D&D 5E I have never once worried about "encounters per day" when prepping D&D 5E (a poll)

[Helldritch]

True. It just is unfortunate that they chose to rebalance things around the wrong rest type.

As for the actual question, yes, of course I worry about it a bit. It is far from exact, and of course ultimately the players actions have a huge effect of what fights happen and when, but I pay some attention to pacing of rests and fights. This is one reason why I use gritty rests, as that way it is easier to get to at least somewhat in the ballpark of the expected encounter/rest ratio. (The other reason being that it is gentler for my somewhat fragile disbelief suspenders.)

For once I fully agree with you. The short rest mechanic is a relic from 4ed and it should not have been included in 5th edition. Multiply Ki and sorcery points by 3, any other short rest restoration by two and you get a decent per day stuff. We are currently thinking to try it this way.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

For once I fully agree with you. The short rest mechanic is a relic from 4ed and it should not have been included in 5th edition. Multiply Ki and sorcery points by 3, any other short rest restoration by two and you get a decent per day stuff. We are currently thinking to try it this way.

Oh, don't worry, everything is normal, we're not agreeing!

They're currently moving exactly the direction you suggest, and I think that's the wrong move. If there were to be just one rest type, I'd rather it to be a short rest (that refreshes a portion of your resources) than the long rest (that refreshes basically everything.) I feel that it is exactly that "all or nothing" nature of long rests that makes them clunky and difficult to use.

 

[Helldritch]

Oh, don't worry, everything is normal, we're not agreeing!

They're currently moving exactly the direction you suggest, and I think that's the wrong move. If there were to be just one rest type, I'd rather it to be a short rest (that refreshes a portion of your resources) than the long rest (that refreshes basically everything.) I feel that it is exactly that "all or nothing" nature of long rests that makes them clunky and difficult to use.

Well... I much prefer long rests over short rests. Everyone sleeps in a while and it is a good time as any to "refresh" your abilities. Short rests are... clunky at best and cut the narrative into something weird that does not feel like a story.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Well... I much prefer long rests over short rests. Everyone sleeps in a while and it is a good time as any to "refresh" your abilities. Short rests are... clunky at best and cut the narrative into something weird that does not feel like a story.

I agree that "night's sleep" is narratively good rest period, but I don't like it restoring everything. Currently I use gritty rests, so my short rests are actually the night's sleep.

 

[Helldritch]

I agree that "night's sleep" is narratively good rest period, but I don't like it restoring everything. Currently I use gritty rests, so my short rests are actually the night's sleep.

And I the same
I much prefer AD&D rest style. The fighter could regain everything over a night's sleep but casters were in for a lot longer depending on level. The 18th level wizard would spend the better part of three days to recover his arsenal, the cleric a bit less (2.3 days). But hey, we're stuck with the system we have now. So gritty for me as well.

 

[MichaelSomething]

For once I fully agree with you. The short rest mechanic is a relic from 4ed and it should not have been included in 5th edition. Multiply Ki and sorcery points by 3, any other short rest restoration by two and you get a decent per day stuff. We are currently thinking to try it this way.

But we need both long and short rest classes to prevent sameness!

 

[Helldritch]

But we need both long and short rest classes to prevent sameness!

For the moment, you are right. But short rests, even 4ed were breaking the narrative. Never liked them too much.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

I do tend to generally plan/structure my adventures in such a way that the players are unable to have their characters take a long rest after every combat. If that counts as worrying about number of encounters per day, then yes. If you try to have your character nova in every fight in a campaign I’m running, it’s probably going to end up being a bad idea.

I don’t necessarily think the “we need to take a long rest/but you CAN’T” player/DM dynamic of 5E is a particularly fun one for either side, but if you as the DM don’t make resource management part of the game by running multiple encounters between rests, the game tends to be too easy.

You say here what I was going to. It seems like a lot of discussion I this thread is taking "I don't worry about encounter count" from a viewpoint of strict numbers per day, whereas I view it as worrying because I don't want to have non-consequential combats waste my time.

This is particularly hard with overland travel. There isn't a way to have a single random bandit encounter matter unless....

1. It's part of at least 5-7 other resource draining scenes the same day.

2. It's potentially a TPK.

I try to find ways to narrate resource loss, which some might find heavy handed, but it allows me to have days of one or two encounters still engage resource management.

For example, I might describe how the party had to climb a short cliff face. While not dangerous and requiring climb checks, it still might be exhausting and cost each character a HitDie. Similarly a high level group getting attacked by low level bandits might just be narrated and tax a couple spell slots from the spellcasters.

 

[Mannahnin]

For the moment, you are right. But short rests, even 4ed were breaking the narrative. Never liked them too much.

I liked them significantly more at 5 minutes than 1 hour.

Narratively, taking a 5 minute (or, heck, even 10 minutes like the required once an hour 1 Turn rest in the Basic dungeon exploration procedures) break in the action to bandage wounds and catch your breath is much more plausible in the middle of an adventure than a whole hour lunch break.

 

[Burnside]

You say here what I was going to. It seems like a lot of discussion I this thread is taking "I don't worry about encounter count" from a viewpoint of strict numbers per day, whereas I view it as worrying because I don't want to have non-consequential combats waste my time.

This is particularly hard with overland travel. There isn't a way to have a single random bandit encounter matter unless....

1. It's part of at least 5-7 other resource draining scenes the same day.

2. It's potentially a TPK.

I try to find ways to narrate resource loss, which some might find heavy handed, but it allows me to have days of one or two encounters still engage resource management.

For example, I might describe how the party had to climb a short cliff face. While not dangerous and requiring climb checks, it still might be exhausting and cost each character a HitDie. Similarly a high level group getting attacked by low level bandits might just be narrated and tax a couple spell slots from the spellcasters.

I tend to handle this same issue by just montaging travel sequences unless there is a strong narrative reason not to do so; I like to focus on site-based design with 5E as much as possible because I feel that location-based adventures are what 5E does best.