Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Harzel" data-source="post: 7202979" data-attributes="member: 6857506">Heh.  I was going to snarkily reply, "Could I suggest taking a closer look at what I wrote?", but in one critical place I see I failed to say (fully) what I meant.  My main (intended) point was that there is nothing in the DMG to suggest that amongst all the combinations of encounters that meet the XP budget, those combinations containing 6-8 encounters are in any way preferred, recommended, or better for the game.  On the basis of this section, the most that one can say about the number of encounters is that it needs to be at least three in order for the paragraph on short rests to make sense.Yes.Yes, except<ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Other than that the number of encounters needs to be at least 3, this says nothing about the number of encounters, which was what I was talking about.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">There is nothing in the DMG about an "optional rest 3".  It mentions 2, that's it.  People do throw around the 2-3 thing a lot, but I'm not sure where it comes from.  Seems like another case of reading into this section things that aren't there.  It would be arguably fair to say that 2 is an approximation, but then 1-2 or 1-3 would be just as good as 2-3 as guesses as to an intended range.</li> </ol>Yes, and to reiterate, there is nothing in the DMG to say that one of these should be preferred over the others.</blockquote>