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

[Fenris-77]

That happens all the time in 5E play. The game is built to encourage a certain amount of nova play.

 

[iserith]

1) Feel bad about yourselves because you're a bad person for not having fun.

In case it's not clear to anyone reading, you said that, not me. I don't believe someone is a bad person because their expectations are not aligned with what a challenge's outcomes can be.

 

[Bawylie]

Question for 5e GMs out there. I proposed this in another thread, and I'm curious about the community at larges' answer.

Consider the lead question (and the question in the poll).

5e (by design) possesses significant asymmetric power relationships and authority distribution disparity. It also possesses two play priorities that can sometimes be at tension: Skilled Play Imperative and Storyteller Imperative. The configuration of this (by my reckoning) is captured below:

1) Rulings Not Rules (not just action resolution mediation...this also includes following rules/ignoring rules/changing rules in the pursuit of a memorable story and a fun time) + GM as Lead Storyteller (a Role and the mandate afforded that role to ensure a memorable is told at the table and people have "fun.")

2) An admixture of table-facing and GM-facing aspects of play that can wax/wane/change as play unfolds.

3) (1) + (2) above is a mandate for the deployment of GM Force at the GM's discretion to facilitate their role and responsibility as lead storyteller/entertainer/fun-ensurer.

4) However, simultaneous to that is a Skilled Play imperative that undergirds all D&D play since time immemorial (eg defeat each individual obstacle and the continuum of obstacles skillfully and be rewarded).


So you've got the potential for competing priorities here. Since the late 80s (when the Storyteller Imperative "came online"), the typical way Traditional GMing has resolved this is by attempting to juggle both the Skilled Play Imperative ball and the Storyteller Imperative ball, keeping them in the air as best they can, only until one must be prioritized over the other. How GM-facing the game is, how asymmetric the power relationships/authority distribution is, how much the manipulation of offscreen/backstory items (particularly offscreen and backstory items that have yet to be established in play) matters... all collectively serve as cover for letting one of those two balls fall to the floor while the other remains suspended (with the GM prioritizing it as the most important imperative at this particular moment of play).


So consider the Rest/Recharge. The players have played Skillfully in a scenario (be it a dungeon crawl or a plane-hopping excursion or a wilderness trek or whatever). They've relatively dominated but they've expended enough resources that they want to attempt a Long Rest to Recharge.

* The Table-Facing aspects of play all say that the Wizard and the group's contingencies should allow this Long Rest to occur. They have defeated the obstacles skillfully, skillfully picked their builds to allow the recharge, carefully planned their contingencies to enable the recharge.

* The Skilled Play Imperative requires the Long Rest should occur.

HOWEVER...

* The Storyteller imperative is at tension with whether the Long Rest will occur. Its invariably (or at least almost assuredly) going to lead to unrewarding, anticlimax if it occurs.

* The GM-Facing and the asymmetric power relationship say that the GM can just deploy move x, y, or z (or all 3 if they wish) to ensure that the Long Rest Recharge doesn't occur. There is nothing systemitizing this (like, say, the way the table-facing Doom Pool grows in Cortex as a result of play and there are rules about when/how it grows and when/how the GM can deploy it to erect a "block" of a player move). The GM is just extrapolating from the fiction (and almost surely leveraging offscreen/backstory info that hasn't been established in play) in order to make this happen...but the important part here is that their first principles to justify this "block" are The Storyteller Imperative requires the Long Rest Recharge must be disabled.

So its entirely possible for the GM to extrapolate the situation naturalistically such that the Long Rest Recharge should be enabled and the GM can naturalistically extrapolate "the block" (disabling The Long Rest Recharge), because, realistically, almost any situation can possess enough intersecting variables such that a model would yield a dozen or more reasonably likely outcomes.

---

So the question in the poll is, in the above situation, do you prioritize Skilled Play (the players have defeated the obstacles before them and done all the things that would reasonably allow for a Long Rest Recharge...BUT...the story is going to suffer for it because the climax is going to be anticlimactic) OR do you prioritize your responsibility with the Storytelling Imperative (you execute the block by using move x, y, z, which you can always reasonably extrapolate because of your unilateral access to offscreen/backstory, and deny the Long Rest Recharge because you deem the Storyteller Imperative as the most important priority here)?

Which do you do 5e GMs?

PSA - Please don't drag this into "False Dichotomy" territory. There are going to be moments where the results of Skilled Play will absolutely lead to Anti-climax (negatively affecting the impact and "memorablnessitude" of a key story moment). At these moments the Skilled Play and Memorable Story priorities are entirely at tension (and as a 5e GM, it is your principal job to facilitate these aspects of play). D&D players/participants/magazine articles/forums have discussed this since time immemorial. Just consider any moment like that if you don't like the example above. As a 5e GM, as an expression of your 5e GM-liness and the mandate afforded you...how do you typically respond? Which ball stays on the air...which ball hits the ground?

The premise does indeed smell like a particular waffle - I agree with other posters on that.

But the question - which ball hits the ground and which stays in the air? - is fair.

And the answer is Neither. These aren’t in tension at all. Leave aside the idea that “the story emerges from play,” for a second. The GUD STOREE stuff happens in the design and overall structure & prep while the GUD PLAY happens at the table. So long as these (Imperatives or whatever) stay in their lanes and aren’t forced into conflict, there won’t be any conflict.

When I write the game, from the central conflict to the maps, there’s no play involved. When I run the game, the story exists as a superstructure akin to the walls of a dungeon - not a moment-to-moment concern. Sure, there are some adjustments to make when adapting to decisions made in play like making sure there’s a fitting end to the game session, so you don’t end mid-battle or whatever. But these two things occupy their own spaces and frameworks.

Therefore if we’re playing at the table and they earned the rest, they get it. If I’m writing/prepping the game, I have in mind an approximation of what kind of firepower the players have access to generally (fireball/fly/multi-attack at 5th level) and don’t sweat how loaded for bear they are at any given point within.

Put another way, when I’m grocery shopping I’m not concerning myself with how hungry I’ll be on Tuesday’s lunch (just assuming I’ll have a meal at that time). And when I’m cooking or eating, I’m not worrying about whether the store has a good price on milk and eggs this week.

 

[Manbearcat]

In case it's not clear to anyone reading, you said that, not me. I don't believe someone is a bad person because their expectations are not aligned with what a challenge's outcomes can be.

So long as they vote in my poll I don't care what they think about my tongue-and-cheek joke about post # 67! Just vote in my poll!

 

[Charlaquin]

Further still, don't you think think that their actual play (initiate a block to a player move when a player couldn't have possibly inferred was out there, deus ex machina, changing rules, ignoring rules, ignoring the results of action resolution, when Skilled Play would lead to anticlimax) is supported in the actual rules text for 5e and in the Adventure Paths that 5e designers have put forth?

Not even a little bit in the actual rules text. Maybe in some of the worse-written adventure paths, kind of, a little bit, if you squint really hard. The designers just endeavor to make the most non-confrontational “however you like to play is fine” statements they possibly can.

 

[Charlaquin]

EDIT - As of right now, GUD PLAY is lapping the field while GUD STORY hasn't made it out of the first turn.

I suspect this has a lot to do with the fact that most people here believe good play always or almost always creates good stories, but not all good stories are good to play.

 

[Charlaquin]

The premise does indeed smell like a particular waffle

Chocolate chip?!

 

[Flamestrike]

Long rests are possible when the story and environment (including time constraints) allow them, and the PCs choose to take one (possibly incurring negative story or environmental consequences).

There should nearly always be a risk/ reward attached to resting (long rests in particular).

Luke Skywalker couldn't just bugger off to long rest when in the middle of saving Han Solo from Vader, or when the Death Star was about to blow up Alderran. Colonel John Matrix couldn't just put his feet up and take a the night off when his daughter was being held captive by Bennett and the plane he was supposed to be on was about to land tipping the bad guys off. The Fellowship couldn't just park a tent and rest for 8 hours in Moria while being pursued by the Balrog and an army of Orcs.

All of those things, are regulated by the DM. If the DM isnt imposing (or turning his mind) to the environmental and story considerations when framing his adventure (and campaign) he isnt doing his job properly, and its one hell of a boring story.

 

[MarkB]

Or.

"Fun" is a quality so ephemeral, a metric of evaluation so malleable, that its impossible to say exactly what its constituent parts are...and certainly what they "should be."

But isn't that exactly what a DM is doing if they decide to override the players' efforts and choices in favour of something they think will be "more fun"?

 

[clearstream]

Question for 5e GMs out there. I proposed this in another thread, and I'm curious about the community at larges' answer.

Consider the lead question (and the question in the poll).

5e (by design) possesses significant asymmetric power relationships and authority distribution disparity. It also possesses two play priorities that can sometimes be at tension: Skilled Play Imperative and Storyteller Imperative. The configuration of this (by my reckoning) is captured below:

1) Rulings Not Rules (not just action resolution mediation...this also includes following rules/ignoring rules/changing rules in the pursuit of a memorable story and a fun time) + GM as Lead Storyteller (a Role and the mandate afforded that role to ensure a memorable is told at the table and people have "fun.")

2) An admixture of table-facing and GM-facing aspects of play that can wax/wane/change as play unfolds.

3) (1) + (2) above is a mandate for the deployment of GM Force at the GM's discretion to facilitate their role and responsibility as lead storyteller/entertainer/fun-ensurer.

4) However, simultaneous to that is a Skilled Play imperative that undergirds all D&D play since time immemorial (eg defeat each individual obstacle and the continuum of obstacles skillfully and be rewarded).


So you've got the potential for competing priorities here. Since the late 80s (when the Storyteller Imperative "came online"), the typical way Traditional GMing has resolved this is by attempting to juggle both the Skilled Play Imperative ball and the Storyteller Imperative ball, keeping them in the air as best they can, only until one must be prioritized over the other. How GM-facing the game is, how asymmetric the power relationships/authority distribution is, how much the manipulation of offscreen/backstory items (particularly offscreen and backstory items that have yet to be established in play) matters... all collectively serve as cover for letting one of those two balls fall to the floor while the other remains suspended (with the GM prioritizing it as the most important imperative at this particular moment of play).


So consider the Rest/Recharge. The players have played Skillfully in a scenario (be it a dungeon crawl or a plane-hopping excursion or a wilderness trek or whatever). They've relatively dominated but they've expended enough resources that they want to attempt a Long Rest to Recharge.

* The Table-Facing aspects of play all say that the Wizard and the group's contingencies should allow this Long Rest to occur. They have defeated the obstacles skillfully, skillfully picked their builds to allow the recharge, carefully planned their contingencies to enable the recharge.

* The Skilled Play Imperative requires the Long Rest should occur.

HOWEVER...

* The Storyteller imperative is at tension with whether the Long Rest will occur. Its invariably (or at least almost assuredly) going to lead to unrewarding, anticlimax if it occurs.

* The GM-Facing and the asymmetric power relationship say that the GM can just deploy move x, y, or z (or all 3 if they wish) to ensure that the Long Rest Recharge doesn't occur. There is nothing systemitizing this (like, say, the way the table-facing Doom Pool grows in Cortex as a result of play and there are rules about when/how it grows and when/how the GM can deploy it to erect a "block" of a player move). The GM is just extrapolating from the fiction (and almost surely leveraging offscreen/backstory info that hasn't been established in play) in order to make this happen...but the important part here is that their first principles to justify this "block" are The Storyteller Imperative requires the Long Rest Recharge must be disabled.

So its entirely possible for the GM to extrapolate the situation naturalistically such that the Long Rest Recharge should be enabled and the GM can naturalistically extrapolate "the block" (disabling The Long Rest Recharge), because, realistically, almost any situation can possess enough intersecting variables such that a model would yield a dozen or more reasonably likely outcomes.

---

So the question in the poll is, in the above situation, do you prioritize Skilled Play (the players have defeated the obstacles before them and done all the things that would reasonably allow for a Long Rest Recharge...BUT...the story is going to suffer for it because the climax is going to be anticlimactic) OR do you prioritize your responsibility with the Storytelling Imperative (you execute the block by using move x, y, z, which you can always reasonably extrapolate because of your unilateral access to offscreen/backstory, and deny the Long Rest Recharge because you deem the Storyteller Imperative as the most important priority here)?

Which do you do 5e GMs?

PSA - Please don't drag this into "False Dichotomy" territory. There are going to be moments where the results of Skilled Play will absolutely lead to Anti-climax (negatively affecting the impact and "memorablnessitude" of a key story moment). At these moments the Skilled Play and Memorable Story priorities are entirely at tension (and as a 5e GM, it is your principal job to facilitate these aspects of play). D&D players/participants/magazine articles/forums have discussed this since time immemorial. Just consider any moment like that if you don't like the example above. As a 5e GM, as an expression of your 5e GM-liness and the mandate afforded you...how do you typically respond? Which ball stays on the air...which ball hits the ground?

It might go beyond false dichotomy, to our assumptions about what is, or can be, "narrative". I've felt for awhile that one way to view games might be as a novel narrative form - non-linear, dynamic, interactive. Let's call that "gameful narrative". It is a form that maps better to the world we experience than linear forms, albeit we are still learning to craft it successfully and it is more complex and arduous to do so than other forms.

SP shouldn't then require that the rest occurs. Once the narrative is seen as gameful, and the rest is gameful, the two work together. The conflict described in the OP is that the "narrative" and "gameful narrative" parted ways. The solution is back up the chain. It is not denying the rest, it is ensuring that the rest forms part of a rigorous mode of "gameful narrative". That is achieved by the DM having a holistic picture of the terms of their "gameful narrative".