D&D 5E A mechanical solution to the problem with rests

clearstream

(He, Him)
DMG page 84 clearly lays out a fundamental balancing principle of 5e. That there will be six to eight medium or hard encounters between long rests, and two or three encounters between short rests. It's not the goal of this thread to debate if that is good or bad. Instead, I aim to move directly on to the question of how to ensure that rest rate happens in play? @CapnZapp in his thread http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?551362-Resting-and-the-frikkin-Elephant-in-the-Room calls out that published material leaves it up to DMs to limit their players' ability to rest. He cites an article by the Angry GM proposing a threat-based solution http://theangrygm.com/ask-angry-resting-in-5e-and-why-its-fine/, essentially increasing the challenge elsewhere when players reduce challenge for themselves through frequent long resting. From those debates and others we have a detailed understanding of the issues, just one example being the balance between long and short rest class features which is perhaps most acutely seen when considering Warlock spell slots against Wizard spell slots. The classes are comparable if rests are enforced as DMG 8 envisions. If they are not enforced that way, the Wizard will be free to cast an order of magnitude more spells than the Warlock. Again, the goal of this thread isn't to debate those problems or even to prove they exist, but only to tackle the fundamental: how might the game mechanics support DMs to enforce rests?

I believe that an observation that DMG 84 asserts a fundamental connection asserted between adventuring days, number of encounters and levelling gives us the most direct starting point for this mechanic. If we analyse the XP budgets per adventuring day on DMG 84 against the levelling costs on PHB page 15 we can find how many adventuring days are expected to level (rounded to one decimal). About 33 days all told, or about 229 encounters.

Level Days
L-2 1.0
L-3 1.0
L-4 1.5
L-5 2.2
L-6 2.1
L-7 2.3
L-8 2.2
L-9 2.3
L-10 2.1
L-11 2.3
L-12 1.4
L-13 1.7
L-14 1.5
L-15 1.7
L-16 1.7
L-17 1.5
L-18 1.6
L-19 1.5
L-20 1.0

This analysis allows us to assert that the game balance implicitly assumes that players will recover their class features (and any other powers) through resting at a rate that is exactly the number in the right column (days) times 2-3 for short-rests and times 1 for long-rests per level. Again, I'm not saying if that is good or bad and I do not want to debate that here. Thus the most direct mechanical solution would be to give players a number of rests per level. How might that work?

Recoveries Per Level
Characters gain a new resource—minor and major “recoveries”. All features that refresh with a short-rest are instead refreshed by spending a minor recovery. All features refreshed with a long-rest are instead refreshed by spending a major recovery. To spend a recovery, a character must do the things described on PHB page 186 for a short (minor) or long (major) rest. If the rest is interrupted, the recovery fails and is not expended i.e. it can be reattempted later. All expended recoveries are replenished each time a character levels up. At 1st level, a character gains two minor and one major recovery to spend. At 5th level, a character gains an additional two minor and one major recovery to spend.

That's the proposed rule. With the huge caveat that it is pending testing, things I like about this rule are


  1. It looks easy to implement
  2. It looks resilient
  3. It looks flexible/extensible
  4. It snaps onto the existing rules with minimum ceremony

And things I hate are


  1. It's very "gamey" so it could be tough to find a fiction that "sells it" to players

I'd love to hear everyone's thoughts. Please respect the goals of this thread and focus on the game mechanics. The question is not whether we approve of rests or require rules for resting, but how to mechanically buttress the "rests" pillar of 5e's game balance given that goal? It'd also be great to know how to wed the mechanic neatly to the fiction?

[Edited to increase count of minor recoveries.]
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Tobold

Explorer
What do you do if the players foolishly waste their recoveries early in the level with little effect and find themselves having still half a level to go with no more resources, spell slots, or hit points available? I would use your system maybe in addition to the "gritty realism" option, where if all else fails you can still rest in a city for a week and recover.
 


CapnZapp

Legend
What do you do if the players foolishly waste their recoveries early in the level with little effect and find themselves having still half a level to go with no more resources, spell slots, or hit points available? I would use your system maybe in addition to the "gritty realism" option, where if all else fails you can still rest in a city for a week and recover.
Entirely fair. More generally, I could see the rules saying "you start each adventure completely rested for free, at no cost in recoveries"

The underlying assumption here is that one week's rest in a city means an adventure break - whether successful or not, the previous adventure is over (or, at the very least, an ongoing story enters a new chapter).

This I like - one problem with the unregulated resting rules is that you really can try and try again at a scenario until you succeed or die. This rule would codify how "real" adventurers would realize when their best efforts weren't enough, retreat, rest up, forget their failures and move on to something new.

So if you run out of spells or hit points (and also Recoveries) you can simply accept defeat. Then you rest for a week, and start a new adventure rested up. I like.

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app
 
Last edited:

KarinsDad

Adventurer
Are you saying that PCs only get the equivalent of two short rests and one long rest per level (until higher level) instead of per adventuring day?

What happens if they have a few boss fights back to back?

I'm not sure your analysis on XP is correct, regardless of designer intent. The PCs in my game sure as heck do not level up every few adventuring days.
 

CapnZapp

Legend
Are you saying that PCs only get the equivalent of two short rests and one long rest per level (until higher level) instead of per adventuring day?

What happens if they have a few boss fights back to back?

I'm not sure your analysis on XP is correct, regardless of designer intent. The PCs in my game sure as heck do not level up every few adventuring days.
I belive that is the levelling speed that results from having 6-8 encounters per day, yes. Or at least, if the calculations are correct.

Remember to please not devolve this thread into whether that is good or bad per vonklaudes wishes. It simply is.

Again, unless there's a problem with the math - I haven't checked.

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app
 

CapnZapp

Legend
Are you saying that PCs only get the equivalent of two short rests and one long rest per level (until higher level) instead of per adventuring day?

What happens if they have a few boss fights back to back?

I'm not sure your analysis on XP is correct, regardless of designer intent. The PCs in my game sure as heck do not level up every few adventuring days.

Also please note the system proposed here does NOT force you to level up every other adventuring day.

Quite the contrary, since it decouples rests from recoveries.

You can easily string out all the encounters that make up a given level over weeks and months, KarinsDad.

The advantage of this system is that even if you do,
a) the short-long balance is preserved; warlocks aren't shafted by wizards
b) resting (ie Recovering) doesn't wreck the intended challenge level of the scenario - you can't circumvent the challenge by casting Rope Trick or Teleport to gain a load of "free" rests.

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app
 

The issue I see is that many groups do not gain keep track of XP from encounter to encounter. The DM keeps track and tells them when they level, or simply uses the milestone method rather than encounter XP.

In such a situation, the party would have no idea of their progress, and so no idea how their remaining rests compare to the remaining XP needed until they will refresh.

If I were to use this variant, I would probably think about giving rests as rewards for earning XP on the way to levelling, rather than making them all available at once.
 

KarinsDad

Adventurer
The issue I see is that many groups do not gain keep track of XP from encounter to encounter. The DM keeps track and tells them when they level, or simply uses the milestone method rather than encounter XP.

In such a situation, the party would have no idea of their progress, and so no idea how their remaining rests compare to the remaining XP needed until they will refresh.

Well, if they are not using milestone, then they would have a good idea about how many encounters they have had. This would give them a fairly good rule of thumb.
 

KarinsDad

Adventurer
Also please note the system proposed here does NOT force you to level up every other adventuring day.

Quite the contrary, since it decouples rests from recoveries.

You can easily string out all the encounters that make up a given level over weeks and months, KarinsDad.

The advantage of this system is that even if you do,
a) the short-long balance is preserved; warlocks aren't shafted by wizards
b) resting (ie Recovering) doesn't wreck the intended challenge level of the scenario - you can't circumvent the challenge by casting Rope Trick or Teleport to gain a load of "free" rests.
[/URL]

Which significantly devalues Rope Trick and Teleport over the core game.
 

Remove ads

Top