Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7184035" data-attributes="member: 996">Why not?&nbsp; That's been most of this thread, no?&nbsp; Going over the same things. ;(&nbsp;Not rules, guidelines.&nbsp; Sure, you can sub a single harder encounter for a couple of softer ones, and have some play in that 6-8.&nbsp; &nbsp;Now that's definitely not a rule, or a guideline...&nbsp; &nbsp;Nothing about the game suggests that, no.&nbsp; It does suggest having a 6-8 encounter day with 2-3 short rests.&nbsp; Calls it 'typical.'&nbsp;&nbsp; Shorter days, the party will be able to handle tougher encounters, longer days each encounter will have to be easier - and, yeah, class balance will also be distorted when you deviate from the typical day.&nbsp; That's all guidance, using it is very much up to the DM.&nbsp; The only 'problem' I see is that 5e didn't do as good a job giving the DM tools &amp; latitude (and shaping player expectations) to actually do that as it did with other issues, like magic items and action declarations.&nbsp; Spells suffer from a similar issue, they're a lot more set in stone (paper) than actions that would use checks.&nbsp; And, spell slots recharge with rests....&nbsp;At least you called 'em guidelines this time.&nbsp; That's all any of these things are.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7184035, member: 996"] Why not? That's been most of this thread, no? Going over the same things. ;( Not rules, guidelines. Sure, you can sub a single harder encounter for a couple of softer ones, and have some play in that 6-8. Now that's definitely not a rule, or a guideline... Nothing about the game suggests that, no. It does suggest having a 6-8 encounter day with 2-3 short rests. Calls it 'typical.' Shorter days, the party will be able to handle tougher encounters, longer days each encounter will have to be easier - and, yeah, class balance will also be distorted when you deviate from the typical day. That's all guidance, using it is very much up to the DM. The only 'problem' I see is that 5e didn't do as good a job giving the DM tools & latitude (and shaping player expectations) to actually do that as it did with other issues, like magic items and action declarations. Spells suffer from a similar issue, they're a lot more set in stone (paper) than actions that would use checks. And, spell slots recharge with rests.... At least you called 'em guidelines this time. That's all any of these things are. [/QUOTE]

Verification