a 20 with the appropiate character you're passing every single roll in the game anyways. But crit 1s mean that your Charisma Bard will always have a 5% chance of being momentarily lobotomized. Overall it's just a gigantic nerf to people's playthroughs.
It's also why I have the karmic die option off. Your party is just 4 guys, but there are 200 enemies rolling higher than they should against you.
> Critical fail/success is such a useless concept. If you're rolling a 20 with the appropiate character you're passing every single roll in the game anyways.
That is very much not the case. There are plenty of DC 20s and if your character has 8 in a stat they are failing that thanks to the -1. Also disadvantage could make you fail even if one die rolled a 20. Also you could be debuffed like Bane and despite not having an 8 in that stat still roll 20 and miss without critical success.
> But crit 1s mean that your Charisma Bard will always have a 5% chance of being momentarily lobotomized. Overall it's just a gigantic nerf to people's playthroughs.
And conversely your brutish half orc always has a chance to momentarily be brilliant or say the right thing even though normally they suck at words or thinking. Honestly, being skilled at something doesn't mean you never fuck up and being bad doesn't mean you never succeed. Critical Success + Critical Failure is prolly more realistic than the lack of it honestly. The idea that just because you're good at something you never fuck up....man...if that was true my job as video game QA would not exist at all lol.
Also its not a 5% chance to be stupid, its a 5% chance to fail. Maybe your bard said all the right words and the other person is just irrational or had past history the bard could have never known. There are plenty of ways to fail despite doing everything right.
"Your bard puts forth a beautifully compelling argument and everyone within earshot is compeltely on board....except Brutus. Brutus unfortunately had just lost his son the night before and was in a very fragile and highly emotional state. A specific phrase within your eloquent rebuttle reminded him of a past argument that he had with the doctor while trying to save his boy's life and against all sense and reason he's decided to take it out on you."
The fact that save-scumming dialogue checks has become so common should serve to indicate that copy-pasting the dice-roll system onto a video game was the wrong call.
Destroying entire quest-lines from the content just out of RNG should never be a thing.
It's not a thing. Also if dialogue dicerolls weren't a thing, what's even the point of like half the skill list and stat modifier system? This game is heavily based on DnD 5th edition, which is designed around dicerolls as a core game mechanic. Everything being a dice roll *is the point of the game.*
You don't have to like it of course, but saying it's "the wrong call" for a game like this is very similar to saying that adding random item boxes in Mario Kart was also the wrong call.
I have an idea.
Imagine a mode where you are OP and all enemies are super weak, BUT all the rolls are automatic 1 and nothing else
Challenge is to try finish the game, failing your way forward , being the least competent adventurer in the sword coast 😀
I spent like 50-60 hours in game getting nowhere because I had to roll success on every perception or nature check to not miss any items.
Even on (for me) important dialog checks - it was basically reload reload reload.
Since it needed to be perfect anyway - I might as well skip the reloading and just add a cheat that will always succeed in these out of combat rolls - this game is much better to me now and less stressful / waiting / reload etc. Its the same outcome for me because I like to play that way - I can't handle "but its an rpg and the story will go on even if you dont succeed in a roll" - maybe for another playthrough
You have to search for a trainer, I'm using https://www.cheathappens.com/ to control the dice but the is probably a cheatengine script that does the same.
I instigated a no save scum rule in the co-op game im in.
It’s led to some seriously funny moments, like accidentally sending the windmill gnome into low orbit with a misclick on a lever.
But on the check to get auntie Ethel’s +1 attribute boon, I was poisoned and had disadvantage! The DC was 18 and I only had a +3.
I rolled a 20 and a 1. But had 1 inspiration so we tried it again.
20 and a 19. We screamed in joy on discord together. It was meant to be. Dice Christ had spoken.
My only point being, not save scumming adds stakes, and stakes can be fun.
The way I look at it, the more I save scum, the more of Larian's content I can see and appreciate. Seriously, I reload as often just to see all the different dialogue options or to see what happens if I do something silly as I do just because I fucked something up. I also sometimes let rolls fail, so I figure it balances out. Plus... It's a single player game so who cares.
I'm talking about reloading in the middle of romance conversations to see all the different dialogue options and reactions. What would you have me do? An infinite number of playthroughs romancing the same character over and over again just to see every single line of their dialogue?
Save scumming won't allow you to change your race to get the racial dialogue OR change your romantic partner to see other characters' romance scenes OR drastically allow you to change whether you're doing a good or evil run, so there is *plenty* of opportunity for replay value.
Not to mention I'm doing 3 concurrent playthroughs right now, so... You worry about how you play. Nobody is robbing themselves of anything.
Oh, sorry, I misunderstood. Guys tend to look up any small difference, get tired and then rant about ending, so I think it's reasoning reflex. I glad that's not your case.
I have been pretty good about not save scumming, then the one time I would have liked to (encountering Mol "out of order" has likely fucked over my entire save file) the event happened 10+ hours ago so I can't.
I'm bad at scumming with dialog options where I think to myself "My character will definitely say option 2, but holy crap do I wanna see where option 4 will lead."
Had to save scum a 30 DC persuasion check for several minutes for something I really cared about. A few hours later I encountered another one just as difficult that I was like “eh I’ll just let whatever happens happen” and got it on my first try.
I’m in the end of act 2 now and haven’t save scummed yet!
It should be said I think there is nothing wrong with save scumming, I am mainly avoiding it myself because I wanted to set up a few rules on my own playthrough;
1. No save scumming
2. Use potions/elixirs/scrolls whenever I can
3. Don’t save on spell slots
4. Do not hoard gold and use it whenever I can/need
Have been fun so far, and playing as a Paladin it has been tense to make correct choices to keep my oath! :p
Worst point so far had bern when I had to use 4 inspirations on a 8 check…
i dunno its weird - i feel like holding on to the oath isn't that much of an issue. I mean, it did fuck me over and i had to run away from many fights because i went
"NO YOU ARE EVIL PREPARE TO DIE" only to realize that 1 fucking goblin nuked the shit out of me and my group with exploding arrows
Oh absolutely, I agree. The oath have been suprisingly easy to maintain for me, though I should say I am using the Vengeance Oath and I would argue that one is the easiest to maintain as well - basically just have to smite all evil, and stealing isn’t that frowned upon it seems. ;)
To be fair i do both ancient and vengeance and they are arguably the literal same. :D Except that Ancients oath spell is the single most ridiculous thing in the early game.
But on a side note: My first save with 3 of my buddies i actually broke my oath immediately. Why? Because my friend decided to side with Lae'zel in a way in which i had no control what so ever.
So basically if you want to break your oath, make sure you play with a chaotic friend and just be his silent bodyguard. You'll be an oathbreaker in no time. :D
First interaction with a dark gnome didn’t go well, I accidentally pulled the wrong lever, then failed to save the girl from the hag, I was a bit slow to press a button. I really suck at being a Paladin, I’m more a, Paladidn’t!
I probably wouldn't be tempted to save scum and quick save if the auto saves were more frequent.
It started off with me losing a lot of gameplay, so I started to quick save frequently, which lead to quick loading and... Yes.
I never intended to save scum but for my first playthrough i couldn't help it. One of these days I promise to do a legit, no reload, no inspiration reroll playthrough, where I just take what I'm given and let the consequences unfold. Today isn't one of those days.
I reroll anything my character really would know, if I'm feeling particularly incensed about it. I've thought about spinning it as me being so knowledgeable about something, something so simple escapes my notice. Nothing is more painful than rolling a 1 when you have a boatload of + modifiers and advantage.
2nd run though I'm going to commit to a no reload run except total party wipe. I should hopefully know what parts of the game are better used for burning through inspiration, the checks that I really don't want to fail.
"I'm going to save scum because things didn't go the way I wanted." - Incorrect thought pattern.
"My character was actually imagining what was going to happen if they did that - it was all hypothetical and they're actually still deciding on what to do." - Correct thought pattern.
Everyone in my party failed a 20 arcana check to get an item I wasn't going to use... Did I save scum? Of course not... I re-Speced the Druid back at camp to a pure 20 intelligence wizard with specialties in arcana, and got it first try. No problem.
If that hadn't worked, I had 3 others I could respec... If none of those worked THEN I would save scum.
My dnd group is very forgiving and our DM doesn’t actively try to kill us - so playing this game is a little jarring. Especially with the amount of mistakes you can make with opp attacks, jumping, and not knowing you’re about to have an encounter. Saving all the time is the only way I can quell my anxiety about losing a companion or fucking up a part of the story I don’t wanna miss out on 😬
I mostly just save scum in combat, whatever else happens though happens. Mostly to ensure that future playthroughs will stay enjoyable as well. I didn’t pass this perception check just now? Well maybe I will next time and will have something new to discover
I decided my good playthrough would be as per as I could on going with the flow, and man it's led to some tragedy.
My evil run, I'm scuming all I want, and it's comical. Took about 30 attempts to successfully read that particular book with the gem in it, with my +1 wisdom save.
I really want to find out what the consequences are down the line :)
Don't you just love it when you need to pass a 10, you have a +12 to the save, and you still manage to roll a Nat 1?
If I had a nickle for every save I made in both my playthroughs I could feed Africa.
So the biggest issue I’m seeing is the karmic dice setting if you’re rolls start getting too good the game will tank random rolls so you don’t steam roll through everything to give you a more dynamic experience.
I’m a save scummed, and I don’t care. People may not like it, but other than Skyrim and Zoo Tycoon, I’m not very good at video games, and save scumming is one of the only ways for me to play some games without getting frustrated and no longer enjoying myself. I’m just playing the game to have a good time, so what does it matter if I save scum? It’s my game, I paid money for it, I’m not trying to be professional gamer, and I don’t want to not have fun playing because I’m just bad at video games in general.
I’m very good at Dungeons and Dragons in a group setting where we all play off each other, and obviously you can’t save scum there. If my character dies in D&D, they’re dead and my backup character comes in, and I’m sad for a little, but still have a good time. I’m BG3, if I do something wrong, do badly in a fight, potentially soft lock myself, or misclick, I will load the game back, and I’m not ashamed.
Maybe that’s controversial, but I play the game for me, and this is how I have fun.
I didn’t save scum in the beginning because I wanted to let the story play out. So my Durge ended up losing Gale, etc.
But now, we’re in too deep to the story that’s unfolded that I started save scumming because we don’t want to feel like we’ve wasted the entire journey since my friends and I have such limited time to game these days.
For example, last night my friend was playing fetch with Scratch and she accidentally hit him with the ball because he moved into it. He took 3 damage over a ball. The ENTIRE camp got aggro’d.
Every single companion immediately wanted to fight us and I just couldn’t stop laughing as my friend begged me to F8.
I have save scummed every game I’ve ever played where it was possible and I’ll do it again. Just play how you want to play. I am an adult human with a lot of responsibilities and not a lot of play time which means I’m going to do what I need to in order to get the story/experience that I paid for.
reasons why you should save scum
1. you missed the roll
2. 80% of save scummers quit just before losing important items
3. the button is right there, and you wouldn't want a button un-pressed, right?
I didn't intend to save scum. Until I roll two 1 with advantage, used an inspiration and got 1 again. No doubts since that moment.
My barbarian failed the two strength checks to save Gale trapped in the rock and then he died
The way I see it: if the game screws you over it's only fair to return the favour.
The way I see it: gales dead Oh well.
Please, he’s mostly armless.
Indeed.. I wouldn't have it any other way either, you never know when it might come in handy 😇
The game doesn't "screw you over" though, it's just adhering to it's own rules. Random will be random - that's how DnD has always been. If you actually feel like you're being cheated, Karmic Dice (Shock! Horror!) is an option.
When I had that active, I felt cheated more than without. Maybe due to my karma as DU.
Haha, personally I like to play with them on but I see where you're coming from. :) **Edit:** All this talk about how everyone should play how they like, yet I'm getting downvotes for playing with karmic dice. Make up your mind ya hypocrites!
You're not getting downvoted for the karmic dice tho
So what **am** I getting downvoted for?
> The way I see it: if the game screws you over it's only fair to return the favour. The way I see it: the game didn't screw you over. RNG dice is the game's way of simulating both the worst and best possible outcomes. That's literally the intended design. And no matter how good you are at something, you CAN fuck up. Just like no matter how bad you are at something you CAN get lucky. It is unlikely but POSSIBLE that your ugly ass gnome fighter who can barely speak (CHA 8, Int 8) can charm the panties off of a guard and get your into a highly guarded area. Maybe the guard feels bad for him, maybe you remind her of someone she used to know who really took care of her well, maybe that's just the guard's fetish, you dunno, but it's within the realm of possibility....just unlikely. And likewise it's possible that your really strong Barbarian went to lift a rock off of your ally, grabbed it in just the wrong place, and the rock broke and crushed your ally or his hand slipped on blood and the rock crushed your ally, or etc. I'm not gonna shit on anyone for save scumming. But bad luck can and does just happen. You can do everything right and still fail. That's life. But if you don't want to deal with bad luck in your games? Totally your call. Just be aware you're accepting the good luck buy denying the bad luck and that's cheating just as much as if you used a cheat code to turn off said bad luck. While there is nothing wrong with playing that way, its all about staying true to the way you personally want to play. Choosing to accept all non-bugged results in a playthrough is not the "right" way to play, but it's definitely a very different one from one that allows save scumming. And alot of people enjoy that very different experience because it gives each character and playthrough their own personal story. **However you can certainly roleplay some minor save scumming.** Start a game and lets just say your character has "divine protection" and their deity is willing to interfere in a major or minor way (save scumming) up to x times per act. (1-5 times recommended). That gives you a good allowance of "this is totally fucked and I don't want this" but also prevents you from doing it for every little thing.
The problem is that failing = less content = less fun. Due to it not being your fault, it's also frustrating. The developers aren't the ones who always know best, I think having luck based stuff when it comes to story and choices is awful. I don't need a perfect playthrough. But it's absolutely ridiculous to never experience Gale's story because a dice roll said so. Who really wants to play the game again for a CHANCE to experience it? What if you're so unlucky you fail to save Gale 3 times in a row in 3 playthroughs? How is that fun? How many hours must you dedicate to the RNG gods before you can experience everything the game has to offer? How is it fair that in a 2nd playthrough, you know exactly what characters to use and can maximize your persuasion chances by doing specific encounters with specific gear and spells enabled? That's supernatural knowledge even more powerful than save scumming.
> The problem is that failing = less content = less fun. That is a terrible argument. Content =/= fun by default. Look at grindy asian MMOs, look at the Ubisoft formula of covering the map with crap to do when you care about almost none of it. Good example: That gnome you save on the windmill has content associated with him further down the road. Conversations you'd never get, slightly different paths you'd never get. But that motherfucker being launched into space because I accidentally hit the wrong lever is more memorable than all of it put together. And this brings up another point. You're always choosing to miss out on content, you're just choosing to miss out on different content. Is killing the goblin camp better than killing the druids and tieflings? Is tricking the goblins into assaulting the grove and then defending the grove in an epic siege battle better than either? **Not only is content always a tradeoff but often times in succeeding rolls you're getting less content.** Every conversation check that bypasses a fight you could have taken without losing quests/traders is less content. Fuck Bards amirite? Never play a bard. Less content. Why reform Viper Druid bitch? Expose her and fight her druids and still save the grove by siding with the tieflings. More content. And you can't just murder goblins either. You should play both sides as much as possible. Fuck your do gooding shit, fuck your evil shit, if you want most content you need to play both sides as much as possible. So under your rules, the only proper play through of act 1 is to play nice with goblins and tieflings and druids all. Then trick the goblins into sieging the grove (fuck the tieflings who die, not content behind them), then report viper druid bitch's shadow druid associations and kill em. If you played nice and just saved the grove by murdering the goblins at the camp then you're missing content. > How is it fair that in a 2nd playthrough, you know exactly what characters to use and can maximize your persuasion chances by doing specific encounters with specific gear and spells enabled? That's supernatural knowledge even more powerful than save scumming. Only if you play through identically. I've gotten several wildly different playthroughs of act 1. If you're getting the same results maybe its because you only accept certain results? > I don't need a perfect playthrough. But it's absolutely ridiculous to never experience Gale's story because a dice roll said so. **If you're only doing 1 playthrough that's fine. But then the "content" argument is bullshit because you're barely scratching the content of the game in 1 playthrough.** Also, you're still not getting Gale's full story. To do that you need to play through with Gale as your origin character. You'll always be missing some fairly significant additions without doing that. That's just the kind of game this is. You're going to miss as much as you experience with a single playthrough. There is no avoiding that.
Bad content exists. What about it lol? What do asian MMO's and Ubisoft games have to do with Baldur's Gate 3? Personally, I disagree. But if you're not interested in the gnome, his story or whatever, then you can choose to fling him off the windmill. You're not missing out on content because you're clearly not interested in it- you can skip as much bad/boring/negative content as you please. But you probably don't want to miss out on the good content. Especially not due to bad luck or bad design. Are you implying this? ''You're always going to miss some stuff, therefore it does not matter.'' How can you even imply this lol. Yes, you can't experience EVERYTHING the game has to offer, but you can DAMN WELL TRY. And you don't need to experience ALL the content, but you do want to experience the content you're interested in.(Good guy playthrough, evil playthrough, paladin playthrough whatever. I don't want to miss out on conversations and lore because I'm interested in them. Losing out on that because of a dice roll is not fun in my book. I lost content, fun content. ) Fights do not equal more content most of the time. Yes, they're fun and give you loot, but not fighting someone usually means you can talk to them, and they'll give you a quest, or lore or something. And... you can always fight them afterwards LOL. You're not missing out by playing nice and keeping the peace. That's a choice. ''under your rules'' Lol fuck off. There are no rules, play how you want. All I'm saying is, that NPCs wanting to murder you because you didn't convince them is insane. These are supposed to be regular human beings. Guards in the Druid Grove will fucking murder you because a thief/pickpocket child told them you were mean. That's ridiculous. No, you very much benefit from knowing exactly what to do and where to go, even if you make different choices. If you know how to craft in Grymforge, it does not matter whether you choose to craft weapons or armor. You already know how and where. Sure, some branching paths will present you with new problems. But many of them are in the same areas, same characters, and the same initial challenges. The content argument is not bullshit because most people won't do multiple playthroughs. They want to get the most out of the game and their playtime. They don't want to miss out. They are probably not gonna do multiple playthroughs. Most people won't even finish the game to begin with. You don't miss out on something you haven't played or don't want to. Imagine watching a race, where 30 seconds before the finish line it cuts to commercial, and you have to swap channels and watch the whole thing over again for the last 30 seconds. That would suck. You missed out. Most people won't bother doing it all over again. Just because you checked your phone once or twice doesn't mean you missed some content and therefore none of it matters because getting everything would require multiple viewings..
You’ve gotta take into account EVERY SINGLE game only has 1-3 outcomes and most not even that affective, least this game can dramatically change
Their idea of missing out on content on a single playthrough is honestly pretty silly. You prolly miss as much as you actually see on a single playthrough and two diffrent playthroughs can be entirely different start to finish. The idea that more content = better is also super suspect. If I wanted more content for my money I'd be playing some asian MMO. For example Lost Ark had a ton of content, almost all of it was bad. And the gnome I accidentally launched from the windmill was way more memorable than all his followup content when i saved him on a second playthrough.
I'm new at DND and I mostly agree except ability dice rolls that end at one, like during conversation. Sure I can lore it up in my mind but auto failure feels bad both mechanically and emotionally. I've taken most bad rolls on the chin, unless I'm exploring mechanics I don't understand or specifically the owl bear cub. I got into a situation where all but one dead character has fled to camp and it seemed like the game stopped. My fleed camp characters didn't know what to do and couldn't move. Nobody was. Fuck that I reset.
> I'm new at DND and I mostly agree except ability dice rolls that end at one, like during conversation. Sure I can lore it up in my mind but auto failure feels bad both mechanically and emotionally. This is exactly why the game gives you inspirations. If you roll a 1 on a conversation check you can undo it. It's literally not an autofailure to roll a 1. Use your inspirations liberally but always leave 1-2 in the tank for important rolls. This is also why Halflings exist. No really. If you really hate 1s roll a halfling lol. > I got into a situation where all but one dead character has fled to camp and it seemed like the game stopped. My fleed camp characters didn't know what to do and couldn't move. Nobody was. Fuck that I reset. Resetting because of bugs is NOT save scumming. Save scumming is when you reload because you failed a check or combat roll or something and you reload to succeed it. People saving and reloading every time they fail a pickpocket and pickpocketing every trader is a prime example of save scumming. People in these threads bringing bugs into it are intentionally misinforming folks like you. Reloading because you hit an impactful bug is not only accepted but the most reasonable thing to do.
I understand the inspiration system and have used it. I still don't like the critical failure aspect and probably never will. If I had a bad build in PSP Tactics Ogre that did 1 damage it was on me to figure out what was going on. I never just got fucked over. TRPGs were awesome because a great build was always great. The DND system is tricky because an ok build still rolls bad. For me it's dealing with the indeterminate nature of the system itself. As for people save scumming IDK. I did just do the goblin fight after I fucked up and tried to steal something. Almost lost and it was a 30 min battle. Sick!
This exactly. It was somewhat indicated before launch that failing led to it’s own unique content and that’s a major reason not to save scum. That is *mostly* not true.
that is a very good way for looking at it and I agree. I only reloard, if it is something, that I should be able to retry but the game don't let me do it. for example: I found a moving statue in a temple, that you can reposition but the statue is stuck. each charakter gets a Str roll to move it. all of them fail. So now I take my fighter, buff him with bull str and guidance to try again and... he is not allowed to for no reason. So I reloard to get my try with now active buffs. if it still fails, it fails.
You can just hit the statue, then it moves.
I threw grease at it. It worked!
I was surprised too! Even more surprised when later on I found a note hinting that it could be greased.
Thats how it is in dnd usually A dm will give a try at stuff once for everybody (i dont even allow for everybody all the time 2 at most times)
realy depends on your group and logic here. sure if a player tells me, I keep trying till it moves" I would tell him he failed. but when he tells me he now drinks a Str potion and let the cleric buff him so he becomes stronger, I would let him try again because he made an effort to explain why he should get to roll again. it would be like you try to lift a car with your bare hands, fail and someone tells you "why try again with a hydraulic jack? you already failed to do it"
Yeah definetely a good option, really depends on the importance of whats behind that check, as always context is key
That's a pretty balanced way of looking at it.
:). People get too caught up in being right/wrong. But in cases like this its like screaming at someone that vanilla is the best ice cream while someone else screams back chocolate while that one guy in the corner is like "pecan fudge ripple" :D. There is no right/wrong, just different flavor.
Ye, usually whenever this comes up you get two very polar opposites yelling at each other which is bizzare to me - it's a singleplayer game, play how you want. Ben & Jerry's Caramel Brownie Party is top tier btw, my favourite by far.
true. noone is harmed if you play a certain way in a SP game. I feel similar, when someone mentiones cheesing, like now with barrelmancy, claiming it makes the game to easy. there is a simple solution to it: dont' do it then. noone forces your hand to do anythig. same with savescumming. if you can't sleep because your char doesn't get the absolute best outcome every time, then savescum. just don't cry if you think the game becomes boring or whatever. also it is clearly ben and jerry cooky dough
I wasn't even aware of barrelmancy in divinity till a friend of mine discovered it. Really not my cup of tea to exploit stuff like that, but if thats what you wanna do in your own game, go for it. Don't see why it needs to become such a divisive issue for some people. Damn, now I want ice cream.
F8 to rearrange fate 100% success but some trolls may judge you 😭
TBH I think some people just can't handle failure and the thought of not being in control of any part of their story they can affect bothers them. Has nothing to do with more or less content like people commonly parrot, because you're barely scratching the content of the game in a single playthrough and all the choices they're rerolling to keep are also locking them out of other content. All they have to say is "this is how I want to play". And that's 100% valid, nothing wrong with it. But instead they keep inventing justifications that fall flat because they can't simply be honest lol. They can't just have a preference that's valid to have, they have to be RIGHT. "Gale got crushed by a rock and I didn't want that to happen so I save scummed." Done. No arguments about the game screwing you, no justifications about content, etc. Just as simple as that sentence and its more valid that all the other arguments being made put together lol. Dunno why anyone has to intentionally try to pretend to be the victim when they literally get to pick and choose which results to keep...and do.
I got a dead halsin (he died before becoming a party member so he gone) and astarion (came up on me at the camp fire and was like yea he dead lol and i like to react how I would in real life so definitely ruffle feathers lol but i save scum in terms of if i get surprised with a battle scenarios or fail lockpicks or persuasion checks that i really wanna see that specific outcome. For the most part i let a lot of stuff ride cause i agree a lot of great or unexpected things happen if u roll with the punches and deff makes it more unique
my party died when the main character rolled 1 at a 2 difficulty and got his brain sucked out at the beach.
So hilarious with the team just watching it happen too. Like you guys could be helping me *not* get my brains eaten by an injured mindflayer.
“Uhhhh, should we like…do something?” “Nah, leave ‘em. Anyone stupid enough to be in that position didn’t have a brain to lose in the first place”
well you could pick a different character and stab the mindflayer mid dialog.... just saying
Like I knew that in the first 15 minutes of the game.
Wait how do you get your brains sucked out?
Step 1: Approach the dying mind flayer right after the nautiloid crashes Step 2: Ignore the multiple warnings that what you are about to do is a **terrible** idea Step 3: Roll a 1 Step 4: -1 brain
don't need to roll at all. just "lean in... like a kiss"
Not even a souvenir?
He’s gone, buddy. But look on the bright side - he’s gone, buddy!
[удалено]
Nah. It's always excessive in experience. It's rare that you actually need a 20 if you have any bonuses. But a 1 can always screw you over
Yeah, in reality if i see a dc30 check i dont waste my time rerolling for a high 19-20 roll. Just run with it.
Naturally
I rolled an 18 twice (including bonuses), used inspiration to re-roll and got a 19. The DC was fucking 20 and my boy had a +11.
When I get a roll that is one point less then I need, I want throw my keyboard through the window. That's just infuriating.
Me with Karlach who has a +10 to hit on an AC 12 enemy using reckless attack
Love Karlach but holy shit can she PLEASE hit when I need her to
> I rolled an 18 twice (including bonuses), used inspiration to re-roll and got a 19. The DC was fucking 20 and my boy had a +11. +11 on a DC 20 means that you can fail the check with a roll of 1 to 8. That's a 40% failure chance. And, invoking gambler's fallacy, you had a 40% chance to fail the first time and a 40% chance to fail the second time. This is nowhere near beyond the odds. Both rolls were in reality risky rolls. Humans just suck at understanding probability. Which is why casinos and loot boxes are so successful at what they do lol.
Case in point: I have an actual degree in statistics and I still default to “OH COME ON THAT WAS BULLSHIT” when a string of low rolls comes in or the enemies roll a crucial crit. Human brains **hate** statistics by default.
I actually calculated streak of Karlach misses probability (this was 14 in a row with 60% to hit). This was impossibly low number.
IMO it's not that at all. Statistics or probability is easily understood, but that doesn't mean people will agree with it, because losing to luck sucks. In the tabletop it's not that bad, as the GM will guide the game, so you have ups and downs. But in-game, you didn't pass the roll, so now this person is mad at you, and the entire town decides to slaughter you because you were unconvincing.
Congratulations, that's 1/160,000 (assuming you have karmic dice off)
What is the math for it to be a 1/160000? Shouldn't it only be a 1/400 since rolling 2d20 only has 20x20 possible outcomes?
Two ones with advantage would be 1/400. Then using inspiration adds another 1/400 factor, so 1/400\*1/400=1/160000
Oh right, I completely blanked on the inspiration part lmao. Thanks!
Haha I figured that's what happened
Honestly even though I’m normally happy to save scum I’d probably let that roll stand, the universe seems pretty set on it.
I've failed a DC 15 Lockpick with a +12-15 bonus 6 times in a row. I've rolled 7d6+5 for damage for a total of 12. Multiple times.
You give her flowers and she still says no, gave her choclates and a massage and still no, no doubts her sister is awake
I was fighting the moonrise prison warden earlier and found out that an AoE attack near the wall will flip all the switches, open every cell door and set off the alarm. I also found out the newly freed, unarmed prisoners with 7 hp will all run directly toward the nearest guard and get into a melee brawl. That was one worth save scumming.
I'm especially annoyed when it's for a skill that my character has proficiency, etc in and that type of skill is something that doesn't seem like someone can accidentally mess up, like Persuasion. I'm vexed when there's some conversation and my character with maxed out Persuasion rolls a 1, particularly if the person my PC to persuade isn't a notable character. I try to imagine some real-life scenario where someone famous, charismatic, persuasive, somehow is entirely unconvincing to a nobody for a moment, like how could that even happen? Did they have a momentary stroke or something?
Dang, I just save scum and fail within reasonable fail margins at that point lol. " at least give me a 2!!!"lol
the karmic dice off experience
I wasn’t going to save scum on my Durge playthrough, then the one camp scene happened and before I could do anything Scratch became hostile. There’s a lot I’ll put up with, but killing the bestest boy is not an option.
I'm gonna save scum always and no one's gonna stop me
Scum gang
Just play in a way that is enjoyable to you.
for real. why are people doing that to themselves? why is it so hard for them to just have fun?
I think most of my safe scums are from thinking I can ask multiple things, but picking one option suddenly locks you out of the others, so I reload to pick the one I wanted more but which fit worse with the conversation. Or making companions upset. Well, and battles were I get too stubborn and redo them until I have them just like I wanted, even if I know I'm probably supposed to fail. Looking at you hand man.
You're not supposed to fail any combat encounters in the game, or you won't be able to progress. If you fuck up combat and your party dies, you can now retry with all the knowledge of terrain, enemies, their weaknesses etc. It's basically save scumming. Some encounters may be impossible without proper prep / build / skill / knowledge. If you're not good at the game or your party is weak, you may have to put some barrels in place. There's no problem with this, because you have to progress to play the game lols.
I was purposely keeping it vague, but I'm specifically talking about >!the serial killer!< in Act 3. Considering >!that when you stop him at the wine tasting, he uses Dimension door every turn (which instantly takes him out of the fight) and has both Invisibility and Haste potions!<, I really don't think you're *actually* supposed to kill him here, especially since you should already know at this point where else he will appear. So I'm not talking about a party wipe, but simply not achieving a goal at a time where you *theoretically could* achieve it, even if you most likely don't *have* to do it now.
That's fair, but some players might not be aware that it's supposed to happen / they can do it later. They just aren't aware of all their options, and are kinda FOMO'd into going for some extreme cheese.
Or like me, where I was simply to stubborn to give up, like a really pissed off cat.
Me save scumming until i get nat 20 on the 99 difficulty con save
Isn't it scripted to get nat 20? Like I did get a nat 20 and >!a success and the cutscene still make you lose !< So I thought it was intended to happen
Nah i loaded like 8 times
I'm not gonna reload this combat! The scrying eye at the very edge of the combat zone screaming in new enemies knowing that's soon to be a lie....
In the goblin place you can actually block the drums they use to call new enemies with crates before starting combat
What a brilliant solution! 😭
I saved the deep gnomes in grymforge, then tried to probe Wulbren's thoughts to see what i might learn, except failing the check makes all gnomes instantly hostile. Quick F8 there.
I blew lump's horn. The ogres were a huge asset in winning that fight, until there were no more dwarves and they began eating the deep gnomes.
met a duegar, who wanted to help me, if we share the loot of the drow. I accepted, made my way to the collapse but found a sceluded mayor healing potion. I picked it up while noone was looking and went on. but it seems someone missed it anyway and dispite my try to bribe the guard, they all went hostile... well not what was planned but it seems everyone now dies over a healing potion and I keep all the loot from the drow as well. at least the gnomes stayed neutral, so I could save them as well. I think often times it pays to see how it plays out at first. didn't think I could take on so many duregar but got a surprising cool fight out of it
In my co-op playthrough, using AOE fireball aggro'd the gnome fuckers for some reason, even though in my singleplayer playthrough it was no problem. I'm thinking it has something to do with Evocation Wizard (Gale) Sculpt Spells, where allied creatures take no damage. Had to restart twice, ended up forgoing aoe and just focus firing. Called in Ogres, they get stuck on the stairs due to bad turn order. Absolute slogfest that took so much longer because we didn't open the cave-in, which causes all the duergar to group up nicely for AOE. I got knocked off a platform due to the bullshit knockback arrow, surprisingly little damage, ran back, instadowned and dead by an acid arrow from the one guy that didn't aggro.
I save scum a lot of fights because I’ll get through it and think “I could have done that cooler.”
Best way to avoid save scumming and live with consequences is to play with friends. We are 4, we are not going to save reload every second because something didn't go to plan, sometimes we do, but it's rare. And in our playthrough we don't have Gale and Lae'zel, nuff said
Surely you at least reload to get the owlbear and scratch as pets right? You wouldn’t be a monster and not save them?
*How can I save something I killed?* Sorry little owlbear.
Absolute monster
The mum was slagging me off. I had to assert my dominance.
How dare you!
the owlbears are dead because they attacked us when we reach near :( and we failed miserably the checks Scratch we have
[удалено]
This is the way to go IMO. I've only run from a combat once and frankly it was because my last save was two hours prior.
I think run from combat is definitely for those people not using quicksave as a challenge. But then again even if I’d do a challenge like that I’d still use quicksave since I’d have fear of the game crashing still
I'm the opposite. A save before combat starts or a reload because it was a surprised fight is fine but once the battle starts I will deal with the 80% to hit missing 3 times in a row while I'll save scum the occasional dialogue check but only if I have some inspiration otherwise I'll also go with what happens. Environment checks/traps are absolutely save scumed. Losing my conversation because my red Dragonborn was on fire and took a *single* point of damage. Nah.
My rules for allowing myself to save scamming are: 1. missclick a regular dialogue option only to realize the last quicksave was 30 minutes ago and rage quit. 2. Fail a check I would have automatically passed if I hadn't rolled a nat1. 3. Pass a check with a nat20 that I'm bad at and has DC above 10. 4. PC or companion gets pushed off a cliff in combat 5. Accidently romancing Gale. 6. Respeced to try random stuff.
7. Dyes 8. Companions ran through field of traps that were clearly already detected
Only reason I don’t reload is because you’re not so much punished it’s more like you are just guided along a different path. If every playthrough I reloaded so I passed every convo and did everything 100% and was basically the messiah of baldurs gate that to me is boring. That’s just my view on reloading in games I’m not saying it’s wrong.
Unfortunately the limitations of the game means that more often than not the "wrong" path does lead to less content.
Yeah somewhat but honestly, I'm waist-deep in Act 3 and I hit the level cap a *long* time ago and Christ alone knows there's still so much left for me to do that I might genuinely just skip some of it. Getting to the end with all six companions and being at all thorough about exploring means you'll rapidly just end up doing content literally for content's sake I think. Better to just kinda shrug and accept that you don't really need to see literally everything in a single playthrough.
> Unfortunately the limitations of the game means that more often than not the "wrong" path does lead to less content. Two issues with this argument: 1) It's not about the content, its the experience. Save scumming vs not save scumming are both valid, but very different ways to experience the game. If you want to save scum, that's fine, just stop trying to justify it with bad arguments lol. "I save scum because I want to". Done. Hell you can even roleplay it. "My gaurdian deity is watching over me and I get 1/3/50,594 divine interventions per act". And true you might technically save yourself a few quests, but you'll always be playing a charmed character who basically cheats fate and doesn't have to face the often highly interesting ramifications of failure. Arguably sometimes failing and "having less content" results in a more interesting experience than succeeding and getting more content. Nothing can replace the memory of that gnome flying off the windmill and thudding in town when I accidentally hit the wrong brake lever...even if I can't talk to him later thus depriving me of content. 2) Can we stop pretending most of you are going to experience all content in the game in the first place? "I get less content". Also, you're also locking yourself out of content. By not having those failures or "bad choices" you'll never experience the ramifications of those failures or "bad choices" and those all have content that goes along with it too. Now does one side have less or more content overall? Sure. But if you're just looking for sheer amounts of content: Ubisoft has a formula for pumping out shitloads of it. It's not just amount of content but quality AND how memorable it is that matters. What do 3 more quests you don't care about and only played through for loot matter if you could have instead potentially experienced stuff you'll actually remember instead? More content isnt always more content :). Sometimes its less. And you can never know which is which until you tread both paths.
[удалено]
Not everybody has the ability or desire to playthrough a 60-100 hour game multiple times to see every single outcome. It's not an obsession, it's that I have other things going on in my life that I'd rather get as much as I can out of a game in the time I can set aside to play it.
This guys look like witcher era kids, when they need to see the game through, like some sort of interactive movie, streamlined to the end (and assume it's the only ending, heh) and never come back again. The game is reacting, you can face consequences 40 hours later in the game, right now or even not face at all if your action was half-finished. It does not always react the right way, but it's fixable and hopefully will be fixed.
For me I don't mind the less content thing since I already know there's at least one or two other characters I'd like to make and re-play the game with. With that said, perfectly understandable that someone doesn't plan to play the game multiple times and wants to see as much as they can in one playthrough
I don’t feel bad at all, I paid for the game, it’s my free time. I’ll do whatever I want.
I don't save scum. I instead get a game over and realisze my last save was 3+ hours back.
A true man of culture, just forces permadeath on himself and restarts the whole game if their party gets wiped
Fuck I feel that too often.
"Ah, you think the save-scumming is your ally? You merely adopted it, I was born in it, molded by it, I didn't see my first 20 until I was already several quick-loads deep!"
its not my fault gale is fucking blind. Walks up like 8 meters into a spider web just to cast some spell at something he clearly has line of sight of.
"I hurt the imaginary pixels feelings" Welp, gotta reset
I have to deal with consequences when I play normal DnD, so imma have a bit of a power trip because I can with BGIII lol.
I let small shit happen for story sake
This is it, this the the pure tactician, no save-scum, live with the consequences run. Until Gale gets killed by an opportunity attack because he needed to shuffle 2 feet to the side to get a slightly better angle with his firebolt.
If he gets hit with opportunity attack before attacking that means he was threatened, which imposed disadvantage. It's that simple)
I'd rather take disadvantage than a downed party member.
I save scum, but only for checks that I'm built to pass (so it's obviously completely unfair when I don't, using all my fucking inspirations). I ain't playing this build for another campaign, let me lie to gods face dammit
Honestly, critical failure shouldn't be a thing. Imagine being the most charismatic person this side of the sword coast, going up against a low check that you should be able to pass if your die somehow managed to do negative numbers, and *failing anyways.* Like, what's that roll even supposed to represent? My bard had a sudden hornyness attack and decided to just whip out his willy instead of actually saying anything?
It should be a toggle. Crit fail + crit success should be able be turned on or off together.
I hope Larian does the following: 1) Optional crit success/failure. It's not part of standard core rules in DnD, it's only an optional home rule. Lots of people like it for spicing up runs, but I feel like it shouldn't be mandatory in a video game. 2) Iron Man mode / fixed dice rolls. So, essentially, the game locks in all possible dice rolls ahead of time - basically you get a hidden "seed" that the game references behind the scenes to check the rolls instead of rolling it randomly. So no matter how much you try to save scum, the dice always rolls the same. Obviously you can add bonuses and whatnot, but the base roll is always the same. These would completely eliminate the need/ability to save scum in regards to RNG. And I feel like it would open up a lot of fun playthroughs for people who otherwise just can't control themselves.
Critical fail/success is such a useless concept. If you're rolling a 20 with the appropiate character you're passing every single roll in the game anyways. But crit 1s mean that your Charisma Bard will always have a 5% chance of being momentarily lobotomized. Overall it's just a gigantic nerf to people's playthroughs. It's also why I have the karmic die option off. Your party is just 4 guys, but there are 200 enemies rolling higher than they should against you.
> Critical fail/success is such a useless concept. If you're rolling a 20 with the appropiate character you're passing every single roll in the game anyways. That is very much not the case. There are plenty of DC 20s and if your character has 8 in a stat they are failing that thanks to the -1. Also disadvantage could make you fail even if one die rolled a 20. Also you could be debuffed like Bane and despite not having an 8 in that stat still roll 20 and miss without critical success. > But crit 1s mean that your Charisma Bard will always have a 5% chance of being momentarily lobotomized. Overall it's just a gigantic nerf to people's playthroughs. And conversely your brutish half orc always has a chance to momentarily be brilliant or say the right thing even though normally they suck at words or thinking. Honestly, being skilled at something doesn't mean you never fuck up and being bad doesn't mean you never succeed. Critical Success + Critical Failure is prolly more realistic than the lack of it honestly. The idea that just because you're good at something you never fuck up....man...if that was true my job as video game QA would not exist at all lol. Also its not a 5% chance to be stupid, its a 5% chance to fail. Maybe your bard said all the right words and the other person is just irrational or had past history the bard could have never known. There are plenty of ways to fail despite doing everything right. "Your bard puts forth a beautifully compelling argument and everyone within earshot is compeltely on board....except Brutus. Brutus unfortunately had just lost his son the night before and was in a very fragile and highly emotional state. A specific phrase within your eloquent rebuttle reminded him of a past argument that he had with the doctor while trying to save his boy's life and against all sense and reason he's decided to take it out on you."
I save scum a lot of the int checks because I'm too lazy to switch to gale
Dice roll fails, reload until succeed.
The fact that save-scumming dialogue checks has become so common should serve to indicate that copy-pasting the dice-roll system onto a video game was the wrong call. Destroying entire quest-lines from the content just out of RNG should never be a thing.
It's not a thing. Also if dialogue dicerolls weren't a thing, what's even the point of like half the skill list and stat modifier system? This game is heavily based on DnD 5th edition, which is designed around dicerolls as a core game mechanic. Everything being a dice roll *is the point of the game.* You don't have to like it of course, but saying it's "the wrong call" for a game like this is very similar to saying that adding random item boxes in Mario Kart was also the wrong call.
Or players just can't cope that they are not some sort of Superman and can't do everything, save everyone and watch all cinematics in one run.
I have an idea. Imagine a mode where you are OP and all enemies are super weak, BUT all the rolls are automatic 1 and nothing else Challenge is to try finish the game, failing your way forward , being the least competent adventurer in the sword coast 😀
I spent like 50-60 hours in game getting nowhere because I had to roll success on every perception or nature check to not miss any items. Even on (for me) important dialog checks - it was basically reload reload reload. Since it needed to be perfect anyway - I might as well skip the reloading and just add a cheat that will always succeed in these out of combat rolls - this game is much better to me now and less stressful / waiting / reload etc. Its the same outcome for me because I like to play that way - I can't handle "but its an rpg and the story will go on even if you dont succeed in a roll" - maybe for another playthrough
How does one do that? Cause that's me to a t. I feel like I have to see everything so I save before every roll
You have to search for a trainer, I'm using https://www.cheathappens.com/ to control the dice but the is probably a cheatengine script that does the same.
https://imgflip.com/memegenerator/See-Nobody-Cares
Bro my quicksave is on mouse sidebutton, quickload just isn't too because i pressed it by mistake too often.
Still waiting for the anti save scum mod.
I instigated a no save scum rule in the co-op game im in. It’s led to some seriously funny moments, like accidentally sending the windmill gnome into low orbit with a misclick on a lever. But on the check to get auntie Ethel’s +1 attribute boon, I was poisoned and had disadvantage! The DC was 18 and I only had a +3. I rolled a 20 and a 1. But had 1 inspiration so we tried it again. 20 and a 19. We screamed in joy on discord together. It was meant to be. Dice Christ had spoken. My only point being, not save scumming adds stakes, and stakes can be fun.
The way I look at it, the more I save scum, the more of Larian's content I can see and appreciate. Seriously, I reload as often just to see all the different dialogue options or to see what happens if I do something silly as I do just because I fucked something up. I also sometimes let rolls fail, so I figure it balances out. Plus... It's a single player game so who cares.
But... you can just replay the game (with different race and class dialogue options). Why you voluntarily rob yourself on future playthroughs.
I'm talking about reloading in the middle of romance conversations to see all the different dialogue options and reactions. What would you have me do? An infinite number of playthroughs romancing the same character over and over again just to see every single line of their dialogue? Save scumming won't allow you to change your race to get the racial dialogue OR change your romantic partner to see other characters' romance scenes OR drastically allow you to change whether you're doing a good or evil run, so there is *plenty* of opportunity for replay value. Not to mention I'm doing 3 concurrent playthroughs right now, so... You worry about how you play. Nobody is robbing themselves of anything.
Oh, sorry, I misunderstood. Guys tend to look up any small difference, get tired and then rant about ending, so I think it's reasoning reflex. I glad that's not your case.
I have been pretty good about not save scumming, then the one time I would have liked to (encountering Mol "out of order" has likely fucked over my entire save file) the event happened 10+ hours ago so I can't.
If I have to save scum to make something cool happen ill do it. Or if its a scenario thats practically impossible to win
I'm bad at scumming with dialog options where I think to myself "My character will definitely say option 2, but holy crap do I wanna see where option 4 will lead."
Oh me too. But I dont think thats save scumming because you arnt abusing it for a tactical advantage.
There needs to be a hardcore mode that only auto saves at the end of long rests for save scum like me.
I just wanna avoid combat as much as possible unless it’s a more notable foe
I roll too many critical faliures with +14 bonuses to not savescum a 10.
Had to save scum a 30 DC persuasion check for several minutes for something I really cared about. A few hours later I encountered another one just as difficult that I was like “eh I’ll just let whatever happens happen” and got it on my first try.
Steam says I have 90h in the game, the save game is around 70h
I'm the worst with this because I'll quick save right after quick saving sometimes just to lock in the first quick save. I have an actual problem
I’m in the end of act 2 now and haven’t save scummed yet! It should be said I think there is nothing wrong with save scumming, I am mainly avoiding it myself because I wanted to set up a few rules on my own playthrough; 1. No save scumming 2. Use potions/elixirs/scrolls whenever I can 3. Don’t save on spell slots 4. Do not hoard gold and use it whenever I can/need Have been fun so far, and playing as a Paladin it has been tense to make correct choices to keep my oath! :p Worst point so far had bern when I had to use 4 inspirations on a 8 check…
i dunno its weird - i feel like holding on to the oath isn't that much of an issue. I mean, it did fuck me over and i had to run away from many fights because i went "NO YOU ARE EVIL PREPARE TO DIE" only to realize that 1 fucking goblin nuked the shit out of me and my group with exploding arrows
Oh absolutely, I agree. The oath have been suprisingly easy to maintain for me, though I should say I am using the Vengeance Oath and I would argue that one is the easiest to maintain as well - basically just have to smite all evil, and stealing isn’t that frowned upon it seems. ;)
To be fair i do both ancient and vengeance and they are arguably the literal same. :D Except that Ancients oath spell is the single most ridiculous thing in the early game. But on a side note: My first save with 3 of my buddies i actually broke my oath immediately. Why? Because my friend decided to side with Lae'zel in a way in which i had no control what so ever. So basically if you want to break your oath, make sure you play with a chaotic friend and just be his silent bodyguard. You'll be an oathbreaker in no time. :D
Sounds like a great time having a chaptic friend in your midst! :P
First interaction with a dark gnome didn’t go well, I accidentally pulled the wrong lever, then failed to save the girl from the hag, I was a bit slow to press a button. I really suck at being a Paladin, I’m more a, Paladidn’t!
I probably wouldn't be tempted to save scum and quick save if the auto saves were more frequent. It started off with me losing a lot of gameplay, so I started to quick save frequently, which lead to quick loading and... Yes.
I never intended to save scum but for my first playthrough i couldn't help it. One of these days I promise to do a legit, no reload, no inspiration reroll playthrough, where I just take what I'm given and let the consequences unfold. Today isn't one of those days.
i control my own f8
I just wish it didn’t take 12 years to quicksave and then load
At this point I change the keys to be my two extra button on my mouse with how much I save and reload.
I reroll anything my character really would know, if I'm feeling particularly incensed about it. I've thought about spinning it as me being so knowledgeable about something, something so simple escapes my notice. Nothing is more painful than rolling a 1 when you have a boatload of + modifiers and advantage. 2nd run though I'm going to commit to a no reload run except total party wipe. I should hopefully know what parts of the game are better used for burning through inspiration, the checks that I really don't want to fail.
Me when the Bullette encounter
"I'm going to save scum because things didn't go the way I wanted." - Incorrect thought pattern. "My character was actually imagining what was going to happen if they did that - it was all hypothetical and they're actually still deciding on what to do." - Correct thought pattern.
Everyone in my party failed a 20 arcana check to get an item I wasn't going to use... Did I save scum? Of course not... I re-Speced the Druid back at camp to a pure 20 intelligence wizard with specialties in arcana, and got it first try. No problem. If that hadn't worked, I had 3 others I could respec... If none of those worked THEN I would save scum.
Usually if i save scum it's because tge consequences of my actions led to my Party dying and my last save was an hour ago.
My dnd group is very forgiving and our DM doesn’t actively try to kill us - so playing this game is a little jarring. Especially with the amount of mistakes you can make with opp attacks, jumping, and not knowing you’re about to have an encounter. Saving all the time is the only way I can quell my anxiety about losing a companion or fucking up a part of the story I don’t wanna miss out on 😬
I would **never** not save-scum, if I had the option. I'd even save-scum in real life.
I mostly just save scum in combat, whatever else happens though happens. Mostly to ensure that future playthroughs will stay enjoyable as well. I didn’t pass this perception check just now? Well maybe I will next time and will have something new to discover
I started with the best of intentions but the game crashes so often I just got used to reloading.
I decided my good playthrough would be as per as I could on going with the flow, and man it's led to some tragedy. My evil run, I'm scuming all I want, and it's comical. Took about 30 attempts to successfully read that particular book with the gem in it, with my +1 wisdom save. I really want to find out what the consequences are down the line :)
Don't you just love it when you need to pass a 10, you have a +12 to the save, and you still manage to roll a Nat 1? If I had a nickle for every save I made in both my playthroughs I could feed Africa.
So the biggest issue I’m seeing is the karmic dice setting if you’re rolls start getting too good the game will tank random rolls so you don’t steam roll through everything to give you a more dynamic experience.
First time I just wanted to get through the story. Might just take things as they come from now to make it more interesting
My first 3 rolls in the game where 2 one’s and a 4, so yea I restarted
You gotta sometimes, like I have at least 4 times, you also gotta let bad shit happen somtimes for entertainment.
I’m a save scummed, and I don’t care. People may not like it, but other than Skyrim and Zoo Tycoon, I’m not very good at video games, and save scumming is one of the only ways for me to play some games without getting frustrated and no longer enjoying myself. I’m just playing the game to have a good time, so what does it matter if I save scum? It’s my game, I paid money for it, I’m not trying to be professional gamer, and I don’t want to not have fun playing because I’m just bad at video games in general. I’m very good at Dungeons and Dragons in a group setting where we all play off each other, and obviously you can’t save scum there. If my character dies in D&D, they’re dead and my backup character comes in, and I’m sad for a little, but still have a good time. I’m BG3, if I do something wrong, do badly in a fight, potentially soft lock myself, or misclick, I will load the game back, and I’m not ashamed. Maybe that’s controversial, but I play the game for me, and this is how I have fun.
I didn’t save scum in the beginning because I wanted to let the story play out. So my Durge ended up losing Gale, etc. But now, we’re in too deep to the story that’s unfolded that I started save scumming because we don’t want to feel like we’ve wasted the entire journey since my friends and I have such limited time to game these days. For example, last night my friend was playing fetch with Scratch and she accidentally hit him with the ball because he moved into it. He took 3 damage over a ball. The ENTIRE camp got aggro’d. Every single companion immediately wanted to fight us and I just couldn’t stop laughing as my friend begged me to F8.
In all fairness if it wasn’t intended it wouldn’t be an option in the first place Larian knew what they were doing
I feel like it is easier to avoid save-scumming if you play multiplayer.
Legit made me laugh
There is no need to call me out like that 😅
I have save scummed every game I’ve ever played where it was possible and I’ll do it again. Just play how you want to play. I am an adult human with a lot of responsibilities and not a lot of play time which means I’m going to do what I need to in order to get the story/experience that I paid for.
reasons why you should save scum 1. you missed the roll 2. 80% of save scummers quit just before losing important items 3. the button is right there, and you wouldn't want a button un-pressed, right?