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

[Inchoroi]

Oddly, I put the onus of resting or not resting entirely on the party; if they want to take a rest after every combat, they can do so. I've never even considered preparing in that fashion, either.

Of course....there might be repercussions. So, you cleared out the first room of the dungeon, then went to rest. While you were gone for 1 hour, the denizens put up hastily erected barricades to the front entrance, and have it ready for you when you arrive. Enjoy.

I would absolutely love it, too, if my players decided to use Leomund's tiny hut in one of my dungeons...I would giggle with glee.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Actually, you just proved the opposite of what you wanted to prove.

If the PHB is rules and resting is solely within the rules (with the exception of variant resting rules in the DMG), then it is obviously within the purview of the DM to change those resting rules. In fact, since the DMG does have variant resting rules, it's implied that not all DMs would want to use the same resting rules.

Or are you claiming that the DM cannot make house rules?

That is nothing like what I said. I'm saying you can't treat guidelines like indisputable rules (because they are guidelines [suggestions] and not immovable rules), therefore, the premise of the OP's post is flawed. That post you quoted was in response to him or her saying that guidelines on encounter building are no different than rules like spell descriptions. And of course they are different for obvious reasons I pointed out.

In fact, your interpretation is the opposite of what I'm arguing, and I honestly have no idea how you could possibly come to the conclusion I am arguing against house rules when I flat stated that it says right there in the DMG to make house rules (tailor your adventures) as early as in the introduction.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Ok, so players at some tables are finagling in too many rests in an adventuring day? Err, how? Is this a Warlock thing?

I'm sorry, I phrased that clumsily. It's still just the perennial 5MWD issue we're ultimately talking, here. Though too many short rests could conceivably be a thing, especially with the Warlock, before you string together many 'short' 1-hr rests, you'll probably take a long rest.

Yes, I see where this system will reduce the total number of "recoveries" between levels so it will reduce the overall number of rests, but won't the issue of "we recover in the middle of the dungeon" replace "we rest in the middle of the dungeon"?

That's the idea, yes. Leveling is pegged to exp, which you get from encounters, which is pegged to difficulty via CR. So the number of encounters/level can be divined from the daily encounter budgets and exp to reach the next level. The OP's helpful chart, for instance, shows that the expected exp in a standard adventuring 'day' at 1st level is, coincidentally, exactly what you need to level up to 2nd. So 1st level lasts one 'day.' By pegging the 6-8 encounters (worth of exp, it could be three really hard encounters, though good luck surviving that at 1st level) and 2-3 short rests of that 'day' to level, instead, you get a number of 'recoveries' the party can use to get through the first level of their careers - whether that level covers an hour of in-world time or a year.

 

[KarinsDad]

That is nothing like what I said. I'm saying you can't treat guidelines like indisputable rules (because they are guidelines [suggestions] and not immovable rules), therefore, the premise of the OP's post is flawed. That post you quoted was in response to him or her saying that guidelines on encounter building are no different than rules like spell descriptions. And of course they are different for obvious reasons I pointed out.

In fact, your interpretation is the opposite of what I'm arguing, and I honestly have no idea how you could possibly come to the conclusion I am arguing against house rules when I flat stated that it says right there in the DMG to make house rules (tailor your adventures) as early as in the introduction.

So, what does the difference between guidelines and rules have to do with the price of tea in China on a Tuesday afternoon?

In other words, you were making some vague claim that his premise is wrong when obviously it is not wrong for HIS game.

It doesn't matter if something is a guideline or a rule. What matters is that there is a perceived issue in the game for him, so he is trying to come up with a solution to that issue. His premise is not flawed. Your premise is flawed. If it is ok for him to house rule, then it is ok for him to pick which guidelines in the DMG that he wants to follow and he can house rule those guidelines, just like he does for any rule. Just because something is a guideline doesn't mean that he cannot come up with a way to codify it. DMs are allowed to do that. Nothing wrong with his premise at all because it a premise based on his game.

It's a guideline in the DMG that magic items are not available for purchase. It doesn't mean that for a given game, a DM shouldn't change that or shouldn't codify it in some way.

 

[Sacrosanct]

So, what does the difference between guidelines and rules have to do with the price of tea in China on a Tuesday afternoon?

In other words, you were making some vague claim that his premise is wrong when obviously it is not wrong for HIS game.

It doesn't matter if something is a guideline or a rule. What matters is that there is a perceived issue in the game for him, so he is trying to come up with a solution to that issue. His premise is not flawed. Your premise is flawed. If it is ok for him to house rule, then it is ok for him to pick which guidelines in the DMG that he wants to follow and he can house rule those guidelines, just like he does for any rule. Just because something is a guideline doesn't mean that he cannot come up with a way to codify it. DMs are allowed to do that. Nothing wrong with his premise at all because it a premise based on his game.

It's a guideline in the DMG that magic items are not available for purchase. It doesn't mean that for a given game, a DM shouldn't change that or shouldn't codify it in some way.

I think you need to go back and reread his posts, because he's arguing that guidelines are RAW, and need to be treated the same as a hard firm rule like a spell description. I.e., that he can't houserule, and if it's in the DMG, then we must follow those rules even if they are guidelines. He flat out states "how do we make sure the PCs follow these rules" when in fact they aren't rules, but just guidelines, and he is free to make whatever houserule he wants. Heck, he even highlights in red text how 6-8 encounters is a hard rule that must be followed.

Either way, I'm not going to argue about this with you any further, and I am quickly reminded why I had you on ignore for a while.

 

[KarinsDad]

I'm sorry, I phrased that clumsily. It's still just the perennial 5MWD issue we're ultimately talking, here. Though too many short rests could conceivably be a thing, especially with the Warlock, before you string together many 'short' 1-hr rests, you'll probably take a long rest.

Hmmm. I must really be dense today. I don't understand at all how this addresses the 5MWD issue unless the Major Recoveries can be used in 10 minutes in the middle of a day to prevent the PCs from setting up camp for the day at 10 AM in the morning. If major and minor recoveries take virtually no time or a very short amount of time, I see where they could keep the party moving on with the delve. Otherwise, I am confused on how this helps 5MWD. I'm also real vague on whether one PC can take his recovery without affecting anything else in the game including the other PCs.

That's the idea, yes. Leveling is pegged to exp, which you get from encounters, which is pegged to difficulty via CR. So the number of encounters/level can be divined from the daily encounter budgets and exp to reach the next level. The OP's helpful chart, for instance, shows that the expected exp in a standard adventuring 'day' at 1st level is, coincidentally, exactly what you need to level up to 2nd. So 1st level lasts one 'day.' By pegging the 6-8 encounters (worth of exp, it could be three really hard encounters, though good luck surviving that at 1st level) and 2-3 short rests of that 'day' to level, instead, you get a number of 'recoveries' the party can use to get through the first level of their careers - whether that level covers an hour of in-world time or a year.

Yes, I get that part. I just do not see the problem that he is trying to fix and how he is trying to fix it.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Hmmm. I must really be dense today. I don't understand at all how this addresses the 5MWD issue unless the Major Recoveries can be used in 10 minutes in the middle of a day to prevent the PCs from setting up camp for the day at 10 AM in the morning. If major and minor recoveries take virtually no time or a very short amount of time, I see where they could keep the party moving on with the delve. Otherwise, I am confused on how this helps 5MWD.

You only get so many recoveries per level. So, if you go 5MWD'ing your way through a dungeon, you run out of recoveries before you earn enough exp to get to level 2. They're a finite resource within a given level. Time is not - well, you'll die of old age eventually, but not from resting 8 hours after every single encounter, you can do that and still go from 1 to 20 inside a year.

I'm also real vague on whether one PC can take his recovery without affecting anything else in the game including the other PCs.

Yes, he could. For instance, the party could rest, and the Warlock could spend his minor rec to get spells, and the Barbarian could spend his to roll a handful of HD - and everyone could save there's for later.

I just do not see the problem that he is trying to fix

That can make it much harder to understand a solution.

 

[DaviMMS]

I kind of liked the system proposed by the OP, but I think it does not take into consideration the multipliers for number of enemies.

You don't actually gain 300 xp per character in an adventure day at 1st level. Your adventure day xp budget will normally not be enough to level up the group.

For example, let's say we have a group of 4 1st level players. Their adventure day budget is 1200 xp.

1 encounter with 4 goblins is worth 200 xp but, because of the number of enemies, the encounter is actually worth twice that (400).

So, after 3 enconters like that, you would already have filled the adventure day budget, but each member of the group only gained 150 xp.

Sent from my SM-G920I using EN World mobile app

 

[KarinsDad]

I think you need to go back and reread his posts, because he's arguing that guidelines are RAW, and need to be treated the same as a hard firm rule like a spell description. I.e., that he can't houserule, and if it's in the DMG, then we must follow those rules even if they are guidelines. He flat out states "how do we make sure the PCs follow these rules" when in fact they aren't rules, but just guidelines, and he is free to make whatever houserule he wants.

He didn't appear to be stating that those were RAW in his first post, rather he called them fundamental balancing principles. He did use the term RAW in a later on post in response to your guideline post, but I'm not convinced he meant it the way that you are taking it.

And yes, it appears that the designers explicitly laid out a specific set of guidelines for both max experience in a day and experience required to level up. I use the word "max" because the DMG uses the phrase "can handle" multiples times in The Adventuring Day section. In other words, there's a perceived potential limit by the designers and nothing seems to indicate that the game was designed to always reach that limit every adventuring day.


I think that one potential flaw in this design is that there are a lot of resources used in game outside of adventuring. PCs cast spells in town to acquire information or accomplish other goals all of the time without actually adventuring and definitively gaining experience per se. Those resources get recovered automatically via normal resting, even though the actions done might not acquire a lot of experience or any experience at all. So unless the PCs can both recover and rest, it would seem like this system would be punitive to players who like to use their limited resource abilities in town without necessarily "adventuring".

 

[schnee]

I'm really struck by how much chaos this causes. I mean, we have a broad mix of D&D experience at our table. I started with Blue Box Basic, a couple others with 2nd edition, someone else with 4th edition Dark Sun, and several people brand new to the game. Lots of possibilities for confusion, resistance, or whatever.

Here's how it went:

"Ok, the new edition balances the classes with long and short rests. Warlocks really need them, other classes like Wizards and Druids benefit. Also, 6-8 encounters between long rests is the balance assumption between martials and casters."

Table all around takes it in, and is fine.

During play:

Someone: "Ok, we've been going for a while. Seems like a natural break. Anyone need a short rest?"
Warlock: "I'm out of spells."
Druid: "I could use a refresh on Wild Shape and a spell recovery."
Someone else: "Cool, Anyone want to push on?"
People shaking their heads.

DM: "Ok, you take a half hour breather, eat, drink some water, and do your short rest things. Anyone want to do anything else special?" People shaking their heads.

"OK, done. Moving on..."

Whole thing takes one minute.

WHY IS THIS SO FREAKING CONTROVERSIAL.