D&D General D&D without Resource Management

[nevin]

The reverse. You just prep all combat and when a utility situation presents itself, then its utility belt swap time.

but not all utility situations give you a minute to swap. the party can die in 10 combat rounds drowning while you are trying to swap a spell.

I'll admit it makes the wizard more powerful, which is not the direction I'd go in, but it doesn't make them batman unless the DM loves to telegraph what's coming.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Even then spontaneous casters who can pull from their pool of known spells are simply more effective than the wizard who has to guess at the beginning of the day. here on the forums Wizards never have to Guess and they always know what they are fighting but , those of us who play or run actual games know that almost never happens.

True, but this is why sorcerers traditionally had fewer spells known.

 

[payn]

but not all utility situations give you a minute to swap. the party can die in 10 combat rounds drowning while you are trying to swap a spell.

I'll admit it makes the wizard more powerful, which is not the direction I'd go in, but it doesn't make them batman unless the DM loves to telegraph what's coming.

I think those utility situations are on the rare end, for sure less frequent than combats with no time to swap. You can argue that GMs will just need to turn every utility situation into a time sensitive death trap, but i prefer to stop bad ideas before they change the entire game. YMMV.

 

[nevin]

I think those utility situations are on the rare end, for sure less frequent than combats with no time to swap. You can argue that GMs will just need to turn every utility situation into a time sensitive death trap, but i prefer to stop bad ideas before they change the entire game. YMMV.

my point is you don't always know what utility you need until you need it. I'm not arguing to make every encounter timed. But sometimes you have time and sometimes you don't.

I run games with the rule that if the PC's can do it, someone else can do it. Bad guys watch they learn they figure out what the wizards can do, they plan for wizards and their utility spells etc. Sometimes a drugged drink the bar, or a simple teleport trap to an antimagic zone, is the best way to deal with really dangerous wizard. I love it when the party uses their abilities correctly, it means the game goes on. But wizards are only "batman" if the DM is bad at their job. Best case the world is full of "Batman's, Batgirl's and Robyn's" who can be hired to fight back against Mr. utility, and Mr utility is well aware of this, worst case the wizard become's enemy number one and the bounty on their head is so high every combat starts with kill the wizard first. But if the wizard is given too much knowledge of the encounter to come, then the wizard becomes too powerful at high levels this has always been the case since 1E.

 

[Vaalingrade]

but not all utility situations give you a minute to swap. the party can die in 10 combat rounds drowning while you are trying to swap a spell.

And if that's how the adventure is designed, the party was going to be killed anyway because the DM is trying to kill you.

Mostly because they're cheating, as you can hold your breath for a number of rounds equal to your CON mod and anyone with a sub-10 CON died in character creation.

 

[Blue]

One of the foundational parts of D&D is that it is, especially in combat, about attrition of resources. So resource management is innately tied in at a very deep level.

I'll gladly play other games with different and/or lowered resource management. But that is more part of D&D play than ability scores or hit points.

 

[payn]

my point is you don't always know what utility you need until you need it. I'm not arguing to make every encounter timed. But sometimes you have time and sometimes you don't.

I run games with the rule that if the PC's can do it, someone else can do it. Bad guys watch they learn they figure out what the wizards can do, they plan for wizards and their utility spells etc. Sometimes a drugged drink the bar, or a simple teleport trap to an antimagic zone, is the best way to deal with really dangerous wizard. I love it when the party uses their abilities correctly, it means the game goes on. But wizards are only "batman" if the DM is bad at their job. Best case the world is full of "Batman's, Batgirl's and Robyn's" who can be hired to fight back against Mr. utility, and Mr utility is well aware of this, worst case the wizard become's enemy number one and the bounty on their head is so high every combat starts with kill the wizard first. But if the wizard is given too much knowledge of the encounter to come, then the wizard becomes too powerful at high levels this has always been the case since 1E.

I dont care for the "its ok if the PCs do it because the NPCs can too" reasoning.

 

[Blue]

Siloing has nothing to do with this. If you want classes to have out of combat powers, give them such. What resource mechanic they use doesn't matter, what matters is having them in the first place.

We know this is false when taken across a statistically significant number of players. Look at utility spells today, both in terms of spells known and slots used. There is not anywhere near equal weight in terms of spells known and slots used in different pillars of play. Combat is so resource intensive that you could say "of course that uses the most slots", but the case still holds true with spells known/prepared.

 

[Micah Sweet]

One of the foundational parts of D&D is that it is, especially in combat, about attrition of resources. So resource management is innately tied in at a very deep level.

I'll gladly play other games with different and/or lowered resource management. But that is more part of D&D play than ability scores or hit points.

Yes, and the idea that some players want to work around that resource management (even a lot of players) doesn't mean anyone needs to radically change the game to accommodate them.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I dont care for the "its ok if the PCs do it because the NPCs can too" reasoning.

It's really just the infinite dragons argument presented as an ultimatum to the players not to use their abilities.

And relying on the fact that technically anything the DM does isn't cheating per-se.