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

[Manbearcat]

If the DM violates what's already been established--either in game-facts, or in play-style--they're risking their credibility. If you're leaning hard enough into Skilled Play (as a play style) that the PCs are able to establish an ability to take a Long Rest, you're violating established stuff to prevent them from doing so; if you've established that the PCs know Strahd's capabilities, you're violating established stuff to change them.

But this assumes that you're leaning hard enough into Skilled Play. Yes, I agree, if you're leaning hard into Skilled Play, this would be a GM risking their credibility. But 5e GM's don't have to do that. There are two other Styles of Play cited on page 34. One doesn't lean into Skilled Play. The other is halvsies.

I made my post to address all 5e GMs...not just the ones that are leaning hard enough into Skilled Play. I was curious about how the voting would turn out given how much leaning into the other two play styles cited on page 34 I see in 5e threads.

My point is that they're very rarely at odds in the way the OP suggests.

I don't suggest anything about frequency in the lead post. There is nothing there about frequency at all.

In fact, I don't even believe this would be a frequent thing (I've GMed 5e for probably 100 Long Rests? At all levels 1-20...I've seen/felt the tension of this maybe a handful of times?).

My question was "when this does happen (even if its only 1 in 50 long rests)...what do you do?"

@loverdrive had the most interesting answer (none of the above). "My bad guys, please don't take the Long Rest or it will screw play up" (again, a D&D version of "hold on lightly").

 

[Vaalingrade]

Unable to vote 'allow long rest to preserve fun, don't care about skilled play'.

 

[hawkeyefan]

In the example, the rules about long rests. It could be any other game rule, though, and OP's question would still apply.

But isn't the DM granted the ability to discard or alter rules if they think it's necessary? And wouldn't a play priority of "do what's most exciting" offer a lot of leeway in that regard.

Again, a specific group of players might object to this based on their preferences, and what has been established as their expectations on how the Gm handles this kind of thing.

Another specific group of players may be fine with it.

The books pretty much support either approach. They just say that you should discuss with your players which approach you will take, and consider their input.

If the DM violates what's already been established--either in game-facts, or in play-style--they're risking their credibility. If you're leaning hard enough into Skilled Play (as a play style) that the PCs are able to establish an ability to take a Long Rest, you're violating established stuff to prevent them from doing so; if you've established that the PCs know Strahd's capabilities, you're violating established stuff to change them.

My point is that they're very rarely at odds in the way the OP suggests.

That may be. Especially for a given group or GM. I think there is significant evidence that shows they can be. Lots of discussions revolve around that conflict, I'd say, or some element of it.

Nope. So long as you didn't establish that those minions didn't exist. (Or, in principle, if you didn't elide them after establishing they did exist, in the event the PCs never found the Sunsword.)

Well there's a reasonable amount of gray area about the resources at Strahd's disposal to the point that the GM can deploy any number of options. That's why I mentioned the "dial" being invisible. I could add or take away minions as needed to match the party's strength.

Skilled play of the classic type would require a set amount of opposition ahead of time. And while an action such as a Long Rest would also allow the NPCs to prepare or marshal forces, there's no set number of creatures as there most likely would have been in one of the old modules. How many Vistani can Strahd have at his disposal? How many vampire brides? How many zombies? The book at best makes suggestions on these topics.

Given this, what would you say was my priority when it came to my group's showdown with Strahd?

 

[Manbearcat]

Unable to vote 'allow long rest to preserve fun, don't care about skilled play'.

That is the 2nd one; Fun/story.

 

[jmartkdr2]

But isn't the DM granted the ability to discard or alter rules if they think it's necessary? And wouldn't a play priority of "do what's most exciting" offer a lot of leeway in that regard.

Again, a specific group of players might object to this based on their preferences, and what has been established as their expectations on how the Gm handles this kind of thing.

Another specific group of players may be fine with it.

The books pretty much support either approach. They just say that you should discuss with your players which approach you will take, and consider their input.

I mean if that's your answer, that's fine, but the question being asked was:

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?

My answer is: I will retain skilled play as a variable.

I do this because it's easier to tweak the story when the rules go against it than it is to salvage a campaign when player choices can be nullified by the dm at any point.

 

[Manbearcat]

Man, if people didn’t think 5e was a Rorschach Test before...this thread cements it!

 

[Manbearcat]

I mean if that's your answer, that's fine, but the question being asked was:

My answer is: I will retain skilled play as a variable.

I do this because it's easier to tweak the story when the rules go against it than it is to salvage a campaign when player choices can be nullified by the dm at any point.

Thats a good answer.

And again, this isn’t a Kafka Trap. There are no wrong answers. This is just me being curious.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

"Yeah, we got so far ahead we were able to long rest in Strahd's own bedroom before we stomped on him!" is a better story than "We were doing great until the dm decided to take away a rest just to make the last fight 'fair' for Strahd."

Yes, the former screams BOTH. Skilled play allowed the party to outwit Strahd and get the long rest. But the story gets its due here as, for years and years I’m sure, the players will recount (pun?) how they all managed to sardine into Strahd’s coffin the night before defeating him.

 

[jgsugden]

PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT REVISED

Are there D&D 5e GMs on the planet earth, posting on ENWorld, who have experienced the following?

A dissatisfying anti-climax (be it the rest of a dungeon crawl or a BBEG encounter or whatever) > which made the story "not particularly memorable" (at least not in a good way) > because the players played (and that includes building their PCs - both individually and synergistically) with sufficient skill that a timely Long Rest recharged all their goodies and a walkover/curbstomp ensued.
...

Not in a long, long, long, long, long time. Many readers of this board were not alive when I last had this problem in the 1980s.

I've had dissatisfying anti-climatic ends. Every DM does. However, mine had no link between a long rest (or just reset in older editions) being taken and the ease of the final challenge.

When PCs use valid tactics to ensure they'll be at peak efficiency when they get to the BBEG - it is celebrated. In game, the PCs planned well and made good choices. If they stomp the BBEG, they're applauded and we talk about how much harder it could have been had they not been rested. The players feel awesome for doing well, and the DM smiles because the players are happy.

When I have an anti-climatic end, it is usually because the players outsmart me in a way that bypasses story - not because they heroically win in a heroic fashion. It is when they figure out a way to not even go in the dungeon and still get the information they need.

Your basic premise that PCs being well rested when hitting the BBEG is inherently bad for the story is 100% wrong. While being weak on resources when you get to the BBEG can have fun results, so can being at full power. In my 40 years of experience, there is no tie between how well rested PCs are and how well a story plays out. None. Nada. Nuttin.

 

[iserith]

Regarding Strahd in Curse of Strahd:

How did the final fight with Dracula go in Bram Stoker's Dracula? I'm talking about the movie in the 90s, not the book. As I recall, those hunting Dracula were well-prepared for that fight and won handily in the end.