Five-Minute Workday Article

While this statement may seem obvious, it isn't really true. Lets look at a 9th level 1e wizard load out (generic adventuring) from a game I played in (disclaimer: I don't have my books on me, so this might be a bit off, not much though):
5) Wall of Force
4) Charm Monster, Major Globe of Invulnerability (I always wanted Wall of Fire, sigh)
3) Dispel Magic, Lightning Bolt (sometimes Fireball), Invisibility 10'
2) Home-brew Magic Missile upgrade (1d4+2 per, longer range)X2, Web, Levitate maybe? Knock? Invisibility?
1) Magic MissileX2, Comprehend Languages, Detect Magic, One other.

Did he "win fights" when he unloaded? No! He could let us escape an unwinnable fight (Wall of Force). If the fight has several quite powerful opponents, Charm Monster (after Prayers went up for the saving throw penalties) could be *really* helpful. It did save us a few times. A well placed Lightning Bolt (yay bouncing!) or Fireball could clear a swarm of ranged opponents, or do some nice softening up. But that is *3* spells. Only *1* of which might be viewed as something close to a fight winner, but if so, odds were the target would save. The Fighters did lots more damage than the Magic Missiles, round after round. Even when we knew we had a specific, dangerous fight coming up, it was the Fighters who did the heavy lifting. Oh, the Clerics helped, a lot. We could get doubled Prayer bonuses, which really, really added up. Magic Circle against Evil 10' was yummy almost beyond words (longish duration). Strength could get the Thief into str-bonuses to damage which mattered when he could get off a dual-wielding X5 backstab. But at the end of the day, it was the Fighters who held the line and did the damage, be it a big fight or small.

Compare that to a 3E caster. He'd have about 1 to two spell slots more per level.

On the other hand, compare it to a 4E spellcaster. He'd have only 3 daily spells (maybe 6 if we count utilities, and we probably should, since some of your spells are utlities.). And of course, the 4E Fighter also has these 3 Dailies...
 

log in or register to remove this ad

The 5 minute workday problem is a result of...


The system's learning curve and workload on DM.

The DM has to be experienced, creative, and have lots of time to plan out pacing.

D&D is just too unfriendly. The system is made with so many gaps for the DM to fill. This is why some don't experience the problem, they have experienced DMs and experienced players who notice the problems and fix it.

The 5 minute workday is a group problem caused by a game system flaw.
 

Out of curiosity, for the people who've experienced the 15 minute work day, have you found it in games other than D&D?
In Rolemaster I've found it to be a huge issue.

In one campaign, it ended up that everyone played casters - so the whole party was on a daily nova/recharge cycle.

In another campaign, we nerfed casters (by limiting spell selection and eliminating the default spell-buffing items) so that, when they nova-ed, they were about as good as non-casters.

I always felt that the 15-min AD was a playstyle issue anyway. After all, in 4e there is not a single thing stopping the party from throwing their every Daily power, magic item, and Action Point at the very first encounter, and then declaring that they were taking a rest.
I can't see how this article is objectionable. The only two ways around short workdays are either:
a) everything is a per-encounter ability (including hp), so the "workday" becomes meaningless,
b) the DM pacing the adventure so the party isn't forced to blow too many (limited) resources early.
I don't really understand. The DM's role isn't to combat the players, it's just to facilitate the ongoing game, the stories, adventures and challenges.

If there's an orc stronghold that needs raiding, then if you dive in, burn all your resources immediately and decide to retreat then they will respond. They'll call up reinforcements, attack the players' camp, build barricades and so on.
The issue isn't about stopping to rest - it's about the imbalance between nova-ing classes (eg spellcasters) and other classes (eg fighters and rogues).

Mearls even notes the problem in the column, but doesn't say anything about how to handle it.

According to some posters on this site, that does not avoid this, and they have noted the existence of the 15MWD in 4Ed.
The main point is, that in 4e (pre-Essentials) it won't cause a balance problem between PCs with different classes.

Why didn't this seem to be as much of a problem in older editions? Module/adventure design typically had wandering monsters, no safe rest zones, or a time limit.
It was an issue when I GMed Against the Giant in the mid-80s.

The day now is our encounter!Just as in 4e, you were doing encounters in waves and such to allow a bit of a breather and to make it more dynamic, that design principle is now used for the whole day.
the Encounter is being stretched out to a whole day.
The problem with this is that the encounter is a natural unit of play for many playstyles. (Ie all those based on strong scene framing.) Whereas "the day" is an arbitrary unit of ingame time - unless you change it in the sort of way that [MENTION=87792]Neonchameleon[/MENTION] and [MENTION=71811]Badapple[/MENTION] have talked about.

For me, at least, there seems to be an element of railroading in mandating a precise number of rounds of combat between rests. Under this approach, how do the players get to shape what happens in the gameworld?

I have every confidence that those who don't like vancian magic will be able to swap it out. In fact, if you just time shift your daily rest to happen after every encounter, and put all your requisite monsters into each encounter (or have some sort of solo or super-solo encounter), you've just gotten rid of Daily magic with one easy rule.
But I still have to have encounters of a minimum level of dangerousness to balance fighters and rogues against casters - otherwise the casters will dominate, as Mearls himself notes. This is not a requirement in 4e, and I'm not sure I want to go backwards in this respect.

I don´t want the 4 encounters assumed per day as in 4e
There is no "assumed encounters per day" in 4e. You can run easy encounters, or challenging ones, at a very wide variation in encounters per day, because what makes an encounter challenging is somewhat independent of a party's overall resources, because the mechanics (the need to unlock healing surges, action points, pre-Essentials magic item usage) put limits on the amount of a party's total resources that it can deploy in any given encounter.

I wonder which playstyles promote the 5-minute workday and which don't.
For me, it's been a big issue in classic D&D and Rolemaster, where casters are ineffective without their daily resources, and a non-issue in 4e, where healing surges provide the only hard cap, and the players have shown they can win level-equivalent combats on encounter powers and three healing surges across a party of 5 PCs.

So for my group, at least, they will push on with their PCs as long as (i) they have viable resources to draw on, and (ii) they are confident they won't be hosed.

These two things are related, but (i) is more a question of active resources available, whereas (ii) is more about the passive buffer against bad luck. Hence why healing surges tend to be a hard cap in 4e play.

The mechanics I need, then, are mechanics that make it transparent to the players what their resources are (4e is particularly good at this, I think) and that makes it easy for me, as GM, to build encounters that are of a reliable level of difficulty. Unpredictability or excessive swinginess reduces the players' confidence that they won't be hosed, which in turn reduces their confidence that they have viable resources to draw on, which in turn encourages them to rest to maximise their available resources.

If you get into a fight, lose some HP, and there's no cost to getting them back - might as well get them back.
Within reason. If I'm hungry, a sandwhich might do. It's not necessarily rational or reasonable to hold out for a whole truck of sandwhiches, even if I've got reason to think one might come by any moment.

4e sends the signals here especially clearly, via its hp/healing surge mechanic. But even without that mechanic, if it's clear that a typical combat is not going to do more than X damage per PC, then a buffer of 2X hp is probably enough for rational and reasonable players. Which is why I think reliable encounter building tools are so important. (Of course, this is also risking the production of encounters that are boring until the last one for the day, because before then no one is at risk of dropping - but this is a different pacing consequence of the 4e hp/surge system. Though the elegance of that system is demonstrated by the way it simultaneously helps resolve too quite different pacing issues, of boring attrition combats and the 15-minute day.)
 

On the other hand, that's 1e. 3e style saving throws make it much easier to find a spell that'll trivialise an encounter. Odds are that if you pick the right one, the target(s) won't save.

Compare that to a 3E caster. He'd have about 1 to two spell slots more per level.

This is why the 15 min workday problem started cropping up in 3E and wasn't a big deal in earlier editions that featured actual checks & balances on casters. More spell slots, more difficult saves, easy spell prep time, little fear of disruption, utility spells easily carried in massive quantities via wands. Is it any wonder that casters were super powered ?

The 9th level wizard Kraydak used in the example would need 8.75 hours of prep time to ready a full complement of spells after a full nights rest (15 min per spell level per spell). A magic user didn't nova at the drop of a hat because replentishing those resources was more time consuming.

Well, taking that time to prepare spells was declared unfun by powers at WOTC and the PEW PEW era was born. The whining about the superiority of casters including the 15 min workday hasn't stopped since.

If you want the problem to go away, then return the checks and balances that kept it from being a problem in the first place. Fewer spell slots, no at-will magic nonsense, risky casting in combat, longer prep times, and no bazillion extra spell slots through wands.
 

If you want the problem to go away, then return the checks and balances that kept it from being a problem in the first place. Fewer spell slots, no at-will magic nonsense, risky casting in combat, longer prep times, and no bazillion extra spell slots through wands.
I think the main problem is the number of spells 3E casters had.

At-Will Magic is not a problem. 4E has at-will spells, and the spellcasters aren't overpowered. The at-will spells need to be balanced against other at-will things, like firing a bow.
Reflex Save to negate 1d6+INT fire damage compares reasonably to a bow or sword.

I also don't think you absolutely need stuff like casting on the defense / damage having you lose a spell and the action you used to cast it. That's way too costly and too swingy. Spellcasting shouldn't be a constant source of frustration for the spellcaster player either.
Longer preperation times actually sound reasonable, since a fighter also doesn't get back all his hit points every night. If hit points are to set the pace, then spell replenishment must conform.

But something like no more than 2 spell slots per level and only up to 7 spell levels (not counting cantrips) could significantly limit the power of spellcasters.

That said, this still doesn't remove all of the entire nova problem. If the spellcaster can cast the equivalent of 5 5d6 fireballs a day at high levels, and the fighter only gets his 1d12+15 damage per action, that's 5 rounds and quite possibly one entire combat that the wizard will vastly outshine the fighter (in fact, fighter, rogue and ranger together). That's still a ton of nova potential, and I would still assume the Wizard has the ability cast utility spells like Fly, Alter Self, Knock and Rary's Telepathic Bond...

Now, if the same level Fighter also has 10 extra actions per day, he may be have similar nova potential as the wizard...

Well, taking that time to prepare spells was declared unfun by powers at WOTC and the PEW PEW era was born. The whining about the superiority of casters including the 15 min workday hasn't stopped since.
Going by people complaining about the 15 minute workday, the phenomen did exist before 3E inception. What didn't exist was EN World. :p
 

I am glad they are taking this approach. Definitely more what I was hoping to see. My only complaint is I hope they don't simply rely on resource management to balance out wizards. Casting time, spell failure, low hp, low attacks bonuses, spell interuptions, etc all need to be in the mix. I like my wizards powerful but balanced out with negatives such as these. Good for flavor and my style of play.
 

pemerton said:
But I still have to have encounters of a minimum level of dangerousness to balance fighters and rogues against casters - otherwise the casters will dominate, as Mearls himself notes. This is not a requirement in 4e, and I'm not sure I want to go backwards in this respect

I imagine it will only be as important as the "one monster per character" or "encounter XP" threshold in 4e.

That is, you can have a 4e "encounter" with 3 minions as your only encounter for the day if you want. It isn't well balanced -- it's super-easy, something I personally wouldn't want to even roll dice for -- but you can certainly have it. If you have a lot of encounters like this, or it most of your encounters are like this, your controllers dominate.

You can also have a 4e encounter with 12 Level 25 Solos if you want. It also isn't well balanced. It also isn't something I'd personally bother rolling dice for usually. But you can have it.

I imagine you can do the same thing in 5e. 5e might give you an "XP per day" budget in the same way 4e gives you an XP per encounter target. It might also or instead just give you advice like the Caves of Chaos gives you advice.

What are we meant to be going "backwards" on here?
 

That said, this still doesn't remove all of the entire nova problem. If the spellcaster can cast the equivalent of 5 5d6 fireballs a day at high levels, and the fighter only gets his 1d12+15 damage per action, that's 5 rounds and quite possibly one entire combat that the wizard will vastly outshine the fighter (in fact, fighter, rogue and ranger together). That's still a ton of nova potential, and I would still assume the Wizard has the ability cast utility spells like Fly, Alter Self, Knock and Rary's Telepathic Bond...

Well, 5d6 Save for 1/2 (17.5 or 8.75) isn't that great compared to 1d12+15 (21.5). If targets save noticeably more often than the Fighter misses, it becomes really questionable who is doing better. The Fighter is winning against the Solo or Elites while the Wizard is winning on the small-fry. Of course, small-fry is often very dangerous if neglected.

Really though, there are two problems. The Nova problem fundamentally is a case of escalation:
DM: whee, weak random encounter
Caster: I've got spare spells, I'll burn one.
DM: hmm, too easy, the next "weak" random encounter will be nastier
Caster: Uh oh, that looks a bit nasty, I'd better burn a few spells
DM: hmm, needs to be stronger yet
Caster: YIKES, BURN IT WITH FIRE!! Oh wait, I spent most of my spells, and I need to cast a LOT every fight. Look guys, we need to rest or we are doomed.
DM: Stupid 5 minute work-day, my plots don't work any more.

Added more spell slots just makes it take longer to get to the final stage. Removing daily spell slots jumps you to the final stage, without the sleeping. All fights are big and choreographed, but no 5 minute work day. However, giving the casters *few* enough powerful spell slots means that the positive feed back never triggers.

In parallel, you have the issue of Novaeing casters potentially outshining non-casters. That can be dealt with by keeping the spell power-levels in line. Say a high level wizard has 1 2-fighter-round-equivalent (FRE) slot, 2 1.5FRE slots, 3 1FRE slots and 4 .5 FRE slots and infinite 0.1FRE slots. Then after 6 rounds he has generated 8 FRE, is at parity after round 10, and falls rapidly behind from there. If Full-Burn encounter last 10 rounds+, the Wizard doesn't dominate. He is, however, really useful by providing an emergency power boost in the crucial early rounds of combat. Of course, measuring a Wall of Force in terms of FRE is, shall we say, tricky, but the point is clear, and the conclusion is all the safer the more the Wizard is pushed away from Nukes and towards temporary battlefield shaping.
 

TO EVERY PLAYER WHO HAS THUS FAR SAID THAT UNLESS THIS '5 MINUTE WORKDAY' ISSUE GETS SOLVED MECHANICALLY BY WOTC, THEY WILL NOT MAKE THE SWITCH TO 5E...

Whatever rules and pacing ideas you instituted in your current D&D edition of choice to combat this same exact problem (which has existed in every edition of D&D up to this point whether you want to admit it or not)...

...use that for 5E.

There ya go. You don't have to "do more work", because you've already done it. Just port it over.
 

At-Will Magic is not a problem. 4E has at-will spells, and the spellcasters aren't overpowered. The at-will spells need to be balanced against other at-will things, like firing a bow.
Reflex Save to negate 1d6+INT fire damage compares reasonably to a bow or sword.

A bow requires arrows. The one benefit of the mundane fighter is the energizer bunny effect. Giving casters at-will magic AND the ability to nova negates that.


I also don't think you absolutely need stuff like casting on the defense / damage having you lose a spell and the action you used to cast it. That's way too costly and too swingy. Spellcasting shouldn't be a constant source of frustration for the spellcaster player either.

Its only frustrating if you see spellcasting as something that has to be done every round in order for the wizard to "feel magical". Knowing when to use magic is part of playing a magic user.



That said, this still doesn't remove all of the entire nova problem. If the spellcaster can cast the equivalent of 5 5d6 fireballs a day at high levels, and the fighter only gets his 1d12+15 damage per action, that's 5 rounds and quite possibly one entire combat that the wizard will vastly outshine the fighter (in fact, fighter, rogue and ranger together). That's still a ton of nova potential, and I would still assume the Wizard has the ability cast utility spells like Fly, Alter Self, Knock and Rary's Telepathic Bond...

At those levels, "going nova" will be a terrible power drain that takes a while to recover. After such a depletion the wizard will be very vulnerable for a nights sleep AND a day or more to prepare new spells. Not something that you would want to do just to easy-mode a typical fight.



Now, if the same level Fighter also has 10 extra actions per day, he may be have similar nova potential as the wizard...

Turning a fighter into a caster has been tried already.


Going by people complaining about the 15 minute workday, the phenomen did exist before 3E inception. What didn't exist was EN World. :p

You may be correct. Surely if the issue is as old as D&D then it would be addressed in Dragon Magazine at some point prior to 3E? Perhaps someone wrote an article to fix the issue or complained about it in the forum column.
 

Remove ads

Top