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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7180968" data-attributes="member: 996">That's not an anecdote "I ran a party of six barbarians through Tomb of Whores and they handled 8 encounters with no problem" is an anecdote.   The actual rules allow for any number of encounters (it'd be a lot of encounters before your ran out of time at 6 sec/round).  The party might not survive past a certain number, but the rules have nothing to do with that.  Encounter guidelines, OTOH, are a different story. I am, this thread is.  It's the least-worst case of the hoary 5MWD scenario. Seems you'd be as or more likely to have en encounter moving stealthy as you would hiding in one place and resting.  All telegraphing resting = random encounter does is force parties to factor in the need to face an encounter to get a rest (unless you're fighting a long time, you get the benefits?), meaning rest that much sooner.    You keep saying 'huge,' I don't think it means what you think it means.  Balance is an after-market accessory, anyway.  Certainly restoring traditional limitations  on casting would shift the balance target.  For instance, you might be able to balance casters against non-casters on a shorter day.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> Fast in the sense of table-time?  I don't think so, it doesn't particular push it that way, that I can see, it requires some bookkeeping and strategic thought that might slow play at the table some.  An all-encounter-based system can be faster, that way - less bookkeeping, less mulling over strategies, more action - at least, that's how it played out when I ran 'D&D Gamma World,' which, unlike 4e, really was almost entirely encounter-based.  (There was a long rest benefit, but my players would go weeks without even considering it).No, if there's any sort of passive-aggressive double-think in the design (and I don't think there is), it'd be along the lines of "You want balance?  I got yer balance right here."   IF someone got dropped to negatives, you had to wait the week.  Otherwise, a typical rest was however many hours it took to recover the cleric's spells - minimum 4 + 15min/level for low level spells - cast 'em all, and repeat until everyone was healed and the cleric had a full slate of spells.  A lot of bookkeeping and rolling d8s for about a day of time and much difference made. Yep, and it shouldn't be 'kitbashing' it should just be exercising judgement and making rulings.  No, you don't get full long-rest benefits for sleeping in the wilderness, you get short-rest benefits, for a long rest, find some civilization (or make a serious camp, like a nomadic tribe would and spend more of your time hunting/gathering/foraging/living than traveling).  There are comparatively hard-rules solutions for the issue of variable pacing.  For instance, don't predicate balance among classes on time pressure, just design each class to balance regardless of day length - it's not hard (for a designer working on an original game), and it reduces overall complexity.  For another instance, there's what 13A did, /do/ balance classes for a certain amount of challenge between re-charges, then base the re-charges on the number of challenges faced - abstract, but solid.  To make it less abstract, 13A also allowed a player-driven rest, at the cost of a campaign loss.  The 13A solution would work for 5e.  You get a 'short rest' recharge every-other encounter and a long rest recharge every 8th encounter, for instance.  Like clockwork.  Well, nothing like clockwork, since those 8 encounters could play out over an hour or a year depending on the pacing of the campaign.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />  It'd be perfectly suitable for a DMG-style 'module.'  But, I think the more 5e-worthy solution is to put (or for the DM to seize, in spite of any player resistance, given the current phrasing of the system) control of whether a rest is possible, how long it takes, and what benefits are gained, entirely in the DM's hands, with the 1 hr and 8 hr long/short rests serving merely as default guidelines, or 'anecdotal' if you're OB1.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

Verification