D&D 5E Interrupting a Long Rest

[iserith]

But why doesn't that securing just end up being tedious bookkeeping? Do you end up just saying "we secure the camp" or are you required to detail the process of securing in order to jump through the DMs hoop satisfactorily?

It's a montage scene where each player describes one thing they do to help secure camp and a DC 15 Wisdom (Survival) group check.

edit: ninja'ed!

 

[Caliban]

I don't see how characters not having to worry about securing camp emphasises the exploration pillar at all?

Where do you get this from? In either interpretation, securing your camp is recommended. If for no other reason than to prevent the entire group from getting automatically surprised and auto-critted while you are asleep. Whether or not the encounter interrupts your long rest is the least of your worries at that point.

In my games, unless you are doing a stealth camp (no campfires, no tents, everyone in a camouflaged sleeping spot, etc.), then securing the camp makes no difference to the chance of a random encounter, but it does mean you have someone on watch to detect the approach of enemies and wake up the rest of the party.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

But why doesn't that securing just end up being tedious bookkeeping? Do you end up just saying "we secure the camp" or are you required to detail the process of securing in order to jump through the DMs hoop satisfactorily?

Here's an example of my players setting up for a rest in one of my campaigns, in the middle of a dungeon even (names are the first names of their characters):

Bruenor: "We should probably take a long rest, I'm running low on spells."
Keyleith: "Me too. Let's head back into that room we were just in that only had one door in or out."
Belgar: "Good plan. I'll jam the door shut with javelins and take the first watch."
DM: [determines whether anything comes along that tries to get into that room, what chance it has to do so if it does try, and how it will respond to the situation at hand]

It's just a thing that flows naturally in their playing of the game, not book keeping, and it doesn't feel like jumping through hoops because neither I nor the rules of the game are prompting them for these behaviors, they are just doing what they imagine adventurers would do.

 

[Caliban]

As a player in one of Iserith's games, we absolutely want to secure camp. Failure to do so means we may have to face one more potentially deadly encounter using our already depleted resources. That's where the tension lies, not in whether we have to tack on an extra hour of rest at the end.

Yeah, but that's kind of irrelevant to the discussion, since that's not how random encounters are handled in the rules. As far as I'm aware, the core rulebooks don't say anything about "PC's have an increased chance for one or more random encounters in one night if they don't secure their camp". That's his house rule.

 

[iserith]

It's just a thing that flows naturally in their playing of the game, not book keeping, and it doesn't feel like jumping through hoops because neither I nor the rules of the game are prompting them for these behaviors, they are just doing what they imagine adventurers would do.

Right. I do prompt for certain things during the "rest phase," such as asking the players if they think any of their character ties were referenced in the previous scenes. So the players discuss it and offer up how they think the characters' relationships came into play. If they do, they earn Inspiration. Then it's just a matter of setting up the watch order, check for random encounters, and if none, gaining the benefits of a rest. So each "rest phase," ends up being a bit of exploration and a bit of social interaction and, sometimes, combat. All three pillars!

 

[Valmarius]

Yeah, but that's kind of irrelevant to the discussion, since that's not how random encounters are handled in the rules. As far as I'm aware, the core rulebooks don't say anything about "PC's have an increased chance for one or more random encounters in one night if they don't secure their camp". That's his house rule.

It's relevant because I was pointing out that iserith's approach doesn't remove tension from the game by allowing the rest to complete.

 

[iserith]

Yeah, but that's kind of irrelevant to the discussion, since that's not how random encounters are handled in the rules. As far as I'm aware, the core rulebooks don't say anything about "PC's have an increased chance for one or more random encounters in one night if they don't secure their camp". That's his house rule.

It's actually that the characters have a normal chance of random encounters per the rules (18+ on a d20), but if they actively work to avoid that and make the appropriate checks (also in the rules), they can mitigate that chance.

But I think this is a tangent anyway based on Yunru's comments about how his or her method involves the exploration pillar. The implication was that if you didn't rule that rest was interrupted by an encounter, then you miss out on that bit. Mine and Valmarius' subsequent posts show that is not true.

 

[robus]

Each PC (four of us) briefly describes what we're doing to help set up camp. It can be as short as, "I set up the tents and get the fire going." or, "I make sure our camp site is tucked away and protected from the elements."
Then we make a group Survival check, if two or more of us pass the random encounter roll is made at disadvantage.

It takes about 5 minutes tops, has some narration from the players, and then gets on with it.

That's cool. And would have been a nice addition to the rule book.

 

[iserith]

That's cool. And would have been a nice addition to the rule book.

The thing is, I might not do it that way in subsequent campaigns. It depends on what kind of play experience I'm trying to evoke. Some other method might be more appropriate. Which is why I have been encouraging folks to look at how they're handling the rules on resting and see if they are doing what you want them to do and not just relying on tradition or whatever. Maybe it's fine or maybe something else will work better. What I see is a lot of people just doing things the way they've always done them without much thought as to whether it actually supports the experience they want.

 

[robus]

The thing is, I might not do it that way in subsequent campaigns. It depends on what kind of play experience I'm trying to evoke. Some other method might be more appropriate. Which is why I have been encouraging folks to look at how they're handling the rules on resting and see if they are doing what you want them to do and not just relying on tradition or whatever. Maybe it's fine or maybe something else will work better. What I see is a lot of people just doing things the way they've always done them without much thought as to whether it actually supports the experience they want.

That's cool but it certainly doesn't apply to me as a newbie my interpretation of the long rest RAW interruption was the same as Yunru's et al. An hour of walking, or any combat, etc. Of course I'm using my alternate travel rules so the players have an adventuring day or two on a long journey instead of dribs and drabs. But this approach seems very good for resting in a dungeon.