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

[CapnZapp]

This is because resting early isn't a mechanical problem. No mechanics are entirely going to stop it. You can't expect a rule patch to fix a social issue. If one player is being abusive to another, or a player is metagaming, or one player is optimized by the others aren't, or one player spends all their time on their smartphone then turning to the rulebook won't solve anything. There's nothing in the DMG, no house rule or narrative fix, that will solve the Facebook issue.
The issue exists at the table with the players, and in the unfolding narrative, and the solution needs to take place at the same level.

Sorry but while this sounds all fine and dandy, you have now completely and conveniently left out the entire 6-8 encounter ballyhoo out of your discussion.

Comparing this to Facebook - hah! WotC should hire you as a PR agent for why they're supposed to get away with setting up conditions for a balanced game but then not have to burden any of the responsibility for meeting said conditions. (So high points all around. The bit about abuse was entirely poor taste, though.)

The bit where you say "no mechanics are entirely going to stop it" intrigues me however. First off, I never claimed I expected a full 100% fool-proof solution, so this is a poor argument for doing nothing.

But what mechanics do you feel will at least partially discourage resting...?

 

[CapnZapp]

Because if they players *really* want to stop and rest after each dungeon room, you can't stop them. They will find a way.

I'm not trying to stop them. I'm trying to stick a cost to it. I'm arguing the game needs a mechanical cost to resting. Every existing such mechanical cost is easily circumvented or ignored.

 

[CapnZapp]

You don't have to force anything. Let them nap till their blessed little hearts are content- and watch their smug faces as you inform them that mopping up the spilled milk after it has run off the counter and soaked into the carpet results in no progress whatsoever with regard to level advancement.

Want to level? Get off your rear and adventure!

Sure... but now you too forgot I'm talking about published adventures... which almost uniformly doesn't care one bit about xp at all!

If you could point me to even a single instance where the party could miss out on a milestone, not by not travelling to a specific chapter (obviously you don't get any Goblin XP if you never enter the Goblin Caves), but specifically by getting there too late, I'd be most impressed!

 

[Mistwell]

Apologies for breaking you off straight away, but I didn't mean "hardcovers can't be used for AL play".

I meant "hardcovers weren't designed primarily for AL play."

They're made for paying customers like you and me. Obviously they will be considered AL legal, but they certainly weren't made primarily or even secondarily for AL.

I disagree with that assessment. Mearls has said repeatedly that AL is a very important component in growing the number of DMs, which they view as a very important issue, and that's why they have put a lot of work into AL support for those hardcover adventures (complete with not just supplementary adventures for those published adventures just for AL, but also free folders, magic item cards, and other give-aways based on published adventures and just for AL). It's at least secondarily for AL.

 

[CapnZapp]

I don't think that's a fair read of what you wrote.

Let me assure you it is. After all I wrote it.

Consider this another way of saying I won't be drawn into a meaningless fight over semantics.

I am discussing this with a focus on published supplements, seeing them to be official showcases of the rules. That's all there's to it

 

[CapnZapp]

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.

A very valid point. Thanks.

As long as it's a mechanical solution to a mechanical problem, I'm all good.

 

[Mistwell]

Let me assure you it is. After all I wrote it.

Naw, intent behind what you wrote isn't the same as a fair read of what was actually written.

For example, if you write "Banana's are Yellow" and you meant "Sky is Blue" it's not a fair read of what you wrote "Sky is Blue" despite it being what you meant.

So I say again, I don't think that's a fair read of what you wrote. If you meant something different than what you wrote, then it would be helpful just saying that.

Consider this another way of saying I won't be drawn into a meaningless fight over semantics.

There's no fight, and it's surely not meaningless to your point. You know, given it's directly addressing it.

I am discussing this with a focus on published supplements, seeing them to be official showcases of the rules. That's all there's to it

Right, and I spent a looooooong time pouring through not one, but now a second published adventure, to address your point directly. And I tied it back to those rules, which you did raise. And now it would appear you are, once again, punting and cutting 95% of my response. I am starting to wonder if you wanted your question answered, or if you were just trying to tell everyone what you thought without a conversation about it.

 

[CapnZapp]

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

Doesn't mean we can't have optional variants for minority needs

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.

As soon as you feel you belong to this group, feel free to stop reading threads with such subjects

 

[CapnZapp]

Not speaking for the OP here (and I agree with you...this approach would work for my game) but some people look at D&D as a strategy game (at least in part). The DM presents a challenge and adjudicates the rules and the players use everything available to their PCs to overcome the challenge. Asking them to not use a resource that is available to recharge their powers is like asking them is to not use a light cantrip to see when it is dark.

For most of us, the obvious answer is "DM provides consequences for resting" just like "DM rules using a light spell attracts monsters". I'm not sure what the OP is looking for here but I doubt just asking his players to skip resting just because is it.

Your feeling of doubt is accurate, but that doesn't mean he at least made it a question.

After all, that's the first step towards getting WotC to include official solutions

 

[Mistwell]

After all, that's the first step towards getting WotC to include official solutions

They have. I've demonstrated it to you, extensively. It's now the "Frikkin elephant in the room". It's like the Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal apparently - as long as you don't look at the solution, then there isn't one?

[I had to get a Hitchhiker's Guide reference in there somewhere. It is, after all, towel day!]