Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 7186216" data-attributes="member: 71699">I wanted to summarise where I think things are generally, and respond to the mechanical issues raised in this thread.Nothing to see here?Some people assert that this isn't a problem for their group. It's impossible to say anything about that without seeing their group in play. I suspect that if you have a group who are engaged with the game mechanics, then this is a problem at your table. (Whether you notice that is another matter. There are always obscuring factors in the mix for a given gaming group.) On the other hand, if your group is focused on the RP then nothing much about the game mechanics is really an issue for you. However you side on this, I value posters who respected the purpose of this thread. The mechanical problem addressed doesn't need to be a problem for you or your group, for someone else to be genuinely interested in looking at it and imagining solutions for it. (And maybe one day, those solutions will benefit you without your noticing.)Story-based solutions?!Many posters advanced that the best solution is to adjust your story to put pressure on your players. So long as a mechanical solution integrates with calendar rests (my one does), then there is no dichotomy between liking story-based solutions and liking supportive mechanics. Or if you believe there is, then the burden is on you to show how one forestalls the other? Additionally, in the context of this thread "story-based solutionists" need to decide if they are really dealing with the problem that this thread was created to deal with, or sweeping it neatly under the carpet? That is, when the going gets rough due to attrition and bad rolls, are they really holding players to account? And if they are holding players to account, then they may need to reconsider their objections.Mechanical problems raisedThank you! I value these hugely, and posters have pointed out a few significant mechanical hurdles. At the top of my list to find imaginative solutions for are<ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">How does the system map to spell durations?</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Should casters be allowed to change their spell lists without spending recoveries?</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">When do you recover levels of exhaustion? And other "world effects"? (Effects on a rest clock that come from things other than PCs.)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">What about downtime activities (like training, if used?)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">If characters use resources outside of encounters, how do they refresh them if they're not earning XP?</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Will variance be a problem?</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">How might DMs retain some flexibility while still benefiting from mechanically meaningful easy and medium encounters?</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">What happens when the value that two players put on resting diverges widely, because one has expended many resources and the other has expended few? In the standard system, the latter player doesn't need to conserve recoveries so could be more tolerant of the former players desire to rest because at least they get some small benefit out of it.</li> </ol>I believe that some of these hurdles need solutions even outside of the mechanical solution proposed, because they amount to a lock-in to the standard schedule of rests and I don't believe that kind of lock-in is good for the game. For instance, if we go with Gritty Realism from the DMG we hit most of those problems. It's super-easy to overlook how sophisticated and joined-up D&D is.Have I missed any mechanical problems of significance? The goal of this kind of design is always to get to a good starting point for playtesting! (@Jester David I'd be shocked if a design was correct on first draught, and testing may reveal problems not yet considered.)</blockquote>

Verification