D&D 5E Allow the Long Rest Recharge to Honor Skilled Play or Disallow it to Ensure a Memorable Story

[Maxperson]

The only thing specific to D&D in there is dice, rules, minis, dungeons, fighting goblins.

Erm, none of that is specific to D&D. Plenty of other game out there with dice, rules, minis, dungeons and goblins.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Ok fair enough. Leaving my definition of conflict aside and assuming for the sake of argument there IS one - the moment you set a priority, you moot the conflict.

Circling back to the game, the question isn’t what or which you prioritize - it’s when and how. IMO, you establish a set of behaviors and values for yourself as a GM early, early on. And agree to a set of norms with your group when you assemble. that is to say, First your order your priorities. And the reason you do that first is so that when the situation arises in game where you have a conflict between whether to rest up or take the BBEG Now, that conflict is moot because you’ve already decided how you’ll handle that sort of thing.

Again, all you’re doing is affirming that folks can have different priorities, which is the premise of the thread.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Why? Why can't I just increase my speed a bit more than I was doing and make it to work on time anyway? I've worked in jobs where I've had to prioritize multiple time sensitive projects and have completed them all. Prioritizing two things doesn't mean that you have a dichotomy where if one succeeds, the other must fail.

Not always, no. Sometimes it does indeed all work out in the end. But part of prioritizing is saying “this thing is more important and so I will focus on that first”.

I’m sure there were also times in your life where you had to prioritize and then didn’t get everything done, right?

 

[Maxperson]

Right. Monopoly clearly isn't about fun and this is demonstrated every time I play it with my family.

As much as I feel you right now, even Monopoly is about fun. When I was a kid, I loved Monopoly. As I got older and realized certain things about the game, I stopped enjoying it. When my son is old enough to play it, he will have fun with it as well and I will suffer through something akin to having all my teeth pulled with no anesthetic. It's about fun for a certain age group.

To address @Bawylie's point about some games being about skill, competition and/or work, those are personal reasons. The games were designed for fun and enjoyment. Some people want to be the best and compete and let that ruin their fun. That's on them. Same with turning games into work to try and make money with them. Some can do that and still have their fun. Others can't. Whether they can or can't doesn't change that the games all have as one of their goals, fun.

 

[Maxperson]

Not always, no. Sometimes it does indeed all work out in the end. But part of prioritizing is saying “this thing is more important and so I will focus on that first”.

I’m sure there were also times in your life where you had to prioritize and then didn’t get everything done, right?

Of course, but those times are far fewer than succeeding at them all. Usually the things that end up down in priority are those for which you have more time to complete them. Failing to succeed at both is more of an exception, than the rule.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Ah, I've been blocked by @iserith. I mean, a long and friendly posting history ended over this? So strange. Someone please do let me know if he does find where "story" is defined in the 5e rules the way he uses it, though. I'm genuinely curious on that account.

 

[hawkeyefan]

The story is about their goals. If they change their goals, then they change what the story is about. If they set as their goals, "Eliminate Stahd's assets, then eliminate Strahd," the story that emerges from play will be about that. If that means the story ends with a curbstomp, that's fine.

That’s a weird way to phrase that, no? Isn’t the story “the heroes seek to destroy the vampire Strahd”? The how of it is up them of course, but I don’t think that changes their ultimate goal.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Of course, but those times are far fewer than succeeding at them all. Usually the things that end up down in priority are those for which you have more time to complete them. Failing to succeed at both is more of an exception, than the rule.

But just that it can happen is the point. I don’t think anyone’s saying that you can’t have different priorities at different times, or that skilled play and memorable story MUST be at odds. Just that they can.

When they are, which do you prioritize? That’s the question.

It’s amazing to me how folks who are challenging the essential point of the thread are displaying how true it is.

 

[Maxperson]

But just that it can happen is the point. I don’t think anyone’s saying that you can’t have different priorities at different times, or that skilled play and memorable story MUST be at odds. Just that they can.

When they are, which do you prioritize? That’s the question.

It’s amazing to me how folks who are challenging the essential point of the thread are displaying how true it is.

For me they never are, at least not as the OP wrote it.

"1) Rulings Not Rules (not just action resolution mediation...this also includes following rules/ignoring rules/changing rules in the pursuit of a memorable story and a fun time) + GM as Lead Storyteller (a Role and the mandate afforded that role to ensure a memorable is told at the table and people have "fun.")"

I don't ignore or change rules in pursuit of story. I will change or ignore rules when they don't make sense for a situation. And when I don't like the rules. And to me, Rulings over Rules is primarily for adjudicating all the holes and vagueness written into 5e. They've created a system where you have to engage in rulings, rather than writing rules for those situations.

I never experience a conflict between the two, let alone a situation where I have to prioritize one where the other would fail.

 

[Argyle King]

This is still attempting to pull back from the actual recharge to a gamestate prior where its "up for grabs" if they've reaped the gamestate sufficient to get a Long Rest recharge. Don't do that.

Do this for me. Fast forward. Fast forward beyond the "attempt" gamestate. In whatever way they should have arrayed all the elements of the fiction such that the gamestate should now be LONG REST RECHARGE ACTIVATED, get there mentally. They've built their PCs skillfully so they have the relevant tools, played the fiction skillfully, made the appropriate action declarations, resolved those action declarations with sufficient rolls to overcome the obstacles that would stand in their way to prevent the Long Rest recharge.

Do you allow the Long Rest recharge if the metaconsequnces are damaging to "memorable/climactic story imperative" (meaning the subsequent fiction/play is negatively impacted because of the recharge)?

Can you explain how allowing the rest ruins the story?

I'm not sure that I fully understand the choices as presented.