D&D General D&D without Resource Management

[Micah Sweet]

I do not, and never have, enjoyed D&D "for the wargame aspect."

The 5MWD problem is a problem for much deeper reasons than that. Like sidelining other characters (as I said above), or trivializing the process of getting from challenge to conclusion (as was my initial argument), or erasing opportunities for people to socialize here in meatspace because everything is resolved with a few pushes of a button.

Non-combat is exactly as susceptible as combat here, because D&D spells are even more overpowered outside of combat. In combat, at least the Fighter can do things on her own that are unique to being a Fighter and moderately impactful, even if they never measure up to a generically strong spell used with a modicum of strategy.

What can a Fighter do out of combat that compares to a zone of truth or a speak with dead to solve a mystery? Or with create food and water in a survival setting? Or with a tongues and a comprehend languages when negotiating with monsters? Or two spellcasters cooperating, one casting greater invisibility, the other silence over the area where the party intends to infiltrate? Or, or, or...

Having your entire daily loadout of spells every time you do something challenging means the people who don't have spells have rather little to contribute.

How could a character possibly be as effective at those tasks without magic?

 

[EzekielRaiden]

How could a character possibly be as effective at those tasks without magic?

1. Make magic less "I Win" button, and more "I create opportunities" button.
2. Give non-magic characters actually defined, useful utility beyond "you can make skill checks good."

It really isn't that hard. The only thing preventing it is folks being terribly precious about D&D magic as always offering "I win" buttons rather than being merely one useful tool (or set of tools, if you prefer) in a larger toolbox.

It would even be a step closer to D&D's roots. Vance's spellcasters cannot solve problems like this willy-nilly. They have to be skilled with a blade and sneaky and (etc., etc.) because their spells, while powerful, are not instant win buttons all by themselves. Conan's sorcerous opponents (and his spellcaster friends) certainly don't have "I win" buttons. Galadriel, Gandalf, Saruman, and Sauron are some of the mightiest beings to live in the Third Age, yet they consistently act with subtleties. Etc.

 

[MuhVerisimilitude]

How could a character possibly be as effective at those tasks without magic?

1: Zone of truth. You're so good at detecting lies that you don't need it.

2: Speak with the dead is easy. You're just that good. Sherlock Holmes could do it. Of course he probably can't instantly detect who actually killed the victim, but with some extra work...

3: Create food and water: You could be so tough you don't need food or water.

4: Tongues and comprehend languages are pointless if you already know all languages, which is certainly possible. Might be a bit far fetched for entirely unknown languages, but those can probably be extrapolated from the ones you already know.

5: Being impossibly silent is easy. We see this all the time in fiction.

6: Moving invisibly can be done too. This has been seen in fiction (Rurouni Kenshin is a good example).

 

[Corinnguard]

How could a character possibly be as effective at those tasks without magic?

There is Level Up's Savant class.

 

[Edgar Ironpelt]

Some abilities would be better (IMHO) if they weren't resources to be managed. In particular, I find that the need to resource-manage Rage uses per day cuts against immersion with a Barbarian character. So do my players - especially those who would enjoy playing a Barbarian, or who would find that class a good fit.

Unlimited turning/rebuking of undead, the way it was back before 3.x is another one.

Full hit points for every fight/encounter. IME players will want this as a "Duh. Of course" thing, and will move heaven and earth to evade DM attempts to take it away. So I'm just as happy, as a DM, to go with the flow. Abundant wands of cure light wounds? Sure. Or even house rules to allow out-of-combat healing from a mundane Healing skill, even if this is blasphemy against the "All Healing Comes From Divine Magic" commandment of standard D&D.

And one other point where resource management gets greatly relaxed if not entirely eliminated is Encumbrance. Back in the old days (1e with pre-1e games still in play) I saw DMs hand out cheap bags of holding to 1st level characters, simply because encumbrance was so unfun that it became unfun for the DMs as well as the players.

 

[Lanefan]

What do you see as the end payoff of D&D? Gaining xp and advancing in levels? Gaining in game rewards? A satisfying campaign conclusion? A character retiring? Resolving a plot conflict?

Any of the above.

For me those are only a minor part of the fun of D&D, the big focus is on the actual adventuring and exploring and roleplaying and fighting and playing in the moment.

Oh, I agree. My argument is with those who see elements of those things (cough resource management cough) as tedium, and therefore not worth doing.

 

[Lanefan]

And, notably, when you're constantly doing the 5MWD, you get a lot fewer of those camaraderie moments. Instant-win buttons and mostly spending your play-time doing bookkeeping and resting just doesn't offer that many moments to be funny or poignant or struggling together.

Unless you roleplay the characters' downtime conversations now and then. I mean, if they're going to spend 23 and a half hours sitting around doing not much of anything, there's got to be some conversation/practical jokes/whatever to be had there at least sometimes, right? And not that I'm saying this has to happen every time the party sacks out, but now and then I've seen those downtime chats take on lives of their own and become the most enjoyable parts of the evening (meanwhile the DM has nothing to do but quaff beer).

But if the choice is "have fun social interactions with my friends OR win more, better, faster, safer, etc."...players will choose the latter. Even though losing all those moments of camaraderie will make the game less fun.

You put this as if it's an either-or. It isn't..

That, and the fun social interactions with friends are mostly out-of-character anyway; oftentimes the players get along far better than their characters do.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Unless you roleplay the characters' downtime conversations now and then. I mean, if they're going to spend 23 and a half hours sitting around doing not much of anything, there's got to be some conversation/practical jokes/whatever to be had there at least sometimes, right?

What is the point of doing so? It only opens opportunities for the DM to inflict problems on you. Avoiding it maximizes your chances of winning. Having a conversation with your fellow runners worsens your chance of crossing the finish first.

And not that I'm saying this has to happen every time the party sacks out, but now and then I've seen those downtime chats take on lives of their own and become the most enjoyable parts of the evening (meanwhile the DM has nothing to do but quaff beer).

Oh, believe me, I agree! That's why I prefer games which actually reward and foster teamwork, rather than ruthless personal optimization. Because ruthless personal optimization pushes you to thinking only in monodimensional, selfish terms, with little to no interest in what others are doing, who they are, etc. beyond their pure instrumental value...and even that is usually perfunctory at best.

Such selfish thinking was, and still is, pervasive in 3e/PF1e groups. It is considered a truism that the game should be played in a fully self-centered way.

You put this as if it's an either-or. It isn't..

Except that it is, for both the reason I just stated above, and for the "optimize the fun out of the game" argument in general. Camaraderie moments add nothing to your chances of success, but potentially might subtract from them. Hence, if one is optimizing for success über alles, one is both pushing forward all elements which increase (or are likely to increase) one's chance of success, and eliminating or reducing all elements which reduce (or have a chance of reducing) one's chance of success. "Minmaxing," to use the jargon term. The 5MWD is a pure, distilled demonstration of minmaxing. Minimize all elements which are not "use spells to solve problems." Maximize all elements which are "use spells to solve problems."

In-character camaraderie is, thus, something to be minimized out whenever possible. It does not contribute to victory (that's what spells are for), but may contribute to defeat.

That, and the fun social interactions with friends are mostly out-of-character anyway; oftentimes the players get along far better than their characters do.

I prefer to play games where the characters are expected to get along reasonably well, mostly because that, too, is a big part of encouraging actual teamwork, rather than "X solo adventurers who just happen to adventure in the same place at the same time." That doesn't mean there can't be conflicts--every group of humans with at least two members has internal conflict now and then, and the N=1 case isn't a guarantee of no conflict either!--but if you want teamwork, you need to have a team, and that means, y'know, people who get along to at least some degree.

Edit: Also, I'm a bit surprised you haven't had to deal with the rather common "old-school" approach of "side chatter is always IC, so any goofing around can and will be used against you." Folks on this very forum still advocate this approach today.

 

[jgsugden]

[snip write-up of what sounds like a fun sequence of events]

And that's all great...but how can/do you sustain that the next day, and the next, etc.?

I wish I had time to play every day.

Having one day work out like that is all well and good. The trick is to find a way to sustain that pressure over a string of consecutive days to - one hopes - slowly wear them down. Easy enough in a dungeon-crawl situation provided the PCs at least attempt to keep moving into new areas, not so easy in a city or travel or shipboard situation without straining credulity beyond reason (many action movies are guilty of the same thing).

It isn't really hard at all to do it most of the time. I don't do it all the time. There are encounters where the PCs think they'll have just one encounter that day and really unload. That is fun when it isn't the norm, but instead the exception ... and usually they hold some in reserve because you never know ... what else ... might pop up.

Levels 5 to 16 of almost all of my campaigns are a giant sandbox with dungeons, politics, mysteries, exploration, etc... There are always clocks running. Bad guys are scheming. Resources are dwindling. Seasons are changing. The PCs in my game rarely ever think, "I'm betting we have lots of time before something goes wrong." It is usually, "If we go do XXXXX, then YYYYY might happen while we're gone. We need to rush!" As long as you have those types of drivers pushing the PCs forward ... 6 to 8 encounters with the design ideas I discussed above providing examples of some ways to use easy, medium and hard encounters amongst deadly ... isn't just easy. It is near automatic.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Some abilities would be better (IMHO) if they weren't resources to be managed. In particular, I find that the need to resource-manage Rage uses per day cuts against immersion with a Barbarian character.

Ah, combine that with the so-called selling point of resource management of making you think strategically about your powers and...

"Krogdar is the seething pillar of Fury, an unrestrained fount of raw, berserk killing anger and desire to rip and tear until all enemies are dead. But Krogdar does not think it prudent to unleash his pent up force of destruction on puny kobolds. Kobolds annoy Krogdar, but what if there stronger enemy later on? Krogdar's unlimited thirst for blood and battle on a strict budget."