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

[hawkeyefan]

If the story is "The heroes seek to destroy Strahd," a curbstomp seems like that.

Yeah of course. So does a brutal fight that taxes the participants.

 

[prabe]

Yeah of course. So does a brutal fight that taxes the participants.

Oh, definitely. But if the players play the game such that they get the curbstomp, because they want to curbstomp Strahd, then they've made the story about curbstomping Strahd. If they play the game so they get a brutal, taxing fight with Strahd, they've made the story about that.

 

[Fenris-77]

I'll admit, I don't see why those two ideas are mutually exclusive. Maybe I'm thinking of it too much as a binary solution...

 

[hawkeyefan]

Oh, definitely. But if the players play the game such that they get the curbstomp, because they want to curbstomp Strahd, then they've made the story about curbstomping Strahd. If they play the game so they get a brutal, taxing fight with Strahd, they've made the story about that.

I think there’s some truth to this, yeah. But I don’t know if that’s all there is to it.

Now, I know Curse of Strahd is a published adventure, but I think it’s largely in line with the kind of prep many DMs may perform. It’s loose enough that Strahd can marshal aid of several different kinds. Even if the PCs may eliminate some of those points of aid.

The GM can bring all kinds of stuff to that last battle. And why wouldn’t they?

So let’s say the situation is one of the PCs getting the Sunsword (it’s a powerful weapon that really messes vampires up) and having won it through a hard battle (it can be in one of several locations in the game), their decision is to either press on to the castle to try and catch Strahd before he knows they have the sword, or rest and recover their spells and HP and so on, and then attack after resting.

So they can attack now but at less than full strength, but Strahd likely won’t be as prepared. Or they can wait and attack at full strength, but Strahd will have time to prepare for them.

That seems a perfectly plausible decision point for the players, and each option seems legit as far as fidelity to the fiction goes. Would you agree?

If so, how would you say skilled play is a factor here?

If not, why not?

 

[Bawylie]

You keep making this observation, but you're not backing it up except to say you can do it. I don't see how. Please elucidate. How can I both want my play to be the determiner in how a scenario plays out AND want the GM to manage that scenario so that it has proper pacing and challenge? I mean, the former says it's about my play while the latter says it's about the GM modifying things regardless of my play, right? These things are in contention.

Now, what I think you might be going for is that this contention might be balanced for a given table -- that there's an amount of "my play determines things" that's sufficient and also an amount of "the GM will manage play to produce proper pacing, challenge, and climatic excitement." Sure, but you're not mixing these but balancing them -- you can't be doing one while you're doing the other, it's either/or. I've already said this can be done, pointing to WotC APs, which have interesting swap points between modes of play in them. Take Curse of Strahd, as I believe that's already been used in this thread. Curse has a huge amount of pacing balancing going on alongside challenge balancing. If you run this as presented, players will wander in certain parts of the sandbox until they're tough enough to start wandering other parts at which time they'll be pointed there. Yet, there's no real way to determine what area you're in using skilled play -- scouting doesn't really work and divinations are off the table and NPCs are unreliable sources of information. You're really relying on the GM to point you in the right direction. But, once you've arrived at a location of interest, the game swaps back to semi-skilled play imperatives -- maps are provided and well keyed with information. DCs are set. Bits of interest are set. The players can absolutely engage in these areas with skilled play. And then it's back to story management.

The final fight with Strahd is mostly story management, though -- the circumstances of the final showdown will largely be up to the GM and not what the players have accomplished.

So, yeah, sure, you can mix and match, and even come up with something that works and is coherent, but it's by swapping, not by merging the two approaches.

IDK how to multi-quote so bear with me.

It is definitely possible to want more than one thing at the same time. We do that every day. Sometimes, we can’t have more than one thing at a time - when those things draw from the same resource pool (considering costs and opportunity costs).

If I have $4000 and it costs $3000 to fix my car and $2500 to buy a new refrigerator, I can’t have both a fixed car and a new refrigerator because my resources are finite and these costs draw from the same resource pool (my $4000).

In the case of RPGs, we have two resource pools only - time and imagination. Our only limits on content are what we can imagine and what we can fit into a session. We can have anything we want, time permitting. Effective time management can provide the lion’s share of curated story concerns (particularly tension, rising action, climax, overall pacing, etc). Imagination largely handles the relative difficulty and content of the “story.”

You want skilled play to determine how a scenario plays out. Are you saying that it must be the SOLE determiner of what plays out? Because it isn’t and can’t be - because skilled play doesn’t happen in a vacuum. After every player action, declaration, or move, the GM narrates how the world changes in response to that action and what reactions happen. Everything from damage taken to reputations shifting to cosmological realignment. And within that GM realm of every possible imaginable realignment, there can be at least ONE such idea that accounts both for skilled play and good story simultaneously.

They’re already often thinking “how much time left before we call it a night? When was the last time Alice had the spotlight? Can I have another beer before I have to drive or should I switch to a coffee now?” They can think of an idea that fully accounts for skilled play and satisfactory drama.

You want the GM to manage the scenario so that they manage the proper pacing and challenge. Are you saying the GM must be the SOLE manager of those concerns? Because they’re not and they can’t be. Pacing and challenge don’t happen in a vacuum. The players get turns. They come up with an idea each compared to the DM’s one. 3 to 5 ideas for each of the GM’s. And they often have ideas or notions that take them far afield of where a strictly managed story would have lead. And within the realm of players’ ideas, wild spells, and so-crazy-it-just-might-work gambles, there might be at least ONE that makes its own wild story resulting in compelling pacing and challenge.

And the fact is, we do this routine every game session. Sometimes every minute. The only way these things can be inherently mutually exclusive is within the theoretical vacuum game where they are the sole concern. So yeah, sure, maybe Curse of Strahd didn’t do it well and maybe you haven’t seen it done well, or can’t imagine it done well. But that doesn’t make it inherently impossible to account for two priorities- especially considering we’re usually accounting for far more than 2 anyway.

—-edit
While I’m on imagination solving “inherently contradictory” desires:

I want cake and I want ice cream - impossible! Until…ice cream cake.
I want to talk to someone over there without actually being over there - impossible! Until… telephone.
I want to surf but I don’t want to go in the water - impossible! Until… skateboard.
I want to cross this body of water but no way am I going to row - Impossible! Until… sailboat.
I want a jacket but I want it made of blanket - Impossible! until… snuggies.
I want to memorialize this moment forever without painting it - Impossible! Until… camera.
I want bread but made out of fruit- impossible! Until… banana bread. (Actually this is only here because I’m eating it now).
I want to have fun watching a game of cricket - Impossible! Until… baseball.

 

[prabe]

I think there’s some truth to this, yeah. But I don’t know if that’s all there is to it.

Now, I know Curse of Strahd is a published adventure, but I think it’s largely in line with the kind of prep many DMs may perform. It’s loose enough that Strahd can marshal aid of several different kinds. Even if the PCs may eliminate some of those points of aid.

The GM can bring all kinds of stuff to that last battle. And why wouldn’t they?

The answer to why they wouldn't is--as you say below--fidelity to the fiction. If the PCs can somehow put the DM in the position of defining Strahd's assets, they can eliminate them or otherwise deny him access to them. Or, if having Strahd use assets now, makes him look like an idiot earlier.

So let’s say the situation is one of the PCs getting the Sunsword (it’s a powerful weapon that really messes vampires up) and having won it through a hard battle (it can be in one of several locations in the game), their decision is to either press on to the castle to try and catch Strahd before he knows they have the sword, or rest and recover their spells and HP and so on, and then attack after resting.

So they can attack now but at less than full strength, but Strahd likely won’t be as prepared. Or they can wait and attack at full strength, but Strahd will have time to prepare for them.

That seems a perfectly plausible decision point for the players, and each option seems legit as far as fidelity to the fiction goes. Would you agree?

It seems plausible, yes.

If so, how would you say skilled play is a factor here?

I suppose it could be, if the players had any specific information to base the decision on. If they knew Strahd would prepare given time, or if they knew he was too powerful for them to take on at anything other than full strength. It also might depend on what is meant by "prepare." If it meant "call in allies or reinforcements," it might make sense to go after the allies or reinforcements.

If not, why not?

If there's nothing to base the decision on, there's no real skill in making it. Like, if the information one needs decide intelligently isn't available, there's no real skill in making the decision.

 

[clearstream]

Oh I agree completely, but skilled play in 5E probably isn't, as resource management is mostly out the window, or at least a solid chunk of it. I was just indexing the bit I thought was more relevant. If I want to emphasize resource management 5E is not the system I'd pick.

I've read the discussion from @Ovinomancer and you about 5e vs SP with interest. It doesn't really chime with my experience. I have played and DM'd all versions of D&D from Basic onward. I find 5e as concrete as any other version.

For example, resources - spell slots, concentration, ki, superiority dice, Hit Dice, inspiration, channeling, encumbrance, equipment lists, various class-specific pools, exhaustion, and a few recovery mechanisms. I have not found resource management to be "out the window" in 5e so there is a dissonance for me when reading that.

Similarly, the rules for 5e are tightly knit and concrete. It is a complete game system: there is little that cannot be managed with the help of one or other mechanic. If time permits, perhaps you could point to some B/X rules that can cast this "looseness" of 5e rules into the light?

 

[clearstream]

If there's nothing to base the decision on, there's no real skill in making it. Like, if the information one needs decide intelligently isn't available, there's no real skill in making the decision.

I like this summary. From my reading of posters' presentations of SP, it most relies on there being something consistent there to base the decision on. The easiest (and classic) case is the drawn map. The DM has an artifact that captures their pre-planning. For decades however, D&D designers have offered advice about pre-planning worlds and NPCs, beyond the drawn map. The blue Villains book would be an example.

Were a DM making everything up inconsistently on the fly, they might adhere to authorial concerns... although it might be shoddy, under the veneer of their story-telling artistry. Where a DM has consistent and discoverable principles - known means and motives for their NPCs and so on - then they don't experience conflict between SP and authorial concerns.

In 5e I've run OOTA and am running ToA. Both have fine detail on terrain, fair detail on NPC means, and poor detail on NPC motives.

Spoiler: Mild ToA spoiler

The deal between Ras N'si and Acererak is a good example. Ras N'si has promised Acererak that he will defend the Tomb of Nine Gods in exchange for the lich's help finding a way to summon Dendar, the Night Serpent, to end the world. On Acererak's side, this is weirdly in conflict with Acererak's fundamental motive that he - "takes sick pleasure in devouring the souls of adventurers, whom he lures into trap-ridden dungeons where they suffer horrible deaths". A more serviceable motive might be that Ras N'si ushers high-level adventurer's into the Tomb - much to the advantage of both! Ras N'si is now dying of the death curse, without (as written) suspecting Acererak is involved... which beggars belief for the Intelligence 18, Wisdom 18, Charisma 21, ancient warlord, who has contact other plane on his daily spell list!

A possible reason for the deal being authored as it was, is that Fenthaza - an erstwhile Yuan-ti ally of Ras N'si's - wants the Black Opal Crown from the Tomb. Fenthaza is intended to be at odds with Ras N'si so perhaps the designers didn't want their goals to align? The designers want the yuan-ti to be an obstacle to the party, with Fenthaza a chink for them to worm through. Note however, that Fenthaza and Ras N'si have the same overarching goal of summoning Dendar.

As written, I felt these motives fell short of successfully merging authorial concerns with SP. I revised the deal so that Ras N'si's promise is to usher high-level adventurers into the Tomb. Ras N'si has other obligations, too - ensuring for his yuan-ti a steady supply of slaves, sacrifices and fresh purebloods. I felt that Fenthaza and Ras N'si's shared overarching goal was more than sufficient to overrule - so long as it were convenient - their underlying distrust or hatred (without setting those motives aside, of course). As written, Ras N'si has suspicions about the lich keeping its end of the bargain, so in my version he simply extends this suspicion to include imagining that the evil creature is at the root of the death curse.

So much detail. The point is that these motives were - with work - perceptible to the player characters. At one point, they had a rather tense, guided tour of the fane, allowing them to make a good assessment of resources. They knew also of other pressures - the Red Wizards, guardian gargoyles, the King of Feathers - to name a few. Were the OP's dilemma to have come up at any given moment, I believe such pre-planning allows a DM to deliver a more "gameful narrative". The putative conflict dissolves: there is a third path.

 

[hawkeyefan]

The answer to why they wouldn't is--as you say below--fidelity to the fiction. If the PCs can somehow put the DM in the position of defining Strahd's assets, they can eliminate them or otherwise deny him access to them. Or, if having Strahd use assets now, makes him look like an idiot earlier.

It seems plausible, yes.

I suppose it could be, if the players had any specific information to base the decision on. If they knew Strahd would prepare given time, or if they knew he was too powerful for them to take on at anything other than full strength. It also might depend on what is meant by "prepare." If it meant "call in allies or reinforcements," it might make sense to go after the allies or reinforcements.

If there's nothing to base the decision on, there's no real skill in making it. Like, if the information one needs decide intelligently isn't available, there's no real skill in making the decision.

Oh I meant for the decision to be fully informed. If this was how it played out, I would explain the consequences of their choice if they didn’t already realize it.

To me, this is more about your idea of choosing what the story is about...a wounded and weary group surprising Strahd when he doesn’t expect it, or the heroes attacking at full strength with the vampire ready for them....than it is about skilled play.

 

[hawkeyefan]

I've read the discussion from @Ovinomancer and you about 5e vs SP with interest. It doesn't really chime with my experience. I have played and DM'd all versions of D&D from Basic onward. I find 5e as concrete as any other version.

For example, resources - spell slots, concentration, ki, superiority dice, Hit Dice, inspiration, channeling, encumbrance, equipment lists, various class-specific pools, exhaustion, and a few recovery mechanisms. I have not found resource management to be "out the window" in 5e so there is a dissonance for me when reading that.

Similarly, the rules for 5e are tightly knit and concrete. It is a complete game system: there is little that cannot be managed with the help of one or other mechanic. If time permits, perhaps you could point to some B/X rules that can cast this "looseness" of 5e rules into the light?

I agree that a lot of skilled play is related to resource management....spells being the big one, but also ki, action surges, superiority dice, and so on.

Where I think it’s significantly different is that these resources are far more easily managed and recovered than in previous editions. Short rests are important here, and long rests as well; but it’s hard to ignore the fact that the GM has a huge role in when these can occur.

Take the fighter. Only after all superiority dice, spells, action surge, indomitable uses, and second winds have been used does the fighter now function like one from 2E and earlier editions. Now, of course the game is designed around this increased efficacy, but I mention it because 5E very clearly is designed not to punish less skilled play.

I think this was a clear design choice.