D&D General 6-8 encounters (combat?)

[Yaarel]

Your conclusion is kind of in error.

Classes are balanced around 6 or so encounters and 2 or so short rests per long rest.

As long as that median is met (not every AD needs to feature this median, some days are longer, and some shorter, some with more short rests and some with none) overall, balance is just fine.

The problem happens when the adventure story diverges away from seven combat encounters per day and two short rests per day. Then the class balance becomes less fine.

The problem is, the narrative requirement to balance the classes mechanically − seven combats per day − is narratively abnormal and unsuitable for most adventure stories.

Meanwhile, it is nearly impossible to have TWO 1-hour short rests if in the midst of a violent battle zone where seven full-on combats are actually happening. To require both seven combats and two rests is a "catch-22".

In sum.

The current 5e guidelines to link refresh to both sleep and lunch are strictly mechanically gamist − and make most adventure narratives unable to happen.

To connect refreshes to sleep and lunches turns out to be bad for the narrative and bad for balancing the mechanics of different classes.

There are good reasons why most 5e DMs reject the official rules and the official guidelines. DMs try to fix the rest problem as best they can.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

I would say that it's a problem in a similar sense to a player saying, "I walk up to the king, punch him in the face, put his crown on my head, and then everyone kneels before me in submission." And everyone at the table accepting this as what happens.

There are undoubtedly players who would enjoy that. There are also players (and GMs) who wouldn't want to be at a table where that is permitted. I agree that if everyone at the table is on board, it's not an issue. However, IME not everyone is necessarily on the same page.

The wizard might want to rest because they've nova'd their spells, while the fighter and rogue want to push on because they're still good for the day. And the DM wants them to push on because some of the DM's fun comes from challenging the players, which the 5MWD undercuts.

I agree regarding talking to your players.

That said, I think that there's nothing wrong with having mechanics that incentivize the players to push on. It is a game, after all, and some behaviors are rewarded (killing goblins and taking their stuff) while others typically aren't (role playing shopping for an entire session will net you very few experience points under many DMs).

Unfortunately, traditionally pretty much all of these WRT the 5MWD have been disincentives (with the exception of 4e milestones). I agree with the poster from earlier in the thread who said that incentives to press on would be a great addition to the game (even if they're only an optional module that I can use and someone else can ignore because they prefer the more traditional, punitive disincentives). For example, the 13th Age RPG has a d6 that increments after every encounter. The value on the die gets added to all PC attacks, and some abilities key off a high value on this die, meaning that the players have a mechanical incentive to press forward, even if some of their resources have depleted.

Oh I agree an out of game chat is best (dont try and abuse the rest mechanic at this table please).

I prefer temporal constraints for other reasons. They simply make the game more fun, and drive the story forward. PCs actions matter, and round by round decisions (do I action surge now, or save it for later?) are important.

Its a lot better than mashing buttons in a nova strike where time simply doesnt matter, and the world doesnt care if you take a week off to put your feet up.

While I agree that bennies to press on would be nice, I am not convinced that they would solve the problem and the reason I emphasised talking as a group is because this is in part a playstyle issue.

I see it as similar to being a player where the DM is running a pre-published adventure or a story focused campaign. If you are to play in such a campaign, they you have committed to follow where the DM is leading. To at least meet the DM halfway and not to deliberately go off piste.

It is something similar to with the adventuring day. The wizard may nova but accept that the warlock and fighter want to press on, then go with that rather than resting at every opportunity. I am also against punishing players; everyone I think that promotes a toxic environment.

 

[Flamestrike]

The problem happens when the adventure story diverges away from seven combat encounters per day and two short rests per day. Then the class balance becomes less fine.

The problem is, the narrative requirement to balance the classes mechanically − seven combats per day − is narratively abnormal and unsuitable for most adventure stories.

Meanwhile, it is nearly impossible to have TWO 1-hour short rests if in the midst of a violent battle zone where seven full-on combats are actually happening. To require both seven combats and two rests is a "catch-22".

But the DMG literally gives you options to deal with this with rest variants and advice to the DM.

If your 'narrative pacing' doesnt support 6-8 encounters per day, why not simply use a rest variant. Like... if you only ever get 0-3 encounters per day, why not simply use the Gritty rest variant?

In my games I deal with the jarring 1 hour breaks of short rests, by making them a few minutes long (quick breather, sip of water, map check and off you go) but limited to no more than 2 per long rest.

Effectively a variant of the Heroic rest variant which shortens them to 5 minutes.

Is there any reason why you need to ignore the DMG here?

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Ya know, I think we (in this thread) are paying more attention to this resource management advice that Wizards have in all the years since the games release.

 

[Yaarel]

But the DMG literally gives you options to deal with this with rest variants and advice to the DM.

If your 'narrative pacing' doesnt support 6-8 encounters per day, why not simply use a rest variant. Like... if you only ever get 0-3 encounters per day, why not simply use the Gritty rest variant?

In my games I deal with the jarring 1 hour breaks of short rests, by making them a few minutes long (quick breather, sip of water, map check and off you go) but limited to no more than 2 per long rest.

Effectively a variant of the Heroic rest variant which shortens them to 5 minutes.

Is there any reason why you need to ignore the DMG here?

I find the offical rest variants − especially week=long and sleep=short − to be equally inflexible narratively.

That is why I count two long rests per level − so they can happen whenever. Sometimes the long rest happens during a sleep. Sometimes the long rest happens after a week of rest and recuperation. Sometimes the long rest happens when the character takes a moment to gather ones wits in the face of a dangerous challenge that one is about to face. A long rest can happen during any one of these kinds of rests.

Then whatever the adventure story is describes the context of when these moments of becoming fully refreshed happen.

 

[Flamestrike]

I find the offical rest variants − especially week=long and sleep=short − to be equally inflexible narratively.

Its guidance only. Make your own up if you have to. Its 5E, that kind of thing is encouraged now.

That is why I count two long rests per level − so they can happen whenever.

Ok so you do do it then.

I use Doom clocks (and prefer them tbh). They're just a lot more fun for the players and really work to tie the story together and drive the action.

I dont overuse them, but I certainly use them, and I use them enough that my players self-police resources never knowing when Im gonna spring one on them.

 

[Yaarel]

Its guidance only. Make your own up if you have to. Its 5E, that kind of thing is encouraged now.



Ok so you do do it then.

I use Doom clocks (and prefer them tbh). They're just a lot more fun for the players and really work to tie the story together and drive the action.

I dont overuse them, but I certainly use them, and I use them enough that my players self-police resources never knowing when Im gonna spring one on them.

It isnt just "guidance" − it is math!

It is class balance!

It is fairness to players who like different classes!



Even if forcing narratives into the gamist guidance, the "guidance" is itself unworkable. To require seven combats is a narrative that precludes two 1-hour rests.

 

[Fanaelialae]

While I agree that bennies to press on would be nice, I am not convinced that they would solve the problem and the reason I emphasised talking as a group is because this is in part a playstyle issue.

I see it as similar to being a player where the DM is running a pre-published adventure or a story focused campaign. If you are to play in such a campaign, they you have committed to follow where the DM is leading. To at least meet the DM halfway and not to deliberately go off piste.

It is something similar to with the adventuring day. The wizard may nova but accept that the warlock and fighter want to press on, then go with that rather than resting at every opportunity. I am also against punishing players; everyone I think that promotes a toxic environment.

I think that incentives would solve the issue in many cases. I believe that the phenomenon of the 5MWD likely has a strong correlation with studies that have shown that players will optimize the fun out of a game when given the opportunity. And this is something that incentives (and/or disincentives) can fix.

Simply make pushing on more optimal than the 5MWD (admittedly, this is easier said than done) and "optimizer" players will no longer opt for a 5MWD. The game can be designed such that the players optimize the fun into the game. We already have mechanics to this end, such a experience points; they're simply orthogonal to the issue of the 5MWD.

That obviously wouldn't solve the 5MWD for groups where "optimization" isn't the root issue. In those cases you'd certainly need to have a conversation, since the issue is probably specific to that group.

 

[Yaarel]

It occurs to me, there are vocal players complaining about the Fighter.

Probably, they are in games that reject the guidance of seven combats per long rest.

Their higher frequency of long rests is making most fullcasters noticeably more powerful than their Fighters.

The rest mechanic − or the lack thereof − deeply effects the enjoyment of the game

 

[UngainlyTitan]

It occurs to me, there are vocal players complaining about the Fighter.

Probably, they are in games that reject the guidance of seven combats per long rest.

Their higher frequency of long rests is making most fullcasters noticeably more powerful than their Fighters.

The rest mechanic − or the lack thereof − deeply effects the enjoyment of the game

The exact wording is ".. most adventuring parties can handle about six to eight medium or hard encounters in a day."
Not seven, however if one does the math on the "Adventuring Day XP" table (at least for the levels i have sampled it at) that breaks down at about 7 to 8 medium or 4 to 5 hard or about 3 deadly or any combination thereof. There is quite a bit of flexibility in the thing.