Melee Combatants, Give it a Rest

[T. Foster]

Another, related, consideration is that at least in OD&D (where the "1 turn in 6 resting plus 1 turn after combat" rule originated) wandering monster checks are made every turn. Thus these mandatory rest periods add an element of tactical consideration -- wise parties will try to time their rests for when they're behind doors that can be locked or barricaded (thus the importance of iron spikes on the D&D equipment list) so as to not have to rest "out in the open" (in a corridor or chamber) and potentially get caught by wandering monsters.

Also, what happens if the party doesn't take their required rest periods, whether by choice or circumstance? Chainmail (D&D's antecedent game) includes some fatigue rules that aren't exactly compatible but could be pretty easily converted -- IIRC fatigued characters fight as one class lower (which in D&D would equate to a "to hit" penalty of, perhaps, -2), have a penalty on morale (which wouldn't affect PCs but would affect their henchmen and hirelings -- if you don't let them rest they're less likely to follow your orders) and aren't capable of charge or running movement (which is very inconvenient when you want to get away from monsters in a hurry!).

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Most DMs I've played with have all participants in a fight make constitution checks after tenrounds or so. What the DC was, I have no idea, because I can't remember the last time we were in a fight that wasn't resolved in under ten rounds. ^_^

And, according to most of the rules for strenuous exercise, spell slinging is every bit as tiring as melee combat.

 

[diaglo]

Also, what happens if the party doesn't take their required rest periods, whether by choice or circumstance? Chainmail (D&D's antecedent game) includes some fatigue rules that aren't exactly compatible but could be pretty easily converted -- IIRC fatigued characters fight as one class lower (which in D&D would equate to a "to hit" penalty of, perhaps, -2), have a penalty on morale (which wouldn't affect PCs but would affect their henchmen and hirelings -- if you don't let them rest they're less likely to follow your orders) and aren't capable of charge or running movement (which is very inconvenient when you want to get away from monsters in a hurry!).

i believe that is on page 11.

actually i always ruled that you got progressively worse. so 1 round of fatigue was -1 to hit, damage, and saves. 2 rounds is -2 to all rolls. 3 rounds -3. etc...

a 20 was not an auto hit or success remember.

it applies to movement in combat too. 5 rounds of continual movement requires you to rest on round 6 or be fatigued.

 

[WayneLigon]

Heh, I do know that this was yet another 1e rule that we didn't bother with.

Same here. GURPS has a similar rule, but I think it's after 10 rounds. Having never seen a GURPS combat go that long, I dunno if we used the rule or not

 

[Menexenus]

Huh! I'm surprised this is much of an issue. In all the 3.x games I've played, it's the *players* who are clammoring for rest, not the DM insisting on it. Usually the players enter the dungeon/encounter area, find the bad guys, and fight all in a relatively short amount of gametime. If the PCs win and feel comfortable enough, they might venture on and face another encounter. But usually, the PCs are ready to make camp/rest/wait for more spell-casting power after only about an hour or two of gametime.

In my 3.x experience, most of the in-game time is spent at a camp resting and waiting for spellcasters to get their spells back. So I'm surprised you find this "enforced rest" rule so important/worthwhile.

 

[riprock]

the rest stops are brief and dispersed enough that they don't make up for the wizard's needs to spend a solid eight hours resting.

I had one DM -- extremely Monty Haul in his judgements -- set a trend that was imitated by several others, including myself when I DM'd AD&D.

He ruled that since it takes 15 minutes to memorize a 1st-level wizard spell, the rest break after combat should allow long enough to re-memorize.

There were a few other AD&D DMs, with whom I did not play as frequently, who said that spells were memorized once a day. Their fighters ran around like marathon runners in platemail and the wizards tagged along after them.

 

[riprock]

Another, related, consideration is that at least in OD&D (where the "1 turn in 6 resting plus 1 turn after combat" rule originated) wandering monster checks are made every turn. Thus these mandatory rest periods add an element of tactical consideration -- ...

Also, what happens if the party doesn't take their required rest periods, whether by choice or circumstance? Chainmail (D&D's antecedent game) includes some fatigue rules that aren't exactly compatible but could be pretty easily converted --

When one can remember to roll on a regular schedule, wandering monsters present an excitement not unlike gambling. (But in fact much more interesting than gambling, because instead of just losing a coin, you're threatened with the potential appearance of
a scary combatant.)

I'd like to say I use wandering monster checks consistently and well. In fact, very often, wandering monster checks are the first thing I forget to do. Then, when I try to throw in some wandering monsters because it's about time, I forget to roll and the excitement of gambling is lost -- the party regards it as another scripted monster.

As for converting fatigue rules from Chainmail ... I think that's a great idea, but my ability to persuade my fellow participants is lacking.

 

[riprock]

Huh! I'm surprised this is much of an issue. In all the 3.x games I've played, it's the *players* who are clammoring for rest, not the DM insisting on it. Usually the players enter the dungeon/encounter area, find the bad guys, and fight all in a relatively short amount of gametime. If the PCs win and feel comfortable enough, they might venture on and face another encounter. But usually, the PCs are ready to make camp/rest/wait for more spell-casting power after only about an hour or two of gametime.

In my 3.x experience, most of the in-game time is spent at a camp resting and waiting for spellcasters to get their spells back. So I'm surprised you find this "enforced rest" rule so important/worthwhile.

I don't know how representative my 3.x experience is. My DM ruled (correctly according to the books, I think) that in 3.0, spells can only be memorized once per day. However, the adventures tended to require exposure to danger for a period of six to twelve hours of game time. Once engaged in battle, there was no safe retreat available for a long time. So tactically, wizards in that campaign were quickly out of spells after the first few combats, and then they had to fight by other means.

In the context of different editions, I've had different DMs say different things about whether wizards should be in that situation.

 

[VirgilCaine]

Same here. GURPS has a similar rule, but I think it's after 10 rounds. Having never seen a GURPS combat go that long, I dunno if we used the rule or not

IIRC, the rule is for every minute of combat, you take one FP in damage.
How someone can stay alive for a minute in a single combat in GURPS is beyond me if the sides are at all equal in skill, positions, and numbers.

 

[T. Foster]

When one can remember to roll on a regular schedule, wandering monsters present an excitement not unlike gambling. (But in fact much more interesting than gambling, because instead of just losing a coin, you're threatened with the potential appearance of
a scary combatant.)

I'd like to say I use wandering monster checks consistently and well. In fact, very often, wandering monster checks are the first thing I forget to do. Then, when I try to throw in some wandering monsters because it's about time, I forget to roll and the excitement of gambling is lost -- the party regards it as another scripted monster.

It's easier to remember to check for wandering monsters (and also cuts down on player metagaming: "we don't have to worry about a wandering monster because this is an odd-numbered turn") if you make the check every turn -- so instead of a wandering monster occuring 1 in 6 checked every other turn (the default in Classic D&D) one occurs 1 in 12 checked every turn; or instead of 1 in 6 checked every 3rd turn (the default in AD&D1) roll 2d6 every turn with a wandering monster occuring on a 2 or 12 (which equates to 2 in 36 = 1 in 18; if you're not a stickler for probability you could also roll 1 in 20).

As for timekeeping in general, it helps to keep things straight if you explicitly emphasize the turn-based nature of exploration in D&D: establish a turn-by-turn procedure and follow it the same way as the round-by-round procedure in combat -- a character can move x distance or perform y other activity in the course of a single turn; think specifically in terms of turns, not freeform actions. Each turn ask each player what is intended action is (or, if you've got a particularly large group, ask a single party spokesperson ("caller") what everyone's actions are), resolve those actions (or as much of those actions as can be resolved within the turn -- if the character is moving towards a door 120' away and has a move rate of 90'/turn don't move him all the way to the door, only move him 90'; he'll have to close the remaining 30' in his next turn), mark off one turn on the turn-tally, resolve turn-based durations (for spells, light sources, required rest periods, etc. -- keep a list of these under the turn tally: "torch lit turn 3 (expires turn 9)," etc.), check for wandering monsters, and return to step one for the next turn.

Players who are used to a looser, more freeform style might rankle at this more mechanical procedure at first, claiming it spoils their immersion, but once they've gotten used to it they'll probably come to appreciate the way it keeps things more tactically focused and actually streamlines play.