D&D 5E A mechanical solution to the problem with rests

[Sacrosanct]

Hehe....

"Please, save my baby from those Orcs!"
"I'm sorry ma'am, we've got to fight the baron in three weeks time, and after that possibly a necromancer somewhere in the winter and we can't afford to take unnecessary damage and rest too often. Try the local fighters guild......"

I was thinking more of, "It will take 2 weeks to travel from here to the orc infested castle BLAAARRRGGGHHH!, but we can't do any actual resting. Even on the quiet nights. Even at an inn. We don't want to waste them."

"So.....you're not getting the benefits of a rest for staying at an inn overnight, but you are getting the benefits of a full rest after spending 8 hours in a smelly rat infested closet that you're hiding in at Castle BLLAAAAAARRRRGGGHHH? Um...OK."

 

[KarinsDad]

It was one of your examples, you focused on it.

Yes, but I used it to indicate that there are spells cast outside of adventuring that do not deserve XP. Not that there was anything wrong casting it every day.

Systematically using-recharging-using an ability, indefinitely, even when not adventuring, is a red flag. Most abilities don't get (ab)used that way.

You mean like Mage Armor?

Like Aid?

I take the time and effort out to brush my teeth and shower every single day. It's time I could be doing for something else, but I prefer the benefits and consider the cost to be inconsequential.

I see no difference with that and casting Animate Dead for 1 minute every day for a PC.

Many spells have no cost but the slot to cast them. Outside of time pressure of some sort, that's no cost, at all.

It's an obvious downside to an n/day limitation, but one we're so accustomed to, it's easy to lose sight of.

Animate Dead has no cost but the slot to maintain it. How is it different than any other spell? How is that different than casting Mage Armor every single day and having the benefits of that (other than Mage Armor not lasting 24 hours, but it could be cast 3 times a day)?

 

[Tony Vargas]

You mean like Mage Armor?

Like Aid?

Yep. By casting them systematically you have a benefit always available that's supposed to be a limited-use benefit.

I take the time and effort out to brush my teeth and shower every single day. It's time I could be doing for something else, but I prefer the benefits and consider the cost to be inconsequential.

If you were in an area with tight enough water rationing you might feel differently. If said rationing weren't tight enough to influence your behavior, it's prettymuch not rationing.

 

[KarinsDad]

Yep. By casting them systematically you have a benefit always available that's supposed to be a limited-use benefit.

What I don't understand is your contention that these are supposed to be limited use benefits. Where dose it state that?

The game is designed such that it is up to the player to decide whether they are used in a limited fashion, or always available (shy of extremely unusual circumstances), or not at all. Systematic casting of spells is a feature of the game.

Sorry, I don't get it. Why would a DM even want to intrude into the decisions of a player for something that the game pretty much gives the player total control over for his PC? Why would that bother a DM and why would the DM want to p__s in his player's cornflakes over it?


I don't decide how my players roleplay, Why would I care about what spells they cast every day? Yeah, maybe if the spell was unbalancing the campaign in some way (like Animate Objects has the potential to wreck one encounter per spell slot).


Sure, if the DM wants a Gritty Realism feel in his campaign as per page 267 of the DMG, then fine. Mage Armor then DOES become a benefit that's supposed to be a limited-use benefit. Absolutely.

But as the core game is designed, that's not the case. That's a variant rule. The game is designed for Mage Armor to more or less be available whenever the player wants it to be.

If you were in an area with tight enough water rationing you might feel differently. If said rationing weren't tight enough to influence your behavior, it's prettymuch not rationing.

Except that I don't live in a Gritty Realism campaign world. That variant rule has not yet been implemented. When it does, the rules will change. In the meantime, rationing is not needed and Mage Armor can be cast every day.

 

[Tony Vargas]

What I don't understand is your contention that these are supposed to be limited use benefits. Where dose it state that?

They're spells, spells use slots. They're more potent than abilities that are unlimited-use. Very basic, mildly problematic, foundational D&D design assumption.

Why would a DM even want to intrude into the decisions of a player for something that the game pretty much gives the player total control over for his PC?

'Cause he's feel'n all Empowered and stuff?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

It is an interesting observation. One or two long rests per level...
I wouldn't enforce that. But it is helpful if you plan milestone afvancement.

Sent from my GT-I9506 using EN World mobile app

 

[CapnZapp]

Hehe....

"Please, save my baby from those Orcs!"
"I'm sorry ma'am, we've got to fight the baron in three weeks time, and after that possibly a necromancer somewhere in the winter and we can't afford to take unnecessary damage and rest too often. Try the local fighters guild......"

You may laugh, but to some players, the way regular D&D heroes can do dungeons each day the year long, is much less believable than heroes eventually being mentally and physically worn out, and in need of an extended vacation.

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

 

[schnee]

Yep. By casting them systematically you have a benefit always available that's supposed to be a limited-use benefit.

Theoretically I agree with Dad here. The 'limited use' is the number of spell slots available. If a spellcaster wants to burn all their 3rd level spells that way, why not?

The question, is how does it play out in the game? With a dungeon delving party, does this wreck games? I haven't seen it in person. Given ideal conditions, it could get out of control in several days' time, but it seems fragile, and I'd say a dungeon with smart denizens would adjust to that sort of thing fairly quickly.

I could see feuding Goblins and Kobolds teaming up to destroy the undead, Tucker-style.

After a certain level I could even see it becoming a bad use of those spell slots. 12 zombies max, and a 7th level Cleric wipes them out with one action.

What am I missing?

 

[schnee]

I see where the OP is going, but how would parties know ahead of time how long the adventure is, and how many rests they can take?

Doing it that way also assumes a certain strict adherence to the CR rules. What if you're in a 'sandbox' game, with a much swingier type of play?

IMO I prefer the old school style of using elapsed time and random encounters, once parties get into a hazardous / adventure / quest situation. (Scarcity of consumables has been almost eliminated in this version, so it's a non-issue unless you use optional rules like slower healing.)

Once a parties' presence is known of in the dungeon, the longer they wait, the better prepared the opposition can be. As a DM, you have to think in terms of how the day-to-day life works out to make this not seem railroad-y, and establish things like the lines of communication between various denizens, so players can knowingly or unknowingly trigger or disrupt them.

Random encounters - yeah, don't get too comfy - that paranoid Dragon in level 4 sends out scouts on a regular basis to make sure the other denizens aren't plotting something. And those scouts don't necessarily need to attack - just do recon and get away. Oh, the Dragon knows? Maybe it starts influencing the other sentient creatures to prepare or attack.

It demands more prep, but I think it's ultimately a better way to manage the 'encounters per day' - basically, make it so the characters are always struggling to get their rests, due to natural consequences of the characters coming in to a new environment and disturbing a fragile equilibrium (or being thrust into something incredibly chaotic) and the game will play out just fine.

 

[DaveDash]

I don't think 5e needs mechanics to dictate the pacing or class balance any more than it has already. I am happy with the DM and the story determining when to rest, not mechanics. And after decades of 3rd Edition, 4th Edition, and loads of MMO computer gaming it did take me a while to make peace with this aspect of 5e.

Yes, some class features and other such things do become a bit more powerful based on resting pace, but it's hardly been an issue that needs addressing in any of the games I've played or ran now for over two years.

We also tend not to have 6-8 encounters per adventuring day, the natural pacing of our group sits around 4-5 encounters per adventuring day. But we are tinkering with some of the slow natural healing rules at the moment to see what impact this has on our game. In other words, there's already a lot of tools in the kit bag to address such issues without adding in more mechanics.
It's a design intent of the system NOT to have a rule or mechanic for everything, and let the DM decide what's best for the game.