Five-Minute Workday Article

[MarkB]

More brainstorming.

How about a maximum threshold, equal to caster level, that inhibits overcasting? Your threshold starts at zero and each spell cast increases your threshold an amount equal to the spell's level (with cantrips not adding to threshold). Any round you spend not adding to your threshold (including casting cantrips) decreases your threshold by 1. Any spell that would put you over your threshold cannot be cast until you have room within the threshold. Alteratively, have an optional rule allowing overcasting that causes either damage or temporary ability loss. Explain the threshold as a surge of magical energies that are dangerous if not kept in check.

I like the concept. I made a similar suggestion over on another thread, characterising it as a level of focus upon controlling magical energies which degrades as the character casts high-level spells and can be restored gradually. In my version, casting at-will spells actually increases the rate of focus regeneration.

It's a mechanic which works well in certain MMOs such as Champions Online, where you use basic attacks to build up a power level which can then be expended upon stronger attacks. I think some of the old Bo9S classes from 3.5e use a similar mechanic.

 

[HoolMarshes Dweller]

The 5-minute workday is nothing more than a talking point that people like to throw around. It's the DM's responsibility to create/run/oversee/ad hoc the adventure. How many people actually have this happen on a regular basis? Especially if they're a 3.x player or 4e player? They have nothing but forum post anecdotes to draw upon.

If the DM is prepared, they'll have more to an adventure than just "go in the dark hole in the ground to fight stuff" (although that's a fine adventure indeed). What about the journey there? If the party decides to rest, is their destination near any kind of settlement? If not, the wilderness can offer plenty of opportunity. Maybe the town they're in is full of spies? Maybe they're offered a reward to watch over a farmer's cows but then find out goblins are poaching them.

I could go on and on but in 30 years of DMing, I have never, not once, had a 5- or 15-minute workday occur except in the case of a group of high-level adventurers in Tomb of Horrors. As for 1st or even 0-level characters, it's squarely on the DM's shoulders to provide a broad canvas to act upon. This charge doesn't change as characters level up either. Characters will die, especially low level ones and that's okay. Then find a way to get resurrected, reincarnated, etc.

I think what this highlights is the need for a very beefy DMG. Let newer DMs see various examples, provide all the tools they need and then some. Give playersThe 1e DMG was a bit of overkill but it certainly had just about everything and the kitchen sink in terms of charts, tables, etc. Sure some of the rules needed editing, the layout was a bit jarring, but the sheer number of resources was helpful. Or the 2e Campaign Sourcebook and Catacomb Guide. All would be welcome in terms of their approach to presenting info for new(er) DMs.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

The 5-minute workday is nothing more than a talking point that people like to throw around. It's the DM's responsibility to create/run/oversee/ad hoc the adventure. How many people actually have this happen on a regular basis? Especially if they're a 3.x player or 4e player? They have nothing but forum post anecdotes to draw upon.

This has already been refuted multiple times in this topic. Nothing to see here! Move along!

 

[Hussar]

To be clear the PC's traveled several hours back to the lodge I don't recall off the top of my head but I think it was 3-4 hours to a place they knew was safe. Set up camp there, made meals, using healing skill to tends wounds, slept 8 hours, then traveled back. So they was gone 15+ hours. Since a alarm was raised the goblins waited a bit but not hours and hours before sending a scout up after not hearing anything. So they had 13+ hours to pack up and leave before the party returned. Also I stated they took what they could carry not that they took everything. But the goblins where gone along with their most valuable stuff. Which for the dozen or 18 goblins left seemed pretty reasonable. Just FYI since you used my example.

I am fair certain if aliens landed and started busting into peoples houses and killing everyone inside and then left just as they started on my block. I am fair certain that I could gather up all of my most valuable stuff I wanted to keep and could carry/pack in a car and leave in 13+ hours.

But you said you would not enjoy such a game and would not play in such again. Which is fair enough, but for me and my group things like that is what makes the game fun. A living breathing world that changes and mutates based on what the characters do or don't do. Not saying one play style is better or worse, but if 5e has a forced fix to do away with resource management and remove some of the elements my group and I like then 5e wouldn't interest us. Which wouldn't be a issue if 5e's goal wasn't to bring lapsed "DnD" players back, so those of us wanting to see that style of play are expressing ourselves on the matter.

As I said I have no problem with a mechanical fix to the 5 min adventuring day that some people have a problem with as long as it is a option and it is easy for the rest of us to opt not to use it.

So, the goblins have a 12 hour head start and the PC's can't track a couple of dozen goblins fleeing? What, no ranger, no druid, no one with any tracking skills, not even a dog?

That the goblins left wasn't the problem. That the PC's were apparently unable to track them down is. IIRC, you said this was PF, so, I'm going to presume that that's the same as 3e for tracking purposes. That's a DC 9 track check. I mean, you barely even have to roll for it. Actually, with Take 10, you DON'T have to roll for it.

So, no, please don't misunderstand me. It's not that the goblins chose to leave. That's groovy. It's that the PC's couldn't find the goblins ridiculously easily.
[MENTION=37609]Jameson[/MENTION] Courage - you're missing the point. The ONLY difference between your group and the absolutely slowest possible group, is about one year. Note, since most of your time is spent in travel and whatnot, there would be no difference between any group at that point. Additionally, any time your group had less than 5 XP awarding events in an adventuring day (the presumed speed of the fast group), the time difference between your group and the slow group lessens.

In actual fact, the difference between your group and a 15 MAD group is about 6 months of game time.

Again, you're going to tell me that 6 months to 1 year is going to make a huge difference, spread over the SEVENTY years of your campaign? Really?

 

[billd91]

So, the goblins have a 12 hour head start and the PC's can't track a couple of dozen goblins fleeing? What, no ranger, no druid, no one with any tracking skills, not even a dog?

That the goblins left wasn't the problem. That the PC's were apparently unable to track them down is. IIRC, you said this was PF, so, I'm going to presume that that's the same as 3e for tracking purposes. That's a DC 9 track check. I mean, you barely even have to roll for it. Actually, with Take 10, you DON'T have to roll for it.

So, no, please don't misunderstand me. It's not that the goblins chose to leave. That's groovy. It's that the PC's couldn't find the goblins ridiculously easily.

One thing you may notice if you stop trying to jump on her about the trackability of the goblins is that she never said the PCs tried to track the goblins. Not every group of PCs is going to be so genocidally tenacious that they'll follow a rag-tag group of goblins trying to flee trouble. The goblins were gone. The PCs appear to have left it at that.

 

[Dark Mistress]

So, the goblins have a 12 hour head start and the PC's can't track a couple of dozen goblins fleeing? What, no ranger, no druid, no one with any tracking skills, not even a dog?

That the goblins left wasn't the problem. That the PC's were apparently unable to track them down is. IIRC, you said this was PF, so, I'm going to presume that that's the same as 3e for tracking purposes. That's a DC 9 track check. I mean, you barely even have to roll for it. Actually, with Take 10, you DON'T have to roll for it.

So, no, please don't misunderstand me. It's not that the goblins chose to leave. That's groovy. It's that the PC's couldn't find the goblins ridiculously easily.

One thing you may notice if you stop trying to jump on her about the trackability of the goblins is that she never said the PCs tried to track the goblins. Not every group of PCs is going to be so genocidally tenacious that they'll follow a rag-tag group of goblins trying to flee trouble. The goblins were gone. The PCs appear to have left it at that.

It is as Billd91 said, they didn't try to track the goblins. The wanted the McGruffin in the dungeon. The players where a bit sad to miss out on the xp and loot, but the characters didn't care. They got what they came from.

 

[Fifth Element]

The 5-minute workday is nothing more than a talking point that people like to throw around.

This is pretty dismissive considering threads full of people discussing their experiences with the problem. Don't make the mistake of assuming your experiences are universal. Where do you think all these "anecdotes" come from - are they fabricated?

If the DM is prepared, they'll have more to an adventure than just "go in the dark hole in the ground to fight stuff" (although that's a fine adventure indeed).

I don't follow - if that's a fine adventure, then what's the problem with not having more to it? This basic point is that if someone's paying X dollars for a game, it should not contain too much "just deal with it yourself" in the rules.

 

[Hussar]

One thing you may notice if you stop trying to jump on her about the trackability of the goblins is that she never said the PCs tried to track the goblins. Not every group of PCs is going to be so genocidally tenacious that they'll follow a rag-tag group of goblins trying to flee trouble. The goblins were gone. The PCs appear to have left it at that.

It is as Billd91 said, they didn't try to track the goblins. The wanted the McGruffin in the dungeon. The players where a bit sad to miss out on the xp and loot, but the characters didn't care. They got what they came from.

Then how is this not a massive PLUS for the 5 minute work day? The players succeeded in their goals and got what they wanted, and didn't have to risk losing their characters in the process.

So, basically, a 5 MAD group actually was more successful than a group that pushes on. After all, the group that pushed on could also have lost PC's, while making minimal gains. After all, all they lost was some "rag tag" goblins. Probably not even worth the trouble right?

Which gets back to my point. The whole argument that a "living world" somehow negates the 15 MAD is flawed. For one, the 15 MAD simply does not add enough time to make any significant difference. For another, since the PC's actually succeeded in their goals, the 15 MAD was a successful tactic.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Then how is this not a massive PLUS for the 5 minute work day?

They could have expended more resources to annihilate the goblins and maybe gain a few more cp. But annihilation of every foe is not the goal- winning (by methods including avoidance) is enough.

Instead, they opted to save those resources for use in possible future encounters. Whether or not those encounters actually occur is immaterial- they made a risk/reward analysis that let them preserve combat & campaign resources for when they might be crucial on a "living world" campaign.

The whole argument that a "living world" somehow negates the 15 MAD is flawed.

If it were flawed, then there wouldn't be so many people who have experienced and recommended it as a tried and true remedy.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

They could have expended more resources to annihilate the goblins and maybe gain a few more cp. But annihilation of every foe is not the goal- winning (by methods including avoidance) is enough.

But if you use all your resources on one fight and the rest of the goblins take off while you rest and you still accomplish your mission, you've succeeded. You completed your goal and you "avoided" the rest of the encounters by making them run away.

If they take the plot item with you, and you need to track them down, it just means you get to fight them all at once the next day when you catch up with them, this time with full spells(and them all close together for AOE spells). It's likely you'll even have the resources to "waste" spells scrying on them and teleporting right beside them to catch them by surprise while they sleep.

That makes the 15MAD a good tactic.

The problem is, whether those extra encounters materialize really IS the point. If the PCs never see a second encounter(either because they've run away after one encounter to rest, or because the rest of the encounters leave while they are resting, or just because the DM doesn't feel like running any extra encounters that day) then it's tactically wise to use all your resources in the first fight.

The only time it becomes a bad idea is if you know you are going to fight at least 4 encounters a day. Most combats are balanced around the PCs using about 1/5th of their resources. Which means, even if you use "all" of your resources in the first combat, you'll survive another encounter with not much problem. Most of the time, it's impossible to use ALL of your resources in one combat. Instead, you just use your highest level spells(since you are still limited to one(or two) spells a round, you can't possibly use ALL your spells). This leaves your medium level spells for another encounter, and your low level spells(plus reliance on the fighting classes in your group) for the 3rd encounter. After that, you'll have to rely entirely on your fighting classes, often causing you to lose.

This means that even if you "go nova" during an encounter, the DM needs to throw at least 3 random encounters at you after that before you begin to regret that decision. Plus, that number increases the more spells you have per day. I've seen level 20 groups in 3.5e be able to "go nova" with enough damage to wipe "appropriate" encounters in 1 round for 3 combats in a row before they even think about resting. Then they can survive easily 3-4 more before they regret going nova.

This got so boring to run as a DM(having a game day last 2 sessions and be nothing but combats gets kind of annoying), I just started commonly using APL+4 or +5 encounters against the PCs as average encounters. That way, even if they went nova, they still didn't defeat the encounters in one round and felt like they were being appropriately challenged. Though, if they didn't go nova before I increased the challenge, I forced them to after...since they'd lose to those encounters if they didn't go nova.
Instead, they opted to save those resources for use in possible future encounters. Whether or not those encounters actually occur is immaterial- they made a risk/reward analysis that let them preserve combat & campaign resources for when they might be crucial on a "living world" campaign.

If it were flawed, then there wouldn't be so many people who have experienced and recommended it as a tried and true remedy.

It will stop people who aren't all that dedicated to "going nova". But some players love big numbers and winning quickly more than anything. Plus, I've seen them do a "cost-benefit analysis" on the tactic.

It comes down to this: If we cast 6 of our highest level spells amongst the party of full offensive spells, and win before the enemy can even fight back then that means we:

-Don't need to use any magic items or spells to heal which are resources we have for later.
-Didn't lose any hitpoints, which are part of our resources

If the day goes long and they are forced into multiple combats, they will rely on different resources than high level spells. If it doesn't go long, then nothing is wasted.

The problem is, I've seen lots of people say that "random encounters and time limits fix this problem 100% of the time. I had a group that tried the 15MAD once, I just threw a random encounter at them and they learned their lesson and never tried it again."

When I throw a random encounter at them after they try the 15MAD, they beat the random encounter and then say "Whew, I'm glad we left after one encounter...imagine if had tried to go further into the dungeon and fought 2 or 3 more encounters and THEN had this random encounter...we would have died. Remember, we always need to pull out of the dungeon as soon as possible in the future."

The thought that they could use less spells in each combat and rely on at-will resources like the fighters weapon attacks never occurs to them at all...after all, why WOULDN'T you try to beat the enemies in the best and fastest way possible? Plus, what's the fun in playing a Wizard if you can't have the satisfaction of saying "I kills the entire encounter in ONE ROUND! If you total up the damage I did with that AOE spell, it was 800 points of damage! Bet you can't do 800 damage in a round, Fighter!"

And time limits are something I hate adding artificially. I find over 50% of adventures don't want or need a time limit. Which limits me to either ONLY running the other 50% of adventures...or finding a kind of contrived reason to add a time limit to the ones that never needed one.

I like the idea of an adventure that says "You found an ancient map to a tomb of a great wizard that's been missing for centuries. It is said to hold a fortune in gold and magic items. Only problem is, can you survive the traps and summoned/created creatures left guarding it?" To then have to add a plot element that says "Oh...after you find the map then you hear there is a magical plague that is going to kill everyone if it isn't stopped in the next 2 days. Rumor has it that the cure is inside the dungeon" just seems kind of silly to me.

I like the idea of adventurers as "making their own destiny" searching for treasure in lost places. But those adventures don't have time limits on them.