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

[FrozenNorth]

It's a different system.

I played Fall of Plaguestone and Abomination Vaults (PF2) as well, and read the first book of Hell’s Rebels (Pathfinder), and they all definitely had filler combats and blatant contrivances. They didn’t have arbitrary restrictions on spellcaster, but they were low level modules before spellcasters get access to more disruptive magic.

 

[Minigiant]

I don't think those two terms necessarily imply the players knowing or not knowing the stakes. That appears to be something you're introducing into their definitions. In my games at least, you'll know the stakes, always. That's so you as a player can make informed decisions.

As for the DM handwaving encounters based on the PCs' current resources, you will never see me doing that. If the rolls say there's an encounter, you're getting one regardless of the current state of your hit points, hit dice, or spell slots. What you do in the face of that is up to you.

But that's not the issue.

The issue is that 5e is designed for the party to get to 6-8 encounters with 2-3 short rest to maintain balance (nott based on favoritism)

social and exploration encounters that do not drain resources nor create other encounters that drain resources for not count to the threshold.

That's a large threshold that can easily be not met organically.

The question is on solution.

"Time pressure with known stake" or doom clocks can be used. However it is hard to use constantly while keeping adventuring from being stale or run by contrived forces.

Random encounters is another. However again, if used frequently the randomness disappears.

Changing rest schedule mechanics works for some. However it creste ripple effects.

Personally I use the mana concentration/leyline method..Certain areas let you hel and restore features better due to a high concentration of magic. Dungeons are often stop leylines or built with Magic concentrators.

 

[Flamestrike]

social and exploration encounters that do not drain resources nor create other encounters that drain resources do not count to the threshold.

Yes, they do.

If the party taks its way past a Sphynx, answering its riddles and befriending it, instead of engaging in combat with it (a social encounter) that counts.

And the party will often expend resources on exploration and social encounters. Plenty of spells deal with exploration (teleport, plane shift, fly, levitate, speak with animals, divination spells, passwall, spider climb etc etc) and social (charm person) encounters.

The goal of the party should be to conserve resources. Not to Nova and then fall back and Long rest.

 

[Flamestrike]

FWIW, Im going to be sorely tempted to limit 'X per long rest = to proficiency bonus' abilities (which now seem to be the norm) to no more than once per encounter.

Possibly allowing a PC to expect inspiration to do it a second time in the same encounter.

That to me seems to be a good way to curb nova then rest 5MWD shennanigans.

 

[iserith]

But that's not the issue.

The issue is that 5e is designed for the party to get to 6-8 encounters with 2-3 short rest to maintain balance (nott based on favoritism)

social and exploration encounters that do not drain resources nor create other encounters that drain resources for not count to the threshold.

That's a large threshold that can easily be not met organically.

The question is on solution.

"Time pressure with known stake" or doom clocks can be used. However it is hard to use constantly while keeping adventuring from being stale or run by contrived forced.

Random encounters is another. However again, if used frequently the randomness disappears.

Changing rest schedule mechanics works for some. However it creste ripple effects.

Personally I use the mana concentration/leyline method..Certain areas let you hel and restore features better due to a high concentration of magic. Dungeons are often stop leylines or built with Magic concentrators.

The question for me is why do you see a doom clock as a contrivance, but "dungeons are often built atop ley lines which affect resource recovery" as not a contrivance? If that's not a contrivance, then neither is a doom clock in my view. They're just things that exist in the setting which with the PCs must contend.

In my games, the players frequently hit 6 to 8 encounters per adventuring day. They get stuff done. Time pressure and random encounters are chiefly the tools I use to promote that outcome.

 

[Maxperson]

The question for me is why do you see a doom clock as a contrivance, but "dungeons are often built atop ley lines which affect resource recovery" as not a contrivance? If that's not a contrivance, then neither is a doom clock in my view. They're just things that exist in the setting which with the PCs must contend.

In my games, the players frequently hit 6 to 8 encounters per adventuring day. They get stuff done. Time pressure and random encounters are chiefly the tools I use to promote that outcome.

It's not that the Doom Clock is inherently a contrivance. It's the frequent or constant use of them that is contrived. Sometimes the adventurers are going to have to race to save the princess before the full moon sacrifice. Other times they will be the only ones who know about the Tomb of Not Been Found in 10000 Years and is Still Full of Loot, so they will have time to investigate at their own pace. That's how life works. Sometimes you are rushed and sometimes not, unless you contrive for them to always be rushed.

 

[Minigiant]

Yes, they do.

If the party taks its way past a Sphynx, answering its riddles and befriending it, instead of engaging in combat with it (a social encounter) that counts.

And the party will often expend resources on exploration and social encounters. Plenty of spells deal with exploration (teleport, plane shift, fly, levitate, speak with animals, divination spells, passwall, spider climb etc etc) and social (charm person) encounters.

The goal of the party should be to conserve resources. Not to Nova and then fall back and Long rest.

Social Encounters that don't drain resources don't drain resources.

If you are past the debate or riffle without using resources, they can still deal with the same amount of chancrer.

 

[Minigiant]

The question for me is why do you see a doom clock as a contrivance, but "dungeons are often built atop ley lines which affect resource recovery" as not a contrivance? If that's not a contrivance, then neither is a doom clock in my view. They're just things that exist in the setting which with the PCs must contend.

In my games, the players frequently hit 6 to 8 encounters per adventuring day. They get stuff done. Time pressure and random encounters are chiefly the tools I use to promote that outcome.

The leyline is built into the setting.

The bandits, cultists, and cannibals always waiting 16 hours to kill isn't part of the setting

 

[iserith]

It's not that the Doom Clock is inherently a contrivance. It's the frequent or constant use of them that is contrived. Sometimes the adventurers are going to have to race to save the princess before the full moon sacrifice. Other times they will be the only ones who know about the Tomb of Not Been Found in 10000 Years and is Still Full of Loot, so they will have time to investigate at their own pace. That's how life works. Sometimes you are rushed and sometimes not, unless you contrive for them to always be rushed.

Yet this tomb may well have random encounters - another time pressure, another contrivance.

Either they're all contrivances or none of them are in my view. It's a game based on childhood games of make-believe. It's all made up.

 

[iserith]

The leyline is built into the setting.

The bandits, cultists, and cannibals always waiting 16 hours to kill isn't part of the setting

Much like other posters, it seems to me you're only criticizing time pressures that are poorly implemented. So... don't poorly implement them?