D&D 5E Serious gamers and new CR formula

[CapnZapp]

I bet many of the people who think CR doesn't work aren't following the recommended encounters per day.

That's easy to say.

But the reality is that there is no system support for enforcing that recommendation.

Everytime I say this, people dismiss me by saying "make the story put a time pressure on the heroes", but having the princess get eaten in exactly 36 hours, go! gets old fast.

The reality is that most published adventures and lots of fantasy stories simply doesn't give a hoot about making sure the heroes face 6-8 encounters before they can rest.

Only in dungeon bashing do you even come close, and even then, it's mostly up to the players drive and curiosity.

The truly wearying part? As soon as you bring up true solutions, such as suggesting you simply can't benefit from a long rest until after, say, five encounters, people totally lose it, cry foul, and completely lose any coherent ability to discuss further...

We never get anywhere as long as some people keep saying "you didn't keep to the recommendations" without the slightest hint on how to actually do that!!

 

[Minigiant]

That's easy to say.

But the reality is that there is no system support for enforcing that recommendation.

Everytime I say this, people dismiss me by saying "make the story put a time pressure on the heroes", but having the princess get eaten in exactly 36 hours, go! gets old fast.

The reality is that most published adventures and lots of fantasy stories simply doesn't give a hoot about making sure the heroes face 6-8 encounters before they can rest.

Only in dungeon bashing do you even come close, and even then, it's mostly up to the players drive and curiosity.

The truly wearying part? As soon as you bring up true solutions, such as suggesting you simply can't benefit from a long rest until after, say, five encounters, people totally lose it, cry foul, and completely lose any coherent ability to discuss further...

We never get anywhere as long as some people keep saying "you didn't keep to the recommendations" without the slightest hint on how to actually do that!!

That's why you don't say "no rest".

You instead raise the random encounter rate or "attacking the camp" rate by 10 for every encounter less than 8 or whatever number the game suggests by 10% per. You still roll, so they can't say you're forcing it. Some days they will stop after 3 encounters and no wolf pack or band of orcs attack.

But the game runs on attrition format. Enforce it somehow or alter the game. No one whines when I roll a die every time they long rest. Most D&D fans are okay with the mercy of the die.

Its the same as the healer assumption. The game assume you'll have some sort of healer who can heal HP and remove conditions. If the party refuses, accept that they can be KOed by a saving throw, hand out potions like candy, or give them a healer NPC.

 

[ad_hoc]

We never get anywhere as long as some people keep saying "you didn't keep to the recommendations" without the slightest hint on how to actually do that!!

My favourite part of the 3.x Ravenloft DMG is the section on pacing models.

It gives good tips on various ways to create a different pace.

You are right though that it can still be tricky. Especially in 5e, it is my only real trouble with the system. 2 short rests per long rest to keep things balanced.

I plan on sitting down with my players, describing the problem, and agreeing on a solution before play.

 

[Rya.Reisender]

I guess I'm lucky I don't have any players that complain when I added some extra rules on resting to ensure I can keep the 6-8 encounters per long rest.

The rules actually allow me to enforce it by saying you can only do (or rather: benefit from) a long rest once per day. Short rests are usually not a problem. There needs to be an encounter in between otherwise I count it still as the same short rest. But other than that, if my players say after every battle they want to rest, I'd allow that, though it can still mean something bad happens because they waste too much time.

In any case, all of this shouldn't actually matter all that much unless you really have a group that says after every battle "We wait 15 hours, then do a long rest." - you can pretty simply solve it by making them have 5-7 encounters during those 15 hours they sit and wait.

Why would your group be angry on you when you don't allow them to do a long rest? The only reason I see is that they are already strongly hurt and don't consider themselves capable of winning another battle. But in that case... if they are already strongly hurt, they already had their challenge. No reason to be an ass and not allow them a long rest here, forcing them to run into a TPK just because they didn't do their 6 battles yet and already wasted all their resources.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Serious gamers

For the serious and discerning game player, use the CR system devised by the development group Booger, Booger, and Fartybutt.

 

[CapnZapp]

But the game runs on attrition format. Enforce it somehow or alter the game.

Thank you for so eloquently illustrating the problem. ;-)

That's why you don't say "no rest".

You instead [do stuff not in any DMG or official adventure module I have ever seen].

Not to dismiss your specific advice, but what I take away is that the game needs house rules to achieve even its most fundamental expectations.

Which is my entire point: the DMG essentially says "we assume 6-8 encounters but it is totally on you to make that happen".

None of Minigiant's advice (or any of a zillion other ideas) is codified in the game.

As far as I can recall, the DMG does not even talk about this as a potential problem. It simply is built on 6-8 encounters a day as if that happens automatically for all adventures. It is completely silent on the fact the game makes an assumption with absolutely no mechanisms to help the DM in achieving them.

 

[Minigiant]

And really, those who complain about the 6-8 encounter assumption have to remember that the design team had to balance at-wills, short rests, and long rest features.

So you're damned if you do and damned if you don't.

Want fighters, monks, barbarians, warlocks, and wizards to play different? You need a lot of encounters.
Want a few encounters? Then everyone has to get a lot more similar.

 

[Minigiant]

Thank you for so eloquently illustrating the problem. ;-)


Not to dismiss your specific advice, but what I take away is that the game needs house rules to achieve even its most fundamental expectations.

Which is my entire point: the DMG essentially says "we assume 6-8 encounters but it is totally on you to make that happen".

None of Minigiant's advice (or any of a zillion other ideas) is codified in the game.

As far as I can recall, the DMG does not even talk about this as a potential problem. It simply is built on 6-8 encounters a day as if that happens automatically for all adventures. It is completely silent on the fact the game makes an assumption with absolutely no mechanisms to help the DM in achieving them.

Well you can't blame the hot dog cart for not serving turkey sandwiches.

It would been nice to provide help for shorter days. But I can't blame WOTC for not doing so. As it look at it, there are so many ways to handle short days from adjusting random encounters to rest tweaks to to class tweaks to monster tweaks to encounter tweaks that I can't see a silver bullet for it. Especially with the various ways players play. So really only the slower rests were warranted due to the small space required.

 

[iserith]

Thank you for so eloquently illustrating the problem. ;-)


Not to dismiss your specific advice, but what I take away is that the game needs house rules to achieve even its most fundamental expectations.

Which is my entire point: the DMG essentially says "we assume 6-8 encounters but it is totally on you to make that happen".

None of Minigiant's advice (or any of a zillion other ideas) is codified in the game.

As far as I can recall, the DMG does not even talk about this as a potential problem. It simply is built on 6-8 encounters a day as if that happens automatically for all adventures. It is completely silent on the fact the game makes an assumption with absolutely no mechanisms to help the DM in achieving them.

I guess I don't see how it is helpful to blame the tools we are given when we know what needs to be done.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

That's because there is no such encounter if playing the game as presented in the books - only ones where the players might think they can use all their resources, but have no way to be sure they won't have need of them after the encounter.

7 level 10 PCs vs. a kraken? Underwater, maybe that would be a tough fight. But above ground, I'm not surprised the kraken lost. It's a meatsack with low movement and limited ranged attacks that require it to see the target (so heavy obscurement totally negates its lightning attacks, as long as the obscurement isn't Darkness or illusionary because truesight--but Fog Cloud would work).

A kraken by itself simply isn't scary. It needs to be the heart of something bigger, like an army or a Slaad invasion or a cult. It's an anvil, and it needs a hammer.

The only thing stopping a first-level wizard from killing a kraken is the fact that the kraken breathes water and can therefore escape. If the wizard caught the kraken two miles from the nearest body of water, you'd have a dead kraken. (Method: human wizard with Spell Sniper. Casts Chill Touch on the kraken from 180' away. Kraken takes 2.03 damage per round while it flees at 40' per round. Wizard uses Longstrider to match its 40' movement, then the kraken takes twenty-six minutes to cover the two miles to the water body, taking fire the whole way. Wizard casts Chill Touch 263 times during that hour (because he loses one round to Longstrider), inflicting 532.58 damage over that period, which is comfortably more than the kraken's 472 HP.

Any creature that can be defeated by a lone first-level wizard is obviously even weaker than the Tarrasque. ;-)

Also, a first-level Mobile fighter could do the job in half the time (520.73 damage in the first mile), although he would expend seven quivers of arrows in the process. But everyone knows that first-level fighters are stronger than first-level wizards so that's not surprising.