D&D 5E Allow the Long Rest Recharge to Honor Skilled Play or Disallow it to Ensure a Memorable Story

[jgsugden]

The reorientation and smuggling you sense may be due to the question not valid. You use a plethora of unnecessarily ostentatious and erudite diction (yeah, yeah) to ask us which is the best fruit: Durian or Dragon Fruit. The answer is neither is best. (Ripe strawberries or go home).

When I construct a game, I consider the story relative to the capabilities of the PCs. I try to put them in positions where they may be able to 'push through' without rest, or withdraw to rest - but at a cost/risk. These decisions add to the story - and the tension. If they are very efficient or lucky with their resources, the decision to push on is easier. If they're wasteful or unlucky, they may also have an easy decision, but there is a cost to the decision to rest and give enemies time to discover their presence, prepare and fortify (or hunt them down).

The "Storyteller Imperative" does not, never has, and never will, require "Disabling the Long Rest Recharge" to rest. The story does not break, diminish, or weaken if the PCs, in character, make the decision to gamble on resting. We've had basic tools to preserve the tension since the start of the game - wandering monster rolls to be used when resting. The risk of disrupted rest is a part of the story, and it adds to the drama. In fact, resting, in my games, tends to be a tense and fear provoking event.

Ah, but once they hit 5th level they get Tiny Hut and resting is essentially guaranteed! Right? Right? Nope. That is not guaranteed in my game. When the dome is up, it is a protective field. However, it has limits and those limits can be considered by foes. Once PCs have access to this tool, I always consider it when preparing for their resting periods. A few bears might come across it, bat at it, and then walk off after a few minutes. However, intelligent monsters may look at it as an opportunity to trap the PCs.

Considering the "game" elements of D&D as part of the story is natural. Game elements reflect abilities the PCs would realize exist. A rogue with Cunning Action will realize they're faster than their friends. PCs will know how long it takes to rest and recharge. All of these elements are things that can be considered in character by the PCs. That makes them part of the story.

 

[MarkB]

If I want to be that much of a storyteller, I'll just write it down. If I'm running a game, my job is to contribute to what's most fun, not to dictate it.

 

[jmartkdr2]

I disagree with the idea that a long rest is ever earned, and especially the idea that it comes form player skill. The long rest doesn't happen because the players finished a number of encounters or whatever. It's an action the players can take, with a cooldown (once per 24 hours) and the possibility of failure (interuption). A long rest is no more earned through skilled play than an attack or casting a spell.

But, if I'm understanding the OP correctly, that's not really the question. The question is: would I, as a dm, interrupt a long rest because story, even if the players were able to rest for 8 hours in-game without interruption? No, I would not. If the rules only exist when I feel like they should, they are no longer rules - or even guidelines, because they no longer give structure to play. The real game becomes "Can the players guess what story I want them to follow along with?" I hate that game, and wouldn't wish it on my players.

 

[prabe]

I'm trying to distill how GMs prioritize Skilled Play Imperative vs Storytelling Imperative (they are responsible for the meta for this in 5e) in a situation where the two are sharply at tension.

This is where I want everyone to get to exactly. Procedure/extrapolation of the backstory/offscreen/fiction (whatever) to determine if any further obstacles need to be erected between players < > Long Rest recharge is done. Resolved. Over. Long Rest Recharge should be incoming.

The meta implications of their Skilled Play is bad for the "memorable/climactic story" imperative.

What does the GM do?

What you're hearing--not just from me--is that the story elements and the game elements in D&D do not contradict or contravene each other in the way you seem to think they do.

When I said this:

I think in the circumstance you've described, the metaconsequences of denying the long rest are worse than those of allowing it. The players have made the story about something other than the "final battle." So be it.

I meant that the players had changed the story by playing the game. If they've carefully put themselves into the position of turning the "final battle" into an ambush, the story is no longer about the climactic "final battle." It's about how they got the drop on the [thing]. If they're just lucking into the timing of it--meaning that even though they're managing their resources skillfully, they're not expecting to be getting the drop on something--then if you think the "final battle" needs more to be "climactic," you can give it more if you want.

I mean, there are countermeasures to the Long Rest itself, if a DM wants to deploy them. Sometimes it makes sense to. Sometimes it doesn't, if you're not a dick.

 

[Charlaquin]

I disagree with your premise, that allowing a Long Rest would interfere with whatever story was emerging. My games are very much about the emergent story, and I don't believe I have ever interfered with a Long Rest because I thought it would make a better story. It's possible that the Gawds of Random have been on the players' side, and nothing has come up on them while they were attempting to Long Rest--but I have nonspecific recollections otherwise.

While the example is framed rather strangely, I think I understand the point it’s trying to get at. I don’t know about you, but I try to keep things like narrative pacing in mind when designing scenarios. I prepare for full adventuring days, and I try to give them a good engagement curve. But that’s all just planning and as they say, no plan survives contact with the players. Some sessions go fairly similarly to what I prepared for, some sessions go wildly differently, and I’ll always prioritize honoring the players’ choices over preserving the pacing I tried to build into my design.

 

[Charlaquin]

@Manbearcat I think the example is getting in the way here. People have too much baggage bound up in terms of how they handle long rests and whether or not they can be “earned” and what “story” even means in a D&D context, let alone what makes one good. All you’re likely to end up with is bickering over definitions and trying to re-contextualize the example. If what you want to know is if people prioritize honoring the results of skilled play or preserving a particular intended narrative structure, that’s what you should ask. No clarifications or examples or context. Such things just give us pedants something to pick apart instead of answering the actual question.

For my part, I prioritize skilled play when those two things come into conflict.

 

[prabe]

While the example is framed rather strangely, I think I understand the point it’s trying to get at. I don’t know about you, but I try to keep things like narrative pacing in mind when designing scenarios. I prepare for full adventuring days, and I try to give them a good engagement curve. But that’s all just planning and as they say, no plan survives contact with the players. Some sessions go fairly similarly to what I prepared for, some sessions go wildly differently, and I’ll always prioritize honoring the players’ choices over preserving the pacing I tried to build into my design.

I guess I can see it being a concern, if you are treating sessions as something like chapters. I don't. Other than not wanting to run too late, I don't really care when in the session a fight happens. Of course, I also don't much set out to make sure parties have full adventuring days, either--they have the encounters that make narrative sense.

I also have found that my planning has been getting sparser and sparser lately. That's a different issue.

 

[iserith]

86ing the Forge waffle would also be good in my view. That jargon is not helpful.

 

[Charlaquin]

Forge waffle

It began with the forging of the great pancakes...

 

[Fenris-77]

It began with the forging of the great pancakes...

The cast iron pans of the gods clanged on their great stove, like the thunder of mountains shifting. Oceans of batter were stirred by the gyrations of the first leviathans, casting up clouds of flour to blot out the sun. The kiss of the batter on the Flat Top of Olympus was as the hissing of a legion of devils. Zeus clapped his hands and rivers of syrup poured forth from golden spigots forged by Hephaestus.