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

[chaochou]

And I claim that every GM does this. Some may do it more, some may do it less, but it is impossible to not do it at all. So at most it is a continuum, not a binary.

I don't, sorry.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I don't, sorry.

When you design a dungeon or an enemy plot, describe an event or an area, decide what an NPC does or says, your decision is never influenced by what you think a cool story would contain? What you do then, intentionally make it a dull story? I simply don't believe you, you do it either consciously or subconsciously, it is impossible to not do it at all.

 

[chaochou]

When you design a dungeon or an enemy plot, describe an event or an area, decide what an NPC does or says, your decision is never influenced by what you think a cool story would contain? What you do then, intentionally make it a dull story? I simply don't believe you, you do it either consciously or subconsciously, it is impossible to not do it at all.

I don't care what you believe, but the fact that this is so alien to you describes your approach to player agency.

I don't design dungeons. I never design enemy plots. I describe areas but usually they've been co-created. NPC reactions are based on mechanics, dice rolls, and player-side goals and relationships. So they're based on player ideas of a cool story, not mine.

But carry on flailing around and attributing your force to others. It's amusing.

 

[ph0rk]

I don't design dungeons. I never design enemy plots. I describe areas but usually they've been co-created. NPC reactions are based on mechanics, dice rolls, and player-side goals and relationships. So they're based on player ideas of a cool story, not mine.

So the game would happen just the same without you being there?

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I don't care what you believe, but the fact that this is so alien to you describes your approach to player agency.

I don't design dungeons.

Where does the dungeon come from then? Or any environment, NPC, or a creature for that matter.

I never design enemy plots.

So the enemy has no motivations or goals? They just stand still like a lemon?

I describe areas but usually they've been co-created.

By whom? By what criteria?

NPC reactions are based on mechanics, dice rolls, and player-side goals and relationships. So they're based on player ideas of a cool story, not mine.

So players and random generators run your NPCs? Why you need a GM then? How do these NPCs speak? Do have random charts to roll sentences for them?

But carry on flailing around and attributing your force to others. It's amusing.

A GM giving NPCs motivations, creating environment and describing things is not 'force'.

 

[Campbell]

My own GMing has often involved a conscious rejection of storytelling as a play imperative. That impulse is always there, sure. That does not mean we should give into it (if it's not a play priority). I prep dynamic situations in most games I run. Not story. The situation is meant to be engaging, but it exists in the form of questions and not answers. What will happen when the players come into contact with it? Who will they side with? Will they all choose the same side? Will they fight with, reason with, or sidestep this character?

As a GM I want to know what's going to happen as much as the other players. In challenge oriented play I want to see how the players will attempt to overcome the challenge and see how it turns out. In character oriented play I want to see how the individual characters respond and see how it turns out. I have no real interest in directing it.

I'm totally capable of buying into story focused play as a player though. When in Rome as they say, but we should all be aware of what we are doing at the table.

 

[chaochou]

A GM giving NPCs motivations, creating environment and describing things is not 'force'.

More goalpost moving.

You said that 'every GM' uses their concept of a 'cool story' in their decision -making process. In other words, you said every GM uses force.

I denied this.

Whether techniques involve force is now irrelevant. You've already stated that you, and every GM, uses force.

 

[prabe]

I haven't tabulated, but a lot of posters talk about the BBEG being able to reinforce etc during the time of the rest.

I've understood that to be conditional. I mean, if it's established in the fiction that he can, sure; but if it's not--or if it's specifically been established that he cannot (such as because the PCs destroyed his reinforcements)--then no.

Strahd came up, and I think it was @hawkeyefan who said Strahd's forces are undefined (or defined as effectively limitless) in the adventure. I think that's pretty crappy design--because it puts decisions as to what if any limits Strahd has on the DM--but that's really beside the point. If the PCs have a way of finding out what Strahd's limitations are, and they do, what happens if they choose to take a Long Rest needs to conform to that.

Purely as a question of definition: Am I arguing for what you've called "naturalism?"

 

[Crimson Longinus]

More goalpost moving.

You said that 'every GM' uses their concept of a 'cool story' in their decision -making process. In other words, you said every GM uses force.

I denied this.

Whether techniques involve force is now irrelevant. You've already stated that you, and every GM, uses force.

No. You're absurdly equating the GM decisions being influenced by their idea of 'cool story' (which you cannot completely avoid as a human being) and using force. These are not even remotely the same thing.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

My own GMing has often involved a conscious rejection of storytelling as a play imperative. That impulse is always there, sure. That does not mean we should give into it (if it's not a play priority). I prep dynamic situations in most games I run. Not story. The situation is meant to be engaging, but it exists in the form of questions and not answers. What will happen when the players come into contact with it? Who will they side with? Will they all choose the same side? Will they fight with, reason with, or sidestep this character?

As a GM I want to know what's going to happen as much as the other players. In challenge oriented play I want to see how the players will attempt to overcome the challenge and see how it turns out. In character oriented play I want to see how the individual characters respond and see how it turns out. I have no real interest in directing it.

But when setting up the situation you are caring about 'cool story' as in creating potential for engaging interactions and when describing things you probably try to describe things evocatively. This is creating cool story. Sure, it is not creating one specific cool story, but why would we want to do that in an RPG anyway? If I wanted specific story instead of one which is emergent I would just write a novel.