D&D 5E Is there a general theory of party construction?

[Lanefan]

It is not a matter of can. It is a matter of must. That is what I do not like.

IME if there's nothing forcing downtime parties will carry on like little Energizer bunnies, which might be fine for pace-of-play but is hella unrealistic.

 

[Yaarel]

IME if there's nothing forcing downtime parties will carry on like little Energizer bunnies, which might be fine for pace-of-play but is hella unrealistic.

Not necessarily enforcing, but incentivizing downtime. Downtime is when the players can invest in the world, build relationships, expand businesses, and so on.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I’d settle for a special theory of party construction.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

IME if there's nothing forcing downtime parties will carry on like little Energizer bunnies, which might be fine for pace-of-play but is hella unrealistic.

Given the comparative ease with which DMs may slow down player progress or create impediments that must be solved in some other way besides constantly powering through, I would prefer that the rules neither particularly enforce, nor particularly dissuade, any specific downtime rate or amount, other than the sacred cow of "spells refresh on long rest-equivalents" because that's one of the few things you can truly say has always been part of D&D (even 4e; I know memorizing spells could be very, very slow in the past, but healing wasn't much faster back then.)

That way, it is up to the DM's choice of what challenges and situations to provide, and the players' choice for what counts as safe gambits and what counts as dangerous over-extension. It feels just as unrealistic to me that there's such an arbitrary "you only get half your hit dice" back each day, when (to the best of my knowledge) that is the only resource that requires multiple long rests to fully recharge.

But then again, I also think that hour-long short rests are ridiculously, stupidly long for no reason, so it's likely this is just another area where you and I simply don't agree on the fundamentals.

 

[Lanefan]

Given the comparative ease with which DMs may slow down player progress or create impediments that must be solved in some other way besides constantly powering through, I would prefer that the rules neither particularly enforce, nor particularly dissuade, any specific downtime rate or amount, other than the sacred cow of "spells refresh on long rest-equivalents" because that's one of the few things you can truly say has always been part of D&D (even 4e; I know memorizing spells could be very, very slow in the past, but healing wasn't much faster back then.)

That way, it is up to the DM's choice of what challenges and situations to provide, and the players' choice for what counts as safe gambits and what counts as dangerous over-extension. It feels just as unrealistic to me that there's such an arbitrary "you only get half your hit dice" back each day, when (to the best of my knowledge) that is the only resource that requires multiple long rests to fully recharge.

But then again, I also think that hour-long short rests are ridiculously, stupidly long for no reason, so it's likely this is just another area where you and I simply don't agree on the fundamentals.

I'm thinking bigger-scale than simple resting. When resting, no matter how long the rests are you're almost always still in the field, holed up somewhere you hope is safe. That's not the type of downtime I'm talking about.

Think training. In-town training that takes an in-setting week or two.

Having to train to level up is the best way to ensure parties have to regularly take some downtime between adventures - even more so if advancement becomes staggered among the characters such that not everyone bumps at once. If not everyone is training, those who are not can engage with the setting in ways other than adventuring and in so doing, potentially enrich and deepen/widen said setting considerably.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I'm thinking bigger-scale than simple resting. When resting, no matter how long the rests are you're almost always still in the field, holed up somewhere you hope is safe. That's not the type of downtime I'm talking about.

Think training. In-town training that takes an in-setting week or two.

Having to train to level up is the best way to ensure parties have to regularly take some downtime between adventures - even more so if advancement becomes staggered among the characters such that not everyone bumps at once. If not everyone is training, those who are not can engage with the setting in ways other than adventuring and in so doing, potentially enrich and deepen/widen said setting considerably.

Okay, well...I was specifically talking about HD and the fact they only come back at half-rate, not full-rate.

I'm fine with things like training taking a while. That's perfectly reasonable...and also a matter of DM implementation, not something hard-coded into the rules like "you only get half your HD back each long rest."