Confusion

[Nikosandros]

Getting back to the perception bonus to allies, I don't understand why they choose to specify such a short range which will create some weird clustering among PCs... IMHO it would have been better just to grant the bonus to all the allies that are "close" to the elf.

 

[Kraydak]

Eh?

As it stands, rest in 3e means 'not doing anything strenuous'. A wizard who is 'resting' to get his spells back can ride on horseback at a casual pace, walk, make tea, etc for 8 hours.

A spelclaster who doesn't have to sleep (Warforged, spellcaster with a Ring of Sustenance) just needs to 'Be at rest'.

So if defining what 'rest' is for a spellcaster for 8 hours isn't a problem, then defining what rest is for a single minute shouldn't be any harder.

A wizard who can sleep MUST sleep for his rest in 3e. Not all 8 hours, but he must be asleep for part of it. But the point is somewhat academic as the time difference between 8 hours (480 minutes) and 1 minute is enough for a qualitative difference and problems with defining what rest is.

Is riding a horse (walking) rest? I hope so. A galloping horse at the heroic tier? Probably not. At the paragon tier? Arguable certainly. I could see riding a galloping steed through a (1st level warrior) battlefield as being "restful" at the epic tier. How about a howling blizzard? How much shelter do you need?

But that, of course, assumes that you need rest to recover per-encounter abilities. Of course, if you can rest to recover per-encounter abilities, can a person inside a forcecage (barless), facing non-teleporting foes (so under no immediate threat), rest? Does it matter if he can teleport out (and so could choose to remain part of the encounter) or not (in which case he was effectively removed from combat)? I can imagine encounters (with absolute *hordes* of weenie foes) where it would be worthwhile to swap party members into and out of combat to recover healing ability, but where the in combat portion of the party could afford to lose people for tens of rounds. Certainly someone who teleported out *without* the intention of returning should be able to recover his abilities. How about those who *might* have that intention?

 

[Rechan]

A wizard who can sleep MUST sleep for his rest in 3e. Not all 8 hours, but he must be asleep for part of it.

Could you please quote the page number and passage for that? Or better yet, could you find that in the SRD? I'm really curious to see that - I've never seen a rule that says you need to sleep, eat or drink at all.

As to the rest of your post, I can give you how I would rule each and every one of those, as a DM. But I doubt that's satisfactory enough for this exercise.

I'm not sure I see your point. Could you explicitly state it?

 

[Kraydak]

It would really have to depend on what the invisible mastermind actually does.
... (much snippage)

So rather than making perception rolls to find out what the mastermind's intentions are (in a general sense), I can just ask if I can recover my abilities? If I can't, he is still near. If I can, no need to burn a see-invis.

One-scene duration effects work decently in cinematic games. Real life (and DnD) can be much messier. DnD is also a generic enough game that it should cater to people who want a more nuanced attitude towards adventure structure.

 

[Rechan]

So rather than making perception rolls to find out what the mastermind's intentions are (in a general sense), I can just ask if I can recover my abilities? If I can't, he is still near. If I can, no need to burn a see-invis.

Or if you try to pull that, the DM could dock you XP for being meta-gamey.

 

[Kraydak]

Could you please quote the page number and passage for that? I'd like to read that. Or better yet, could you find that in the SRD?

If you can read: "Rest: To prepare her daily spells, a wizard must first sleep for 8 hours. The wizard does not have to slumber for every minute of the time, but she must refrain from movement, combat, spellcasting, skill use, conversation, or any other fairly demanding physical or mental task during the rest period. If her rest is interrupted, each interruption adds 1 hour to the total amount of time she has to rest in order to clear her mind, and she must have at least 1 hour of uninterrupted rest immediately prior to preparing her spells. If the character does not need to sleep for some reason, she still must have 8 hours of restful calm before preparing any spells." (SRD-Magic Overview-Arcane Spells-Preparing Wizard Spells)

as anything other than requiring wizards who normally sleep (non-warforged, say) to actually sleep during part of their 8 hour rest period, I'll stand impressed.

As to the rest of your post, I can give you how I would rule each and every one of those, as a DM. But I doubt that's satisfactory enough for this exercise.

So, what exactly is your point?

Defining encounters is hard. Some (most) gaming groups aren't perfect. Players will run roughshod over DMs and vice-versa. Adding such a subjective element to such a crucial portion of the game is just asking for trouble. If may not be trouble that would show up in playtesting (due to group selection bias), but it is trouble that will show up in Sage Advice. It is also trouble that can be neatly avoided at little cost by using a more ToB-like system.

Or to put it differently, if you would have no trouble with strict per-encounter, you would have no trouble with a ToB like system. The inverse statement does not hold.

 

[Kraydak]

Or if you try to pull that, the DM could dock you XP for being meta-gamey.

You note, I *can't not*. Oh look, I don't see any foes. I try to recover my abilities. Wait, I can't?? I guess that guy didn't leave after all, and he must be near. Or if I *can* then I know he left. By tying recover to the meta-game condition of encounters ending, you are put into a position where you must give away information that should not be available. The metagaming here is on the part of the system itself.

 

[Cryptos]

So rather than making perception rolls to find out what the mastermind's intentions are (in a general sense), I can just ask if I can recover my abilities? If I can't, he is still near. If I can, no need to burn a see-invis.

One-scene duration effects work decently in cinematic games. Real life (and DnD) can be much messier. DnD is also a generic enough game that it should cater to people who want a more nuanced attitude towards adventure structure.

At most, all you know is that the encounter isn't entirely over (and that's if I dignified that question with a response.) You can guess all you like as to why, but a decent DM would keep you on your toes.

It could be that there was a pit trap in the room, and there's a goblin hiding behind a curtain waiting to pull the lever.

But you don't spot a goblin.

Maybe something really bad happens when you try to loot the bodies. Or take the stone from the altar.

But nothing does.

So maybe the mastermind is still there, waiting to stab you as you leave the room. But none of this helps you figure out where he is, or who he's going to stab, or at which precise moment. Maybe he'll change his mind.

And to be honest, if I had players that were constantly trying to get around using abilities in game because they thought there was something there due to out-of-game knowledge like abilities not refreshing, I probably just wouldn't answer until a new encounter did start, every time (Two rooms later, when they encounter a pair of bugbears: "Oh, yeah, all of your per encounter abilities have refreshed.")

The point is that using "Hey, my abilities haven't refreshed" wouldn't last very long as a viable way to sense danger, or even help you to figure out what that danger may be, if you tried to abuse it in this way, against any DM with common sense.

Also, you're assuming that "I try to refresh my abilities" would be an option a player would take as opposed to the DM telling you when they refresh, or mentioning that they have at the beginning of a new encounter (as opposed to at the end of one.)

 

[Rechan]

If you can read: "Rest: To prepare her daily spells, a wizard must first sleep for 8 hours. The wizard does not have to slumber for every minute of the time, but she must refrain from movement, combat, spellcasting, skill use, conversation, or any other fairly demanding physical or mental task during the rest period. If her rest is interrupted, each interruption adds 1 hour to the total amount of time she has to rest in order to clear her mind, and she must have at least 1 hour of uninterrupted rest immediately prior to preparing her spells. If the character does not need to sleep for some reason, she still must have 8 hours of restful calm before preparing any spells." (SRD-Magic Overview-Arcane Spells-Preparing Wizard Spells)

Thank you for providing that.

Now, why is it that the above isn't confusing to you, and yet the notion of resting between encounters to get per-encounter abilities does?

Defining encounters is hard. Some (most) gaming groups aren't perfect.

Hey, D&D is hard, all those rules to learn. Some gaming groups aren't perfect. DMs have to make decisions all the time.

It is Impossible for the rules to cover every situation. The rules are not set in stone, they are guidelines. And if a DM can't make his own decisions, I'd say perhaps he shouldn't be DMing.

Players will run roughshod over DMs and vice-versa. Adding such a subjective element to such a crucial portion of the game is just asking for trouble. If may not be trouble that would show up in playtesting (due to group selection bias), but it is trouble that will show up in Sage Advice.

There is no rule that says a character other than a spellcaster has to sleep. There is no rule that says anyone has to eat or drink.

Do you think that the rules should say, "You must sleep, drink or eat every day"? Because unless the rules state it, then players might run roughshod over Dms and vice-versa.

Or to put it differently, if you would have no trouble with strict per-encounter, you would have no trouble with a ToB like system. The inverse statement does not hold.

If you have no trouble with strict per-round spell durations, per-feet distances, and per-day spell-slots, you would have no trouble with a 3e D&D system. The inverse statement does not hold.

So what then?

 

[Rechan]

Edit: Cryptos answered this better than I.