A Discussion in Game Design: The 15 minute work day.

[Ariosto]

I've read/seen enough fantasy fiction to encounter more than a few spellcasters who... fire crossbows or use a sling...

Such as?

We're talking about them being "supposed to" be carrying and shooting with such gear as a regular thing, not about its happening once in a blue moon. About all I can think of offhand is Jaelith in the Witch World.

Not that it would be to the point, anyhow. Some of the reasons things were as they were designed to be had to do with making for a good game! Messing up the class system of "separate spheres" is what I was harrumphing about. I said not a word against "spellcasters who hoard their power, eschewing the use of magic until it is absolutely necessary."

The game was not meant as a "simulator" of Tros of Samothrace or The Worm Ouroboros, of The Well of the Unicorn or The Blue Star, of Mary Poppins or Five Children and It, of The Twilight of Magic or The Magician's Nephew, or any other particular fictional world.

If that's what you want, then you've got your work cut out for you. It was no secret surprise, though, no false bill of goods, at least in the OD&D and 1st ed. AD&D books.

 

[BlubSeabass]

We've seen several answers and solutions to this 15-minutes work day, and I'd liked to summarize them a bit. First, I'll try to explain what's the problem with the 15-minute work-day, and why it can hurt the gameplay experience. Then I'll go through some of the interesting things posted here. I'll give some links to things I found relevant, for people just tuning in or wanting to reread that post. I shamelessly may have copied one of your opinions, but certainly not all said in the links is represented in my post, especially not the counter-arguments.

What is the problem with the 15-minute work day?
Skip this if you already agree =). To see the problem we need to make a few premises:
1) Resource management, or the problem of how to spend your resources, is a vital part of strategy.
2) Different strategies is what makes the game fun. The ability to tackle problems on several ways, one more effective then the other, is a major aspect of RPG's in general.
3) Nova, or using all resources from best to worst to create a large spike of damage, is the superior resource management strategy if those resources can be re-used in the next challenge.
4) Optional- Full resources strongly favor spellcasters, while low resources favor warriors.

The 15-minute work day is the problem in which the PC's can immidiately regain their resources after a challenge by resting. This and premise 3, results into Nova always being the superior strategy. The players will be strongly encouraged to Nova, and probably will do this if able. This and premise 1 result in the strategy mostly being the same all the time, since one strategy is superior. This and premise 2, lead to a boring and repetitive game (always using the same superior strategy). The balance is directly gone with premise 4 and the option to always regain your resources.
Conclusion: The 15-minutes work day encourage the same superior tactic, which leads to boredom and imbalance.
Relevant posts IMO: Stalker0, Cerebral Paladin, Dannyalacatraz, Arscott, MichealSomething's blog, Doug Mcrae, Lost Soul, Jgbrowning, Myself =D, Storminator Beginning of the End and Dausuul

How do we fix this?
It's pretty obvious that in this case, rest should be discouraged, or not resting should be encouraged. Here are some of the solutions, with my opinion.
DM's mercy: Most people here who didn't find the 15-minute work day a problem, agreed that resting, and therefor when the party regains resources, is at the hand of the DM. The DM is the one who decides when rest is available. He could control this by environment, but also by bad consequences. Since the DM can be unpredictable, players are forced to take more care of resource management. The bottom line is, the environment, not the mechanics, discourage the rest.
My opinion: It's basically what most good adventures do right now. It works fine in reality, but I have three problems with it. First, it is taking away the option from the player, something I wish to avoid. Second, the DM has to prepare for the things the PC's are going to try to get a rest. I think some here could write a book about "How the DM got rope-tricked." Penelizing this creativity with, " you just can't" is not something I like. Finally, it doesn't solve the mechanic, it just walks around it.
Relevant posts: Dannyalacatraz, Ariosto, Dannyalcatraz II, Jgbrowning, Stalker0, Beginning of the End and Silvercatmoonpaw2.

Redifine your resources: This I've seen alot. Abilities usable once per day become usable once per session. Every resource is usable at will. Everybody gets equal resources. If everyone get's equal resources, the imbalance of nova is gone. If abilities are usable x times a session, resting loses it's replendishing ability. One nice idea is to make resources unlockable after x rounds. Resources would then have to be earned in though fights. Nova-ing is not possible anymore.
My opinion: While most certainly do adress a lot of the problems, I don't like messing with the resources of the PC's. If they want to nova, its up to them. Most of these ideas consist of taking away options from the player, which I don't like. Making every resource usable at will actually turns every battle into novas. The one of rebalancing resources over the classes solves imbalance, but still leaves nova the superior tactic.
Relevent posts: Starfox, Arscott, Ariosto, Tuft, Billd91 and Doug Mcrae.

Punish the sleepy ones: Redefine rest so that it costs something to rest. This could be in simple consequences, but Dausuul had the sweet idea of resting taking longer and costing money. Storywise, they would relax with their favourite gal, spend quality time with family, drink till the sun rises or spend a night playing a tabletop RPG with some friends. This penalizes resting, and thus does not more encourage the same Nova tactic.
My opinion: Pretty sweet, but doesn't get my favor for 2 reasons. First, it influences the setting pretty badly. Are there girls available? Is your family close? Where is the rum? Even worse, when you're in a dungeon, and you need to replendish your resources, you can't rest! You'll have to go back to town, spend some days etc. while the lich slays the hostages one by one. The second reason has more to do with my own likes and dislikes, and I prefer giving the players then taking things out of their hands, even though when its way more practical.
Relevant posts: Dausuul and Dausuul II

Praise the heroes: Give them something for not resting. Many things have been said, prominently XP rewards, but milestone bonusses and resources are also mentioned. The player is rewarded for not resting in a (often temporary) bonus.
My opinon: Yay! Finally something I agree with! I don't like XP awards for the same reasons others didn't like them, and as I stated above, I don't like messing with resources. But milestone bonusses (for not-4e I guess that would be after-encounter bonusses) are the way to go. They give something a player can't get any other way, and challenges the benefits of resting in a balanced and gradual way. Nova is still a valid tactic, but so is moving on.
Relevant posts: Stalker0, Kurtomatic, Mark CMG and Uder

Obviously I haven't included everyone and their thoughts, but I was getting confused, so I tried to summarize the big lines.
I like this discussion way too much...

 

[Silvercat Moonpaw]

My opinion on the milestone/after-encounter bonuses is it offers nothing to help the DM know how the encounters will pace. Players can still choose how many encounters they want to have. Encounter balance is messed up because the amount of resources used up is out of the control of the one who has to calculate the whole deal.

 

[GlassJaw]

...there are only two ways to prevent the 15 minute adventuring day

There's a third actually:

Get Trailblazer!!!

*hides!*

 

[Fifth Element]

Another way of looking at the problem is this: There are two varieties of the 15-minute adventuring day. The first is the "nova" (the PCs use all of their most powerful abilities in a single encounter and then rest); the second is the "forced rest" (the PCs are out of resources and must rest/retreat to recover them).

These are two different problems.

There is at least one more type, only present in pre-4E games. Pre-4E, "nova" really only has meaning for casters. Fighters couldn't nova. So this third type of problem is when some characters (casters) systematically run out of resources before others, forcing the others to rest before they would otherwise.

So what would be the absolute worst way to fix the 15-minute adventuring day problem?

(1) Give all classes daily powers (increasing the mechanical incentive for nova strategies).

This one actually solves the third type I mentioned above. At least all characters can nova, so that the party doesn't end up resting just because the wizard's out of spells.

This is the form of the 15-minute adventuring day that really affected the groups I played in. The players knew they were better off resting, if they could, once the wizard used up his good spells.

 

[LostSoul]

In my 4E hack, I messed around with Extended Rests.

[sblock=Refreshing Character Resources]
All Classes:
Each 6 hours of rest you recover 1 healing surge and reset your APs to 1.

Daily Powers vary for different classes.

Martial Classes:
Carousing: Must engage in an act of physical enjoyment with another character.

Divine Classes:
Liturgies: A specific ritual (not Ritual) that the divine character performs. They vary based on the god worshipped (ranging from funerals and marriages to giving financial advice, raising the dead, and mock drownings).
Rites: A specific ritual (not Ritual) that the divine character can perform alone, but it requires some Sanctified Incense (GP). Again, these vary based on the god worshipped (dancing naked under the moon, sleeping in a fresh grave, human sacrifice).

Wizards:
Spend 16 hours of uninterrupted study, during which time you do whatever crazy thing that helps you memorize the spell. If you're interrupted the entire session is lost.

Warlocks:
Must satisfy their pact obligation. Blood sacrifice of sentient beings, learning someone's most terrible secret, ritual sex, cannibalism, mindless destruction, and showing people The Yellow Sign.

*

These things take time, require the PCs to integrate themselves into the setting, introduce NPCs, reveal the setting in motion, reveal the consequences of the PC's actions, and introduce complications. They're all social in nature, even the Wizard (he needs to lock himself up somewhere safe, but doing so he freaks out the regular people around him) and the Warlock (who breaks and destroys social order).

That leads to more adventure based on the choices the PCs make. This is the middle level of play; the high level is when PCs control settlements and make decisions for their wards.

I call it a Fantasy Western because the game is about imposing your own social order on the frontier, whatever that may be.[/sblock]

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Such as?

We're talking about them being "supposed to" be carrying and shooting with such gear as a regular thing, not about its happening once in a blue moon. About all I can think of offhand is Jaelith in the Witch Worl

Well, besides the ones mentioned by others?

Most of the spellcasters in Thieves' World and Discworld are like that; Elric & most of the other incarnations of the Eternal Champion; the spellcasters in Harry Turtledove's Darkness series; Niven & Pournelle's "Warlock" series of stories; the spellcasters in Gordon Dickson's Dragon Knight series; the casters in Terry Brooks' Shannara/Word & Void series; Barbara Hambly's spellcasters are generally stingy with magic, as are the Elves in Mercedes Lackey's modern fantasy books; many of the sword & sorcery spellcasters found in foundational works like the Fafhrd & Grey Mouser or Conan stories rarely use their powers (though, in all fairness, many are also more accurately "multiclassed" in D&D terms)...

Oh yeah...and that black dude in "Krod Mandoon."

The game was not meant as a "simulator" of Tros of Samothrace or The Worm Ouroboros, of The Well of the Unicorn or The Blue Star, of Mary Poppins or Five Children and It, of The Twilight of Magic or The Magician's Nephew, or any other particular fictional world.

In its original formulations, the game wasn't meant as a simulator of any particular fantasy work at all. Besides Vancian/Lieber-ian/Moorcockian/Howardian/Tolkienian influences, you can find the work of other fantasy authors, Biblical/religious/mythological ideas ("Sticks to Snakes", anyone?) from all cultures, and liberal dashes of horror, sci-fi and other genre fiction tossed in for seasoning.

It was meant for the players to be able to simulate all kinds of magical worlds, and its flexibility is pretty impressive...which is why I've never had a problem running that kind of spellcaster and never seen the 15 minute workday in person.

My casters? I expect them to be unable to cast spells at some point- for whatever reason- and that I'll be able to contribute to the party's success even then.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Thinking a bit more about why I wasn't a parsimonious wizard and cast a spell every round* in combat.

1) I'm a wizard. Wizards cast spells. It distinguishes me from the non-caster(s).
2) Each player character is expected to contribute their utmost to a combat. Holding back on spells, when they weren't needed later on, could be seen as slacking, and risking the lives of the other PCs. By and large our encounters were very challenging. If the wizard doesn't cast his best spells, we may die.
3) There's a competitive element between the players to see whose character can contribute the most to victory.
4) I want to play the game. Playing the game means doing things now, not maybe or maybe not doing something later in an encounter which may happen, but probably won't. Live for today, not a tomorrow that may never come. I tend to be short-term in my approach to virtually everything, so the way I play D&D is unlikely to be different.

Dannyalcatraz and Beginning of the End have said that the risk of another encounter is enough to make a wizard parsimonious. Not for me it wasn't, or, I think, any other Vancian caster I've seen played. Factors 1-4 seem to be strong enough to outweigh that risk.

Another aspect to consider in the computer game ToEE I mentioned upthread is that a single player controls the whole party - five PCs. This leads to a very team-focused approach and it doesn't matter if one character is holding back most of the time. If it was a face-to-face game with a single player controlling the wizard then that player would most likely be bored shitless. I would be.


*I should note that my PC was a specialist wizard so I had more spells than the base.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

1) I'm a wizard. Wizards cast spells. It distinguishes me from the non-caster(s).

Granted.

2) Each player character is expected to contribute their utmost to a combat. Holding back on spells, when they weren't needed later on, could be seen as slacking, and risking the lives of the other PCs. By and large our encounters were very challenging. If the wizard doesn't cast his best spells, we may die.

The problem is that you don't know if they will be needed later on or not.

Besides, its not like I'm doing nothing- I'm doing damage with my ranged weapons; I'm doing coup-de-graces on helpless foes; I'm watching for that blasted invisible, teleporting foe we keep encountering, etc.

And, FWIW, being able to save the party's bacon with a well-placed lightning bolt in the 6th encounter of the day simply rocks.

3) There's a competitive element between the players to see whose character can contribute the most to victory.

Never felt that pressure.

4) I want to play the game. Playing the game means doing things now, not maybe or maybe not doing something later in an encounter which may happen, but probably won't. Live for today, not a tomorrow that may never come.

Playing the game for me means playing my PC the way he should be played. If he's a hothead, he'll go all Leeroy Jenkins. But my spellcasters tend to be more thoughtful.

Recent exception: Adragon, the Mage-Brute.

Besides, casters who live for today may not live to see tomorrow because they got ganked when they encountered some brigands after going nova...

Dannyalcatraz and Beginning of the End have said that the risk of another encounter is enough to make a wizard parsimonious.

...in the context of generally playing with GMs who:

1. often DID have another encounter waiting- IOW, the risk was recognizably high and actually recognized.
2. would not give the party a break just because the Wizard was out of spells- IOW, they wouldn't fudge in-game reality to favor the party.

Besides, if the fighter accuses you of "slacking," remind him that he can swing his sword all day and that you only have 3 fireballs to cast in that same time period...

"Sure, I could have used one of those to save you 3 minutes of slogging through kobold guts, but who will be whining when the 45' long Frost-Drake comes screeching out of the sky and I'm fresh out? You will...but not for long."

 

[Doug McCrae]

My casters? I expect them to be unable to cast spells at some point- for whatever reason- and that I'll be able to contribute to the party's success even then.

We fought a golem in the 3e game I've described and I remember being quite annoyed that, after casting haste, all I could contribute was aid another. Aid another falls well below my threshold for an acceptable level of contribution.

Complete Arcane, with its superior SR ignoring conjurations, wasn't out then. These days I'd have been able to blow that golem away with orbs and suchlike. (I regarded glitterdust as, tho powerful, not fitting my PC's personal style.)

I'm just like this guy:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_Pq56pHtnY]YouTube - ‪CRAZY german KID(playing counter strike)!!‬‎[/ame]