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

shoak1

Banned
Banned
Just curious... what do you do when the players take a route you hadn't anticipated?
We don't play in the sandbox specifically because my players dont like DM ad libbing, they feel it lessens their agency. They would rather give up their ability to go anywhere they want in exchange for their decisions and choices tainted by DM ad libbing.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

OB1

Jedi Master
I don't see how this helps. The combats are still going to be trivial if you rest-encounter-rest. To counter that problem in sandbox play, you need to constantly manufacture time crunches or geography constraints on rests. And those constraints will seem increasingly implausable and railroady - which is contrary to the essence of sandbox.
[MENTION=54380]shoak1[/MENTION] I am more than willing to admit that the DMG and modules don't give a ton of great advice for how to best handle attrition as a DM, which is why it's great that we have these boards to help find solutions! One thing that I've learned is that every day in the world need not be an "Adventuring Day" that pushes the PCs to their limits. ADs only need to occur when the players are attempting to accomplish something of significance in their world.

So in sandbox play, traveling between towns in a powerful kingdom need not be difficult (though for commoners, the threat of a single bandit raid along the road might have them travel in numbers with armed escorts). Making your way across the Desert of Despair to find the ancient lost White Pyramids and it's amazing treasure, which no one has ever returned from, is a whole different story. Now you have to ask yourself why no one has made it there and back before your party?

If you want the travel itself to be difficult, perhaps you have to pass through the territory of an evil race of sentient beings, who will relentlessly attack anyone who dares enter their territory. To stop and rest would mean certain death as you become surrounded. Or perhaps the desert is guarded by an adult or ancient blue dragon (depending on what level you want the party to be able to get through). This is a single encounter that would TPK a lower level party, but one that a fully rested one may be able to take on a few levels below the recommended.

I've mentioned this far earlier in this thread, but the lesson I've learned from playing 5e and tweaked to fit my players is that I run the game in two modes. Exploration Mode and Mission Mode.

Exploration Mode will rarely see the adventurers hit their daily XP limit. Players here are figuring out what they want their next mission to be. Will they try and get through the desert and plunder the treasure in the White Pyramid, or will they go investigate rumors of a new Kingpin running the city of Vorimport and try and recruit him as a spy? Either way, they will focus on the social and exploration pillars to gather information and make a plan to accomplish their chosen goal as we move into Mission Mode. Fights, when they happen, are designed to give the players a taste of the types of creatures and tactics they may be up against when they move to Mission Mode.

Mission Mode will have encounters far in excess of their recommended daily XP limit and consequences for abandoning the mission once they start it. They will need to apply what they learned during the Exploration phase to to avoid encounters and have a chance to complete their mission. Now, I can hear the complaint, "but constantly having time constraints is implausible." I'm sorry, but I just don't buy it. A living world reacts to the presence of powerful entities attempting to impose their will on it. There are either other intelligent entities working against them that can get the upper hand if they stop to cower, or the task is so difficult that no one else in this neck of the world has been powerful enough to accomplish it.

5E gives great flexibility so that DMs can tailor games to their players. It's exists to spark the imagination and serve as a starting point. It's easy out of the box so that new DMs don't accidentally kill off parties. Even the much vaunted 6-8 encounter per day guideline isn't a guideline, it's a red flag to new DMs that shouts "Hey Noob! I know you love our monsters but don't stick 20 encounters in a row in front of the players and expect them to live."

Could their be more advice in the DMG and Modules? Sure. But there isn't, so the best we can do is try and help each other with interesting ideas of how to make it work for our tables.
 

Imaro

Legend
We don't play in the sandbox specifically because my players dont like DM ad libbing, they feel it lessens their agency.

Sandbox... lessens their agency more than a linear adventure where (I assume but correct me if Im wrong) the DM knows what they are going to encounter ahead of time so that he can prep it in detail? That seems a little backwards or am I missing something? It would seem they are limiting their agency in exchange for more prep by the DM...
 

shoak1

Banned
Banned
[MENTION=54380]shoak1[/MENTION] I am more than willing to admit that the DMG and modules don't give a ton of great advice for how to best handle attrition as a DM, which is why it's great that we have these boards to help find solutions! ........
Could their be more advice in the DMG and Modules? Sure. But there isn't, so the best we can do is try and help each other with interesting ideas of how to make it work for our tables.
I agree, but also think the forums are a great place to stand up and say "Change this dangit!!!!" lol.
 

jrowland

First Post
With all due respect, if you think players don't know if their DM is a "decide when u get there" kind of guy, you're kidding yourself. The majority of the players I have met don't like that kind of DMing, because it makes it all about the DM.

With all due respect, a DM can be a "decide when u get there kind of guy" and make it all about the players rather than the DM. Pre-designing encounters can also be all about the DM (his design, story, etc). A responsive DM responds to the needs, wants, fears, of the table to create a fun, engaging experience knowing that moods change. You can do that by pre-designing, but pre-designing doesn't account for moods at the table, so flexibility is an important skill to have, especially when your design is flawed and only during play do you catch the flaw (such as people are bored stiff with the design, or frustrated from something not accounted for in design like immunity/resistance, etc)

Clearly you have a very different experience. That's great! Happy Gaming!
 

OB1

Jedi Master
I agree, but also think the forums are a great place to stand up and say "Change this dangit!!!!" lol.

What do you want to change? If it's the basic assumptions of the game, you've got at least 6 or 7 years before we see 6E, possibly 10 to 15. If it's the way modules are designed? Maybe, but I think WOTC is much more interested in having APs that are approachable by new and casual players rather than cater to veteran ones. I think WOTC would say, and I would agree, that the best person to challenge a veteran player is a veteran DM who knows the player well.
 

shoak1

Banned
Banned
Sandbox... lessens their agency more than a linear adventure where (I assume but correct me if Im wrong) the DM knows what they are going to encounter ahead of time so that he can prep it in detail? That seems a little backwards or am I missing something? It would seem they are limiting their agency in exchange for more prep by the DM...
Not exactly. In our view, the supposed agency gained by allowing the payers to go wherever they want is more phantom than real, because it necessitates a DM creating or placing content on the fly. Prepping ahead of time (creating a fair and balanced and detailed encounter) allows it to be just the PCs and the bad guys duking it out in a prearranged setting, without the DM's heavy hand deciding things. The monster profiles have their tactics, objectives, and contingencies preset to limit DM winging it.
 

shoak1

Banned
Banned
What do you want to change? If it's the basic assumptions of the game, you've got at least 6 or 7 years before we see 6E, possibly 10 to 15. If it's the way modules are designed? Maybe, but I think WOTC is much more interested in having APs that are approachable by new and casual players rather than cater to veteran ones. I think WOTC would say, and I would agree, that the best person to challenge a veteran player is a veteran DM who knows the player well.
The modules would be a good start - and I would say the exact opposite of what you suggest. It is the new and casual players that are most likely to be detrimentally affected by the lack of coherent support in resource management/rest. Modern gamers challenge game systems and will quickly tire of a game that is so easy to "beat." And that is exactly what happens with rest-encounter-rest. And imagine the poor noob DM trying to stop it and having to come up with plausible reasons on the fly to limit the rests.....And all because the designers don't even give token support to this fundamental balancing mechanic.

Now hard core roleplayers wont care - it doesn't affect their ability to socially interact, develop their characters, etc. Veteran DMs will likely have some tricks up their sleeve or prep the module to account for the management. But why should they have to?
 

shoak1

Banned
Banned
With all due respect, a DM can be a "decide when u get there kind of guy" and make it all about the players rather than the DM. Pre-designing encounters can also be all about the DM (his design, story, etc). A responsive DM responds to the needs, wants, fears, of the table to create a fun, engaging experience knowing that moods change. You can do that by pre-designing, but pre-designing doesn't account for moods at the table, so flexibility is an important skill to have, especially when your design is flawed and only during play do you catch the flaw (such as people are bored stiff with the design, or frustrated from something not accounted for in design like immunity/resistance, etc)

Clearly you have a very different experience. That's great! Happy Gaming!
Yes certainly a bad DM could make either way flawed, agreed.
 

OB1

Jedi Master
Modern gamers challenge game systems and will quickly tire of a game that is so easy to "beat." And that is exactly what happens with rest-encounter-rest. And imagine the poor noob DM trying to stop it and having to come up with plausible reasons on the fly to limit the rests

Why do you assume the players are able to challenge the game system through quick mastery but not the DM?

I think this is at the heart of both your and CapnZapp's concerns about the supposed elephant in the room. You both give tons of credit to players being able to master the game and trivialize it, but none to the DM to counter that.
 

Remove ads

Top