D&D 5E Resting and the frikkin' Elephant in the Room

[robus]

As I've said before I think it all comes down to what constitutes an "Adventuring Day".

1) Not every day in the game-world is an adventuring day and therefore the rest mechanic does not apply to those days. Attempting to make the rest mechanic function every day is going to be an exercise in frustration.

2) Knowing when the players have begun an adventuring day is key. Then the stakes change and the opportunity for rest becomes much more constrained. This has to be where DM skill comes into play. Now, often it's obvious when the PCs are adventuring, they're exploring a dungeon. But sometimes it's not.

My point is - when the PCs are experiencing an adventuring day their opportunities to rest should be curtailed. Which forces them to make choices about which resources to use when. Is this the big encounter where they can afford to loose off some big hits? Or is it just a precursor to the big encounter? Mixing up the number of encounters on an adventuring day is also key in order to prevent a pattern from being established and things becoming routine. All DM skill and knowledge I'm afraid.

I would like the adventures to provide things like a sketch of how a particular dungeon might be divided up into adventuring days - for example "This dungeon will take a typical group of 4 PCs of level X N adventuring days to complete." or something mostly to get DMs thinking about how that mechanic comes into play (or just to acknowledge that this mechanic is a part of the game ). A big issue I have with the Starter Adventure is that it provides none of that kind of advice on how those rules should be applied while running it.

 

[dave2008]

Unfortunately I don't run published adventures so I can't comment on those. However, i will echo what [MENTION=6799753]lowkey13[/MENTION] snipped, I sometimes get frustrated with the toughness of my players, but they never do Of course, I just beef up my monsters if I need to.

Though to be honest if I used my monsters on one of my groups it would be a TPK, they can barely handle the monsters and encounter guidelines in the MM and DMG. Every group is different, so if the book was written for you and your group it would utterly fail for one of my groups. I don't mind taking the time to make the adjustments I need for it work with both of my groups. For me (tougher monsters + modified rest) it is easy to adjust the difficulty.

 

[Oofta]

It's an easy thing to fix.

I've been running my most recent campaign with the alternate rules. A short rest is 8 hours, a long rest is several days (usually a week). In addition I generally have two (5-6 hour) game days between long rests. I then put the PCs into situations where getting a short rest is not as simple as saying "we take a short rest" and resting for a week is simply not possible. Every once in a while I throw in an unexpected long rest via specially blessed area or similar if I want to set up some difficult encounters or if the PCs are getting too beat up.

Problem solved if you want people to stretch their resources.

I haven't decided if I'm going to do this for my next campaign, but it does make it better for my narrative flow. I get in 5-8 combats between long rests and a couple of short rests in a fashion that suits the story.

Unfortunately I can't help with your apparent elephant infestation. Have you tried mice? I hear elephants are frightened of the little critters. You'll have to get cats to get rid of the mice, then dogs to get rid of the cats. Lions of course will get rid of the dogs. But then, how do you get rid of the lions you ask? Elephants!

Or just use the alternate rules because the solution to your problem was already spelled out in the DMG.

 

[Yunru]

TL;DR: Wah, everyone keeps telling me to add time restraints! But they're all wrong because it's not in the rules!

Gravity is not in the rules. There's fall damage, but not standing on something causing you to fall isn't in the rules. Needing air isn't in the rules (except when underwater).

Lot's of things are "not in the rules". That doesn't make the suggestion that you make use of them disingenuous.

 

[The Old Crow]

Possible solution 1: Eliminate short rests. At least, eliminate short rests being 1 hour. I did. I doubled the amount of short rest things PCs get and had them all reset on a long rest. HD expenditure on a short rest is reduced to about 10 minutes. I.e., while you're resting the remainder of the party that isn't resting is looting bodies, searching, etc.

Curious to know how this is working out in play for your group, and if you've encountered any pitfalls with any of the classes. I really don't care much for short rests. and was thinkng of having a recharge by spending an action a couple of times per day, but I am beginning to think that just getting rid of short rest altogether (except for the use of healing dice) would be far simpler and less annoying. I am just not sure yet how much extra the uses of the short rest powers need to be increased to be in the Goldilocks zone.

 

[GameOgre]

I use 15 min rests and 8 hour long rests and have no issues with resting.

I do not however follow the handy dandy encounter building guidelines. Nope, I threw them out long ago and now eyeball them with my party in mind and what i'm trying to do in that encounter and or what would be there.

I often will build encounters that will flat our destroy my party. They better damn well not initiate a battle because unless that run very fast, it will be there last battle. These encounters are simply not meant to be fought.

I will sometimes build encounters that should kill the entire party ....but in reality probably will not as long as the PC's play well or are lucky.

I will mostly build encounters that will cause the party to use up some resources and cause some damage but if the party played stupid or has horrid luck,could result in a death.

I will often build encounters that my party will steamroll over and just enjoy the heck out of killing large numbers of bad guys.

I sometimes build encounters that will cause damage and use up resources but the party will win that seem totally random or use riddles and tricks.


you are the DM, you don't need anyone else to tell you how to build encounters. Throw out those rules and build what you need to make your game great!

Just remember, very few players EVER thought the game where there favorite character died was a lot of fun. The goal isnt ever to kill the pc's but let them have fun. Yes some fights need to be challenging or even impossible but those type fights are the exception not the rule.

If you have a 10% of getting killed every fight and fight 40 battles, odds are you are dead. I know we all like to pretend that our characters can defy the odds but very few characters actually do. The dice just roll randomly.

 

[Uller]

The rules are tools for the DM and players to build adventures and characters that are fun to play and the various game elements are the parts.

If you take a hammer and use it to nail together a bunch of 2x4s and it doesn't turn into a house you can live in it would be very odd to say it is because the hammer and planks were dishonest.

Yes...the standard rest rules can make for some disatisfying game play if your adventure style consistently doesn't meet the assumptions of the number of encounters and rests per day. My own game doesn't always. But it does often enough that my players have to make judgment calls on when it is safe to rest or when it makes sense. Most of the time I don't have to do anything. They press on unless they are in really bad shape because they assume a safe rest is not available or there is some other IN GAME reason to not rest.

Sometimes they just have one or two medium encounters between long rests and it is boring. Other times they are begging for a chance to rest. I don't do anything to force these scenarios. They just happen organically.

If your players aren't resting when they don't really need to and it bothers you then talk to them. Are they acting on meta information? For instance...the party is trying to get from point A to B. They get in one fight, nova and take a long rest. Why? Why do the PCs behave as if there are no threats worth saving resources for and no need to arrive at B in a timely manner? They must be going there for a reason. Is whatever in game benefit going to still be there indefinitely? Is that how real life works? If I'm traveling to the beach and my car breaks down I don't behave as if I have an indefinite time to get to the beach. I'm going to have to make some choices on what resources to spend to get my car repaired so I can still enjoy the beach. Do I spend a loy of money to get the car repaired quickly? Do I leave the car at a shop and rent another vehicle? Do I change my plans and explore the local area while my car gets repaired?

Your players' PCs should be facing these sort of choices. If your players are just acting on the player knowledge that they have no time constraints then something is not right and you should discuss it with your players. It isnt the fault of the rules.

For my part I don't like that short rests take an hour but shorter ones might encourage my players to take them too often. So I make them 15 minutes for the first one then double the duration...so first one is 15 min then 30...an hour...two hours...etc. This works at my table because my players were conserving short rest powers too much. So now they use them knowing they can usually get a 15 or 30 min rest. After that they get more conservative.

 

[robus]

I really don't think [MENTION=12731]CapnZapp[/MENTION] is as out of line as many posters here seem to think. The fact that the published adventures completely avoid talking about rest is quite an interesting point. Dungeons should indicate whether places suitable for long rests have been designed in (or what criteria might need to be met in order for a long rest to be possible). And how short rests might be accomplished in the same dungeon.

Publishing an adventure without reference to key mechanics (and, sorry [MENTION=6780961]Yunru[/MENTION], gravity is not a mechanic) that must have been considered during the design of the adventure is puzzling IMHO - why should the DM have to reverse engineer it at the table?

 

[Warmaster Horus]

I tend to make more deadly-level combats to drain resources and challenge players. If the system's baseline is softball then, if the situation warrants, I'll raise it to hardball. Takes very little to do. Add some of monster X, increase HP, change up the environment to be advantageous to opposition and harmful to players, throw in a time restraint, etc.

 

[Corwin]

The fact that the published adventures completely avoid talking about rest is quite an interesting point.

Is that so? They completely avoid it? Are you sure about that? I'm asking honestly because I haven't read them all so I wouldn't know. I just find it to be an odd claim. Like, do you think they are actively avoiding it? Do you think its intentional? If all of them are failing to mention it, you must believe its intentional, right? Otherwise, at least one of them would have accidentally, at least, made mention.

Dungeons should indicate whether places suitable for long rests have been designed in (or what criteria might need to be met in order for a long rest to be possible). And how short rests might be accomplished in the same dungeon.

Really? When I read opinions like that, I can't help but get the impression the next logical step is asking for the adventure to run itself. Or, at least define predetermined results at every turn so as to maintain expectations pre-written along the way. Otherwise, I can't fathom how a book could know how a particular adventure, being run form it, is going. It can't tell you. Because the things you are asking for will change every time it's ran. What you are asking for, seems to me, to result in a very railroad-y experience. No thanks.

Publishing an adventure without reference to key mechanics (and, sorry @Yunru, gravity is not a mechanic) that must have been considered during the design of the adventure is puzzling IMHO - why should the DM have to reverse engineer it at the table?

I think the published adventure also fail to explain what happens when PCs, and/or NPCs, drop to 0 hit points. Another important mechanic that comes up during the playing of it.