D&D 5E Encounter Based Resting

[Tony Vargas]

Good thoughts about setting a baseline, I'm going to think about how to rework and simplify.

How about half EP for a failed encounter?

Y'know, I was thinking in terms of 'after a failed encounter, they'll really need the rest,' but if EPs are like momentum (morale, adrenaline, etc) or milestones, then I guess failure wouldn't 'earn' one, you'd need a longer rest to recover from failure than from success, because you also have to find your determination again.

Yeah.

 

[CapnZapp]

I'd probably prefer a minimalist Encounter Point variant. Here I've tried to cut down rules language to a minimum.

Gaining Encounter Points
Your DM will award you Encounter Points after each encounter, regardless of outcome. Either the DM or the players track these in a Short Rest Pool and a Long Rest Pool. Both pools reset to zero after a long rest is completed.

Easy Encounter - 0 short rest points and 0 long rest points
Medium Encounter - 1 short rest points and 1 long rest points
Hard Encounter - 2 short rest points and 2 long rest points
Deadly Encounter - 3 short rest points and 3 long rest points

Spending Encounter Points
You spend encounter points when you wish to gain the benefits of a rest. You can still rest without spending encounter points, but this will then not give you the benefits of that rest (but see below). When a rest is interrupted for combat, it must be restarted, but you only need to spend the points when you successfully finish the rest and gain the benefits.

A short rest costs 3 short rest points and requires one hour.
A long rest costs 9 long rest points and requires 8 hours.

Resting without Encounter Points
Even if you don't have encounter points to spend, you can still gain the benefit of a short rest by resting for 8 hours uninterrupted by combat.

Even if you don't have encounter points to spend, you can still gain the benefit of a long rest by resting for 7 days uninterrupted by combat.

 

[Xeviat]

Interesting idea. I've been thinking of a more simple solution instead by reducing the time for a short rest to 10 minutes (a break at work) but limiting you to only 2 short rests per long rest. In essence, short rest would be a recovery resource.

This idea is solid, but gamist. I could see people complaining about it. Luckily, those people are probably fine with how the game is now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Klaudius Rex]

No offense but I don't like it.
I don't think my players would either.. It's a nice try, but no one wants to keep track of something else in the game.

 

[OB1]

I'd probably prefer a minimalist Encounter Point variant. Here I've tried to cut down rules language to a minimum.

Gaining Encounter Points
Your DM will award you Encounter Points after each encounter, regardless of outcome. Either the DM or the players track these in a Short Rest Pool and a Long Rest Pool. Both pools reset to zero after a long rest is completed.

Easy Encounter - 0 short rest points and 0 long rest points
Medium Encounter - 1 short rest points and 1 long rest points
Hard Encounter - 2 short rest points and 2 long rest points
Deadly Encounter - 3 short rest points and 3 long rest points

Spending Encounter Points
You spend encounter points when you wish to gain the benefits of a rest. You can still rest without spending encounter points, but this will then not give you the benefits of that rest (but see below). When a rest is interrupted for combat, it must be restarted, but you only need to spend the points when you successfully finish the rest and gain the benefits.

A short rest costs 3 short rest points and requires one hour.
A long rest costs 9 long rest points and requires 8 hours.

Resting without Encounter Points
Even if you don't have encounter points to spend, you can still gain the benefit of a short rest by resting for 8 hours uninterrupted by combat.

Even if you don't have encounter points to spend, you can still gain the benefit of a long rest by resting for 7 days uninterrupted by combat.

Very well done, if you don't mind, I'd like to edit my OP to include this at the top.

Would love to see it play tested in a UA. Perhaps I'll tweet it to MM

 

[clearstream]

Gaining Encounter Points
Your DM will award you Encounter Points after each encounter based on the following per DMG guidelines. Players should track these in a Short Rest Pool and a Long Rest Pool. When points are awarded, they should be added to both pools. Both pools rest to 0 after a long rest is completed.

Medium Encounter - 1 EP
Hard Encounter - 2 EP
Deadly Encounter - 3 EP

Spending Encounter Points
You spend encounter points when you wish to wish to gain the benefits of a rest. These rests must still be uninterrupted by combat. Deduct the points only when you finish the rest. Note that exhaustion levels are still reduced after an 8 hour long rest.

Short Rest Cost
8 Hour Short Rest - 1 EP
1 Hour Short Rest - 3 EP
5 Minute Short Rest - 6 EP

Long Rest Cost
1 Week Long Rest - 3 EP
8 Hour Long Rest - 9 EP
1 Hour Long Rest - 18 EP

Thank you for this thread. I believe your system has merit as presented and had the idea that we might generate further insights by inverting it. (As a thought experiment, not a critique.)

Story Points (SP)
Each time you finish a rest, you gain short or long rest story points (SSP and LSP). While you have story points any abilities you have that replenish at the finish of a rest of that kind, instead don't replenish. You reduce your number of story points through encounters.

SP gained from a Short Rest
8 Hour Short Rest - 1 SSP
1 Hour Short Rest - 3 SSP
5 Minute Short Rest - 6 SSP

SP gained from a Long Rest
1 Week Long Rest - 3 LSP
8 Hour Long Rest - 9 LSP
1 Hour Long Rest - 18 LSP

Reducing SP
SP are reduced by resolving encounters. At the end of an encounter, subtract SP of both kinds according to the table below.

Medium Encounter - subtract 1 SSP and 1 LSP
Hard Encounter - subtract 2 SSP and 2 LSP
Deadly Encounter - subtract 3 SSP and 3 LSP

It seems kind of interesting to flip it on its head. Maybe it helps narrative because it becomes like a threat system? We rest, and while we rest the story gains impetus. Once we're back in action we get to work quelling the rising threat. I don't know at all if it is meaningfully different: it might be...

 

[CapnZapp]

From a purely mechanical design stand point:

One approach gives you tokens (or coins, or whatever you're using to remember your points). And you're told you can get back your HP and spells once you've collected enough.

In the other approach, you're given all the tokens upfront. And you're told as long as you have any left, you can't replenish your HP and spells.

To me one approach makes the tokens into a reward, the other makes them a curse and a liability.

I would say from a pure game design perspective, one is clearly more attractive than the other.

You don't want game elements the players actively want to get rid of. If the table is disturbed noone has the incentive to keep track of tokens that are bad for you.

Again, this is not even looking at how these tokens are used. It's the simple observation that positive tokens are more fun than negative ones.



Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

 

[clearstream]

From a purely mechanical design stand point:

One approach gives you tokens (or coins, or whatever you're using to remember your points). And you're told you can get back your HP and spells once you've collected enough.

In the other approach, you're given all the tokens upfront. And you're told as long as you have any left, you can't replenish your HP and spells.

To me one approach makes the tokens into a reward, the other makes them a curse and a liability.

I would say from a pure game design perspective, one is clearly more attractive than the other.

You don't want game elements the players actively want to get rid of. If the table is disturbed noone has the incentive to keep track of tokens that are bad for you.

Again, this is not even looking at how these tokens are used. It's the simple observation that positive tokens are more fun than negative ones.

I was thinking about where this started - with threat level. The Angry GM appeared to be all for giving essentially threat or menace or danger tokens (in the form of dice) to parties who faff around. So this inverted approach to EP merges the threat level concept with the EP concept and in doing so perhaps keeps visibility high and offers some control to players. Honestly, I've no idea if it is good approach or not. I do feel that having players track a penalty is no more risky than having them track a benefit.

From a pure game design perspective, we can't tell until we playtest I am playtesting one variant at present. When I have a good sense of how that is going, I may switch to another variant.

 

[CapnZapp]

Very well done, if you don't mind, I'd like to edit my OP to include this at the top.

Would love to see it play tested in a UA. Perhaps I'll tweet it to MM

Looks good. Good luck!