Getting to 6 encounters in a day

[MichaelSomething]

The game is built around resource management throughout many encounters.

It's quite possible to design the game so that the resource management part is minimized, but then you'll get a lot of people complaining it's not D&D.

 

[Sunseeker]

If the party is in a classic dungeon or similar situation, the DM can design the circumstances such that PCs trying to have a Five Minute Workday are going to either be attacked, surrounded, or reinforced against. Tactically, the party will have to face/force a higher number of encounters before camping or else at best end up besieged.

If the party is in the wilderness or the like, there are still random encounters or other cases of encounters coming to the party (if the PCs decide to camp every few miles instead of making a long trek through enemy territory to rest up, what’s to stop large reinforcements from arriving in the area?). Also, even if there aren’t combats going on, the wilderness can have non-combat encounters that drain resources (and conditions that impede proper rest).

The problem with the latter case is that:
A: random encounters are random. You might get attacked, you might not. You might get a short rest, or even a long rest in before you get attacked. But random encounter tables get somewhat silly. I mean, imagine walking through the woods, and over the course of 8 hours, you get attacked by 6-8 different packs of wolves. Or you get attacked by 3 packs of wolves, two pairs of bears and one mountain lion.
This isn't how walking through a forest actually looks. This is how walking through a zoo looks.

B: Keying off above, the forest would have to be absolutely INFESTED with whoever you were fighting.

I mean that's fine if you want to present a theme park. But real people can go out into real forests and be lucky to see one wild predator and a good portion of the time, those predators aren't interested in the people.

If PCs keep trying to rest after just a few encounters, it’s an issue of design more than anything, a design that regularly presents a sense of predictable safety — combat encounters being treated like scheduled sports matches instead of the fog of war. If the circumstances of the adventure and campaign are designed such that simply being awake and keeping moving to clear out space is a better tactical option than holing up, no mechanical changes or benefits are required. Plus it makes for a far more exciting story.

The problem with the logic of "there's always random encounters" or "there's enemies out to get them" is that the logic doesn't magically go away after 8 fights. Once you've set up the idea that the party is going to have to deal with the DM rolling for random encounters every hour that logic still applies after 8 fights. If there is a hostile enemy force out to get them, then that hostile force doesn't stop after 6-8 fights.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

This is one possible solution of many. Personally I don't like encouraging behavior based on meta-game rewards like XP. It leads to weird dissonance of PCs that push on for no in-world reason.

That assumes XP is a meta-game reward which doesn't correspond to anything within the game world.

Alternatively, everyone is fully aware that you can only learn and grow by constantly testing your own limits.

 

[Oofta]

But if they came up with an "in-world reason," you'd presumably be fine with it?

Or perhaps if one was created as part of the mechanic, such as it being a boon of the God or Goddess of Skill for those who test their limits in the pursuit of excellence?

Sure, but the proposal is that you reward XP for pushing on. That leads to conversations amongst players of basically "it will be worth more if we do another fight". Worth what? It takes you out of the immersion of the campaign and puts the focus on game mechanics. Any "in-character justification" is going to be a sham. As far as a boon, no I'm not fond of using the (literal) hand of god to justify behavior.

Ideally if I were a writer I could put down my character's choices and decisions and it would make sense in a novel based on their motivations and the situation from the perspective of the PC.

If you and your group has an issue with too many rests, there's other options I prefer. If you want to approach it from a more mechanical/meta-game it's fine. Just not my preference.

 

[Oofta]

That assumes XP is a meta-game reward which doesn't correspond to anything within the game world.

Alternatively, everyone is fully aware that you can only learn and grow by constantly testing your own limits.

But from a character perspective, there's no reason to test your limits and risk your life if you know you could just pick up tomorrow after you're fully rested. At least not for many people.

I know there are some people that climb mountains or run marathons just to prove they can do it. They're outnumbered by people who don't have that perspective by a hundred to one. In addition, a marathoner is generally not risking death by pushing the boundaries.

There are many ways to set up games to push players. This is one I wouldn't use, and would prefer not to be used at a table I'm playing at.

 

[iserith]

Sure, but the proposal is that you reward XP for pushing on. That leads to conversations amongst players of basically "it will be worth more if we do another fight". Worth what? It takes you out of the immersion of the campaign and puts the focus on game mechanics. Any "in-character justification" is going to be a sham. As far as a boon, no I'm not fond of using the (literal) hand of god to justify behavior.

Ideally if I were a writer I could put down my character's choices and decisions and it would make sense in a novel based on their motivations and the situation from the perspective of the PC.

If you and your group has an issue with too many rests, there's other options I prefer. If you want to approach it from a more mechanical/meta-game it's fine. Just not my preference.

I use time pressures and random encounters/wandering monsters (though they are also just forms of time pressure) generally. If I wasn't running a game with little to no time pressures, a bonus XP mechanic works well to achieve the same end by a different means. And, for those for whom it matters, some thought can be given to why that makes sense to them in the game world.

On the justification being a sham or breaking immersion, I disagree - I think it enhances what some may think of "immersion." When a player tries to actively square up his or her desire for doing a thing with the motivations or fictional circumstances which make sense to their idea of the character, the result I see is an exploration of that character's likely thoughts, history, goals, allegiances, and all manner of traits to justify the outcome. That's a player thinking hard about being that character in my view. I think it results in better fleshed-out characters at the table. And if you identify immersion as that feeling of connecting with the game world through your character, that process of squaring up player and character I describe is a pretty easy way to get there in my experience.

 

[robus]

The problem with the latter case is that:
A: random encounters are random. You might get attacked, you might not. You might get a short rest, or even a long rest in before you get attacked. But random encounter tables get somewhat silly. I mean, imagine walking through the woods, and over the course of 8 hours, you get attacked by 6-8 different packs of wolves. Or you get attacked by 3 packs of wolves, two pairs of bears and one mountain lion.
This isn't how walking through a forest actually looks. This is how walking through a zoo looks.

B: Keying off above, the forest would have to be absolutely INFESTED with whoever you were fighting.

I mean that's fine if you want to present a theme park. But real people can go out into real forests and be lucky to see one wild predator and a good portion of the time, those predators aren't interested in the people.

I dunno. I came up with an alternate travel system that broke the travel between adventuring days and regular days, basically every few days of travel the party comes across some situation such that there are a number of encounters to tackle before they can continue on their way. A fast moving river in hostile territory, a treacherous mountain pass guarded by monsters etc etc. something that makes the travel memorable and provides a good adventuring day of fun rather than the drip drip of the standard system.

It’s not hard to cobble together an sdventuring day of that sort from the random encounter tables.

 

[Shadowdweller00]

The problem with the latter case is that:
A: random encounters are random. You might get attacked, you might not. You might get a short rest, or even a long rest in before you get attacked. But random encounter tables get somewhat silly. I mean, imagine walking through the woods, and over the course of 8 hours, you get attacked by 6-8 different packs of wolves. Or you get attacked by 3 packs of wolves, two pairs of bears and one mountain lion.
This isn't how walking through a forest actually looks. This is how walking through a zoo looks.

B: Keying off above, the forest would have to be absolutely INFESTED with whoever you were fighting.

I mean that's fine if you want to present a theme park. But real people can go out into real forests and be lucky to see one wild predator and a good portion of the time, those predators aren't interested in the people.

Perhaps; D&D regularly violates any sensical natural or scientific consistency....but then again real world ecology doesn't include things like undead or magical constructs that don't need to eat; nor does the real world have conflicting gods, wild fey spirits, nor wizards of dubious mentality provoking or creating creatures of aggressive demeanor to influence events. Potential predators in much of the real world have long since been beaten back by human encroachment and destruction of habitat. The presence of magic has the power to fundamentally alter nutrient production in the lower steps of the food chain - we don't have trees underground in the real world for example, but you'll find just that in several modules / adventures. Furthermore, from an adventure design standpoint, it's entirely reasonable to link encounters. Maybe the party isn't facing 3 separate packs of wolves...but three different waves of stragglers from a giant super-pack lead by a direwolf, werewolf, or some other type of monster. And the longer one stays in the area, the greater the chance the alpha or the main pack will start to notice that members are going missing...Or maybe predators / bandits merely follow the trail of bodies.

 

[Kurotowa]

It's easy if the following are true:
A: the fights are small.
B: the party does not have control over when they can rest.

The 6-8 fights works well for a dungeon where the enemies are actively seeking to expel the party, or the party is forced to move forward.

It doesn't work well for an open-world explory type game.

I think you've hit the nail on the head. If you're doing a dungeon exploration campaign? A lot of the encounters will be small "you enter the room" sorts. If the party turns back after the first serious fight they'll never penetrate very deep and so there's a clear reason to press forward until you're low on resources.

IME it's the story focused campaigns that fall most into lop sided adventure days. If instead of delving into a massive dungeon complex you're assaulting a much smaller border fort or ruined temple? If the DM isn't using a module and doesn't feel like planning out a lot of little encounters that don't impact the plot? If you're doing something really different like providing security for the Duke's ball in case those cultists try to make good on their threats? Then it's a lot harder to get even close to those six encounters in a day.

 

[jgsugden]

This whole 'problem' baffles me.

The PCs are traveling and come across a town... in the process of being attacked by gnolls. They race to the town to help, stopping a bunch of gnolls attacking the butcher, then sprinting off to aid at a tavern down the way. After those gnolls are dispatched they spot where the main host of the gnolls are gathering at the edge of town to drag away captives. They manage to stop several groups of gnolls ina lengthy battle, but others escape with live captives. They pause to assess damage, heal, and speak to the mayor, but after a short rest they go into pursuit and track the gnolls back to their lair. They take out the outer guards, then face off againsta gnoll shaman that is conducting a foul ritual, then finally fight their way to where prisoners are kept. They hold off gne gnolls long enoug for the townsfolk to escape and then retreat back to town to recover before returning to finish off the gnolls...

Where the @#$% were the PCs supposed to take a long rest in tht series of 6 to 8 encounters? If they did, the townsfolk would be lost.

Tell a good story and you'll have few single combat days.