D&D 5E Resting and the frikkin' Elephant in the Room

[Tony Vargas]

To me the elephant is the clear absurdity between balancing everything on 6-8 encounters then completely ignoring it in published materials.

Balance is just not assumed as the default, is all. The 6-8 encounter guideline is there if you want to add some systematic balance, like putting an aftermarket spoiler on your ford escort, but it's not standard equipment with every AP.

That might not matter to you roleplayers but for us miniature/combat enthusiasts (remember, D&D historically has been as much a miniatures game as an RPG) its the whole frickin ball game

Y'know, it's funny, they bring out 5e in response to complaints that D&D was a tactical board game, and now we get complaints that it's not. I've also apparently crossed the roll/role divide, again...

Encounter-long rest-encounter-long rest destroys any meaningful choices in the game that are combat or stat based - unless you double to triple the XP budget of encounters, but then again if you are in the sandbox you wont KNOW how many encounters they had/will have.

Sure, so detailed prep is less useful, there's something to be said for running by the seat of your pants.

 

[shoak1]

When they're out in the open country they can rest, more or less no matter what you do. I was referring to when they're deep into a dungeon somewhere (even the sandboxiest sandboxers do some dungeon crawling sometime), that's when you can pull the no-rest triggers.

That said, there's other forms of resource management. If they're lost at sea and running out of food and water, for instance - or crew, as the madness takes them one by one. If they're beseiged in a fortress somewhere with dwindling ammo (and, oddly enough, unable to rest properly as there's not enough people left to allow anyone to sleep). If they've somehow gone off-plane to a place without divine contact (thus no spell recovery for divine casters), or have wound up on a non-magical world (thus no spells or devices for anyone). And so forth.

Lan-"then again, you've always got the option of just houseruling at campaign start that resting doesn't do as much as RAW says it does, and going from there"-efan

I hear what you are saying but that also is my exact point - in a sandbox when they are in the open, how do you balance the game RAW? Sure the PCs have freedom to go wherever they want, but there is no challenge or balance sooooo.....

 

[shoak1]

I add monsters and subtract monsters all the time as the situation demands.

I understand your point of view but some of us want to play D and D as a game with rules and limits, and not have to have a DM willy nilly adding and subtracting monsters as he sees fit as we go. Its kind of like a DM deciding whats behind a door after we open it....what was the point of making the decision which door to open in the first place? Just so I can have the illusion I had "agency?" The DM made an NPC that he really likes, so wherever we go we're gonna find him, just in different clothes?

The inability to realistically compel resource management is to me just one of many reasons why sandbox just doesn't cut it as a serious game. Certainly I can see it as being potentially entertaining, but as a compelling, fair, and challenging game/puzzle/competition? nah

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I just don't think about it at all, and the game works fine.

The game is theoretically balanced around 6 encounters a day or whatever, but it literally works fine with any number from 1 to about 6-7, maybe 8. It doesn't work the same, necessarily, but it works fine. It's a pretty robust game.

Some days we have one big fight and a couple social encounters, sometimes it's a whole session without any "real" fights, sometimes it's 4-6 hours of battle, battle, battle.

Regardless, no one is broken, fights aren't trivial or complete pushovers, ect.

 

[shoak1]

Balance is just not assumed as the default, is all.

Wow - just - wow...So then why have all the other rules? What does it matter if a caster has 2 spells or 50? Why track hp? Why have a game at all? Why not just sit around a campfire and tell stories?

Its kinda like saying mobility is not the default for an automobile lol....I guess you could park one in front of the house for its scenic value, but it seems like there would be a lot better and cheaper options

Y'know, it's funny, they bring out 5e in response to complaints that D&D was a tactical board game, and now we get complaints that it's not.

See I DON'T think its "funny" - I would call it extreme tragic short-sighted reactionism actually

 

[hawkeyefan]

To me the elephant is the clear absurdity between balancing everything on 6-8 encounters then completely ignoring it in published materials. IT DESTROYS game balance and trivializes the tactical challenge. That might not matter to you roleplayers but for us miniature/combat enthusiasts (remember, D&D historically has been as much a miniatures game as an RPG) its the whole frickin ball game. I could give a rats behind about the background of the innkeeper but I DO want challenging combat encounters.

Encounter-long rest-encounter-long rest destroys any meaningful choices in the game that are combat or stat based - unless you double to triple the XP budget of encounters, but then again if you are in the sandbox you wont KNOW how many encounters they had/will have. Sure, you can still use funny voices, have interesting conversations with the barkeep, explore strange new worlds, etc. but there is no GAME left.

The ELEPHANT is WoC not even trying in their published materials to create a structure that limits access to such rests.

I don't think it's accurate to say the published materials don't stick to the 6 encounter day guideline. There are some sections within most of the adventures that have fewer, but more often than not, adventure areas seem designed with the expectation of multiple encounters.

I don't think that "Encounter-long rest-encounter-long rest" is the expectation at all. Will there be an occasional day where there is only one encounter? Sure. But it should not be presented as the norm.

And they do indeed provide the structure that limits such rests...theyare limited to one a day, and also require other elements such as safety and shelter and the like. It is up to the DM to determine if all these elements are present and if a rest is possible.

So I'm not sure where your assessment is coming from. It seems more about your bias of linear game over sandbox game, or tactical minis ovsr roleplay....but it doesn't actually seem to be based on what's in the books.

 

[CapnZapp]

I took the red pill on this one, and by going down this rabbit hole, as you are clearly doing, you'll eventually learn: "There is no spoon" and "you must unlearn what you have learned".

I am not really sure why attrition is even a thing. You don't need to do a lot of hard work. Just ignore it. Its not a thing. There is no attr



I let the players take them when they want. Murder the kings guards and take a short rest in the hall outside his bedchambers? Sure. There is a 20% chance every 10 minutes someone comes by. Oh? changed your mind. That's fine too. USe rope trick/magnificent mansion? Great thinking! here's a cookie.

Seriously. Just let it ride man, do what seems marginally feasible for the situation. Sometimes they get to face a fight at full strength, once per day every day, and face roll everything. Sometimes its a slog to merely survive the "dungeon" (castle, city block, etc) as waves of annoying mooks make what was a supposed to be a single encounter into one massive running fight (Hey, just because the DM asks, "does anyone strike the gong?" doesn't mean that you should!).

I add monsters and subtract monsters all the time as the situation demands. I don't do any hard work. I have job, thank you very much, and DMing is not it. Its easy for me to add monsters (the far door opens and a group of cultists rush in!) or subtract (With have of their number down, the cultists try to flee).

Attrition is great for an Avalon Hill Napoleonic Wargame. My 2cp, chasing attrition balance in D&D turn the game into EVE online: A Spreadsheet Simulator.

Sure. And thanks for the essay.

I'll just note that at no point during your text do you even approach the question here:

Why can't there be optional variants in the DMG for people that play differently from you?

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

 

[Lanefan]

I hear what you are saying but that also is my exact point - in a sandbox when they are in the open, how do you balance the game RAW? Sure the PCs have freedom to go wherever they want, but there is no challenge or balance sooooo.....

In a true sandbox you don't bother with that sort of balance. It's all somewhat random anyway...they might meet something in the hills that's an absolute pushover, then they rest, then in the next valley meet something that pushes them to the limit, then they rest, and in the valley after that meet something that pushes them over, and then they're too dead to rest.

Lan-"one of the following does not enable you to recover any spells or abilities: a) short rest b) long rest c) rest in peace"-efan

 

[Sadras]

I'll just note that at no point during your text do you even approach the question here:

Why can't there be optional variants in the DMG for people that play differently from you?

I think to be fair Cap, they cannot cater for every variant and they haven't as yet released any splat books really, certainly not for the DM to run the specific gamestyle each and every DM desires. People wanted the silver standard, did they get it? No. People wanted DP for armour, did they get it? Besides a solitary feat, No.

We have to be realistic.
I believe the 6-8 encounter is a margin/guideline, otherwise they would have converted all the short rest powers to long rest powers if it was the standard.

EDIT: And I'm one of those who actually changed the Rest period to suit my playstyle. Thankfully the 5e chassis is malleable enough. I see the DMG as not the book for all variants, but a book providing examples to DMs for how the system may be manipulated.

 

[CapnZapp]

I think to be fair Cap, they cannot cater for every variant

but it isn't a variant!

This whole thread isn't so much about what specific variants we can use, as it is about how WotC is getting to keep the cake and eat it too.

On one hand they care about balance and build their game on the presumption that any single encounter isn't supposed to be overly challenging, instead having a string of encounters tax your resources...

...on the other hand, they do absolutely nothing to ensure that this actually happens, dumping the entire responsibility in the lap of the DM, silently hoping she invents story after story where the heroes just so happens to be in a diffuse time crunch. And there was absolutely no effort in reining down spells like Leomund's Tiny Hut.

It just doesn't add up. They are getting away with not even having to acknowledge this is a real issue!

And so people needs to be told about it, so more people start to question this, so we eventually get to see real change here! If it can be the default of 13th Age it can certainly be a DMG optional variant here!

Also, don't forget this wasn't a thing back in d20, because there was no short-long rest dichotomy.