Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 6860891" data-attributes="member: 1465">Nothing stops them from resting as often as they can, but is it really a problem?Your DM might choose to run adventures from a large range of options with relation to encounters frequency. If you deviate too much from the common, you are suggested to actually change the length of rests rather than limiting their numbers. The typical example is a LotR-style adventure, where you may get encounters with days or even weeks between, and rarely more than a couple on the same day: perhaps in such case you'd be better off with short rests = 1 night / long rests = 1 week. At the other end of the range, with a continuous stream of encounter in a megadungeon you can't get out of for a long time, consider short rests = 5 minutes / long rests = 2 hours. Just try to keep a somewhat similar proportion between shorts and longs.There is a kind of small ambiguity in the definition of rests length when it says &quot;at least 1 hour/8 hours&quot;, in the sense that a stingy DM could even rule that consecutive short rests count as one, but it could cause boring arguments at the table.Interrupting rests should not make the DM feel guilty. Just don't cause interruptions specifically to spoil the players' strategy. Make them clearly part of the world, and roll randomly for them so that it is not your decision to make them happen. The idea is that if the PCs are in a dungeon/forest/else with wandering monsters, choosing to rest or not should be a tactical choice with a calculated risk. The DM sets the probability (and magnitude) of such risks, but rolling randomly makes the DM not guilty when the risk materializes. It's not sour grapes when you tell the players that the chance is on the dice!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Li Shenron, post: 6860891, member: 1465"] Nothing stops them from resting as often as they can, but is it really a problem? Your DM might choose to run adventures from a large range of options with relation to encounters frequency. If you deviate too much from the common, you are suggested to actually change the [B]length[/B] of rests rather than limiting their numbers. The typical example is a LotR-style adventure, where you may get encounters with days or even weeks between, and rarely more than a couple on the same day: perhaps in such case you'd be better off with short rests = 1 night / long rests = 1 week. At the other end of the range, with a continuous stream of encounter in a megadungeon you can't get out of for a long time, consider short rests = 5 minutes / long rests = 2 hours. Just try to keep a somewhat similar proportion between shorts and longs. There is a kind of small ambiguity in the definition of rests length when it says "at least 1 hour/8 hours", in the sense that a stingy DM could even rule that consecutive short rests count as one, but it could cause boring arguments at the table. Interrupting rests should not make the DM feel guilty. Just don't cause interruptions specifically to spoil the players' strategy. Make them clearly part of the world, and roll randomly for them so that it is not your decision to make them happen. The idea is that if the PCs are in a dungeon/forest/else with wandering monsters, choosing to rest or not should be a tactical choice with a calculated risk. The DM sets the probability (and magnitude) of such risks, but rolling randomly makes the DM not guilty when the risk materializes. It's not sour grapes when you tell the players that the chance is on the dice! [/QUOTE]

Verification