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

[CapnZapp]

I agree, but I have a hard time imagining what kind of rule you could create that would "give the players a reason to push on". Or why it would be needed.

It's kind of like saying "there should be a rule that forces the PCs to fight creatures of the appropriate CR".

There is no rule like that because it's the DM's responsibility.

That comparison makes no sense.

Adventures and DMs easily control which monsters the characters face. If the PCs retreat, that's an outcome too.

In contrast, the DM can't control how many encounters there are between rests, since the right to rest every 24h and the right to cast Roe Trick are given unconditionally.

Completely different situations.

Take the desert trek as a trivial example: where the story suggests one encounter every 2-3 days. I'd like to see the DM getting six encounters in a day out of that adventure only using official variants that he's comfortable using in the rest of his campaign as well.

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

 

[Oofta]

That comparison makes no sense.

Adventures and DMs easily control which monsters the characters face. If the PCs retreat, that's an outcome too.

In contrast, the DM can't control how many encounters there are between rests, since the right to rest every 24h and the right to cast Roe Trick are given unconditionally.

Completely different situations.

Take the desert trek as a trivial example: where the story suggests one encounter every 2-3 days. I'd like to see the DM getting six encounters in a day out of that adventure only using official variants that he's comfortable using in the rest of his campaign as well.

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

Really? The DM has no control?

Do a rope trick in a dangerous area, you give the enemy an hour to set up their ambush. Maybe not every time, but often enough. Wilderness treks are a bit different, but I just deal with it by saying that you can't get a long rest in the wilderness it's not safe enough.

But wilderness treks in dangerous area are a small percentage of the game, and something that is easily dealt with.

 

[Yaztromo]

The solution is very simple: if you feel that this is an issue that spoils the fun at your table and you still want to follow the adventure modules as they are written (rightfully, because you paid for them to be playable as they are and not just an inspiration that you are forced to adapt), then stick to the E6 convention (see some more info here: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?206323-E6-The-Game-Inside-D-amp-D ) as many DM do, reducing the top level that the characters can achieve to 6th (or 7th, if it works better for you) and don't buy adventure modules for any higher level.
I'm quite confident this approach will make you feel better.

 

[S'mon]

Well I went over to 1-week Long Rests recently, and was deluged by complaints, refusal to use LR abilities even on the first encounter, etc. Hopefully my players are adapting but it was pretty shocking. They seemed convinced that "1 week to recharge" would cripple their PCs no matter how often I said it simply meant taking longer between expeditions.

 

[rabindranath72]

Well I went over to 1-week Long Rests recently, and was deluged by complaints, refusal to use LR abilities even on the first encounter, etc. Hopefully my players are adapting but it was pretty shocking. They seemed convinced that "1 week to recharge" would cripple their PCs no matter how often I said it simply meant taking longer between expeditions.

The abstract rest times (per "heal up", where the rate of "heal up" events doesn't necessarily match a physical unit of time) are working really well in my 13th Age campaign. I make sure that the in-game fiction "matches" the rule requirements, so the players have not complained and don't feel artificially constrained (and I also have tied Relationship rolls to these "heal up" events.)
I have found that when "heal ups" are rare and tied to the in-game narrative, they are strongly cherished by the players, who become very aware of the values of the resources.
I wonder if such a system would work for 5e?

 

[Corwin]

Well I went over to 1-week Long Rests recently, and was deluged by complaints, refusal to use LR abilities even on the first encounter, etc. Hopefully my players are adapting but it was pretty shocking. They seemed convinced that "1 week to recharge" would cripple their PCs no matter how often I said it simply meant taking longer between expeditions.

To me, that variant rest option lends itself to a different kind of story than what some people be used to, or sometimes even comfortable with. A much more episodic or anthology driven campaign. Less day-to-day-in-the-life, which IMX a lot of home campaigns tend to focus on. Both are fun ways to play a campaign. But very different in approach. As long as your chosen ruleset matches the playstyle desired, all's good.

 

[S'mon]

To me, that variant rest option lends itself to a different kind of story than what some people be used to, or sometimes even comfortable with. A much more episodic or anthology driven campaign. Less day-to-day-in-the-life, which IMX a lot of home campaigns tend to focus on. Both are fun ways to play a campaign. But very different in approach. As long as your chosen ruleset matches the playstyle desired, all's good.

Well I was thinking 1 week LR works for
1. Dungeon delves with a week between delves.
2. Long term overland/oversea movement with several encounters between rest stations.
3.Time-critical missions where you need to face multiple encounters.

My main interest is in facilitating #1, I got sick of game-time progressing at snail's pace as PCs went Back To the Dungeon EVERY DAY.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Well I went over to 1-week Long Rests recently, and was deluged by complaints, refusal to use LR abilities even on the first encounter, etc. Hopefully my players are adapting but it was pretty shocking. They seemed convinced that "1 week to recharge" would cripple their PCs no matter how often I said it simply meant taking longer between expeditions.

It's all relative. If the campaign pacing fits a 1-week Long Rest, (there are 6-8 encounters & 2-3 short rest between those week-long breaks), it's no different than any other adventuring 'day,' mechanically.

Really, there's no need for rests to take a prescribed time....

The abstract rest times (per "heal up", where the rate of "heal up" events doesn't necessarily match a physical unit of time) are working really well in my 13th Age campaign...
I wonder if such a system would work for 5e?

It could, mechanically. The 6-8 encounter/2-3 short-rest 'day' between long rests just becomes a heal-up (short rest recovery, but no significant time required) every-other encounter and a full-heal-up (long-rest recovery, or even full HD recovery) after, say, the 7th encounter (or 6th or 8th, I suppose).

 

[Corwin]

A minor disconnect I have with the 1-week LR is the in-game reality that certain spells/abilities can only be accessed a single time across an entire week+. It takes a different game world paradigm than the one I'm used to, I guess. Which throws me off a bit. For example, a 17th-level cleric being able to cast only one 6th-level spell per entire week+ seems weird to my sensibilities. Just a personal preference thing. Its not a mechanical issue, just an aesthetic one.

 

[Oofta]

The only issue that we've hit with short rest being overnight and long rest being a week or more is tweaking certain spells.

Our house rule is that since the "adventuring day" stretches out to several days, any spell that's meant to be available for the entire day is available for a week. For example goodberries normally only last for 24 hours so we said they now last for a week.