D&D 5E DMG excerpt: Carousing!

[I'm A Banana]

Because the rule is insane as listed and requires extra bookkeeping of "original days" and "extra days" How incredibly incompetent do your workers have to be to actively set back the construction time of something? "I'm leaving for a day. Don't touch anything! When I come back, we'll only have two days of work whereas if you idiots do anything I'll have four".

It's so crazy, I'm not certain it's RAI even if it's RAW.

It makes more sense if you imagine the actual project taking 3x the time, and the presence of the PC just speeds things up by that much.

Like, a 60 day project is what it is from the PC's perspective. From the perspective of the rest of the world, it's a 180 day project that the PC can manage to get done in 60 days.

Because this is 2014 and our idea of heroism now extends to management principles like efficiency. "I will heroically lead this team to beat our bottom line projections! I took the Agile Development feat and multiclassed into Scrumlord for the +2 to Effectiveness from Standing Meetings feature."

Papers & Paychecks, you're getting closer every day.

 

[designbot]

Yes, the RAW are very confusing. However, it's completely understandable and manageable if you rephrase it as:

Work can continue while the character is away, but construction will progress 1/4 as quickly while the character is away.

 

[steeldragons]

Lotta people here never actually worked with contractors building something from scratch, have they.

The rule makes perfect sense.

 

[gribble]

It can get a little weird based on how you interpret it. Let's say you're a PC who is having a 60 day structure built but are gone during those first 60 days. When you get back you find it will now take 60*3=180 more days to finish. But your being there now does nothing to speed up the work...

I'd probably rule that they burn the "extra days" first, before continuing with the "original days". I.e.: in this scenario, the builders get through 15 "original days" and 45 "extra days" in your absence. This leaves 45 "original days" remaining when you return, not 180 "extra days".

That being said, there are some weird corner cases (such as when there are 2 days remaining, and you're away for only one of them), and the bookkeeping seems like a bit of a mess. Seems like they aimed for simplicity, but oversimplified things and ended up making it more complex!

I agree with other posters that it would have been more straightforward to just multiply all the times by 4, and then say that with a PC (or a suitable hireling) in charge the workers can build 4 days worth of construction in a single day. That way there could even be different rates (2 days in a single day for a hireling, maybe 6 or 8 days for a wizard or suitable magic item, etc).

 

[Mirtek]

I'd probably rule that they burn the "extra days" first, before continuing with the "original days". I.e.: in this scenario, the builders get through 15 "original days" and 45 "extra days" in your absence. This leaves 45 "original days" remaining when you return, not 180 "extra days".

Doesn't matter which they use up first, as the extra days are added three times as fast as they are used up. It's 180 days no matter whether it's 0 o-days and 180 extra days or 60 o-days and 120 extra days.

180 extra days are added in the same time as 60 days, whether orginal or extra, are completed.

 

[gribble]

Doesn't matter which they use up first, as the extra days are added three times as fast as they are used up. It's 180 days no matter whether it's 0 o-days and 180 extra days or 60 o-days and 120 extra days.

That... makes no sense. You are away for the first 60 days of construction. It's pretty clear to me that the intent of the rule is that the first day, the workers complete 1 "original day". The second, third and fourth days, they complete the 3 "extra days" for you being away, the fifth day, they complete a second "original day", the sixth, seventh and eighth days they complete the 3 "extra days" for the second original day... and so on and so forth.

It's pretty clear that by the time you return on the 61st day, that the workers have completed 15 "original days" and 45 "extra days", hence they only have the remaining 45 "original days" left to complete construction - not 120 "extra days". So you're definitely not better off starting over rather than continuing with construction.

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

Man, some folks on this thread could more constructively spend their time carousing than in trying to nitpick rules language.

New downtime activity: NITPICKING RULES LANGUAGE

d100
01-02 Your PC manages to have no discernible effect on anyone's behavior.
03-00 Your PC is found bludgeoned to a pulp in an alley. Despite dozens of witnesses, no one can identify the perpetrator.

 

[MonkeezOnFire]

I agree with other posters that it would have been more straightforward to just multiply all the times by 4, and then say that with a PC (or a suitable hireling) in charge the workers can build 4 days worth of construction in a single day. That way there could even be different rates (2 days in a single day for a hireling, maybe 6 or 8 days for a wizard or suitable magic item, etc).

I feel like it was worded this way because the assumption is that the PC is available since this is the downtime section of the book. Construction is something you do when you have nothing else going on. The PC not being there is supposed to be the edge case which the rule covers.

 

[steeldragons]

I think it was worded this way on purpose. The designers of 5e precisely knowing they would elicit threads like this all over the interwebs.

Guard your skulls. The mind flayers are on the move!!!

 

[gribble]

I feel like it was worded this way because the assumption is that the PC is available since this is the downtime section of the book. Construction is something you do when you have nothing else going on. The PC not being there is supposed to be the edge case which the rule covers.

I can understand that approach but I think the alternative is a lot clearer, less ambiguous, opens itself up more for further customisation, and just as simple.