Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="tetrasodium" data-source="post: 9658214" data-attributes="member: 93670">Your entire post seems to be various flavors of claiming that you are not convinced from your self granted position of authority over acceptable vrs badwrongfun play..  worse is that you do it while relying on a strongly implied "wotc did surveys and they know what's fun" in all of those bolded sections.Your don't play with someone like Bob who voices outrage isn't quite accurate though because of how the context is changed from the original quote of "the rules themselves actively sandbag the GM who cares to push back when a player like Bob starts voicing outrage about RAI surveys and fun".  Given that your own post quite literally does the same just by continually bringing up how rules supporting the gm in pushing back against Bob are not needed and wouldn't improve the game you show why it was a failure for wotc to not bother with it. The rules bury the bar so far below ground for players that they only feel the need to dismiss any reasoning presented against excess in order to sandbag resistance to excess  is deeply against RAI. Unfortunately for the GM attempting to push back against such a high bar, it becomes the gm who is immediately painted as the one derailing the game with toxic rules lawyering icalvinball style changes because with absolutely no bar for players to meet there is zero effort from the players to even consider the scenario before the gm feels the need to use fiat to block the rest with the scenario itself or troll the party with endless interruptions to the rest.I too remember those ultra long rests still present in 2e, but you aren't quite reporting how it tended to work in play. When someone in the party felt they needed to rest there would be a comment about it and the party would express  a desire to find a safe place to rest or go back to town so they could.  While there were risks involved if the safe place/town was volatile enough that events could intrude, the important part was agreeing with the gm what needed to be done to safely rest or what fraction of a rest could be taken at some lesser area.  Once that was worked out and PC actions were taken it was simply done at the speed of plot.  The only time players were left slowly ticking off drips and drabs was when the gm and players disagree on what mata safe place to rest and the players decide to take one anyways knowing that there were real risks they couldn't shrug off consequence free simply by trying again until the gm gives up. By comparison the 5e rules for resting effectively assume that it should always be safe to rest here and now and that the gm is always going to be the one pushing things too far when the scenario of that rest suggest otherwise.</blockquote>

Verification