D&D 5E Aren't Short Rest classes *better* in "story-based" games rather than dungeon crawls?

[FrogReaver]

when the players hole up for an hour in a closet or whatever you almost need video game style patrols and spawn points globally for the players to be found and for their opponents to react. When players hole up somewhere for an entire night there is time for someone to notice, that person to tell someone in charge, & that person in charge to send a bunch of reinforcements to deal with it or just do something like pull up stakes & vacate along with everything of notable value.

If it's safe enough to rest for 1 hour then it's often safe enough to rest for 8 hours. The DM has to try really hard to come up with fictoinal scenarios such that the players can rest 1 hour with minimal consequences if the rest 8 hours they face major consequences. It's the demand on the DM to come up with such fictional scenarios to get short rests to 'work' that's the problem.

The better solution is player self policing resting and it's the same exact solution that has been being used forever when it comes to long resting.

 

[tetrasodium]

If it's safe enough to rest for 1 hour then it's often safe enough to rest for 8 hours. The DM has to try really hard to come up with fictoinal scenarios such that the players can rest 1 hour with minimal consequences if the rest 8 hours they face major consequences. It's the demand on the DM to come up with such fictional scenarios to get short rests to 'work' that's the problem.

The better solution is player self policing resting and it's the same exact solution that has been being used forever when it comes to long resting.

I don't disagree on the first part, it's abhorrently unchecked munchkinesque design, the difference is that 8 hours has 8 times as much time for opponents to prepare. It's the difference between "wow, they gathered up all these people/they cleared out all of that during a lunchbreak" and "yea.. 8 hours is a while, I've loaded a whole house of stuff into a uhaul with minimal help in less that's fair I guess/yea It makes sense that they could gather all of this in 8 hours".

That "better solution" is awful though & illustrates just how bad theo5e design is here. I've seen numerous ttrpgs that include guidance on doing that kind of sportsmanship type thing directed at the players & the gm with crunch analysis on how to balance the needs or how different styles will influence things. o5e by contrast has barely any sportsmanship type guidance & crunch analysis.

 

[Baron Opal II]

If it's safe enough to rest for 1 hour then it's often safe enough to rest for 8 hours. The DM has to try really hard to come up with fictoinal scenarios such that the players can rest 1 hour with minimal consequences if the rest 8 hours they face major consequences. It's the demand on the DM to come up with such fictional scenarios to get short rests to 'work' that's the problem.

The better solution is player self policing resting and it's the same exact solution that has been being used forever when it comes to long resting.

You imply that you can take an 8 hr rest at the start of the day. Is that allowed these days?

 

[FrogReaver]

You imply that you can take an 8 hr rest at the start of the day. Is that allowed these days?

...No, I imply you can wait till the next day because in most fictional positioning what happens in an hour and in 8 hours just isn't enough of a difference to matter

 

[FrogReaver]

That "better solution" is awful though & illustrates just how bad theo5e design is here. I've seen numerous ttrpgs that include guidance on doing that kind of sportsmanship type thing directed at the players & the gm with crunch analysis on how to balance the needs or how different styles will influence things. o5e by contrast has barely any sportsmanship type guidance & crunch analysis.

The lack of advice is awful.

But, when you think about long rests, it's really the only thing that consistently allows long rests to work as well - especially since many games have moved beyond the dungeon environment. I think short rests have made this 'issue' more apparent - mostly because they are newer and less ingrained.

 

[Xetheral]

IME almost anytime we have wanted a short rest we could have take a long rest instead. We don’t typically do that though because we police our own resting.

My experience differs sharply. A short rest is pretty easily available any time that the party doesn't have an imminent deadline. The total time cost is low, or even almost zero if the party just stops for their next meal earlier than originally intended. Moving lunch up a couple hours, for example, doesn't change how much the party can get done in a day.

By contrast, spending 9-23 hours for a long rest (depending on the remaining time before the party is eligible to take another long rest) slows the party strategically. If everything they do takes significantly longer thanks to stopping early for long rests, they won't accomplish nearly as much.

I suspect the difference in our experiences may come down to how many active quests/opportunities/goals/priorities the PCs are pursuing simultaneously. In my campaigns it tends to be half a dozen or more at any given time, which creates background time pressure. Even if none of those priorities have an explicit doomclock, time spent on one priority is time not spent on the others, and (almost) none of them are so static that they'll wait around unchanged for the PCs to eventually get around to them.

 

[FrogReaver]

My experience differs sharply. A short rest is pretty easily available any time that the party doesn't have an imminent deadline. The total time cost is low, or even almost zero if the party just stops for their next meal earlier than originally intended. Moving lunch up a couple hours, for example, doesn't change how much the party can get done in a day.

By contrast, spending 9-23 hours for a long rest (depending on the remaining time before the party is eligible to take another long rest) slows the party strategically. If everything they do takes significantly longer thanks to stopping early for long rests, they won't accomplish nearly as much.

I suspect the difference in our experiences may come down to how many active quests/opportunities/goals/priorities the PCs are pursuing simultaneously. In my campaigns it tends to be half a dozen or more at any given time, which creates background time pressure. Even if none of those priorities have an explicit doomclock, time spent on one priority is time not spent on the others, and (almost) none of them are so static that they'll wait around unchanged for the PCs to eventually get around to them.

I think that’s a great point. Though it sounds like you agree that the PCs are being pressured quite a bit -‘the world doesn’t wait around on them’.

Which is one of the things I’ve said. Games with that kind of pressure consistently being applied behave quite differently.

 

[tetrasodium]

I think that’s a great point. Though it sounds like you agree that the PCs are being pressured quite a bit -‘the world doesn’t wait around on them’.

Which is one of the things I’ve said. Games with that kind of pressure consistently being applied behave quite differently.

The world doesn't, but it's not like a crpg where you have x amount of quests that you can do because those are the ones coded in the game. If the players don't deal with a particular problem that npc bob has npcbob might have a different problem later or npcalice might step in down the road when bob moves on. Even if npcalice is salty with the PCs for not solving it when npcbob was in charge she or some other npc is going to find something for them to do rather than the gm just saying "sorry guys all the quests are completed or in a state they can no longer be completed."

 

[Baron Opal II]

...No, I imply you can wait till the next day because in most fictional positioning what happens in an hour and in 8 hours just isn't enough of a difference to matter

Thank you for the clarification.

 

[Asisreo]

I think that’s a great point. Though it sounds like you agree that the PCs are being pressured quite a bit -‘the world doesn’t wait around on them’.

Which is one of the things I’ve said. Games with that kind of pressure consistently being applied behave quite differently.

Though, I think the reality is that while players will want to be quick with pressure applied, they'll also want to preserve some form of caution while proceeding.

So while a wizard can use their highest-level slots to cast a spell and rest to get them back, the warlock can do so in an eighth or even a twenty-fourth of the time. Sure, it's still time expended, but it's significantly less.

I think parties naturally try to form a balance rather than leaning completely on "As fast and reckless as possible" or "as careful and slow as possible." So, if a party knows the module uses time-based random encounters, they'll rather take the chance of resting for an hour and hopefully have nothing happen than resting eight and being surprised that the dungeon includes incorporeal enemies anyways.