NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 7200493" data-attributes="member: 6785785">Sorry....poorly worded. I don't find them to be that problematic in my game. Short rests aren't always possible, and my players know that, and I'm willing to alter rest mechanics as circumstances dictate. They work pretty well, overall. Sure, it's not a perfect mechanic. Sure, some classes will have more at their disposal if numerous short rests are allowed, others will benefit if there are a small number of encounters per day. But like I said earlier, I find that varying it up is the key. Let some characters shine one day, and others shine another day, and your players unsure what kind of day it's going to be, so they don't expend all resources because they know there will only be one fight, or whatever. Sure, there are consequences and we deal with them. I'm just saying that we can influence how much of an impact these things may have on a specific game. Sure, but that's why we talk it out, no? I mean, I know that Zapp is big on "official" answers to problems he finds with the game, but most of us seem to just want a workable solution for issues we find, and are not so concerned about the source of the solutions or in laying blame for the problems. My point wasn't that you don't have to do anything. My point is that, in the post I quoted by you, you said for those DMs who choose to have encounters in an area that has been established to be trivially dangerous to the PCs at their current level, it can be an issue. My point is that such DMs are choosing to create the issue. Others choose to avoid the issue. This is not by saying there's nothing in the forest....Nothing has to happen? Not following how you drew that conclusion, but that's not what I've been saying. As you say, I do think we likely play very similarly. What we disagree on is the severity and/or certainty that you insist happens on the game world when shifting from 6 to 8 normal encounters to 3 deadly. I think that the impact can be minimal or nil. That's true. I didn't mean to imply that anyone who cites a problem is making it up or exaggerating. But I've noticed that trend at times, espcially when discussing theory. We often resort to increasingly extreme examples to support an argument. I am guilty of it at times as well. I am not disagreeing with the way anyone plays.....plenty of folks have cited examples they use, and they're all interesting even if I'd never play that way myself. Or never again, in some cases. I used to be big on XP and encounters and budgets and all of that. This was more a result of teh 3E era material being so quantified. I became frustrated with a lot of it over time, and only when I abandoned it did I start to enjoy DMing again. So I am probably a bit biased in that regard. And 5E's shift in focus was a well timed one, for me. Plenty of folks love the maths and honestly, that's fine, more power to them. But I needed the math to die. Or most of it anyway. And maybe there are other DMs or possible DMs out there that need to hear you don't need a table and a die roll to decide things. You don't need to have a set number of encounters, or budget for XP. The game doesn't necessarily fall apart if you don't follow the guidelines. That's one way to do it, sure. It really depends on what you're going for. You don't need to have the creatures in a given area be a threat for the PCs over their entire career. You can, if you want. But if you don't want to, then you can simply have the danger in that area be so insignificant to the PCs that you don't focus on it any more. I find a lot of travel play....days on the road, rolling for random encounters....to be kind of monotonous. So do my players. They lose interest. So I've lessened that in our game unless there's a reason. So skipping the trip through the goblin infested woods and just explaining what happened is a game saver. Sure, this is true. But is the chance for some unexpected outcome worth the risk of playing out some combat encounter that's almost assuredly going to be boring as hell?</blockquote>

Verification