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

[Ashkelon]

I always thought it would be cool if spell slots didn't increase with level and instead simply grew in power.

A first level wizard might have 3 major spell slots, 3 minor spell slots, and 3 cantrips. As they level scaling would work by slots changing their tier. Eventually minor spells become cantrips and major spells become minor ones. By 9th level , the wizard might have 3 major slots (5th level spell equivalents), 3 minor slots (3rd level spells equivalents) and 3 at-will cantrips (1st level spell equivalents).

How does this tie into balance and resting? Well, wizards in 5e already recover some spell slots on a short rest, we just need to expand that concept. Arcane recovery can simply recover one major spell slot and one minor spell slot per short rest. No more spell level limits or daily limits.

These factors combined would allow wizards to regain a decent amount of power back from a short rest to effectively extend their adventuring day. The reduced total in spell slots that the major/minor/cantrip slot devise provides would prevent wizards from dominating every single encounter and also reduces their nova potential. Having fewer spell slots and having more of them recoverable with short rests also makes them more easily balancable with short rest or at-will based classes.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Thanks for understanding. It would just be nice to be able to post problems and look for solutions (or at least have the complaint seen and heard) rather than be deluged every time with lectures re those 3 "solutions." While many of those offering those solutions may be well-intended, it often serves to drown out the complaint in an overwhelming way, making it an ordeal not worth going through much of the time.

Understanding that many of us don't want to change games, or have the DM always fix things, or play in less Gamist fashion would go a long way toward bridging the gap between the styles.

The game should work however you want it to work. I agree with you on that. You shouldn't have to justify your style of play.

Having said that, I acknowledge that this is a problem for you in the game. Beyond the DM stepping in, I don't see what can be done for you. Perhaps future adventures will give DMs more advice on managing rests and compelling players to avoid 5 minute work days. Perhaps there will be another book along the lines of the DMG that has options for altering the existing rules to suit your specific taste.

I don't know if I would expect the latter, however, because the DMG certainly seemed like a collection of options meant to inspire DMs and players to come up with more of their own. I think the default assumption of this edition is that the game will be altered if desired.

This is why I try to offer solutions. I'm sorry if you don't like the advice I offer, but since I don't think anyone at WotC is going to overhaul the books they've already published for 5E to suit your specific desires, I think homebrewing a solution is your only real option.

 

[Lanefan]

I don't divorce the game from the story - my stories are integral to the game. But like millions of Americans who go to watch movies or theater, my players are quite content with the story being written by someone else, as long as they can act in it and have a role in deciding the outcome. Believe it or not, many players PREFER not to do any heavy lifting story-wise or direction wise and just enjoy the game. Those approaching D and D from a purist rpg angle on the other hand, have the attitude that the players should dictate the story, or at least should have a major role in it.

I'd consider myself an rpg-er but I don't mind the DM in large part driving the story.

It's more about having the option, as a player (or group of players), to at some point and for some reason say in-character "screw it, we're going that way" and thus throw the DM a curveball...which the DM then has to be able to hit.

Now if you're simply saying that your particular players would never do such a thing and thus you've never had to worry about it then all's cool. But it seems you're trying to say more...I'm just not sure what it is.

Lanefan

 

[shoak1]

I'd consider myself an rpg-er but I don't mind the DM in large part driving the story....It's more about having the option, as a player (or group of players), to at some point and for some reason say in-character "screw it, we're going that way" and thus throw the DM a curveball...which the DM then has to be able to hit....Now if you're simply saying that your particular players would never do such a thing and thus you've never had to worry about it then all's cool. But it seems you're trying to say more...I'm just not sure what it is.

To put it simply, we view both your player curveball and the DM heroically hitting said ball as strike outs - sorry. My players like to know that what is behind the door was there yesterday, and isnt just some stuff the DM decided was there when the PCs got there. Its really that simple. And we are not alone lol - half the D and D ers I meet are that way. They just don't like sandbox and sandbox DMs .... they'd rather be railroaded into a good story and adventure path that is pre-designed and balanced - they don't want the DM to decide whats behind the door once they get there, like I said.

To each their own - I just don't get why this concept is so difficult for many of you to understand. Almost all the games on the planet are predesigned - much of D and D history as well is dominated by people playing non-sandbox adventure paths - sure sandbox is dominant now in 5e but it hasn't always been that way.

 

[Lanefan]

To put it simply, we view both your player curveball and the DM heroically hitting said ball as strike outs - sorry. My players like to know that what is behind the door was there yesterday, and isnt just some stuff the DM decided was there when the PCs got there. Its really that simple. And we are not alone lol - half the D and D ers I meet are that way. They just don't like sandbox and sandbox DMs .... they'd rather be railroaded into a good story and adventure path that is pre-designed and balanced - they don't want the DM to decide whats behind the door once they get there, like I said.

This is an interesting perspective, because usually a mention of railroading around here gets the locomotive shoved down the mentioner's proverbial throat.

To each their own - I just don't get why this concept is so difficult for many of you to understand. Almost all the games on the planet are predesigned - much of D and D history as well is dominated by people playing non-sandbox adventure paths - sure sandbox is dominant now in 5e but it hasn't always been that way.

Other than Dragonlance, which is a thing all unto itself, true career-start to career-end APs didn't really show up in any big way until Paizo...who proceeded to build their business around them. It's called Pathfinder, and it's pretty late in the history of D&D and its variants.

2e was story-heavy, to be sure, but not in the pre-packaged adventure path style of PF. 4e kind of tried to have an adventure path with the official WotC modules but most of what I saw looked like stand-alones to me. 5e, despite your claim that it's sandbox-dominated, has seen quite a few career-length AP-like modules - mostly in hardcover by WotC - and these seem to be seeing lots of play.

Now as for smaller quasi-APs embedded within a larger campaign, sure. Loads of people back in the day ran the Slavers series, or the U1-U3 Saltmarsh series, or I3-I5 in the desert, or the G-series or even all of GDQ - but none of those series were a whole campaign by any means...they weren't big enough, for one thing. So even ignoring homebrew adventures written by the DM a typical 1e game would likely end up a mix of sandbox (between the linked series) and quasi-AP.

Maybe something like this, with the sandboxy bits highlighted:

Keep on the Borderlands
SERIES
- U1
- U2
- U3
Slavers' Stockade run as a standalone
Maltese Clue (a Judges' Guild module)
Baltron's Beacon
Ghost Tower of Inverness
SERIES
- G1
- G2
- G3
White Plume Mtn
Forgotten Temple of Tharizdun
SERIES
- D1
- D2
- D3
- Q1

Campaign end.

Lan-"grumpy old D&D players and grumpy old cats have one saying in common: get out of my sandbox"-efan

 

[Lanefan]

To put it simply, we view both your player curveball and the DM heroically hitting said ball as strike outs - sorry. My players like to know that what is behind the door was there yesterday, and isnt just some stuff the DM decided was there when the PCs got there. Its really that simple. And we are not alone lol - half the D and D ers I meet are that way. They just don't like sandbox and sandbox DMs .... they'd rather be railroaded into a good story and adventure path that is pre-designed and balanced - they don't want the DM to decide whats behind the door once they get there, like I said.

Reading this again makes me wonder if you're maybe mixing two separate issues together.

The DM deciding what's behind the door the moment it gets opened is a quite different issue from sandbox vs. railroad. A sandbox-style DM might have (or try to have) everything as meticulously pre-planned and prepared as you do, with the obvious difference that she will sometimes have to make an educated guess where the PCs are going to go and will have to prepare a lot more, just in case. And, as I argued to a rather crazy length in another thread a few months back, if the DM is any good then the players won't be able to tell the difference anyway between a pre-planned AP and the DM making stuff up, nor between whether the occupant behind the door was determined 8 months ago or 8 seconds ago. (though you did mention you show your players your DM notes after the session; I'd never do this until enough time (sometimes years) had passed such that any secret info on them - e.g. item properties, things done by a PC that no-one else knew of, etc. - could safely be revealed)

As for always wanting things to be balanced...meh. It starts to become too artificial at that point, particularly if it's obvious. Sometimes you wipe the floor with your opponents, other times you're the mop. All is good.

And I'm probably not the player you want to have riding a railroad, in that if my character sees something more interesting over there than the prepared dungeon over here then over there is where she's gonna go (after talking the party into joining her); and if you haven't got 'over there' planned out...well, batter up!

Lan-"you must be blessed (or cursed, depending on POV) with very Lawful-aligned players"-efan

 

[Hussar]

I suppose that might be helpful, but again once the PCs have made contact and changed the status quo, how does a map that says 4 monsters are now in room 7 help if they have already been killed?

Well, considering that you'Re looking at the map, wouldn'T you get out your magic Pencil Of DMing, and just append the map? I mean, it's not like they can do everything, but, there's a middle ground here between a map that is just the outline of a room and a number and something that's actually useful at the table.

 

[shoak1]

And I'm probably not the player you want to have riding a railroad, in that if my character sees something more interesting over there than the prepared dungeon over here then over there is where she's gonna go (after talking the party into joining her); and if you haven't got 'over there' planned out...well, batter up! .....you must be blessed (or cursed, depending on POV) with very Lawful-aligned players

Good luck convincing my players there's something more interesting over there. "Dude are you frickin kidding me? We're here to play a GAME that the DM has taken his time to build for us - stop being a primadonna, put the bat down, and stop wandering off the board or we're gonna beat your ____!!!! (assortment of juvenile "your mama" jokes follow)

 

[OB1]

To put it simply, we view both your player curveball and the DM heroically hitting said ball as strike outs - sorry. My players like to know that what is behind the door was there yesterday, and isnt just some stuff the DM decided was there when the PCs got there. Its really that simple. And we are not alone lol - half the D and D ers I meet are that way. They just don't like sandbox and sandbox DMs .... they'd rather be railroaded into a good story and adventure path that is pre-designed and balanced - they don't want the DM to decide whats behind the door once they get there, like I said.

To each their own - I just don't get why this concept is so difficult for many of you to understand. Almost all the games on the planet are predesigned - much of D and D history as well is dominated by people playing non-sandbox adventure paths - sure sandbox is dominant now in 5e but it hasn't always been that way.

This is precisely why I run my games in the two modes I described upthread. When things are sandboxy, they are also low stakes. When things are high stakes they are also highly preplanned (as in I could show my notes to the players and have them see that every encounter was decided upon before the session).

I see a version of this in most of the APs, where there are sections of low stakes, decision making periods and other times where you go into a dungeon and have your traditional XP budget adventure day. I've never had a problem with 5MWDs from players in the APs, and I've run for both brand new players to RPGs and 30 year veterans, but I can also see how that could be a problem for some. Is that where your group runs into problems with 5E APs? If so, would my XP Rest variant rule set work for your group?

 

[shoak1]

This is precisely why I run my games in the two modes I described upthread. When things are sandboxy, they are also low stakes. When things are high stakes they are also highly preplanned (as in I could show my notes to the players and have them see that every encounter was decided upon before the session).

I see a version of this in most of the APs, where there are sections of low stakes, decision making periods and other times where you go into a dungeon and have your traditional XP budget adventure day. I've never had a problem with 5MWDs from players in the APs, and I've run for both brand new players to RPGs and 30 year veterans, but I can also see how that could be a problem for some. Is that where your group runs into problems with 5E APs? If so, would my XP Rest variant rule set work for your group?

I think maybe the issue is that most of my players are gamers - D and D is another GAME for them , not story time. To be honest, that's the kind of players I have always seen. I personally dont know any rpgists, just min maxers lol. And they are levelers - so any variant that cuts down on leveling does not work.

Because my players enjoy sticking to the game board, balancing for me is relatively easy in my home brew stuff. I put a campaign plausible storyline driven time crunch on them, balance my encounters for 6-8 per day, and let them resource manage. They like the choices it gives them, as they do the other tactical choices and challenges I present them with on The Path. D and D for us is a tactical game, and we couldn't care less about having to stay on the game board, its fun there

Every other game we play has a game board as well, so its natural for us to want to play on one (it is after all the most dominant style of game in the world behind computer/console games). RPG purists on the other hand, like to walk off the monopoly board and go exploring. I understand that and can appreciate the personality type that enjoys that kind of thing - but we prefer the balance and depth of experience we get from the thoroughly thought-out and prepped game board - plus we then have the time to make it a fancy board (I create 3d lush dioramas). So why would we want to leave and go running off in the sand? ick! (the sand gets in the armor and starts to chafe....)

D and D has traditionally supported both styles to different degrees in different editions. Unfortunately 5e has largely abandoned us from a support standpoint (the rules themselves I would give an 8.5). I am therefore crying foul - I hate buying modules only to spend hours upon hours balancing them and setting the resource management dials.