Of all the complaints about 3.x systems... do you people actually allow this stuff ?

[Hassassin]

But, as I said, my timelines aren't because they make the 15 MAD unprofitable, it is because, for me at the least, it makes the world more believable.

Same here.

Below is a list of things I do that I suspect make 15 MAD less of a problem. It's not the *reason* I use these. They just are good plot hooks, turning points and complications.

• Random encounters. I lower the frequency when there have already been multiple encounters in the day. Time based, so resting 23.75 hours means higher chance. Even a low chance shows the players I'm rolling.
  
• Easy encounters. If it's over in two rounds and no one got hurt, do you really want to sleep? (Healers tend to have more leverage in asking for rest.)
  
• Time limits on some things. I don't use this often, only when it makes sense like full moon, kidnapped persons, etc.
  
• Bonuses/penalties for quick/slow work. Variation of the above, doesn't have to be money. Example penalty: serial murderer kills one person every X days.
  
• Replenishing and/or improving encounters. You defeated the kobold guards yesterday? Now there are twice as many, because they are alarmed. They also trapped the corridor.
  
• Missed opportunities. A paranoid necromancer lives in a dungeon and sends undead to terrorize the town? If you retreat from the dungeon, he may notice and move elsewhere. BTW, the kobolds above hid their treasure.
  
• Encounters that can be worked around. Used diplomacy or sneak tactics to bypass an encounter? Good for you, no resources spent.
  
• Distances. Sure this is probably not your problem with 15 MAD, but things between encounters also take time.

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

No, it is because the are lazy.

But, as I said, my timelines aren't because they make the 15 MAD unprofitable, it is because, for me at the least, it makes the world more believable.

I've no interest in going in circles with you while you make assumptions about my group and my game. If the 5 MWD isn't a problem for you, yay!

Just know that it is a problem for some of us, and not because we're lazy or munchkins or dirty gamists or crazy communists or whatever. (Lazy? Seriously? "We keep going" doesn't take any more energy than "We stop to rest.")

 

[MortonStromgal]

I've seen the problems happen on occation, its usually a problem when you have a min/maxer in a group of thespians or a thespian in a group of min/maxers.

 

[SlyDoubt]

I've seen the problems happen on occation, its usually a problem when you have a min/maxer in a group of thespians or a thespian in a group of min/maxers.

Both of those groups sound like the premise for a sitcom.
I laughed when I read your post.

 

[kitsune9]

The big one is the what... 20 minute adventure day ? This brings me to my question, does this ACTUALLY happen in your games? If so, why do you allow it?

I'm dealing with this in my PF game frequently, but it's okay. The players shot everything they had at the baddies, so that doesn't bother me. I dealt with it a lot in my 3.x games, but I tended to use a lot of powerful encounters so I guess I could be partly to blame.

The other thing is the so called "Caster / Melee" rift. Where wizards and other casters are basically much better than every one else. Has anyone ever actually encountered this in their games?

I remember this complaint in 2e, but not in 3.x or PF with my group.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

I've no interest in going in circles with you while you make assumptions about my group and my game. If the 15 MWD isn't a problem for you, yay!

Just know that it is a problem for some of us, and not because we're lazy or munchkins or dirty gamists or crazy communists or whatever. (Lazy? Seriously? "We keep going" doesn't take any more energy than "We stop to rest.")

Lazy. 'I don't feel like destroying evil today. It's time for me nap.'

'Oh no! I used me fireball killing a kobold! Time to take me nap!'

'I can't adventure today! It's Wednesday!'

'Naptime!'

*EDIT* It is possible that these example are exaggerated. It is also possible that they should be read aloud with a lower class British accent.

You say you have a problem with the 15 MWD, yet you encourage its use. My sympathies are limited by the fact that it is your choice.

If you are having fun playing that way, then you have no grounds for complaint. If you aren't having fun, then there are things that you could do to handle the problem, but choose not to.

That is not a problem with the rules, that is a problem with the GM and/or players. If you do not enjoy the 15 MAD then don't reward it!

*EDIT* I will agree that some advice on handling the 15 MAD should be in any 5e DMG. I just don't think that there should be rules about it. Just guidelines.

I have not had the problem beyond that one time, and then the problem fixed itself because I did nothing to make it a useful tactic. The bad guys weren't idiots, and took advantage of the fact that the 'heroes' decided to hide out for a little while.

I hate static settings, the bad guys should be doing things that make them the bad guys.

Take hostages.

Kill supporters of the party.

Bribe guards to harass the heroes.

Poison the well.

Make use of the time that the heroes have so generously given you.

The Auld Grump

 

[MortonStromgal]

Both of those groups sound like the premise for a sitcom.
I laughed when I read your post.

The best one was when I played Exalted with a group that... well if there are 4 axis for what gamers want out of a game then we had all four extreme cases covered plus two in the middle people. I was amazed that group lasted as long as it did before it blew up.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

Being a guy that learned the hard way (i.e. by experience) how to DM with a bunch of 14-year old friends playing, I've never had a problem with the 15-minute adventuring day. By the time I was playing with adults, I knew how to squash that flat, and rarely needed to anyway. (A little squashing goes a long way.)

We have had, however, an immense amount of frustration, off an on, at having to do the things necessary to avoid it. It doesn't have to be perfect--it just has to give us something to work with. Frankly, this bothers the players more than me:

Wizard Player: "Well, I could do X, which would pretty much solve this, but the purpose is to have fun fighting this encounter, or finding a clever way around it. So I won't."

Cleric Player: "Bummer, you are correct. Guess I won't do Y, either."

Fighter Player: "Even if you did, CJ would just have to do one of his patented work-arounds again--which means we'll do some accounting on our character sheets during play, and not gain anything in the end anyway."

Wizard Player: "Why did I even select X in the first place?"

This is one of the handful of reasons why, for us, 4E leads to more immersive play.

4E does not solve the 15-minute adventuring day. It answers that last question from the wizard in a just plausible enough manner to keep us from thinking along those lines. That's something, however small.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

The big one is the what... 20 minute adventure day ? Rules as written yes, this "theoretically" could be a problem. The thing is , I have been running campaigns for about 15 years now and I can honestly say I have never had this problem. This brings me to my question, does this ACTUALLY happen in your games? If so, why do you allow it?

The other thing is the so called "Caster / Melee" rift. Where wizards and other casters are basically much better than every one else. Has anyone ever actually encountered this in their games? I personally haven't, perhaps it's because my group isn't into min maxing or something. People who play fighters or monks or whatever, they have a fantastic time. They kill enemies just as much as any other character, and I personally have just never seen all of these horrible terrible game breaking elements that seem to be so rampant.

I'm not saying they don't exist but it just seems to me that given RPG's that have so many rules these type of things are bound to happen, that's where the DM comes in. The DM is there to be a referee, he is there to reign in things that may be game breaking. The DM should not allow free reign in their game letting players get what ever they want.

Games such as GURPS and HERO blatantly say something akin to..."there are game breaking skills (or powers or whatever ) presented here, as a game master and player, you need to work together to make sure you can create a character that is suited for the game you intend to run." This seems only logical and I dont know why so many D&D players don't under stand this.

In my opinion characters need some sort of drawback, in the form of ability scores or powers or whatever. I have come across people who say something similar to... "well some people don't think it's fun to run a character that sucks." or "I hate people who think you should make crappy character because it's better roleplaying" .

First off , in my opinion if you want to play in a game thats nothing but min maxing fighting awesomeness that's fine, but I don't run games like that. I believe there are many better mediums to do that in rather than running it as a table top rpg. Secondly , people who usually say they hate playing characters that have drawbacks because it's good roleplaying, obviously are not aware of what people term a 2 dimensional character.

In my opinion, all characters should have drawbacks, end of discussion. Stories are not fun or entertaining to read if your character has no chance of doing anything wrong. It takes away the element of story telling, and gaming. I cant imagine a person who would just love to kill everything all the time with no threats . It would get boring very quick. If you are playing a table top rpg for ego boosting and showing everyone you are better than them , I would say you are in this hobby for the wrong reasons. There are other hobbies out there that allow you just such a thing, video games, board games, table top war games, writing novels, going into the army , playing sports etc etc.

Any one agree, disagree? Have your own stories or thoughts on the matter?

I agree and I would like to say something on the matter of game breaking.

A lot of the game breaking combos are still to this day questionable as to whether or not they actually work. Since certain editions are no longer supported there is really no way to prove they work nor is there an way to prove they don't work.

A lot of the game breaking things that went on were DM fault. If you always allowed your casters to know ahead of time what was going to happen and allowed them ample time to cast as many buff spells as they wanted then you were just asking for trouble.

Casters vs Melee can only really be measured during actual gameplay, not coming up with scenarios on internet forums. I can tell you that in our games it was always the fighter and barbarian that rules when it came to killing monsters. I always played a Wizard and while I could come up with some nasty combos, our DM was able to adapt the campaign to each of our strengths.

Also if a crazy combo required a 2 hour discussion and came down to breaking up every word of the combo then it wasn't allowed. If it wasn't straight forward and was obviously broken then it wasn't allowed.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

If you allow the 15 minute work days then you actually cause players to be less tactful and more prone to waste.

Why would should the casters carefully consider their spells and spell use when they can gain everything back in 15 minutes?