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

[Flexor the Mighty!]

IMC the players just mostly reached 10th level in a group of 6 PC. The resting issue is an issue, they are old school cautious gamers and often pull back to rest when they can. Now they have the spells and equipment to make encounters while resting mostly a non issue barring a random encounter while resting being a caster who can dispel magic. In the campaign they are traveling over vast distance with a pretty long timespan so they aren't rushing, though they try not to waste too much time. So when they are moving through areas where its two encounter checks a day, which is the a lot of the areas in Out of the Abyss, these are meaningless. Maybe if there are a lot of wandering beholders and CR13-15 monsters, but even then they whipped said Beholder in its lair without much drama a level ago, a player went down but with the death door spell and a quick heal he was back up and in fighting form in 12 seconds. They have some +1 weapons and misc magic trinkets but not a lot of heavy stuff and no magic armor. Yet it feels like this is D&D on easy mode after 5th level or so. Maybe things will change as they get higher levels and I think I read the Annihilation AP coming up has rules to make the game more challenging so I'll check those out. But if not I don't see me running 5e after this is over especially with the veteran group I have as its either near TPK or totally trivial encounters. some of the 5e assumptions I thought were cool are not working as well in practice. IME and YMMV of course.

 

[hawkeyefan]

So I've read through the last several pages of this thread, and there has been some interesting discussion. I just ran the most recent session in my group's campaign on Tuesday night, and some interesting things came up in regard to rest that I thought I would mention here.

So our group of PCs are currently on Athas. They aren't natives, but are instead planar visitors searching for something important to the ongoing campaign. In order to try and convey the different feel of Athas compared to more traditional fantasy worlds, I am making strong use of Exhaustion and Rest Mechanics.

In our last session, the PCs had completed a quest they had been sent on by an order of warriors in the region north of the Tyr valley (beyond the town of Bitterwell along the Sea of Silt, for anyone curious). They had slain a powerful unique monster that plagued the area, and they were headed back to the warriors' fortress. The creature was served by a group of blind humanoids similar to halflings, but much more devious and fierce. These creatures scattered when their leader was slain, but then gathered in numbers to harry the PCs upon their trek back to the fortress.

They did not actually attack, but tracked the PCs. One night, they approached the campsite, staying just close enough to be seen, but far enough to flee if they wanted. Their presence was detected by the PC on watch (and also by a Mordenkainen's Hound spell that had been cast). He diligently woke the rest of the PCs. The PCs remained aware of this horde of enemies nearby, and therefore were not able to fully resume their rest.

So I had each PC who had taken a watch make a Constitution saving throw with a DC of 12. Anyone who failed, did not benefit from a long rest. The party Wizard and Bard failed, while the Rogue, Fighter, Dwarven Cleric, and Ranger all succeeded. Effectively, the characters who would most be affected by lack of a long rest failed their check, and regained no spells.

Now, some people may say "why didn't they just rest longer to make up for the time lost?" which is a good question. But as I'm sure anyone here would agree, sometimes when you try to rest, you simply cannot. Especially under such crazy circumstances (extreme environment, tribes of crazed halflings following you through the desert, and so on). To me, this is a clear "Rulings, not rules" kind of approach to solve the "problem". I did not limit my decision making to what is in the rule book, but instead decided "sometimes people can't rest even when they try".

I think that the best way to handle this problem is through the use of DM judgment, to adjust rules to fit specific circumstances, or to apply rules variations to achieve the desired effect. I think this is the game's expectation. I look at the DMG not so much as a list of rule variants, but as a list of examples of how to change the rules, with the intention that these examples will help a DM come up with his own.

This is why I think that the only real answer to this problem is for the DM to use his judgment to come up with something that achieves what he wants. This may be situational or it may be something applied for all rests, it depends on what is wanted. I have tweaked rest mechanics at times when I thought there was a need (in Barovia I ruled that there could be no Long Rests outside of settlements, mentioned earlier in the thread), but I generally don't have a problem with the rest mechanics. I just think tweaking them from time to time can create an interesting effect.

The goal that the DM is trying to achieve is going to play a huge part in what he may consider a solution. If the view is simply that the Rest mechanics are "broken" because players abuse the mechanics and are able to rest too easily, then the DM has to come up with something more suitable to how he wants the game to play. Alternatively, he can try and influence how his players play the game and how they view rest mechanics to be less rules-centric.

If it's more of a flavor thing, then my approach above to tweak rest mechanics in certain areas or situations seems suitable. Either way, there's never going to be consensus on one fix....which is why I think they've come up with a basic mechanic, and they leave the "solution" to any perceived problems with that mechanic up to the individual groups.

 

[hawkeyefan]

IMC the players just mostly reached 10th level in a group of 6 PC. The resting issue is an issue, they are old school cautious gamers and often pull back to rest when they can. Now they have the spells and equipment to make encounters while resting mostly a non issue barring a random encounter while resting being a caster who can dispel magic. In the campaign they are traveling over vast distance with a pretty long timespan so they aren't rushing, though they try not to waste too much time. So when they are moving through areas where its two encounter checks a day, which is the a lot of the areas in Out of the Abyss, these are meaningless. Maybe if there are a lot of wandering beholders and CR13-15 monsters, but even then they whipped said Beholder in its lair without much drama a level ago, a player went down but with the death door spell and a quick heal he was back up and in fighting form in 12 seconds. They have some +1 weapons and misc magic trinkets but not a lot of heavy stuff and no magic armor. Yet it feels like this is D&D on easy mode after 5th level or so. Maybe things will change as they get higher levels and I think I read the Annihilation AP coming up has rules to make the game more challenging so I'll check those out. But if not I don't see me running 5e after this is over especially with the veteran group I have as its either near TPK or totally trivial encounters. some of the 5e assumptions I thought were cool are not working as well in practice. IME and YMMV of course.

My group is of similar make up....6 PCs of level 10. But I don't agree about the simplicity of encounters. But, that's likely because in the scenario you describe, I doubt I'd bother with the travel. It sounds to me like that may be the issue more than anything else....a possible two encounter day for days on end, with the players extending that at whim with no concern so that they can full rest whenever they like....that doesn't sound like a recipe for a high challenge.

It's hard to say without knowing more details....but why not just let a 10th level group of PCs get where they're going? If the journey is the point and is meant to be challenging, then throw away the random encounters, and come up with some encounters along the way that will be a challenge. Some site based encounters maybe, that would have more than one combat in them, and into which you could inject some kind of time constraints or other factors that can make encounters compelling. Maybe they come across a group of Grimlocks that have captured some Svirfneblin and are planning on sacrificing them to the creature they consider a god, which is the Beholder you mentioned. So the PCs have to infiltrate the Grimlock lair, or attack it, without endangering the prisoners, and then must face the Beholder. You can string together a few different encounter types this way. Sounds a little more dynamic and meaningful than the typical random encounter.

Right now, as I said in my last post, my PCs are on Athas....which is to them an alien and harsh environment....so we're going with travel type rules and so on. But if they were back home, and they had a journey that ultimately they're going to complete, then I would simply narrate it. "Your trek through the Underdark is long and at times arduous, but you're seasoned adventurers at this point, and you make it to your destination after two weeks." That kind of thing.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

I get what your are saying, and honestly I'm thinking at this point of just pretty much hand waving most everything but the set piece battles. "sure the underdark is horrible and currently more demon infested but you make the 3 week trip and are at your destination..." Kind of unsatisfying to me. Going by the setup of that AP though I wonder what they thought was fun about the traveling sections? Check twice for encounters that are totally trivial, save for one chart where you can randomly encounter a demon lord.

Maybe actual play will change my impressions as they move up in levels higher but ultimately I just get the idea that there are two kinds of encounters at this point, meaningless and probably TPK. Even fights where the monster has an attack that can kill a PC it so trivial to hit them with a couple spells that have them on their feet and right as rain barring disintegration. Unless they can kill a bunch at one time and those are the TPK probable fights. My players who use the environment to their advantage and clever use of resources are just steamrolling this will little drama. For those who have a gamiest approach where they want a game to challenge them more its getting boring. The idea that things are balanced over a 6-8 encounters per rest isn't working out very well right now though part of that is admittedly the setup of this AP.

I can re-write a lot more of it but that is what I'm hoping to avoid with this kind of module.

 

[OB1]

For groups that accept the 6-8 encounter paradigm, there's no problem at all.

There is NO 6-8 encounter paradigm! There is a 2 short rest per long rest paradigm that assumes a certain amount of encounter XP between those rests, but the number of encounters between rests can be anywhere from 1-6 depending on if they are deadly (1), hard (2), medium (3), easy (6) or some combination of those to total 1 deadly.

I really, really wish the DMG didn't give the example of the number of medium to hard encounters per day, as it skews what the system is intended to do.

But the rest of you post is spot on

 

[Tony Vargas]

I thought this was already the case. Interesting.

Understandable, concentration was part of casting for so much of the game's history. The same concept did double-duty as both a restriction on casting and a determinant of duration. In 4e, casting was restricted only by action type, and rituals didn't much interact with combat mechanics, while the duration went to 'save ends' (pioneered in 3.5), and 'sustain' actions. 5e brought back the name concentration, to replace 'sustain' and removed the action cost, and also brought back concentration for rituals, even though they'd likely be used out of combat. Putting it back for casting in general seems like an obvious variant - as does adding back many other restrictions on prep/memorization & casting.

Explain please.
As written you're saying the reaction is reacting to something that hasn't happened yet, which doesn't make any sense. But I don't think that's what you're trying to say, and so I'm not getting it.

Many reactions, like a Shield spell or Counterspell or OA, need to happen /before/ the triggering event is 'resolved' (ie completed & the results applies), or they do nothing. You can't take an OA after someone has actually moved out of your melee reach, you can't counterspell a fireball that's already blown you up, and while a Shield spell would stay up for any subsequent attacks, there'd be a lot less point to it if it couldn't stop the triggering attack.

Resolving reactions in FIFO order would make any reaction after the first useless, it'd be simpler to just rule that you can't take Reactions on your turn and that you can't take Reactions to Reactions.

So you agree that it's up to the individual GM to sort the issue out then?

That's the point, yes, that 5e DMs are generally given latitude and tools to customize the game to their liking. In the case of the 6-8 Encounter/day guideline, the aren't as clearly given that latitude when it comes to the duration, requirements, and timing of rests, the duration & timing of which, in particular, are spelled out unequivocally, with DMG 'modules' only giving equally exact alternatives.

That's still no more a problem than it is for a GM in any system - including systems like 3.5 & 4e that received a lot of flack for 'not supporting' this or that style or pushing 'Player Entitlement' or whatever.

So, I'm mainly advocating (as so often seems to be the case) "you're the DM, you fix it," but, in this case, I'm having to advocate going beyond the rules & modules and guidance presented, and just overriding explicit rules, rather than ruling on more flexible (vague) ones.

I also (reluctantly) have to be with Zapp on this one: that WotC really should go ahead and toss an AL-legal module or UA or something (something between a tweet and a formal errata in weight) that doesn't change the way short & long rests work by default, but leaves the final ruling on how long they take and whether they're possible with the DM, explicitly.

That kind of leap to exclusion reasoning isn't terribly helpful, why try to drive people away from a game that's meant to include them? [\quote]

Yet, funnily enough when I bring up exactly this argument about warlords I see multiple threads trying to shut down conversation.

To be fair, the threads are probably trying to have the conversation, and all being shut down with that same rush-to-exclusion.

Fair enough. Since it wasn't I'll continue to be selfish here.

Fine, don't 'be the change...' ;P

There is NO 6-8 encounter paradigm! There is a 2 short rest per long rest paradigm

Well, 2-3.

that assumes a certain amount of encounter XP between those rests, but the number of encounters between rests can be anywhere from 1-6 depending on if they are deadly (1), hard (2), medium (3), easy (6) or some combination of those to total 1 deadly.

The guideline is 6-8 medium-hard, and 2-3 short rests between long rests, it's less clear on encounters/short rest. So, that's a nice alternative, precisely, if not intuitively (& in 'natural language'), stated. But I don't buy that it's the 'real' guideline, even if it might well be a better, ultimately more usable one.

I suppose there's also an implied number of rounds between those short rests, since the 'paradigm' is balancing at-will vs short-rest vs daily resources all against eachother, not just the last two, but difficulty should mostly map to that.

I really, really wish the DMG didn't give the example of the number of medium to hard encounters per day, as it skews what the system is intended to do.

A number of encounters is just a lot more intuitive and easier to remember. But, yes, the whole point of the thread is that it could have been presented better. Whether that's more flexibly, or less so.

So our group of PCs are currently on Athas.

OK, I can see how rulings on rests could be appropriate, with the post-apocalyptic desert setting and the survival themes...

They aren't natives, but are instead planar visitors searching for something important to the ongoing campaign. In order to try and convey the different feel of Athas compared to more traditional fantasy worlds, I am making strong use of Exhaustion and Rest Mechanics.

Even more so!

(Full disclosure: I've yet to see an 'exhaustion' mechanic in D&D that I don't loathe.)

...These creatures scattered when their leader was slain, but then gathered in numbers to harry the PCs upon their trek back to the fortress.
...The PCs remained aware of this horde of enemies nearby, and therefore were not able to fully resume their rest.

So I had each PC who had taken a watch make a Constitution saving throw with a DC of 12. Anyone who failed, did not benefit from a long rest.

To me, this is a clear "Rulings, not rules" kind of approach to solve the "problem".

Ding!

I think that the best way to handle this problem is through the use of DM judgment, to adjust rules to fit specific circumstances, or to apply rules variations to achieve the desired effect. I think this is the game's expectation.

I agree that's the best way, and, in so much of the rest of 5e, it clearly sets that expectation. Rests, per my above comments to Hussar, not so much.

It sounds silly to say we need to raise 'Awareness' of the 5MWD issue, since awareness has got to virtually unanimous - maybe we need to overcome some 'Denial' - but since the presentation of 5e didn't go the full DM-Empowerment press in this area, it's good to raise Awareness that even in those rare, seemingly blessed cases where 5e presents clear, explicit RAW, it's still the DM's privilege and duty to toss them to the winds and just make rulings.

The goal that the DM is trying to achieve is going to play a huge part in what he may consider a solution.

Nod. You've used rulings in the area to get across the feel of an alien world, and it's dangers. Well done. Since the 6-8 encounter/day guideline is more about keeping the corresponding encounter guidelines usable, and classes balanced, a DM might also want to follow it for those reasons, which could mean a much more arbitrary approach, depending on how much he's willing to warp his campaign around those considerations...

Either way, there's never going to be consensus on one fix....which is why I think they've come up with a basic mechanic, and they leave the "solution" to any perceived problems with that mechanic up to the individual groups.

DM Empowerment is the 'one fix' that lets everyone implement their own fix. 5e encourages it very well in other areas, starting with basic resolution. It's odd it reverts to a 3e style fixed numbers and explicit rules in this one, relatively critical (to class balance & encounter difficulty - I know that the former is anathema to certain D&D de-facto traditions, and the latter /needs/ to be swingy for the CaW style) area.

To sound like Zapp for a moment, what it looks like is that 5e presents as being 'for everyone,' as intended, including having guidance for those who value class balance and want to be able to use encounter guidelines with some confidence, but then intentionally undermines that guidance.

 

[hawkeyefan]

I get what your are saying, and honestly I'm thinking at this point of just pretty much hand waving most everything but the set piece battles. "sure the underdark is horrible and currently more demon infested but you make the 3 week trip and are at your destination..." Kind of unsatisfying to me. Going by the setup of that AP though I wonder what they thought was fun about the traveling sections? Check twice for encounters that are totally trivial, save for one chart where you can randomly encounter a demon lord.

Maybe actual play will change my impressions as they move up in levels higher but ultimately I just get the idea that there are two kinds of encounters at this point, meaningless and probably TPK. Even fights where the monster has an attack that can kill a PC it so trivial to hit them with a couple spells that have them on their feet and right as rain barring disintegration. Unless they can kill a bunch at one time and those are the TPK probable fights. My players who use the environment to their advantage and clever use of resources are just steamrolling this will little drama. For those who have a gamiest approach where they want a game to challenge them more its getting boring. The idea that things are balanced over a 6-8 encounters per rest isn't working out very well right now though part of that is admittedly the setup of this AP.

I can re-write a lot more of it but that is what I'm hoping to avoid with this kind of module.

Okay, gotcha....I wasn't sure if you were actually running Out of the Abyss or just referencing the rules from it for another Underdark adventure.

for that module (which I have read, but not yet run), I think the earlier section where the PCs escape the Drow fort and flee into the Underdark is worth playing out. The PCs are sufficiently low level to make such a trek dangerous regardless of how much they rest, and they're very likely limited on supplies on top of that. Plus, they probably have a bunch of whacky NPCs tagging along, and interacting with those NPCs can help make the "uneventful" parts of the journey less boring. The PCs can learn a lot from those NPCs.

Later, when they return to the Underdark, I think it needs to be played differently. I agree that simply narrating the situation....a journey through the Underdark while it's infested with rampaging demons...is probably a boring way to handle it. You can of course come up with some more involved encounters, but I get your stated desire to avoid having to create a lot of content.

So then what I would say to do is simply tweak what's there. There are hordes of demons rampaging through the Underdark....that's a pretty cool set up. So why only check twice per day for encounters? Check more often. Or simply decide on a few a day. If you think some of the standard random encounters provided are bland, then add a few monsters to them, or just come up with a few new ones. Use the Demon section of the MM and just throw some of them at the PCs. Mix and match a few to create a cool encounter. Or take a random encounter from the list, and then in the middle of running that encounter, have a swarm of Chasmes show up and attack both sides.

I think the more important thing, even for players with a more gamist mindset, is to make the encounters memorable. The best way to do that is to really try and evoke the situation given in the book. For all intents and purposes, the PCs may as well be wandering through a layer of the Abyss. No need to stick to the encounter rules as described if that's not working for you.

Or, if the Rest Mechanic is the big factor here, then simply say that Gromph's spell has interacted with the Faeress in such a way that it weakens mortals the longer they are exposed to it, and then say that the longer the PCs are in the Underdark, the less often they can utilize a full rest. Or say that they do not regain all HP with a long rest, but must instead rely only on Hit Dice.

I think you can achieve what you're going for without a whole lot of extra work. But I think you will definitely need to deviate from what's provided in the book.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Yeah, and we are nearing the end, the long travel parts are nearly done and now they have teleport. Your suggestions are good ones though and things I've been tossing around in my head. I have put a lot more demon encounters in to keep things more interesting.

Players who have a lot of fun interacting with the army of NPC probably have a different view since it keeps wanting to saddle you with dozens of NPC. I did get rid of a lot of the NPC horde, they wanted no part of running an army though half the module so I nipped that down to one in the second half of the module.

I wonder how different it would be with a 4 man party though. Adding in extra attacks from a PC really changes the dynamic in a hurry with the low AC scores.

 

[hawkeyefan]

OK, I can see how rulings on rests could be appropriate, with the post-apocalyptic desert setting and the survival themes...

Even more so!

(Full disclosure: I've yet to see an 'exhaustion' mechanic in D&D that I don't loathe.)

I'm not crazy about the exhaustion rules either, and rarely use them except in real edge cases. But I thought they would be suitable to evoke the feel I wanted while the PCs are on Athas. Let me also point out that i am using the rules loosely....applying levels of Exhaustion when it seems suitable, rather than working from a specific list of triggers for the condition.

Ding!

I agree that's the best way, and, in so much of the rest of 5e, it clearly sets that expectation. Rests, per my above comments to Hussar, not so much.

Why not? The DMG gives suggestions for alterations to the rest mechanic, the same as they do for many other game elements. What more do you feel is needed in order for the Rest Mechanics to seem as meant for customization as other game elements.

It sounds silly to say we need to raise 'Awareness' of the 5MWD issue, since awareness has got to virtually unanimous - maybe we need to overcome some 'Denial' - but since the presentation of 5e didn't go the full DM-Empowerment press in this area, it's good to raise Awareness that even in those rare, seemingly blessed cases where 5e presents clear, explicit RAW, it's still the DM's privilege and duty to toss them to the winds and just make rulings.

I think the 5MWD is a phenomenon that will rear its head to any group at some point. It will be a bigger problem for some than for others, but likely still a problem.

I will say that it's not a major concern in my game. I think that is likely because I have players who recognize the impact that rest has on challenge. It may seem paradoxical to some, but my players are very tactical and "gamist" in their approach, but that's tempered by an understanding of story and its impact on the game. They don't ask to rest when it makes no sense except in a purely game-mechanical way. Essentially, their acknowledgement of elements beyond the mechanical rules helps to maintain a mechanical challenge for them. At least, that's one contributing factor.

Nod. You've used rulings in the area to get across the feel of an alien world, and it's dangers. Well done. Since the 6-8 encounter/day guideline is more about keeping the corresponding encounter guidelines usable, and classes balanced, a DM might also want to follow it for those reasons, which could mean a much more arbitrary approach, depending on how much he's willing to warp his campaign around those considerations...

Definitely. If a DM simply wants to alter the mechanics because he's found that his approach to the game means that players are not as challenged, then I think he should certainly consider doing so. I mentioned it in my post to [MENTION=23029]FL[/MENTION]exor the Mighty, but even just taking away the full HP restoration of a long rest and shifting things to Hit Dice only can be a significant change. It increases the importance in Hit Dice (which I've found are not as much a concern for my players as I might have expected at the start of 5E; they rarely need to use more than half and therefore, almost always recover all HD when they rest) and becomes another resource management dynamic, but still leaves a difference between Short and Long Rests.

DM Empowerment is the 'one fix' that lets everyone implement their own fix. 5e encourages it very well in other areas, starting with basic resolution. It's odd it reverts to a 3e style fixed numbers and explicit rules in this one, relatively critical (to class balance & encounter difficulty - I know that the former is anathema to certain D&D de-facto traditions, and the latter /needs/ to be swingy for the CaW style) area.

To sound like Zapp for a moment, what it looks like is that 5e presents as being 'for everyone,' as intended, including having guidance for those who value class balance and want to be able to use encounter guidelines with some confidence, but then intentionally undermines that guidance.

Perhaps. I would say that "undermine" is too strong a term. I think they create the basic mechanic, but don't at all times require that all other aspects of the game must rigidly adhere to and fit with that basic mechanic, knowing it will work for most, and those who find an issue with it have the ability to alter it until it works for them.

I hope that makes sense....perhaps it seems a small distinction, but one which I think is important.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Yeah, and we are nearing the end, the long travel parts are nearly done and now they have teleport. Your suggestions are good ones though and things I've been tossing around in my head. I have put a lot more demon encounters in to keep things more interesting.

Players who have a lot of fun interacting with the army of NPC probably have a different view since it keeps wanting to saddle you with dozens of NPC. I did get rid of a lot of the NPC horde, they wanted no part of running an army though half the module so I nipped that down to one in the second half of the module.

I wonder how different it would be with a 4 man party though. Adding in extra attacks from a PC really changes the dynamic in a hurry with the low AC scores.

I think a 6 man party is a huge change from a 4 man party.

With a party of 4, you either have to kind of fill each of the "classic" four roles, or risk foregoing one of those roles in order to really focus on one. So you can get rid of a highly skilled character like a Rogue in order to add another damage dealer, and so on.

But if you can simply add another damage dealer without sacrificing a skill class or a caster or healer....then you've significantly altered the core assumptions, I think. My players have 6 PCs among 4 players, and the extra PCs are not always with them. During those times, I've noticed a huge difference in how encounters play out.