Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Flamestrike" data-source="post: 7120471" data-attributes="member: 6788736">So do I.6 encounters per [long rest] is ample time for class abilities to be used. Even assuming a 7th level party thats:Wizard: 2 spells per encounter [4 x 1sts, 3 x 2nds, 3 x 3rds, 1 x 4th plus arcane recovery of 3 levels worth of spells]Barbarian: 4 x rages. Enough to rage for 2/3 encounters.Paladin: 4 x 1st level spell/smites, 3 x 2nd level spell/smites. 17d8 worth of smite damage to dole out over those 6 encounters, with 1 x smite per encounter.If a paladin is smiting on every attack that lands, a Barbarian is raging on round 1 of every combat, and the Wizard is casting spells starting with his highest level spell and working down, that's boring as bat poo. There is no decision point for the player (do I use this smite/ rage/ spell now, or do I save it for later?) and those abilities dont stand out. With longer 'adventuring days' those abilities have much more narrative and dtramatic impact when used at the table. If it takes a Wizard 1 month to recover a 9th level slot, then when the player chooses to cast a 9th level spell, it's a big deal (both for the player and the narrative). If the party have to deal with 10 encounters before long resting, then the barbarian choosing when to rage (and when not to) is equally vital, and when those abilities get used they stand out more as special.Thats an entirely different issue.Personally I use a system where a Long rest is still 8 hours, but you only get back 1 slot of each of levels 1-5, plus 1 slot of 6th level or higher (or a single arcanum). This makes full casters (and paladins) much more conservative with spellcasting/ smiting.The thing is though that a full week to recover long rest resources means you (as DM) have a lot more wriggle room with time pressures on your quests.You should be imposing a time limit or time pressure on all your quests. If an NPC has to be stopped from completing a ritual or a NPC has to be rescued, a macguffin has to be destroyed/ recovered/ located/ or an NPC's lair has to be assaulted or whatever.... it has to be done be [time X].If you're not imposing time limits on quests or PC objectives you're failing as a DM. There is no pressure on the players to do their task and it becomes a boring 'take as much time as we want and there are no consequences'.When its a week long break to get back long rest resources it does two things:1) The players conserve those resources in the knowledge that it'll be a week before the get them back2) It gives you a lot more creative freedom in imposing time constraints. Instead of 'destroy the macguffin by midnight' it becomes 'destroy the macguffin within 4 weeks'. Now the players know that they have enough time for a long rest or two to complete the quest (destroying the macguffin) within that time you only need a dozen or so encounters (over the course of an entire month) to hit the balance mark.I would find 1-3 fights then falling back to long rest extremely weird in every edition of DnD (whcih have revolved around dungeons with a half dozen or more encounters per dungeon level).I mean; thats essentially entering a dungeon, killing the monsters in the first room or two, then falling back overnight to rest. That is super weird pacing and poor management of the adventuring day by the DM. Its no wonder why your table probably feaures [full casters/ barbarians/ paladins] being super strong and [fighters/ monks/ warlocks] being super weak.The decsions you make with lowering the number of ecnoutners per long rest down to 1-3 (when the game is balanced around 6-8) thats causing this disparity in the power of those classes.</blockquote>

Verification