Search results

“There’s no point in being grown up if you can’t act a little childish sometimes.” —Doctor Who

Sorry, but no. This is one of those clear examples of dumb rules that should not be blindly followed. Like surviving swimming in lava without magic and a person filling a 5-foot square.

“Evil, I think, is the absence of empathy.” —Captain G. M. Gilbert, after the Nuremberg trials. I can think of no better definition of evil. Should be an interesting watch. Not sure about Crowe as Göring.

Yeah. It’s always been a ridiculous read to say it takes 1 hour of combat to interrupt a long rest. Yet another thing the designers got wildly wrong. See the OP again.

Pointless.

It's also how Dave Arneson ran games. You end the session in a dungeon and you'd have to make a roll to see how your retreat went as you fled the dungeon.

Yes, exactly. Regardless of what they choose to do, continue or rest, they will inevitably face "random" encounters. It's disguising the inevitability of a random encounter with pointless rolls. The choice doesn't matter.

That’s probably Beau, Marisha’s monk.

I see Taliesin hasn't worked on his Irish accent since the start of C2.

Yeah, you might as well not bother. There's no real choice there as it's not a risk of an encounter, it's a guarantee. It's a quantum ogre with extra steps. Just roll 1d8 for which hour of the rest the encounter happens. After the first encounter, roll your 1d8 again and if they're still resting...

They're separate issues. How the designers assumed people would play and how people actually played. The design of 5E is largely a massive rejection of 4E design with several elements from 4E "hidden" in 5E's design. 4E was an encounter-based minis skirmish game. Lots of people loved it, more...

It’s only a real choice if there’s a chance they can successfully rest. Saying they have a chance but the chance really being zero means it’s not really a choice. It’s a quantum ogre. Alternately, the possible reward is so overwhelmingly great, i.e. a bog standard long rest, that they’ll simply...

Sure, but unless you’re presenting a false choice, there will be times they don’t face random encounters. Which bring back the problem.

It’s a compromise, to be sure. To me, it’s a question of which is easier to use. Decoupling rests from sleep or the house rules and forced pacing you’d need to fix the mess? I tried the house rules and forced pacing for a decade. I’ll gladly take a clock with 18 ticks over that. Absolutely...

Yeah, it’s all subjective. Everyone has different lines in different places. For me, making the referee’s life a touch easier by just accepting the game is a game makes for a better experience. Like so many of the other “little things” we do or ignore to make the game run smoothly. Shrugging...

You see it as a con, I see it as a pro. Not really. The longer the combat lasts, the more damage you take and the more resources you spend. It's not possible to design a game that gamers won't try to exploit. There's no perfect solution, only a series of compromises. To me, not having to deal...

I'm not sure I see what you're objecting to. They have to eventually get a long rest. If you make long rests a resource they gain after 18 rounds of combat and disconnect it from sleep, it solves all the problems with rests and balance.

You could also make rests a recharging resource based on combat. This is effectively what Draw Steel has done. Gain a spendable short-rest resource after six rounds of combat. Max two per long rest. Gain a spendable long-rest resource after 18 rounds of combat. You could even divorce these...

And the players expect to be challenged.

I was thinking about the two short rests between long rests and how that should be handled. For “balanced” days that would be two fights, short rest, two fights, short rest, two fights, long rest. Assuming 3 round fights, that’s 18 rounds. Which is close enough to Mearls’ ~20 rounds. That...