D&D 5E Spending time [Encounter pacing and Resting restrictions]

[DEFCON 1]

[MENTION=12731]CapnZapp[/MENTION] (and Angry DM) are right that one of the hardest things to make players feel (in a potential negative way) is the passage of time. Letting time get away from you, or using it for things other than what matters most in the task at hand can be very difficult. As [MENTION=6792135]Tersival[/MENTION] said above... if the party arrived at the BBEG and it has a bunch of minions in front of it... was that because the BBEG always had those minions, or is it because they dilly-dallied through the dungeon after letting that one enemy escape? Players can of course guess whether things are happening due to them letting time get away from them... but it's usually just that, a guess. And even if the DM is quite explicit to them in saying "Nope, these monsters are hear because you did X, Y, and Z" (which we all know is more of a meta-game explanation for the situation than anything else)... the players don't tend to feel the tension in the moment as they see the results of letting time get away from them.

Using a dice pool such as this... or heck, even just using the Jenga tower mechanic of Dread itself... it puts the passage of time front and center so everyone can see it. They see the pool get bigger or the tower begin to wobble, and they KNOW that stuff is happening and is going to hit the fan. There is a tangibility to the tension.

Now the biggest question mark though, is exactly WHEN that tension is released and WHAT happens when it does. And that (as [MENTION=37579]Jester David[/MENTION] points out) is one more place where the DM has to think on their feet and come up with something important enough to hopefully be a deterrent... knowing full well that you might roll that '1' or have the tower fall during a rather undramatic point. It requires a DM to really be on their game. Making the release of tension actually something of consequence, and being able to figure out what that is even when it occurs at an inopportune time.

Some DMs might be great at it. But others, when put on the spot like that, might end up coming up with nothing better than indeed your prototypical "random monster encounter". So this dice pool for time is not a guaranteed mechanic for all tables. But then again, what mechanic is? Every rule, mechanic, or variant could be the holy grail for one table, and a total waste of time for another. And at least to me... the visualization of something ephemeral like the passage of time that the players do not experience while their PCs do can be a huge boon. And it might be a very effective way to let the players experience something like it.

 

[Jester David]

[MENTION=12731]CapnZapp[/MENTION] (and Angry DM) are right that one of the hardest things to make players feel (in a potential negative way) is the passage of time. Letting time get away from you, or using it for things other than what matters most in the task at hand can be very difficult. As [MENTION=6792135]Tersival[/MENTION] said above... if the party arrived at the BBEG and it has a bunch of minions in front of it... was that because the BBEG always had those minions, or is it because they dilly-dallied through the dungeon after letting that one enemy escape? Players can of course guess whether things are happening due to them letting time get away from them... but it's usually just that, a guess. And even if the DM is quite explicit to them in saying "Nope, these monsters are hear because you did X, Y, and Z" (which we all know is more of a meta-game explanation for the situation than anything else)... the players don't tend to feel the tension in the moment as they see the results of letting time get away from them.

Using a dice pool such as this... or heck, even just using the Jenga tower mechanic of Dread itself... it puts the passage of time front and center so everyone can see it. They see the pool get bigger or the tower begin to wobble, and they KNOW that stuff is happening and is going to hit the fan. There is a tangibility to the tension.

Now the biggest question mark though, is exactly WHEN that tension is released and WHAT happens when it does. And that (as [MENTION=37579]Jester David[/MENTION] points out) is one more place where the DM has to think on their feet and come up with something important enough to hopefully be a deterrent... knowing full well that you might roll that '1' or have the tower fall during a rather undramatic point. It requires a DM to really be on their game. Making the release of tension actually something of consequence, and being able to figure out what that is even when it occurs at an inopportune time.

Some DMs might be great at it. But others, when put on the spot like that, might end up coming up with nothing better than indeed your prototypical "random monster encounter". So this dice pool for time is not a guaranteed mechanic for all tables. But then again, what mechanic is? Every rule, mechanic, or variant could be the holy grail for one table, and a total waste of time for another. And at least to me... the visualization of something ephemeral like the passage of time that the players do not experience while their PCs do can be a huge boon. And it might be a very effective way to let the players experience something like it.

In managing time, I think a count down adds more stress than a building dice pool.

Whenever I've wanted to emphasise time with a visual I use glass beads, removing one after the other over time. So the party knows how much time is left and can see it ticking down. You could remove a bead on regular intervals or base that on dice rolled.
But that's less abstract.

 

[clearstream]

[MENTION=12731]CapnZapp[/MENTION] [MENTION=6792135]Tersival[/MENTION]Now the biggest question mark though, is exactly WHEN that tension is released and WHAT happens when it does. And that (as [MENTION=37579]Jester David[/MENTION] points out) is one more place where the DM has to think on their feet and come up with something important enough to hopefully be a deterrent... knowing full well that you might roll that '1' or have the tower fall during a rather undramatic point. It requires a DM to really be on their game. Making the release of tension actually something of consequence, and being able to figure out what that is even when it occurs at an inopportune time.

Some DMs might be great at it. But others, when put on the spot like that, might end up coming up with nothing better than indeed your prototypical "random monster encounter". So this dice pool for time is not a guaranteed mechanic for all tables. But then again, what mechanic is? Every rule, mechanic, or variant could be the holy grail for one table, and a total waste of time for another. And at least to me... the visualization of something ephemeral like the passage of time that the players do not experience while their PCs do can be a huge boon. And it might be a very effective way to let the players experience something like it.

I have a similar concern, hence my proposed mechanics for what each point can translate into. I think a problem one always has to be sensible is what a rule is like on the nth iteration? That big pool of dice in the middle is probably a lot of fun the first few times. By the nth iteration the DM is falling back on the same problems they created for the players last time, and the players have started to just incorporate the mechanic into their behaviour. That's why the "immediately" clause in my proposal and again why the points are envisioned to be simple to track, hidden, and used in specific ways only when the DM wants.

 

[Psikerlord#]

Low Fantasy Gaming fixed the "let's long rest before we push on coz there's no reason not to" by making a long rest take 1d6 days (or 1d4 in an inn or similar).

It also uses 5 min (not 1 hr) short rests, where PCs must make checks to get back an expended ability or half damage suffered (limit 3 short rests per day, and there must be a significant* encounter in between [GM decides what counts as signficant]).

In combination these two refresh mechanics encourage pushing on with the adventure, rather than looking for a place to camp.

Free PDF or print on demand: https://lowfantasygaming.com/

 

[CapnZapp]

In managing time, I think a count down adds more stress than a building dice pool.

Whenever I've wanted to emphasise time with a visual I use glass beads, removing one after the other over time. So the party knows how much time is left and can see it ticking down. You could remove a bead on regular intervals or base that on dice rolled.
But that's less abstract.

The problem is that then you commit yourself. You open up yourself to a chicken race, and there are only losers in a chicken race: either the DM chickens out (and the campaign dies an agonizing death) or there's effectively a TPK (and the campaign dies an agonizing death)

Building Jenga towers creates stress/dread/anxiety without any such commitment.

And I say this well aware I just said I dislike the kind of vague hazy "the world will end unless you hurry up" threats that never materialize.

What you want is something more tangible than vague and hazy, without committing yourself to a specific number of days/years/encounters/mcguffins collected/guardian monsters killed.

The idea is to remove player decisions from story, and focus them on game. When they don't have a pressing story reason, the point is to encourage them to press on rather than rest for no other reason than to keep the dice pool from growing.

The underlying reason we want players to press on is mechanical. So the solution is to mechanically award players for deciding against resting in all those cases where they could rest, but where they could also not rest.

The point is to shift the "default" decision away from "since we have no particular reason to believe one more rest will make a difference, we'll rest now" to "since we have no particular reason to believe one more rest will make a difference, we'll skip resting now". Before, rest carried a small cost. Now, hopefully the baseline cost of resting is sufficiently increased you only rest when you "have to", which imho is what the encounter expectation is based on already from the start.

Some players already do think this way, no prodding necessary. And that's great - you don't need any of this thread!

But many players don't.

 

[CapnZapp]

In combination these two refresh mechanics encourage pushing on with the adventure, rather than looking for a place to camp.

That's exactly what is the desired end result here. Thanks.

 

[transtemporal]

It is similar to the idea posted by AngryDm, but it uses a carrot, instead of a stick, approach. It gives increasing bonuses (XP) for each encounter.

I like this idea! Yoink!

 

[Jester David]

The problem is that then you commit yourself. You open up yourself to a chicken race, and there are only losers in a chicken race: either the DM chickens out (and the campaign dies an agonizing death) or there's effectively a TPK (and the campaign dies an agonizing death)

That is certainly what happens when the only failure condition is "death".

At that point, there's no reason NOT to rest after every fight. Seriously. If the only way to "win" is to survive, then you want to maximize your chances for survival. It'd be stupid not to take every opportunity you can to increase your survivability.
And if the DM is unwilling to actually make things more difficult - to actually kill you or overly penalize you for rest related game decisions - then you're subtly encouraged to rest whenever you can.

Again, the solution to this is to add other failure conditions beyond death. Or the end of the world.

And I say this well aware I just said I dislike the kind of vague hazy "the world will end unless you hurry up" threats that never materialize.

What you want is something more tangible than vague and hazy, without committing yourself to a specific number of days/years/encounters/mcguffins collected/guardian monsters killed.

I don't think the point is about having a set time limit. That's the wrong take-away from the discussion.

A growing pool is as effective as a countdown to an unknown. Neither are particularly dramatic as there's no predetermined lasting consequence. "Don't do X or *something* might happen at some point in the future" is a weak incentive not to do that action.
Instead, the point is that there should be a reason to keep adventuring beyond a vague threat.

As I mentioned earlier, having a time related pool that just penalizes taking unimportant actions risks penalizing the party for taking any risks. It discourages roleplaying and side tasks by increasing the chances of a wandering monster.
If the only penalty for failure is still death, then facing a wandering monster is an appropriate penalty, provided there is a real chance of dying. It also works if the penalty is significantly and lastingly draining resources. However the problem is that the players can rest whenever they want. So a random encounter isn't much of an inconvenience if the party can just rest immediately afterward. This creates a vicious cycle where you have multiple random encounters - literal and actual session filler, since it doesn't fill a narrative or tonal role - that depletes resources encouraging the players to stop and rest. Especially prior to any difficult fight. Adding increased chances of random encounters that only deplete resources but don't have other lasting penalties just encourages the players to keep resting and hoping the odds end up in their favour and they don't get a random encounter.

The only cost is time at the table.

The idea is to remove player decisions from story, and focus them on game. When they don't have a pressing story reason, the point is to encourage them to press on rather than rest for no other reason than to keep the dice pool from growing.

First, removing player decisions from the story is so foreign to how I look at the game and what I expect from a campaign that I had to read that two or three times and refresh my browser to take it in.
It's effectively encouraging metagaming. o.0 I spend most of my time as a DM working hard to ENCOURAGE the players making decisions from the story.

That aside, if you want to encourage them to press on shouldn't, y'know, encourage them? Positive reinforcement. Maybe some variant of the milestone system.

The underlying reason we want players to press on is mechanical. So the solution is to mechanically award players for deciding against resting in all those cases where they could rest, but where they could also not rest.

Emphasis added. Because the other problem with the rules you're presenting is that when the party does need to rest (such as after a rougher than expected fight) they're penalized for that failure. If they don't rest they risk death, and if they do rest they risk death. There's no winning.

Now, the easy rebuttal to this is that the DM isn't required to increase the time pool when the party has no choice but to rest. But, if you're bringing in fiat like that to manage the rules, you don't really need the rules in the first place. The DM can just increase the chances of random monsters or arbitrarily add more encounters (or make the encounters more difficult) if the party rests.

Okay… the underlying reason we want players to press on. It is *kinda* mechanical in that we, as DMs, want to challenge the party and have the drama of a harder fight. We don't want the party to nova and obliterate the enemy.
But it's equally narrative. In that we want climactic fights that feel climactic. And fun, because nuking everything gets old and we, as DMs, also want to have fun and do cool things with our monsters.
That's what we want. But that's not whom the mechanics are aimed at.

It's the underlying reason the players want to rest is the problem. That's what needs to be addressed. In this instance, they want to rest or to regain powers and hit points. That's just the means to the end.
The players rest because they want to obliterate their enemies. And because they want to win.
Those are the desires at play. Those are what needs to be addressed by any solution, either narrative or mechanical.

Narratively and mechanically the first is easy. As the DM, give the players some fights they can just faceroll over. Easy fights or even mathematically hard fights where the players have a strategic advantage. Because if every fight is hard, the players will need to find other ways of getting their fun (i.e. the aforementioned obliteration). If the DM enables them to scratch that itch without resting, the players might feel good and not be as quick to nova.


The second is the trickier one. The players want to win.

Narratively this requires more work. As I mentioned before, there needs to be other win conditions. Just beating the encounter is not enough to "win". Lives at stake, treasure being lost, the enemy is gaining power, a ritual is being completed, etc.

If they win by beating encounters, then the easiest route to victory is nova-ing. That's a tried and true strategy that's been effective since OD&D.
How do you counter this?
Mechanically, you counter this by making it as hard to win by not taking as rest as by taking a rest. If the difference between resting and continuing is going into the final chamber with one fight under your belt (a random encounter) rather than two fights (the fights prior to potentially resting) then the advantage is clear. You rest. If not, you keep going. But that's hard to communicate to the players, and the challenge of encounters is variable. If the random encounter was harder than the two previous fights, the players have actually lost resources by resting and might feel cheated. Nothing was gained and only time was lost. That's not fun.

The thing is, people are also bad with odds. That's how Las Vegas stays in business. Since the lost condition (a random encounter) is not a certainty, many players will test their luck and risk it. Either way, someone loses at the result. If there's no random encounter, the players "win" but the DM "loses". If there is a random encounter or other consequence, the DM "wins" but the players feel like they have "lost". But if they don't gamble the DM still "wins" while the players feel like they have lost. And there's the uncertainty of whether they would have rolled well or not, that will make them second guess themselves.

Some players already do think this way, no prodding necessary. And that's great - you don't need any of this thread!
But many players don't.

I don't think I need this thread, no. I'm lucky in terms of players (mostly). But I opted to read based on the subject, under the assumption I might still get ideas from this thread. I can always learn new tricks.

And I replied assumed you might actually want feedback from a variety of sources, not ones that agree with you...

 

[Jester David]

[MENTION=1207]Ristamar[/MENTION] posted the following idea in your thread-

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...ikkin-Elephant-in-the-Room/page17#post7122123

It is similar to the idea posted by AngryDm, but it uses a carrot, instead of a stick, approach. It gives increasing bonuses (XP) for each encounter.

In your prior thread, I noted that the crux of the issue is identified in the AngryDM's post- specifically, time. This is an issue that has existed in all D&D editions, to a greater or lesser extent (arguably 4e didn't have it as bad, because it used a more balanced/gamist framework, but it still existed).

There are a number of different solutions, it's just a question of finding out the one that works for your table.

I'm always in favour of carrots over sticks.

Increasing XP is one way. Or the 4e milestone system. Maybe an encounter based version of 13th Age's Escalation Dice mechanic.
Or even something akin to a Final Fantasy limit break system; perhaps the more encounters you have the number range needed for a critical hit increases.

If the issue is that players want to win, and resting is the easiest way to win, there needs to be something that evens the odds to encourage you to continue adventuring, or at least makes continuing to adventure slightly more attractive.

 

[FrogReaver]

So I just realized something. To me it's very insightful. The ability to rest and regain resources is itself a special ability. Except it's unlimited, can be used nearly anytime the player decides to, and has no observable cost (the princess may have died whether we rested or not, the bad guys brother my have crossed our path because we rested just as easily as he crosses our path because we hurry along, etc).

As such it's likely easier to have the players self police their resting than any kind of mechanic to police it from the DM's side. As such I think the game (or at least the DM) should insist that players make characters who take every opportunity to be heroic and who don't slow down or stop when there's people to be saved and evil to be vanquished except for lunch and bedtime. On occasion when absolutely necessary the hero would take an extra rest.

But if these were the kinds of characters the game generally demanded then I don't imagine we would ever have any rest issues.