Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tobold" data-source="post: 7185221" data-attributes="member: 6691663">Thank you. This is probably the best explanation of the problem in the whole thread.The question is not whether the 6-8 medium to hard encounters per adventuring day is a rule or a guideline. It is just a simple fact that the devs designed game balance, both in terms of players vs. monsters and in terms of class balance based on a premise of this many encounters between rests. Of course 5th edition D&D remains viable with any other resting setup or house rule. But if you run a campaign with more frequent long rests for example, certain classes are going to be overpowered and others are going to be underpowered.It is only natural for players to push for more frequent rests if that makes their character more powerful. And it is up to the DM to deal with that request and see what the negative consequences in terms of too trivial encounters or players unhappy with their devalued class would be. Fundamentally there are three solutions that the DM can use: <ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">A story-based solution where the DM basically tells the group that they can't rest when they want because of time or other constraints; that solution wears thin over time as time constraints don't work with every single story.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">A consequence solution, where the world reacts to the group taking a rest, e.g. with the monsters using the time to defend better; that solution only solves the players vs. monsters balance issue, and doesn't help the poor fighter or warlock being constantly outshone by the frequently rested barbarian or wizard.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">A mechanical solution where the DM changes the resting rules from the standard 8-hour long rest gives you back all resources. The DMG even lists an option like the long rest takes 7 days version. And this forum is full of proposals.</li> </ol></blockquote>

Verification