D&D General IS the 5 min work day a feature or a bug?

[Asisreo]

Whether or not the casters have full spell slots should be completely irrelevant to the fight.

It should go without saying that if you care about that form of balance, you should make thoughtful encounters. Otherwise, the caster may end up being useless in most fights because the high-initiative martials drain the enemy's HP before a full round resolves.

The problem, I believe, is that despite DM's having so much more creative and narrative freedom in 5MWD's, they don't fully conceptionalize each fight.

Every fight in a 5MWD should be a boss fight, not in terms of power or challenge, but in terms of uniqueness and thought.

It doesn't matter what you analyzed the game in terms of balance. As long as the caster feel like they really have to earn their victories and the martial feels like they had alot of different things to do, then the reality of it doesn't matter. This game is imagination, after all.

 

[jmartkdr2]

I don't even understand what people mean by non-attrition-based? All resources refresh after every encounter? Meaning only mechanical stakes is death, and once you get resurrection magic (which you can use limitlessly, as no attrition) there are no mechanical stakes other than TPK?

More like "the system is designed to provide tough, interesting fights even when everyone's at full strength." 5e does this okay in practice if no one metagames it, 4e did it fine, and 3e did this until level 8 or so in practice. PF2e delivers on this at lower levels at least. 13th Ages handles this pretty well.

In other words, we want a version of the game where you can have challenge without attrition, not a game where attrition never happens.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

In other words, we want a version of the game where you can have challenge without attrition, not a game where attrition never happens.

That is pretty damn significant difference!

 

[Ruin Explorer]

The should be a resource warrior, a nonresource warrior, a resource caster, and a nonresource caster.

Maybe, but I don't think D&D is going to double its number of classes/subclasses, which that would more or less require.

Rather I think "Pick a lane" is the right approach. And until Vancian casting DIAFs that lane is resources.

 

[jmartkdr2]

That is pretty damn significant difference!

It's the difference between "attrition-based" and "attrition exists" Attrition-based gameplay limits storytelling options.

 

[Oofta]

Tangentially, I have to say that one of my favorite underutilized mechanics in 3.5Ed were the Reserve feats. For the forgetful or newer players, those were feats that granted minor at-will or always on spell-like abilities as long as you met some other condition- usually, having access to an uncast higher-level spell with a related nature.

So you might be able to fire off little bolts of force if you had a 4th or higher level Force spell you hadn’t cast. It was a great way for spellcasters to have magical tricks up their sleeves 75% of the time.

There were also a few classes and alternative versions of classes that had similar mechanics. I believe it was the Shadowcaster (?) whose lower level powers became at-wills as they leveled up.

On the whole, stuff like that would probably have made the 5MWD less common than it apparently is. Alas, this type of mechanic popped up mid- to late-stage in the game’s cycle, so never really found their stride or a sizable fanbase, IMHO.

Aren't those feats a lot like cantrips? Spells that become at-will similar to cantrips becoming more effective as you level up? Because the problem with some people (aka people that don't have eldritch blast) is that they feel like they aren't contributing if they're using cantrips.

On the other hand I don't remember the feats. While I have fun playing casters I don't mind playing front line types, so I always ended up playing the tanks so I could have easily missed them.

 

[Oofta]

Where to me, given the bolded, the five-minute workday is neither bug nor feature but instead merely a predictable and inevitable result based on what the characters would realistically (try to) do in the setting. The problems only arise when (encouraged by the game system itself, sadly) a DM tries to fight this instead of just accepting it as a fact of play and moving on.

Never mind that, in comparison with games like B/X and 1e, 5e has already toned down the resource management piece to a mere whisper in the background.

At least the wizard always had darts to throw after they spent their 2 spells per day!

 

[Minigiant]

Maybe, but I don't think D&D is going to double its number of classes/subclasses, which that would more or less require.

Rather I think "Pick a lane" is the right approach. And until Vancian casting DIAFs that lane is resources.

No need to double classes.

Just add 2more: Warblade and Arcanist.

 

[DND_Reborn]

No need to double classes.

Just add 2more: Warblade and Arcanist.

Heck, you can remove classes really. Subclasses can take care of pretty much anything.

We got rid of Barbarian, Sorcerer, and Warlock by making them subclasses of Fighter, Wizard, and Cleric.

 

[Minigiant]

Heck, you can remove classes really. Subclasses can take care of pretty much anything.

We got rid of Barbarian, Sorcerer, and Warlock by making them subclasses of Fighter, Wizard, and Cleric.

That makes the problem worse as you scrub out options in resources.

The point is if you want attrition gameplay, you should only allow classes that manage resources: Barbarian Scoundrel, Cleric, Wizard

If you want set piece gameplay, you should only allow classes that are expected to nova every encounter: Warblade, Rogue, Druid Arcanist

If you want "floor" based gameplay, you should only allow short rest classes who have muliple uses of their things: Monk, Warlock,