Healing Surge Damage

STFU and listen to the DM
... as I said before, I am big on players having a direction in how a game goes but as there are certain things that the players have no control over (which monsters they face, what treasure they drop etc) nor should they have control over basic things such as rests. Their input should be considered but just as if there were 5 players that all wanted to play Wizards... at some point the DM decides things and the players ... PLAY

IMCs the PCs often get to decide which monsters they fight, eg in my Wilderlands game they just decided to attack a bandit fortress rather than leave and seek out the kidnappers of a PC's sister.

And certainly have control over when they rest - though they may be ambushed if they rest in the wrong place, or other bad things may happen.

For that matter they can all play Wizards if they want, though again they take the consequences, and may have trouble with some encounters.

I see the first two - deciding what to do, and when to rest - as part of 'play', ie within the purview of the PCs and thus the players.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

If the players would insist on leaving the Dungeon to take their extended rest in town then they are trying to run the Session.

If the group knows what the score is, if they insist on taking the short cut around the way you want to design the story there are 2 ways around it

1 : Leave the group, clearly the group disrespects you
2 : TPK them .... give them some eternal rest, should about do it!

I am all for player power and the player being an integral cog in the running of the game... however if the DM states the rules and they are agreed on and the players decide to run the game a different way regardless, that just isnt on!

I don't agree with this.

The players make ALL of the decisions for the PCs. The DM makes NONE of the decisions for the PCs.

The DM influences decisions via his presentation of the world, but if the DM insists that the story has to run his way and that he can overrule player's decisions for their PCs or punish them because they "aren't playing the game the way he wants them to", then the problem isn't with the players, it's with the DM.

The story revolves around the PCs, not around anything else. No PCs = no story. That doesn't mean that everything that the players want to happen happens, it means that the PCs are the story. They are the most important part of the story. The rest is just the scenario that the PCs find themselves in.

The DM makes all of the decisions for what is in the world and what the NPCs decide.

The players make all of the decisions on what the PCs decide. Again, that doesn't mean that the player decisions always work out, it means that they make the decision on what the PC is attempting to do (like walk back into town to take an extended rest). Something might prevent that decision from succeeding, but it should be something inherent to the setting. It shouldn't be the DM punishing the players for not following his storyline the way he wanted them to.
 
Last edited:

I don't agree with this.

The players make ALL of the decisions for the PCs. The DM makes NONE of the decisions for the PCs.

You are right that they shouldnt make the decisions, but the DM should be responsible for setting the ground rules. Regardless, Extended Rest is not a matter of choice, it is a matter of biology.

An extended rest where you recover Daily Powers and Healing Surges occurs because you SLEEP not because you take 8 hours to sit around doing nothing.

Unless you can find a way to justify an entire group sleeping every 2 hours, I would like to hear it.... No, it isnt and if the PCs want to wait around for 6-8 hours and THEN take their extended rest, that is a very extreme way of wasting time and if a DM has players attempting this, I would throw them random encounters every 30 minutes and the players would learn that an adventure that should take 3-4 sessions instead takes 30-40 sessions because the group want to fight random encounters all the time.


The DM influences decisions via his presentation of the world, but if the DM insists that the story has to run his way and that he can overrule player's decisions for their PCs or punish them because they "aren't playing the game the way he wants them to", then the problem isn't with the players, it's with the DM.

Extended Rest isnt a case of the DM overrulling a players need to long jump over a monster or figure a clever way to trick the duke into revealing his plans... it is a core rule that he is forcing the players to adhere to.

Like I said, the only way that a group can force a DM to allow them to rest every encounter is to sit around for 6 hours and wait for the need for an Extended Rest.

Whilst this is LEGAL and POSSIBLE it is ridiculous because you would never do this in real life... so to try and TRICK the game into allowing you this is pointless.

I am very stern on the idea of forcing Extended Rests to be as per a normal sleep cycle. The game is designed to have players using Extended Rests sparingly.

The story revolves around the PCs, not around anything else. No PCs = no story. That doesn't mean that everything that the players want to happen happens, it means that the PCs are the story. They are the most important part of the story. The rest is just the scenario that the PCs find themselves in.

The DM makes all of the decisions for what is in the world and what the NPCs decide.

The players make all of the decisions on what the PCs decide. Again, that doesn't mean that the player decisions always work out, it means that they make the decision on what the PC is attempting to do (like walk back into town to take an extended rest). Something might prevent that decision from succeeding, but it should be something inherent to the setting. It shouldn't be the DM punishing the players for not following his storyline the way he wanted them to.


Just to clarify
I am not saying the DM needs to overrule whatever the players want. The rule of "Yes.. and" is the best rule of DMing and if I was a DM and my group wanted to do something, I would try and find a way to make that work.

Excluded from this are things that try and BEAT the mechanics of the game.
Just like using a loaded die, forcing a DM to allow extended rests less than is warranted is cheating the system and I would not play with players who would force that type of game play.

This however is the freeform-ness of D&D, you can play however you want. If you want to make dailies work every encounter, do it... if you want to play in a Golden Compass style world where you have a Demon Animal Spirit to follow you around - do it!

I choose not to break the rule of Extended Rests being akin to a normal sleep cycle. I will not let any group I DM do so and would not be aparty to a group decision to force it on a DM I am playing under or allow the DM to make it a houserule that extended rests operate differently.

As a DM, you spend a LOT more time planning the game than the Players and whilst it is a group game and it neither belongs more to you than the others, there is a sense of respect that all DMs are due that comes from the hours they spend planning and prepping adventures as well as their time taken away from the PC side of the table to arrange the adventure.

If my DM told me that I couldn't do something I clearly would have all rights to do (aka take an Action Point I was due perhaps) I would disagree with him but would accept his ruling after making myself clear and possibly taking it up with him privately out of the game... The key thing in that is that I would accept what the DM wants because you respect the position. If that means the group / game / DM isnt for you, you find a way to deal with that.
 

I think the rules allow only one extended rest per 24 hour period. But, I could be wrong.

If my players insisted on taking a one day break between each encounter, they would lose out on quests/encounters that require a sense of urgency: Attack the gnoll camp to rescue the kidnapped prince, who will be roasted alive & eaten at dawn. If the players took an extended rest after encountering a gnoll patrol, and then another extended rest after their initial foray into the gnoll camp, they'd soon find that the prince was now dead and eaten, and maybe the gnoll chieftain has the prince's ears on a necklace.

Granted, not every encounter and every event has that level of urgency, but many do - my last campaign (3.5E) was one where they were racing against the clock the entire campaign - the evil high priest had impregnated a prophesied woman, who would give birth to a child whose blood would anoint the evil high priest as a god and allow him to rule the world for 1,000 years. So - they had nine months from start to finish.
 

While I can see the argument for not allowing PCs to take extended rests after every encounter, I don't see how a DM can simply deny a group the option.

If the PCs come across a particularly difficult encounter, or maybe all the rolls go against them, they are perfectly in their right to go and find a place to recuperate. If this means sitting around for the rest of the day feeling sorry for themselves before getting a well deserved night's sleep, then so be it. Seems perfectly sensible to me.

Of course, the campaign world should be dynamic and the DM has the responsibility of determining what has transpired while the PC were out of action, and it may be that assassin in the night is just the trick (if the DM wants to be particularly cruel). But it could also be something a lot less dramatic - all the PCs investigations into the whereabouts of the bandit camp are useless as the bandits have now moved on.

However, the PCs also have a responsibility to not try to fix the game and should make some kind of effort to battle through encounters effectively enough to survive a handful each day as this part of the fun and they way the game has been designed to be played.

The metagame thinking of extended rests = powers reset is not one I would encourage (as player or DM), but neither would I force TPK just because the PCs feel they need a break (and the way the game is going would make this tactic credible).
 

While I can see the argument for not allowing PCs to take extended rests after every encounter, I don't see how a DM can simply deny a group the option.

He is not denying the option.
He is enforcing the rules.

To be honest, if a DM is throwing monsters at you and you NEED to rest after 1-2 encounters, it is bad DM planning but if you can go on (ie most people in the group have at least 1 Healing Surge left) then stopping is pointless... and the only benefit is to refresh your Healing Surges and regain your Dailies.

If the PCs come across a particularly difficult encounter, or maybe all the rolls go against them, they are perfectly in their right to go and find a place to recuperate. If this means sitting around for the rest of the day feeling sorry for themselves before getting a well deserved night's sleep, then so be it. Seems perfectly sensible to me.

It may seem sensible to you but it doesn't to me. Most encounter environments are in places where you can't just sit around doing nothing, danger will find you. Even so, you are playing Heroes who will fight to the bitter end to defeat their opponents... not sitting around for 8 hours with a bruised knee waiting for beddy-byes time.

In such instances I recommend a DM houserules a Moderate Rest, this allows you to take an hours rest... you regain half of your healing surges (putting you at 50% of them) but no dailies. Only 1 of these is permitted between Extended Rests.

This is useful for making the adventure last a bit longer, it makes more logical sense and defeats the NEED to force an extended rest by waiting around. You don't get dailies back but if the whole purpose of wanting to take an Extended Rest early is to do that, go play WoW as this isnt the game for you!

Of course, the campaign world should be dynamic and the DM has the responsibility of determining what has transpired while the PC were out of action, and it may be that assassin in the night is just the trick (if the DM wants to be particularly cruel). But it could also be something a lot less dramatic - all the PCs investigations into the whereabouts of the bandit camp are useless as the bandits have now moved on.

However, the PCs also have a responsibility to not try to fix the game and should make some kind of effort to battle through encounters effectively enough to survive a handful each day as this part of the fun and they way the game has been designed to be played.

The metagame thinking of extended rests = powers reset is not one I would encourage (as player or DM), but neither would I force TPK just because the PCs feel they need a break (and the way the game is going would make this tactic credible).

The role of a DM is to try and challenge his players across the Adventure whilst not killing them, just like a Rollercoaster where the greatest thrill comes at the apex of the dip where you hang weightless as your body is pulled downwards... the edge of risk is the place where you play.

If a DM is throwing too much at you and you can't handle it, he needs to plan better or give you the chance to heal more (ie moderate rest).

if you are playing and just want to recover your healing surges or dailies but not enough time has passed to take that Extended Rest... suck it up. So what, you may have to roll a Death Save (I sometimes want that to happen, its quite fun!).

Extended Rests should not be governed by the players. If any player I am DMing says to me (I want to sit around and do nothing for 8 hours then take an Extended Rest) it is such an idiotic thing to do and completely deflates the immersion of the game that I am very tempted to show him how idiotic that was, in game!! (muhahahaa)
 


no, you seriously don´t enforce any rule by saying: no, you can´t extended rest.

The right response is, as you stated:
"Yes, but you have to sit around for 20 hours berfore you can have your extended rest, meanwhile..."

Yes but it becomes silly when each hour they pull an encounter that lasts 1/2 to 1/3 the session.. So instead of running the Adventure, they are running a delve and its just hack+slash whilst they wait around.

Sun Tzu says something along the lines of "You shouldn't fight a battle where you know the only outcome is failure" ... So if you, as a DM know that the "waiting-around-for-hours-whilst-you-take-an-extended-rest" will result in random encounters that will become boring and take time away from the story progression... why not just instruct the players that it is too dangerous too rest and OOC tell them that you dont permit extended rests outside of normal sleep cycles

A PC can not flap his arms and fly... so when a PC insists that he wants to do that, what does the DM say? Yes, you try and fly and fail... obviously

So if the result of waiting around to take an Extended Rest is pointless random combat encounters that reduce the storyline to mush then why not just prempt the stupidity and instruct the players that trying to do so will just involve lots of pointless random encounters and they can choose between those and continuing on with the adventure.

If the group decide to take the random encounters, its probably best to just run Delves against them since they arent keen on RPing and undertaking the story side of the game... otherwise they should take the hint and realize that unless they are on deaths door, an extended rest is NOT needed.

In most adventures of 8-10 encounters, it is unlikely that the group will waste all of their healing surges, if they will then just allow them a moderate rest (recovering 50% healing surges) for an hour half way...

If this still doesnt add up then the DM is throwing far too much at the group and needs to chillout. Just as it is unfeasible that the group shouldnt taken an Extended Rest every 2 encounters, it is unfeasible that the group should be challenged to the point they NEED that extended rest so often.

So... if the DM is being too hard and an Extended Rest is needed often, its the DMs fault and he should fix the issue
So... if the players are demanding an Extended Rest even though they don't need them, its the Players fault and they should just grow up and get on with the game
 

no, you seriously don´t enforce any rule by saying: no, you can´t extended rest.

The right response is, as you stated:
"Yes, but you have to sit around for 20 hours berfore you can have your extended rest, meanwhile..."

I agree with this approach. I would never tell the players they couldn't take an extended rest.

However, if they were on some sort of timeline, I might remind them that Duke Dunderhead said they needed to rescue his kidnapped son by midnight of that very day, or else he'll be executed... or that the captain of the ship that brought them to the remote island said he'll only wait till dawn on the third day before he leaves, or whatever.

and, if they are abusing the extended rest rules by playing ultra cautiously, I might have the bad guys regroup and reorganize, maybe rebuild some defenses, put in a trap or three or whatever. Heck, maybe they attack the captain of the ship and sink it, stranding the PCs on the island.

Sometimes, though, an extra extended rest could be okay - the players are nearly out of dailies and/or surges, plus they suspect they have a Boss Fight coming up soon.
 

I agree with this approach. I would never tell the players they couldn't take an extended rest.

However, if they were on some sort of timeline, I might remind them that Duke Dunderhead said they needed to rescue his kidnapped son by midnight of that very day, or else he'll be executed... or that the captain of the ship that brought them to the remote island said he'll only wait till dawn on the third day before he leaves, or whatever.

and, if they are abusing the extended rest rules by playing ultra cautiously, I might have the bad guys regroup and reorganize, maybe rebuild some defenses, put in a trap or three or whatever. Heck, maybe they attack the captain of the ship and sink it, stranding the PCs on the island.

Sometimes, though, an extra extended rest could be okay - the players are nearly out of dailies and/or surges, plus they suspect they have a Boss Fight coming up soon.

You would never tell a player they couldnt do something... yes fair enough but telling them they cant do something and anticipating failure and saving them time in doing it are 2 different things.

There are things that players CAN do and things they CAN'T do.
They can't summon the Tarrasque to fight their foes, if a player suggests this are you going to say "Yes, you summon it... um" - then what?

The fact is that the "Yes and " rule only goes so far before the players are the ones dictating the game. What if you have a player who wants to play evil and kill everything in sight? Yes - of course he CAN do it but if he is allowed to do it, it disrupts the game.

The DM isnt just the narrator, he is the Referee and if someone makes a foul, they get called on it.

Abusing Rests is a foul, pure and simple...
As I said before, if the players NEED the rest and are only a little bit into the Adventure, that is bad planning on the part of the DM (aka putting +6 level monsters against them) and he will need to deal with that.. However if the players are crying because they WANT a rest but dont NEED one then if the DM gives it to them, he is pandering to a blatant foul.


There is a lot that players CAN do in the game.
The reality however is that it is 100% Metagaming.
In reality no-one would turn around and say "You know, I am feeling a bit weak - I reckon I could go on but Im lazy and want to sit on my arse for 6 hours until I get tired and then take a rest" ... that isnt the life of an adventurer, its the life of HOMER SIMPSON.

If your players are doing that I would suggest to them that D&D isnt for them, this isnt an RPG computer game where you can kite the monster until you heal and recharge your big weapon, fire, rinse and repeat...

So, seriously guys - Grow Up, play the game how it is supposed to be played and if you don't like it play something else.
What is next? House Rules that allow you more Healing Surges instead of taking more Extended Rests? No? Well they amount to the same thing IMO
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top