Campfires

[VentilatorOfDoom]

After Taneliz the overall difficulty was really dropping in KotC imo.
And one of the main reasons was that in all giant lairs you could rest whenever you wanted. Limited use of campfires or even getting ambushed would be an improvement.

[screeg]

I'm mostly thinking about adventure areas which lock you in. Offering limited-use campfires instead of offering infinite use fires means the designer can make them available earlier, while rewarding players who don't need to rest that often.

I get what you're saying, but I don't want them available earlier. I like the challenges BS presented with lock-in situations and I like the way they were done. How are players rewarded for not resting? Don't you mean that sloppy players are punished by running out of campfire?

The adrenalin option would be to trigger in-game events every time a campfire is used. If the princess was kidnapped and is still in town, resting might mean she's been moved to another location. Game-logic reasons to press on instead of resting make good sense, so long as they're signaled correctly.

This is a promising idea, but I don't know if BS is interested in this kind of game engine change.

[Narsham]

I'm mostly thinking about adventure areas which lock you in. Offering limited-use campfires instead of offering infinite use fires means the designer can make them available earlier, while rewarding players who don't need to rest that often.

I get what you're saying, but I don't want them available earlier. I like the challenges BS presented with lock-in situations and I like the way they were done. How are players rewarded for not resting? Don't you mean that sloppy players are punished by running out of campfire?

OK, let's take the Orc Fort. (SPOILER WARNING.)

Once you get to the locked-off portion, your first chance at a campfire is to kill the level 1 leader and rest there. Once you do that, you can rest between every single one of the level 2 battles if you wanted to.

Alternately, you make the deal with the level 1 leader and you end up trying to clear level 2 without a campfire.

So I agree with you that the first part of the design worked well. But offering an infinite campfire takes all the challenge out of the second level. Not offering one at all, IMO, makes the second level too difficult for most players. Offering a limited campfire encourages players to "save" their resting as long as possible without forcing a player to revert to an old save upon discovering that he spent too many resources to have any chance at winning the next fight.

I wonder if the save/load dynamic isn't part of the disagreement here? My assumption is that a player who makes some play mistakes (or "mistakes"--like spending out spells in the dragon fight and not having enough resources left to win the last fight of the second level after cutting a deal on level 1) and gets himself into a situation where he lacks the resources to continue will either revert to an old save or quit playing. Choice two may be unavoidable in some instances, but a good game will make most players want to keep playing. But save-game slots are simply another layer of resource management. I save, enter the next fight, spend X resources to win, save in a second slot and proceed. If I lose the fight, I revert to my nearest save and try again. In some instances, especially at the lower levels, I may lack vital resources needed to win (generally speaking, spell slots). Then I need to revert to an earlier save and try to conserve resources in those earlier battles.

IMO, ideal design means pushing the average party (and player) close to the limit, then allowing for resource recovery via a campfire. Wait too long and you push players into repeating the same content trying to conserve resources better, or convince them to give up completely. Offer recovery too soon and the challenge drops. Offer it constantly and the challenge drops to zero.

Don't get me wrong--a player who wants a greater challenge can always choose not to rest and see what happens. If you don't then have the option of resting and recovering when you hit the point where you can't handle the next fight, though, that's a problem. And if the game provides strong incentives to behave a certain way--either by using the campfire after every fight, or by using the campfire as infrequently as possible--then most players will follow those pushes and prods. Limited campfires (and, potentially, limited uses) are a prod to the player to conserve resources and try to push through multiple combats; limit them too greatly, though, and you push players into the save/reload/abandon game spiral.

It's like the difference between a "sandbox" game which encourages exploration and has built-in rewards (which may in turn affect your play of the main storyline) and those which claim to offer you freedom but then crush your character if you try to take advantage of it...

[Darkion]

This might seem off-topic, but bear with me, this back and forth argument reminds me of coffeepots. Yes, coffeepots. At my workplace, a co-worker started a war with me because she liked her coffee made with half a cup of grounds per pot and when I made it I used a full cup, to the point that she actually brought it up as an official complaint to our supervisor. I shut her up by stating that there is no easy way to make a weak cup of coffee stronger, but if she wanted to have weak coffee she could just water it down to her satisfaction without forcing everyone else to go down to the cafeteria to get a decent cuppa. So what does this have to do with campfires? Well...

After Knights of the Chalice came out the main complaint players had (aside from the font that some disliked, not me) was the limited resting places, so I don't see how limiting campfires even further is going to endear a hell of a lot of players or make them buy the next game. I'm firmly in the belief that a game should accommodate all type of players, if a player wants to have more challenge or even MOAR EXTREME CHALLENGE!!!, they can self-impose that challenge without forcing everyone else to their strict view, if the player wants to have a more leisurely adventuring experience they should be able to do it also. Not my thing, but some people like it. I would hate to see KotC2 turned into some sort of elitist game that only four or five RPG specialists would enjoy playing.

I like the current state of resting places and the challenge to find them after some difficult encounter and hope that it continues like that in the next game. I don't run to a campfire after every fight and sometimes not at all, but I don't want to be restricted of my choices. An occasional restricted campfire (like in the Undead Tower) is not really a big deal, but everywhere? Ugh! If someone believes that campfires are too numerous, then they should abstain from using them that often, it's not my fault if someone doesn't have the self control not to abuse something and I certainly don't want to be penalized because of someone else's lack of discipline. At the most, if these changes are actually going to take place, let them be optional, maybe by having a difficulty setting at the start of the game or an "EXPERT" setting similar to the Ironman selection. Flame away!

[Darthcast]

Nice anecdote.

Maybe resting could be limited at all optional dungeons (like the undead tower in KotC 1). That way players wouldn't complain (I guess)... and optional dungeons/quests should be more difficult than normal ones anyway (imo).

[Narsham]

After Knights of the Chalice came out the main complaint players had (aside from the font that some disliked, not me) was the limited resting places, so I don't see how limiting campfires even further is going to endear a hell of a lot of players or make them buy the next game. I'm firmly in the belief that a game should accommodate all type of players, if a player wants to have more challenge or even MOAR EXTREME CHALLENGE!!!, they can self-impose that challenge without forcing everyone else to their strict view, if the player wants to have a more leisurely adventuring experience they should be able to do it also. Not my thing, but some people like it. I would hate to see KotC2 turned into some sort of elitist game that only four or five RPG specialists would enjoy playing.

In KotC 1, Blue Salamander pretty much had binary options--offer access to unlimited resting, or deny access to resting entirely.

Adding an intermediate option--limited access to resting--as in the undead tower, provides an extra option. Whether it's used to make the game easier or harder depends on the design choices made. Making the campfire available more than once (as in the undead tower) seems like an important possibility to me.

I'd argue that KotC had harder encounters in many places precisely because Blue Salamander had to set the difficulty based on an entirely rested party, but wanted most of the fights to be challenging. If none of the fights are simply attriting PC resources without themselves being a major threat, then more of the fights can be minor ones. (KotC certainly has some of these, like when you encounter one or two enemies in place of 6+.)

FPS games tend to have cheat codes to reduce the challenge. KotC had options to do so. I see no reason not to offer players more options. Having campsites which work only N times offers an easy challenge slider to adjust. Want an easier game? Go to settings and set campsites to N+3, or to infinite use. Want a harder game? Crank campsites down to N-1 or N-2.

Or, following along with your suggestions, KotC 2 should allow resting anywhere. Forcing players who want to rest after every fight to wander back to a campsite on another level or map doesn't really add to the game.

[Darkion]

Or, following along with your suggestions, KotC 2 should allow resting anywhere. Forcing players who want to rest after every fight to wander back to a campsite on another level or map doesn't really add to the game.

Don't put words in my mouth. I never said or suggested that I wanted resting anywhere at anytime, I explicitly said that I liked the way the campfires worked in Kotc1, which was a very limited amount of them usually after a difficult encounter.

[BlueSalamander]

An occasional restricted campfire (like in the Undead Tower) is not really a big deal, but everywhere?

Just to clarify, limited campfires will not be used everywhere. Most campfires would be just like they are in KotC. A few others, in closed areas similar to the Undead Tower and Frost Giant Rift, could have a limited-use campfire to encourage a conservative play. It's just a streamlined way of reproducing the scripts in the Undead Tower.

[Darkion]

Just to clarify, limited campfires will not be used everywhere. Most campfires would be just like they are in KotC. A few others, in closed areas similar to the Undead Tower and Frost Giant Rift, could have a limited-use campfire to encourage a conservative play. It's just a streamlined way of reproducing the scripts in the Undead Tower.

I see! Thanks for the clarification.

[screeg]

Just to clarify, limited campfires will not be used everywhere. Most campfires would be just like they are in KotC. A few others, in closed areas similar to the Undead Tower and Frost Giant Rift, could have a limited-use campfire to encourage a conservative play. It's just a streamlined way of reproducing the scripts in the Undead Tower.

In that case, how about making them something altogether different from "campfires"? Like a tent or hut or bedrolls or something. I guess it makes more sense to make the campfire a limited term resource, and a tent permanent for example.