D&D 5E Resting and the frikkin' Elephant in the Room

[Krachek]

Even if it were, it likely wouldn't produce the same results. Official modules have to be written too generically to bring about the kind of results I get with Exploration/Mission phases in my homebrew.

At the same time, you can apply these principals to any of the official APs, but the problem of course is that if the stakes you set up are real, then failure of a mission would mean having to homebrew material to either get the players back on the AP or veering off in another direction. Having the ability to branch and change isn't something an AP can really do well and even if it tried, it could never cover every possible scenario.

Again, if you want challenge, your players are good with an AP ending early due to TPK and you don't want to do much work, have them roll 3d6 in order or give them a starting array of 8, 9, 10, 10, 11, 12 to work with and see what happens.

Sad to say but usually most table just want high stat, high magic, powerful feat, combo and mc, and on top of that meaningful challenge. All at once!

 

[Saeviomagy]

It's a given that the GM is supposed to handle things like that. No written scenario will account for all possibilities.

As others have pointed out, balancing this sort of thing is actually hard... hence why you kind of want your professionally produced roleplaying product to at least contain some advice...

A few years ago, I ran an adventure in which the party figured out early who the BBEG. They crafted a plan, and they essentially jumped him in the street. The dice went their way the entire combat, and they finished him off in a matter of rounds, and escaped virtually untouched. They gambled huge, and it payed off.

Needless to say, that wasn't how it was supposed to play out. As the guy running the game, I had to figure out what this sudden power vacuum meant; how the world would react in order to continue the campaign. Because sure as heck nobody foresaw that possibility.

Which is just an extreme version of the scenario in which the party hits a guard house or a brigand camp and retreats to hit them after they rest. The world has to move on, but the rules or adventure notes themselves aren't going to tell the GM what to do. This is where the GM ea me his keep.

The rules or adventure notes SHOULD cover obvious scenarios, or at least give sufficient information about the world that the DM can handle them. In this case "what happens if the BBEG dies too early" should have been covered, since it's a pretty obvious thing to happen.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

The rules or adventure notes SHOULD cover obvious scenarios, or at least give sufficient information about the world that the DM can handle them. In this case "what happens if the BBEG dies too early" should have been covered, since it's a pretty obvious thing to happen.

It was a non-scripted encounter that only happened due to good roleplay. The way it played out, no one would or could have predicted. Almost every roll went in the party's favor:

1) both he and his retinue were surprised
2) the party's Paladin's alpha strike included 2 crits (the BBEG did make his save vs massive damage)
3) another member of the party critted the BBEG in the 1st non-surprise rd
4) spellcasters incapacitated or killed 2/3 of the retinue by the end of the 1st rd
5) the BBEG's 1st rd action basically fizzled; few of the retinue landed a blow
6) the BBEG was dropped by the 3rd hit of rd2, and the party's druid cast a spell that let the party escape.

 

[SmokeyCriminal]

So Instead of using the Stick to get your Players to stop Short Resting; Random Encounter rolls, Exp deduction, and Alarm clocks (Altho I think vague time restraints don't work as well as most would like. I like the Pie clock system from Blades in the Dark. Have a 4 or 6-sectioned clock and fill in one or two slices for every Short/Long rest, and keep it in plain view of everyone.)

Maybe offer them a Cupcake instead "So you want to take a Short Rest? I'll tell you what Players, if you don't take that short rest, I'll add an extra roll to the loot. Come on, what do you say? If I didn't think you could handle it, I wouldn't try to stop you. If you go two scenes without a rest, I'll throw in a loot table upgrade. There's some sweet sweet loot on table D, lots more magical Items. You know you want to, look at the Thief Player his mouth is watering, he knows what's on table D. It's the good stuff, the really good stuff."

Players love Cupcakes more then they hate Sticks.

 

[S'mon]

1. Having 1 or 2 fights per long rest may be your preferred combat model BUT when you push the players to where they need a long rest after 1-2 fights then the 5e rules aren't going to work as intended. They just weren't intended to accommodate that style of play without having some classes like full casters feel much stronger than others. Then again, I suppose if you like the old school method of a few combats a day you probably also like that casters past a certain point dominate those games...

At 0-3 fights/day, LR casters seem well balanced against the LR martial Barbarian, IME. My
solution is more towards bringing all the martial PCs (Fighter & Rogue, notably) up to the Barbarian level of coolness.

 

[S'mon]

Sad to say but usually most table just want high stat, high magic, powerful feat, combo and mc, and on top of that meaningful challenge. All at once!

I find 5e is excellent at delivering this.

 

[Cyrinishad]

Well... no? A rule where "character MUST have X fights before resting" are... arbitrary, and bizarre.

"Ah, finally, a decent inn with good food and a warm bed. Tell you what Patsy, I shall sleep in an extra hour or two tomorrow morning, and ask for the scrambled eggs and ham" "Excellent sir Lancelot, I am a bit tired too be honest"

Players: we take a long rest

GM: No

Players: erm... what? We are in a safe inn, good food etc... how is this not restful? Our last long rest we slept in a ditch!
Patsy: Well at least we had a tarp over us

GM: You haven't fought enough yet! You must kill the Knights who say Ni before you gain any slumber!

Players: oh bugger....

OR

Doctor: "So I prescribe rest for the next 2 weeks, your body needs to recover after this car hitting you. Buuut it looks like you still have a lot of fight in you, so go pick a fight with some ruffians, or maybe get in a boxing match?"
Patient" Wut?

I agree completely. It's arbitrary and bizarre, but it seems to be the kind of thing CapnZapp needs to cure his woes... I admit I haven't found the need for such a prescription at my table, but clearly CapnZapp needs something to let him play in a sandbox and alleviate the burdens of a narrative. So... when all logical points are endlessly refuted, the illogical, arbitrary, and bizarre are all that remain...

 

[Krachek]

I find 5e is excellent at delivering this.

They are doing quite well and its popularity is there to prove it.
Most people dont care about resting attrition or strategic balance.

 

[Corwin]

Most people dont care about resting attrition or strategic balance.

I'd even go as far as saying most people would consider over emphasis, or constant worrying, about those things are actively detrimental to their enjoyment of the game.

 

[Valdier]

Another option would be to have a conversation with the players and say "hey guys, I'm trying to offer you guys a reasonable challenge, but I feel the resting issue is getting in the way of that".

One of the house rules in my home game is to allow the benefit of just two short rests a day. They get to pick when that benefit kicks in, and I don't really tell them they can't take one very often. After that, they are stuck with what they have left for the rest of the day of adventuring.

Most times they tend to be pretty conservative about using them/taking them when in a setting that isn't a dungeon. In a 6-8 encounter (or more) situation, they tend to maximize the best uses of those rests and it works out pretty well.