D&D (2024) How many combats do you have on average adventuring day.

[Paul Farquhar]

Probably, but tracking HP, expended spell slots, and used features is hardly unusal... even amoung more "casual" players IME. And taking 5 minutes to review that stuff before you begin play isn't very demanding of the "non-serious" players.

Well, I know my players don’t take 5 seconds to review their character sheets, but I’m really the one who struggles with book keeping, due to a learning difficulty.

 

[tetrasodium]

I guess if you play rarely it might make things easier.

However, since players typical track all that stuff on their character sheet... I have never found it necessary to implement such a policy. After all, if you write down your current HP, expended spell slots, used features, etc. during the session, you just leave it until you pick it up again. The player can use their own time to review the information prior to the actual session, so you don't lose any game time. And the DM can email/text/post a story recap to keep the plot refreshed in the players' minds as well.

None of these things are so difficult to manage IME that "artificially" imposing a long rest at the end of a session is necessary at all.

As a player, it would irk me quite a bit--but if it works for you than go with it of course.

My experience is that players who start using DND beyond start resetting their resources between sessions or maybe just whenever they feel like it. There was a bit of peer pressure towards honesty when players had to start erasing and writing in new values one by one, that went away when it was an "oops" button with no obvious indication for others to notice. That habit seems to get more pronounced when the player is playing one of the two classes that allow them to say "but my character needs those [short] rests to keep up" and can say " I thought we ended with a rest">“no Bob it literally ended here on the initiative.

The fact that long and short rests in DDB are triggered and completed by the players encourages it.

 

[ezo]

Well, I know my players don’t take 5 seconds to review their character sheets, but I’m really the one who struggles with book keeping, due to a learning difficulty.

Only you can address that obviously--and as I said before if it works for you and your group--no issues. I just know I couldn't play like that myself, and would bow out of the group.

The fact that long and short rests in DDB are triggered and completed by the players encourages it.

We don't use DDB at all. We have too many fixes to make it viable, and even then I prefer character sheets to be non-digital due to too many technology issues.

Fankly, I wouldn't put up with such shennagins anyway. Players like that will quickly find themselves out the door.

 

[Minigiant]

Probably, but tracking HP, expended spell slots, and used features is hardly unusal... even amoung more "casual" players IME. And taking 5 minutes to review that stuff before you begin play isn't very demanding of the "non-serious" players.

Its not that they can't do it or it's hard to track.

It's that the players want to start the session fresh. Sometimes because scheduling has groups adventuring in irregular times or incomplete parties.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Its not that they can't do it or it's hard to track.

It's that the players want to start the session fresh. Sometimes because scheduling has groups adventuring in irregular times or incomplete parties.

In a rush to get to the game from work is a big factor. Not everyone has time to start thinking about the game until they need to.

But it makes it easier when a player can’t make it too.

 

[Seramus]

I generally set things up for 3 deadly fights a day, but sometimes one or more of those get replaced with 2 hard fights. I try to leave opportunity for a short rest after each deadly fight.

Same. I make a general effort to aim for 3 fights, with a short rest between each fight. The needs of the plot come first, of course, and there are many days where there's one BIG fight, or a few dungeon style days with a half dozen fights. But 3 is my general "Go To" number.

 

[tetrasodium]

Its not that they can't do it or it's hard to track.

It's that the players want to start the session fresh. Sometimes because scheduling has groups adventuring in irregular times or incomplete parties.

I've tried to ban it multiple times with varying degrees of success but players using it in secret is almost worse.

 

[Deset Gled]

My experience is that players who start using DND beyond start resetting their resources between sessions or maybe just whenever they feel like it.

This would trigger me to very heightened levels if someone pulled it in one of my games. But, ignoring my personal feelings...

This scenario is so far outside the bounds of this discussion that I don't understand how it can be relevant. Literally, how can there be meaningful talk about the number of combats per adventuring day if the players randomly and independently choose when a new day begins, completely at will? At that point, there simply is no resource management. You've houseruled away any meaning to a rest or day, essentially removing the mechanics from the game. By all means, feel free to play that way. But you should also recognize that it means those experiences really aren't germane to the poll. You might as well be arguing about long vs short rests in a 3.5e game.

 

[ezo]

Its not that they can't do it or it's hard to track.

Um... ok.

It's that the players want to start the session fresh.

While I can appreciate the "clean slate" concept, I still find it odd in a game that is ongoing generally.

Sometimes because scheduling has groups adventuring in irregular times or incomplete parties.

I fail to see how that has anything to do with it. Regardless of when you play, a few minutes to review your PC (even if you have to use "game time" to do it) is not hard (as you stipulate in the opening of this post).

Incomplete paries also has nothing to do with the issue. Having players not show is an entirely different issue. Few games can end sessions at points where a PC can "disappear" because a player can't make the game for some reason. I suppose you could tailor your game to fit that if it happens often, but such players would not last in my games.

If you want to play, scheduling it should be a priority just like any other commitment to any other hobby such as sports, writers groups, poker games, cooking classes, or whatever. If you cannot commit to the level established by the group, your absences are disrruptive and disrespectful to those who do show up regularly. Obviously, emergencies and occasional misses is a different and understandable thing--life happens after all.

In a rush to get to the game from work is a big factor. Not everyone has time to start thinking about the game until they need to.

So you take the five minutes to do it when you arrive...? Most games IME have a good 15-30 minute "settling in" period prior to game play starting as players chat, trickle in, arrange snacks and food, or whatever.

But it makes it easier when a player can’t make it too.

How? Now you have to deal with a PC who is in the game, but no player to play it???

 

[Paul Farquhar]

How? Now you have to deal with a PC who is in the game, but no player to play it

If we didn’t play when someone couldn’t make it we would hardly get to play at all. Busy lives have more important things in them than D&D!

Ideally, absent players have their characters benched, but if the narrative can’t support that someone else plays the character, which is why it helps if they start the session fully rested.