Do the rules need to?

[Dannyalcatraz]

I disagree.

D&D does support both playstyles. If you're like me and have never experienced the 15MWD in person, it's because you play a certain way. And the game itself does not penalize you for doing so.

If you're part of a group that DOES routinely have the 15MWD, it's usually because the DM is running his game in such a way that the playstyle is rewarded. And as long as HE'S OK with it, there is no inherent in-game penalty for that syle of play either.

 

[S'mon]

No.

Personally I prefer adventures that don't assume PCs will plough through umpteen static encounters before resting. Either have one big 'spike' encounter, or have reasons in the adventure why the PCs won't want to rest, or accept the 15 minute delve.

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

D&D does support both playstyles. If you're like me and have never experienced the 15MWD in person, it's because you play a certain way. And the game itself does not penalize you for doing so.

If by 'support' you mean 'doesn't specifically deny,' then yes D&D supports both the 5 minute workday and badassery. But one play style is clearly strategically better than the other, unless a DM puts extra time and energy into adventure building. So saying that D&D supports both play styles isn't quite accurate.

If you're part of a group that DOES routinely have the 15MWD, it's usually because the DM is running his game in such a way that the playstyle is rewarded. And as long as HE'S OK with it, there is no inherent in-game penalty for that syle of play either.

You're right; usually the 5 MWD is the result of how a DM runs a game. More specifically, it's a result of a DM not putting in the extra prep time necessary to avoid it. And yeah, if a DM is fine with that, cool. Everyone's happy.

But for a DM who doesn't want to write every adventure as a time-sensitive meat grinder, and doesn't want players going nova every fight, it feels like the rules are working against him. And it sure doesn't feel like the game is supporting his play style.

"Cowboy up, and put in the extra prep time" and "Just ask your players to ignore common sense" work as stopgap solutions, but what we're really saying with that advice is "You have to pick up the slack left by the rules [or the lack thereof]."

 

[Raven Crowking]

I think sandboxes are more vulnerable to 15MD-ing than adventure paths, for two reasons:

1) In an AP the bad guys typically have an evil plan that will result in really bad stuff happening soon. This time limit puts pressure on the PCs, stopping them from resting overly much. In a sandbox the bad guys' evil plans typically result in only somewhat bad stuff happening, nothing world destroying, so there's less pressure. And the PCs are usually more mercenary, more Cugel or Conan than Frodo, so they don't care about somewhat bad stuff happening unless it will cost them mazoolah.

2) In a sandbox the players are free to choose the adventure. They may always choose to assault tombs, ancient treasure vaults and the like, which, as has been mentioned upthread, have no negative consequences for 15MD-ing. Indeed in a recent thread more than one poster recommended the 15MD as a tactic for dealing with the classic Tomb of Horrors module, partly to ensure the scout always had a fly spell active, I think.

This makes sense, but it doesn't jive with my experience. IME, time is a precious commodity in the sandboxes I run, precisely because nothing stops moving simply because the PCs do. Many adventure paths IME assume that events will happen when the PCs get there, no matter how much time it takes them to do so.


RC

 

[howandwhy99]

Do rules need to prevent player tactics?

Yep, rules limit human behavior, period. There may be 10,000 different options one could take under the rules, but there are only those 10,000 and nothing else. On the flip side, there are "do anything, but" rules... so while more freeing, they are still limitations as well.

Do you think that rules systems need to address the fifteen minute workday?

I think that's a boogeyman, which came out of how many groups chose to play 3rd edition. It mainly has to do with between combat play being no longer bounded by rules. Think of it like this: the PCs clear dungeon level 1, level 2, and half of level 3. Then they decide to quit for the day and sleep. Going back to "safety" was probably a free ride. Perhaps they even slept unguarded at the inn that night as that was "gool", a safe zone. I don't know, but all out power use and then uninterrupted rest and recharge makes for a short adventuring day. It is as if nothing else could or would happen after those 15 minutes.

There are creative ways to address this. For instance,

1. 4th concatenated combat and resting into encounters and then balanced stringently within them. I don't know the nightly sleeping requirements, but encounters when resting could be faced well powered with perhaps the lack of dailies.

2. Earlier games populated the map with monsters and other challenges, so traversing it was dangerous no matter the PC's resource level (this includes both lair-based "relatively stationary" and wandering monster encounters for when the PCs stayed in one place).

Think of it as balancing on the small scale or the large scale. Both make the 15 minute adventuring day a poor option, but do so in different ways.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

More specifically, it's a result of a DM not putting in the extra prep time necessary to avoid it.

What extra prep time?

It takes minimal effort on a DM's part- on the fly- to have the party encounter a guardhouse's squad's replacements discover they've all been slaughtered at their posts...and are waiting for the SoB's that did it (especially for an organized force). Or that the noise of combat has drawn other creatures to the site of the last conflict.

It takes minimal effort to say that a party that retreats from the dungeon to recharged finds the vacuum they left has been filled by other predators or reinforcements from other parts of the dungeon.

It takes minimal effort (again, on the fly) to use a commercial or home-made wandering monster chart appropriate to the adventure.

"Just ask your players to ignore common sense"

Common sense? It is "going nova" that is counter to common sense.

Common sense- at least, in the terms of armed conflict- tells the military commanders of the ages to not commit all of your forces unless and until you absolutely have to. ALWAYS hold something in reserve for the unexpected. This applies as much to individual powers as squadrons of archers or heavy cavalry. Even though using overwhelming force is the way to take down your opponents, you don't use your nukes to swat mosquitos.

That a DM chooses to put the world on pause and let his players' retreat to recharge distorts this reality.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Professional Plus 2010
Microsoft Office 2010 Online
Microsoft Office 2007
good posts.

Reported.

 

[Stormonu]

There are already some rules in the system aimed at stopping the 15MWD - spells with expensive components, magic items with charges, etc.

However, I don't think rules to stop the 15MWD cold will ever exist. And in some cases, for some playstyles, it's a bad idea. For example, if the players had been playing well and smart - and reached a point in the adventure where it sounded like a good idea for players to rest and recharge there abilities, I don't feel I should be forced to roll for random encounters while they do so.

I do think, however, that advice - and discussion with both the players and DM about the 15MWD and what can be used to minimize or negate it is beneficial.

 

[Pentius]

"Do the rules need to stop the 15 minute work day?" is the wrong question. The rules are the source of the 15 minute work day. They provide the possibility of it by limiting player resources by in game day, while those resources can be spent within around 15 minutes(or 5 minutes, or half an hour, the exact time isn't important, except for how it is much, much shorter than a day) of in game time. The right question is "Should we continue making rules that provide for a 15 minute workday?" and I think the answer is no. Another possible question is "Should we continue using rulesets that provide for the 15 minute work day?" and that one's a bit tougher, because it isn't a dealbreaker for everyone(myself included).

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

[quoteI too have seen these posts, and as someone who plays 4e they initially mystified me, until I realized those making these claims had not played 4e.][/quote]

Those are not the posts I'm talking about. I'm talking about DMs complaining about their active campaigns.