D&D 5E Solving the 5MWD

[Garthanos]

It does eventually become a hard limiter on nominally at-will combat abilities, though.

Since it only limits at-will abilities it means they are well restricted from having any peak potency beyond at-will grade unless they also have some other limits ... no climactic awesome for you

 

[Garthanos]

My Dwarf thanks you for his new favourite word.

ax me no more questions leaped to mind for me but I resisted thanks for ruining it.

 

[Maxperson]

My Dwarf thanks you for his new favourite word.

Would it be wrong of me to create a dwarven cleric who runs around axcommunicating the enemy?

 

[Ashrym]

That's kinda the point, really: every class has HD, in exactly the same proportion to their hps. It's not a meaningful distinction among classes that factors into class balance, the way spell slots or rage are.

It does eventually become a hard limiter on nominally at-will combat abilities, though.

My point is that spells wouldn't drive a 5MWD, which is what I was getting from your comments. Hit point recovery from natural healing is so strong by default that it would drive the same concept.

That's the theory behind 6-8, rather than exactly 7, perhaps. Or if it's meant to be an average among greater extremes, we're to contrive an 11-15 encounter day for each 5MWD? Will everyone's HD keep them going that long?

More like 4-10, 6-12, 8-14+; generally higher levels can handle longer days for those daily resources. It's never contrived, however; contrivance is circumstances allowing for the 5MWD that have removed the sense of urgency. The encounters follow a natural break in activity as narrated through the plot.

Any yes, hit dice will keep them going a long time. There's a lot of healing in the hit dice and more available in various short rest mechanics.

Except 'resting' isn't metagame, at all - In fact a leading criticism of the 13A (partial) fix (and thus FrogReaver's more nuanced one) is that it /is/ metagame.

Resting isn't. Choosing to rest prematurely by players to leverage the game mechanics associated with resting is.

Resting itself is part of the sleep cycle and expanded on in XGtE. Normal non-meta would be making camp as nightfall approaches and characters thinking "this is going to be a long day" when infiltrating the enemy stronghold the next morning. No one thinks "I can make this a short day by using all my best resources because I can just ignore the rest of the day and rest 20 hours, and ignoring that time will have no negative impact because of my choices".

Resting to recharge is obviously a player meta-game strategy as opposed to roleplaying. You've tried to rationalize it, but in the end we've got characters who are clearly aware bad things can happen while they wait and know they have hours of time to prevent it; but choose not to conserve resources because the players are relying on the long rest game mechanic for the 5MWD premise.

Trying that still results in the short rest mechanic hitting long before the long rest would and enables further adventuring.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Resting isn't. Choosing to rest prematurely by players to leverage the game mechanics associated with resting is.

I guess that depends on how you narrate resources that recover. If casters wonder why they can't cast their best spell a 3rd time that day, and have no idea that a long nap will recharge that ability, sure, it's meta-game. If hit points represent ineffable luck & divine favor &c that the characters can't have an awareness of, then 'healing' of any sort is metagame when applied to anyone that hasn't dropped (or at least gotten past 1/2 max hps).

It's never contrived, however; contrivance is circumstances allowing for the 5MWD that have removed the sense of urgency. The encounters follow a natural break in activity as narrated through the plot.

And, if that natural break occurs after one encounter, you've got a 'natural' 5MWD. If you make sure the breaks map to the day-length the game is more functional/balanced at, then that's contrivance.

Ultimately, the 5MWD isn't a problem because it happens, or because it happens for a certain reason one disapproves of, but because, when it does happen, it distorts class & encounter balance.

 

[Ashrym]

I guess that depends on how you narrate resources that recover. If casters wonder why they can't cast their best spell a 3rd time that day, and have no idea that a long nap will recharge that ability, sure, it's meta-game. If hit points represent ineffable luck & divine favor &c that the characters can't have an awareness of, then 'healing' of any sort is metagame when applied to anyone that hasn't dropped (or at least gotten past 1/2 max hps).

There's no wondering. Those spell casters have gone through training learning about rituals and magic, and have learned over long periods of time that they need to be properly rested to prepare for the day. They know what they have prepared and they know how long a day is, and they understand they will need to be well rested again.

As for hit points, they represent and abstract concept covering many things, including stamina and healing. Everyone knows they feel refreshed after resting.

What your doing is rationalizing the argument to match the behavior, but the behavior is based on the premise that they can simply take the time in spite of the world. That's not reasonable behavior and requires the DM to manage the world to allow it to happen instead of managing the world to match a more reasonable time flow.

Resting is downtime and actions (or lack of) in that downtime. DM's determine downtime and DM's determine the results of actions. The DM empowerment model prevents players from leveraging rests, which is ultimately what's being argued here.

And, if that natural break occurs after one encounter, you've got a 'natural' 5MWD. If you make sure the breaks map to the day-length the game is more functional/balanced at, then that's contrivance.

Why would you arbitrarily decide that natural break takes place after one encounter? Stopping gameplay for downtime because that can allow a 5MWD is contrivance. As a DM I can put that natural break in after one encounter but I'm going to put that break in where it seems the most appropriate.

Ultimately, the 5MWD isn't a problem because it happens, or because it happens for a certain reason one disapproves of, but because, when it does happen, it distorts class & encounter balance.

I agree it can distort class balance. Where I disagree is in managing the rests themselves. I said earlier that the only thing a person needs to do is make sure the DM is controlling the rests. That's all it takes. How well the DM can do that improves with experience and the amount of effort the DM puts into setting up beforehand.

 

[Tony Vargas]

the behavior is based on the premise that they can simply take the time in spite of the world.

I'm not sure where that's coming from. Are you thinking that the issue is only if /every/ day is a 5MWD?

Why would you arbitrarily decide that natural break takes place after one encounter?

If there's no metagaming going on, why wouldn't you? Longer journeys the classic example. The party travels from A to B through dangerous points in-between. If the journey takes days, does it really make sense for any dangers involved to number 6-8 and be clustered in one day of the journey?
I mean, you could contrive to make it make sense, of course.

I agree it can distort class balance. Where I disagree is in managing the rests themselves. I said earlier that the only thing a person needs to do is make sure the DM is controlling the rests. That's all it takes.

And that's DM "contrivance."

And the 5MWD does also distort encounter balance - that's easier to deal with, you can just dial up encounters, but you do need to realize you'll need to do so, and get a feel for just how much, as the extant guidelines stop being useful. More a challenge than a problem, and probably second nature if you've run D&D (any edition at all, really) for a meaningful length of time.

 

[Lanefan]

And the 5MWD does also distort encounter balance - that's easier to deal with, you can just dial up encounters, but you do need to realize you'll need to do so, and get a feel for just how much, as the extant guidelines stop being useful. More a challenge than a problem, and probably second nature if you've run D&D (any edition at all, really) for a meaningful length of time.

Were I to find myself training up a new DM, somehting I'd advise would be to ignore and chuck out any sort of baked-in encounter guidelines, and to instead learn by trial and error what your particular party can handle and what it can't. Sure you might crush a few parties during that learning process, but as long as they have an option to run away it's on them if they don't.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Were I to find myself training up a new DM, somehting I'd advise would be to ignore and chuck out any sort of baked-in encounter guidelines, and to instead learn by trial and error what your particular party can handle and what it can't. Sure you might crush a few parties during that learning process, but as long as they have an option to run away it's on them if they don't.

I mean, that was solid advice in the 20th century, when there /weren't/ any such guidelines. And it's not bad advice now, since the 5e guidelines are a little unwieldy to begin with. But it is kinda just giv'n up, in a way, and it could very easily end up with a campaign pacing that, yeah, that party can handle, and handle well, but which does also leave you with distorted class balance. In turn, of course, players can adapt, too, and stop playing classes that don't work well at that pacing....which then moves your target for 'what the party can handle...' and so it goes...

One good reason never to change editions. Once you /do/ have that kind of hard-won tribal knowledge, don't give it up!

 

[Lanefan]

I mean, that was solid advice in the 20th century ...

I well remember my DM in a long-running 3e game at the time swearing a blue streak sometimes at 3e's encounter guidelines, largely because of a combination of two factors:

1 - he'd done some significant rules kitbashing that, after about 2nd level, threw things out of whack a bit
2 - he's a stubborn sort, and if those guidelines were in there then dammit, he was gonna use 'em.

He later figured out roughly what effects his rules tweaks had produced, and was able (with effort) to bend the encounter guidelines to suit. But it would probably have been far easier on him if he'd just let them go completely and done a little trial-and-error on us.

when there /weren't/ any such guidelines. And it's not bad advice now, since the 5e guidelines are a little unwieldy to begin with. But it is kinda just giv'n up, in a way, and it could very easily end up with a campaign pacing that, yeah, that party can handle, and handle well, but which does also leave you with distorted class balance. In turn, of course, players can adapt, too, and stop playing classes that don't work well at that pacing....which then moves your target for 'what the party can handle...' and so it goes...

Were I training said DM up to run 5e I'd also advise of said issues; and go on to advise that when she felt confident enough she should toss the rest-and-recovery RAW in a lake somewhere and design her own version from scratch*.

* - or dig around in this forum, every now and then someone floats a solid-seeming idea on this topic.