Discouraging the 15 minute adventuring day

[Ferghis]

I feel that the rules encourage taking an extended rest very often, especially for strikers (who's job is basically to nova), so I asked myself and my players how I could encourage them to manage their resources a bit more. After a bit of conversation, I implemented the following house rules:

There are no experience points. Characters level up during an extended rest after every three (or whatever) milestones. In of itself, this is off-topic, but it's relevance is cleared up below. I never really got xp (and I've been playing since the 1980s). Why is one xp? Why are there always given out in hundreds or thousands? It makes more sense to me to use a smaller number when tracking how close you are to gaining a level. To explain the low number of milestones necessary to level up, we wanted to push for some fast levelling up, for a variety of reasons, including the fact that it was a play-by-post game.

Milestones are usually gained for every encounter except the first one following an extended rest. This encourages characters to push on instead of resting. It also gives them more AP (which are fun for them to use) and more (before they changed the rules) uses of daily item powers. I can award milestones for exceptional first encounters of the day, and for difficult skill challenges. Players need not take a technical extended rest whenever they sleep. They only do so to recharge their surges and powers. This is the carrot portion of my idea.

The full benefits of an extended rest is only gained if a milestone has been achieved. If a milestone has not been achieved, an extended rest only recovers one daily power and half their lost surges. This is the stick portion of the idea. If they really want to recover everything and haven't really done much, it's going to waste time for less gain. The penalty here is mostly conceptual: I don't think a party would take an extended rest without a few milestones under these rules.

 

[Blue]

A lot of good ideas in terms of in-game reasons to keep going. That's something I know about and can already do, but it feels artificial to have every adventuring day be against a time limit/every extended rest interrupted/etc. I'm being a bit melodramatic because you switch up and try not to use the same device again soon.

But really, in a well designed system, the mechanics support the feel. In this case the feel I want is "heroes push beyond their limits" (or at least comfort zones) and the mechanics are saying "rest early / rest often". I can take care of the feel in-game, I'm looking at making the rules support the style of game I want to run.

There were some mechanical suggestions. One I liked but ultimately won't use was that an extended rest only gives limited recovery before a milestone. I was looking for encouraging players to want to push, not penalizing them into doing what I want. Also there are times, say a "random" encounter when traveling that there might only be a single encounter in a day (or in several days).

There's a feat (human only?) that gives bonuses to saves and such for each milestone, and a number of items that work better after the first milestone. Those are good examples of making people want to push on from their own free will. (The items are interesting, because it turns the "rest and recover dailies before a big battle" on it's head.)

So, what suggestions do we have to make the rules support the wanted feel?

 

[keterys]

Few ideas -

Give out more action points, with a caveat:
Milestones and extended rest:
'After an extended rest, you lose all action points.'
'After almost every encounter, you gain an action point. Particularly easy encounters or ones which burn little to no resources will not qualify as a milestone for this purpose.'


Why: Mostly to reward doing more encounters and make taking an extended rest less rewarding and the first encounter less alpha strike capable. Assuming the group is doing at least three encounters a day it should work in their favor, though.

...

Limit PCs to one daily per encounter (each). Fits well for barbarians and wardens and others who go into stances or forms, it largely says "Go ahead and use some dailies throughout the day instead of hoarding them", but it does make it trickier (potentially in a good way) to avoid overdoing dailies in one encounter to completely remove the challenge... or to recover from total failure.

...

Every milestone, (pick one or more, as appropriate)
...any PC below half their surges gains a healing surge.
...add 1 to your healing surge value.
...each PC heals their level in damage.
...each PC gains temporary hit points equal to their level.

...

Every PC now gains a new ability, called Heroic Grit.
Heroic Grit: Once per round, you may add a bonus to a damage roll equal to the number of milestones you have passed.

 

[Arlough]

A lot of good ideas in terms of in-game reasons to keep going. That's something I know about and can already do, but it feels artificial to have every adventuring day be against a time limit/every extended rest interrupted/etc. I'm being a bit melodramatic because you switch up and try not to use the same device again soon.

But really, in a well designed system, the mechanics support the feel. In this case the feel I want is "heroes push beyond their limits" (or at least comfort zones) and the mechanics are saying "rest early / rest often". I can take care of the feel in-game, I'm looking at making the rules support the style of game I want to run.

I don't think it is a system failure that the adventurers wouldn't want to push themselves beyond their limits, it is just the way the world is.
In the real world, people only push themselves to their limits if there is a pressing, and usually dire, need. Soldiers always want to be fresh and well supplied before going into a fight, lawyers don't stay up for days before a trial if they can help it, a jockey doesn't prepare for the Kentucky Derby by running his horse to a lather early that morning.
Same in popular media. John McClane probably wishes he had more time, bandages, and bullets. Detective Deckard would take a nap if Roy Batty would just stop trying to kill him. And I am positive that Mitch Hennessey managed to use up all of his healing surges and was still bloodied, but continued trucking along because it was important to him.

Some will push themselves beyond their comfort zones deliberately, but only when trying to become stronger. The most egregious example of this is of course the Sayans, who become stronger the more they get the crap kicked out of them.

But either way, people and characters only push themselves when they feel it is needed to achieve their goals.

So, I think that story is going to be the primary factor in how this needs be resolved. Either the players want to become stronger and need to push themselves to do so (the no XP without a milestone is one way to achieve this) or they need a pressing external (plot based) reason to venture forth into probable death.

If you just limit the HP and Daily Power recovery to a small amount per extended rest, this will just encourage multiple extended rests in a row. If you make it so they have to hit a milestone to get a daily power back, then the fights will most likely become quite grindy as they look for low level battles just to recharge, or avoid using Daily Powers when they should because it would be too much trouble to get them back.

 

[andy3k]

I like the following ideas:

• Action point after each encounter. Lose all action points after extended rest.
• Heroic Grit: except I'd change the bonus from a damage bonus (insignificant) to an attack bonus. In fact, I may even say the Heroic Grit bonus goes up after each encounter.

I do not like limiting the number of dailies per encounter because:

• Sometimes you DO just want 1 or 2 encounters in a day
• Dailies may be more useful in one encounter and not as useful in the next. It would suck that I couldn't use multiple radiant-dealing dailies against the undead ambush and then have to use it on the orcs who are not vulnerable to radiant.

I'm on the fence concerning the healing surge/HP reward per milestone.

I DO like the idea of changing the XP level based on the extended rest. However, they should not get 0 XP for the first encounter. They fought hard and deserve some credit. Maybe it can be something like 75% XP for encounter 1, 100% XP for encounters 2 through 3, and 125% XP for encounters 4 and up (counting encounters between extended rest). This even works for 1 encounter per day situations since going nova gives them an edge, even with a Level+4 encounter. Even better, long runs without extended rest reward them. Of course, this assumes you use XP to level them up.

 

[BriarMonkey]

I think you are way overthinking this (as are a lot of people).

The game has certain assumptions regarding how a character "recharges" and what is expected for rest periods. If you just add in a bunch of extra fiddly bits, you are changing those assumptions - and really, for nothing more than cluttering up the mechanics.

If you want the characters to move at a better clip, or understand when it is safe to rest, then make the world around them alive.

Simply, just because the characters rest does not mean the bad guys do. The world goes on around them. There will be times, like during the winter in the far north, where no much happens due to weather, etc. No real concerns there. But, come spring, that orc army may be on the move again. If the PCs opt to rest, they give up 8 or 12 hours to that army, as opposed to heading out at first note and being on an equal footing.

The world and it's events keep moving - its up to the PCs whether they move at the same pace.

 

[andy3k]

BriarMonkey, I agree with you on the point that the world keeps moving. But that is a story-based solution and only the player types that care about the story itself will be affected. The rest of the players don't care. One particular D&D group I am in was about ready to stand up against a horde of 100 goblins. They don't care. "We'll kill as many as we can, soak up XP, and run if we see more than 10 at a time." They don't care that their characters should be damn scared of having 100 goblins within a quarter mile of their location.

If the party rests and said army keeps moving, so what? Are the encounters going to keep getting harder until the DM finally kills of the party? Either the DM, doesn't make things progressively harder, and the players have no mechanical punishment for going nova and sleeping, or the DM kills off the party and things reset (or a new game starts), both of which don't help the DM with the original problem. Storywise, the army runs over the PC's village and kills their family. The party sheds a token tear, probably making a joke at the same time, and then move on with killing things.

There needs to be a mechanic that offers a compelling reward, or an IMMEDIATE penalty, for continuing or resting. Maybe we can meet both needs my attaching a mechanic to the story. You can rest now and go nova again, but the army will have taken some of your treasure you would otherwise recover. You can rest AGAIN instead of going on but the army will wipe out the town where your tutors live but then you won't go up a level until you find more tutors. Or maybe not resting means that the party can beat the army to a special artifact that will make stopping the army easier in a future encounter. There, now the story lives AND mechanical consequences are assumed.

 

[BriarMonkey]

Characters, or Players, can't be made to care - in which, yes, the story may go out the window then. Attaching a penalty simply means that these types of players will wait it out. They will sit by until either the penalty goes away, or the issue which caused it has passed - as for them, the story is not what matters, it's their characters.

With a group who attaches meaning to the story, then that alone works as they understand the rammifications of their actions, or lack there-of.

Too, look at it from the player's side. If they rest up, they may fully feel that they have a better chance at making inroads - especially since that is how the rules support it. (Now, I'm not going to say I agree or disagree with the rules...) If they go for a long string of encounters, each pulls resources, and each in turn becomes more difficult to deal with. For these players then, are they wrong to try to keep up their strength so that they may try to avoid a TPK, as well as hit as hard as they can?

Depending on your enemy, it is most effective to take out the command structure, but that normally means you need your best resources. That can be done, if planned well, maybe in a couple solid strikes. Compare that to potential endless encounters trying to mop up the soldiers themselves, and the incessant drain on those finite resources.

I can wholy understand what is trying to be done, but I think this type of an issue of trying to force the characters into doing more is more a game style issue. If they don't want to continue, then they won't. Penalties will cause grief, and rewards can be meta-gamed.

It comes down to expectations between the GM and the players.

 

[Arlough]

andy3k,

I DO like the idea of changing the XP level based on the extended rest. However, they should not get 0 XP for the first encounter. They fought hard and deserve some credit. Maybe it can be something like 75% XP for encounter 1, 100% XP for encounters 2 through 3, and 125% XP for encounters 4 and up (counting encounters between extended rest). This even works for 1 encounter per day situations since going nova gives them an edge, even with a Level+4 encounter. Even better, long runs without extended rest reward them. Of course, this assumes you use XP to level them up.

In the realm of incentive based rewards for longer days, this is my favorite idea as well. But, I would adjust the percentages a bit. I would go with:

• 1 encounter = 25% XP for the day
• 2 encounters = 50% XP for the day
• 3 encounters = 75% XP for the day
• 4 - 5 encounters = 100% XP
• 6 encounters = 125% XP for the day
• 7 encounters = 150% XP for the day

And just give them the XP at the end of the session, using the appropriate multiplier. That way, the first fight is worth 25% only if it is also the last fight. If you went through 4 fights that day, all of them are worth full XP. I am pretty sure that is what everyone was talking about, but I wanted to make it clear just in case.

Also, just like milestones, any "fight" that isn't a credible threat does not count towards the encounters per day. So if you go into a bar and kick the butt of a NPC 8 levels below you, that does not count as an encounter.

The theory behind this is that people are only able to grow in power when they are forced to push beyond their comfort zone. For example, I am not going to gain much more strength by doing the same thing I have already been doing every day, but if I push my limits, my body is forced to start producing new muscle and I become stronger.

Also, I consider 4 encounters a day to be the norm, so I wouldn't give 100% XP until they had at least achieved what is normal.

BriarMonkey,
I actually agree with you, so long as you have a story driven party. Right now, my party doesn't even get XP, they just get a new level when they have reached a story milestone.
But, I am not running a 100% sandbox campaign (actually, it is only about 60% sandbox) and thus I can do that. Many people play to "win" more than for the story. That is a perfectly acceptable way to play, and that is who this is for. For most parties, 4 encounters a day is normal and this rule will not effect them.

 

[Saeviomagy]

They don't care that their characters should be damn scared of having 100 goblins within a quarter mile of their location.

You can't make PCs scared. If they ran around being scared all the time, they wouldn't make great heroes. The tactic "we'll run if we see more than 10 goblins at a time" sounds like they're planning a scouting mission. They ARE worried about meeting large amounts of goblins - they're just not worried about 100 goblins if they can kill them in neat parcels. Which makes perfect sense. Over the career of any PC they're going to kill 40-50 creatures a level. An army of 100 creatures of equivalent level is not scary unless you have to fight the whole thing at once.

If the party rests and said army keeps moving, so what? Are the encounters going to keep getting harder until the DM finally kills of the party? Either the DM, doesn't make things progressively harder, and the players have no mechanical punishment for going nova and sleeping, or the DM kills off the party and things reset (or a new game starts), both of which don't help the DM with the original problem. Storywise, the army runs over the PC's village and kills their family. The party sheds a token tear, probably making a joke at the same time, and then move on with killing things.

There needs to be a mechanic that offers a compelling reward, or an IMMEDIATE penalty, for continuing or resting. Maybe we can meet both needs my attaching a mechanic to the story. You can rest now and go nova again, but the army will have taken some of your treasure you would otherwise recover. You can rest AGAIN instead of going on but the army will wipe out the town where your tutors live but then you won't go up a level until you find more tutors. Or maybe not resting means that the party can beat the army to a special artifact that will make stopping the army easier in a future encounter. There, now the story lives AND mechanical consequences are assumed.

Yup. I'd recommend against requiring a tutor to train though, because IMO the mechanic makes the world seem a great deal more gamey and encourages more rests and timewasting.

Even if your players are only motivated by XP and loot, it's pretty trivial to remove those things from players if they fail to meet deadlines. You need a trading town to convert money into equipment that's above your level. You need to succeed at objectives to get XP bonuses. You need for your foes to not carry treasure away if you want to own it. You need your opponent to not flee if you want to kill them (or you need to outpace them when they flee - either is a good reason to limit rests).