• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Dungeons & Dragons Has Done Away With the Adventuring Day

Status
Not open for further replies.
dnd dmg adventuring day.jpg


Adventuring days are no more, at least not in the 2024 Dungeon Master's Guide. The new 2024 Dungeon Master's Guide contains a streamlined guide to combat encounter planning, with a simplified set of instructions on how to build an appropriate encounter for any set of characters. The new rules are pretty basic - the DM determines an XP budget based on the difficulty level they're aiming for (with choices of low, moderate, or high, which is a change from the 2014 Dungeon Master's Guide) and the level of the characters in a party. They then spend that budget on creatures to actually craft the encounter. Missing from the 2024 encounter building is applying an encounter multiplier based on the number of creatures and the number of party members, although the book still warns that more creatures adds the potential for more complications as an encounter is playing out.

What's really interesting about the new encounter building rules in the 2024 Dungeon Master's Guide is that there's no longer any mention of the "adventuring day," nor is there any recommendation about how many encounters players should have in between long rests. The 2014 Dungeon Master's Guide contained a recommendation that players should have 6 to 8 medium or hard encounters per adventuring day. The 2024 Dungeon Master's Guide instead opts to discuss encounter pace and how to balance player desire to take frequent Short Rests with ratcheting up tension within the adventure.

The 6-8 encounters per day guideline was always controversial and at least in my experience rarely followed even in official D&D adventures. The new 2024 encounter building guidelines are not only more streamlined, but they also seem to embrace a more common sense approach to DM prep and planning.

The 2024 Dungeon Master's Guide for Dungeons & Dragons will be released on November 12th.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Christian Hoffer

Christian Hoffer

Actually, I have never seen Aarakocra in my games.

But I do offer a homebrew "Wings" cantrip that grants limited flight. It requires the use of an Action to Move, there is no hover, and takeoffs require a running a distance. It is mainly useless in combat.

(The "Avariel" Elves have this as their innate Elf cantrip.)

Heh, most Humanoid populations have longbows and can easily shoot down any flyers who get annoying.

Compromise? in D&D! Now there's a novel concept!

I had an aarakocra moon druid PC in one of my low level games a while back. I'm extremely permissive as to what I allow, but that was bit of a test! No bad issues though, worked out fine.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Aarakocra (a flying race) are canon Greyhawk, they are also a playable 5e race. If the DM is running 5e, in Greyhawk, but states, no flying PCs?

Flying PCs, at low level, for a DM that's new, or simply doesn't want to deal with the extra element CAN be an issue.
The trouble with aarakocra is that 5e removed all of the rules that separate flight from standing in the sky but still having the benefits of "flight" like magneto and Ichigo kurasski do.
 

Aarakocra (a flying race) are canon Greyhawk, they are also a playable 5e race. If the DM is running 5e, in Greyhawk, but states, no flying PCs?

Flying PCs, at low level, for a DM that's new, or simply doesn't want to deal with the extra element CAN be an issue.

Just because something exists doesn't mean you get to play it.

At will flight is a PitA/balance issue.
 


The trouble with aarakocra is that 5e removed all of the rules that separate flight from standing in the sky but still having the benefits of "flight" like magneto and Ichigo kurasski do.

Eh, if you want to be the only PC flying when the baddies have bows? you do you!
 


This is my experience with flying PCs - they soon get shot down.

Then they start flying even further away and are to far away.

5E rewards spreading the danage around. Everyone has hit dice. Yet flyers tend to attract those players who don't want to be anywhere near the front lines.

A lot of critters lack ranged options or effective range options.

DMs can cherry pick of course. Then you're back to 3.5 rocket tag. If the DM needs to metagame against flying it's a bad idea to allow it.

A lot of advantages as well mitigating exploration pillar.
 

Then they start flying even further away and are to far away.

5E rewards spreading the danage around. Everyone has hit dice. Yet flyers tend to attract those players who don't want to ve anywhere near the front lines.

A lot of critters lack ranged options or effective range options.

DMs can cherry pick of course. Then you're back to 3.5 rocket tag.

A lot of advantages as well mitigating exploration pillar.
If you're playing WotC 5e, you've already given up on the exploration pillar from my perspective.
 

I think that gets to the heart of the issue.

Some players really do believe that if it's official content they should get to use it. I've never had that issue, but, supposedly, it exists.

Yeah, and while not universal I find those also tend to be problem players.

I do try my best to avoid disappointment so I let people know straight away when I invite them to a game what is on and off the table so they don't come up with concepts they can't play.

I don't use multicasting for example but then I don't think I've had anyone want to use it anyway.
 


Status
Not open for further replies.

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top