Stopping the "extended rest after every encounter"

[Goblyns Hoard]

Fair enough - then consider this one:

D&D is a group game, for the enjoyment of all... that includes the DM.

Make it clear to them that their approach is affecting/ruining (your choice of word here obviously) your enjoyment of the game. Ask them to change their methods to help improve your fun. If they refuse you have options.

Number 1 - Stop DMing and find another set of players (always a bit harsh I know but if you're not enjoying the game then you may need to consider it

Number 2 - Don't give them a choice in resting - by having them unable to escape the encounters. Even in the city that's an option, hit them with gangs of thieves when they go to sleep, a vampire attack in the middle of the night, whatever you want. If they complain just tell them that you were trying to enjoy the game too.

Ultimately if your not having fun tell your players. If they won't change then you need to - change game, change style, change who's controlling how things happen... anything to make sure they understand that your enjoyment is important too.

Obviously the extent that you want to take that change is up to you and your relationship with your players (are they good friends or just fellow gamers extracting the urine). So don't think I'm trying to wreck your relationship with what might be your best friends

 

[lordkiwi]

But changing the rules to pander to this behaviour is not what D&D should be about.

A lot of D&D is about finding optimal strategies for success, and the only concrete tool the players have for this is the rules. A rule to avoid players resting after every encounter is no different from the rule fixing sword damage at 1d8 instead of letting the players choose how many dice to roll... it avoids abuse and promotes a certain play style.

D&D is a group game, for the enjoyment of all... that includes the DM.

...and the players. The players are having fun trying to use the system they have been presented with creatively. As it's not fun for the GM you can say one of a couple of things if you want it to stop...

1. Cut it out it's not fun for me... which reduces their fun.
2. Provide the players with a more balanced system to use that encourages the play style you want... thus both you and the players are having more fun.

A mechanical solution adds to the game, a social solution removes something.

Lord Kiwi,

 

[Goblyns Hoard]

A lot of D&D is about finding optimal strategies for success, and the only concrete tool the players have for this is the rules. A rule to avoid players resting after every encounter is no different from the rule fixing sword damage at 1d8 instead of letting the players choose how many dice to roll... it avoids abuse and promotes a certain play style.

Fair enough - if you think it's necessary then go ahead I'm not stopping you... but I'm still not going to promote it. The separation of daily and encounter powers clearly sets up the idea that there should be multiple encounters per day - otherwise there is no need to distinguish between them. If you want to step away from that feel free. Infocynic obviously wasn't happy with the style his/her (sorry Infocynic - not spotted any gender clues yet) players had adopted and wanted to find a way around it. Rather than complicate things by adding new rules I feel the existing system provides suitable methods, and having to add another carrot to the system because the players are 'abusing' (my opinion) it strikes me as unnecessary. There are already plenty of tools to encourage players away from resting after each encounter, I'm advocating their use over putting in additional rules to pander to them. And yes I will continue to use the word pander - these players (again my opinion) are not looking to be creative with the system - they're looking to 'win' by optimising their strategy and making sure they have maximum resources for every fight.

...and the players. The players are having fun trying to use the system they have been presented with creatively.

Do you DM much? I DM 95% of the time in my group. I'm not moaning about it, I actually prefer it to playing a lot of the time. But I also know that I put in significantly more work in terms of prep time. If my players were to adopt a style of game I wasn't enjoying then why on earth should I put in all that work for their enjoyment alone. You're right - the game is there for the enjoyment of all, but I truly doubt that Infocynic's players are NOT enjoying themselves at the moment. I'm not proposing killing the players characters straight off - I'm proposing challenging them on the situation - either IC or OOC. They're playing the safe game to win it. Some of the BEST games I've ever played are the ones when the characters were up against the wall, people dropping all around, getting through by the skin of your teeth. These guys will never see that. Do you truly feel that by challenging them they really aren't going to have any fun?

1. Cut it out it's not fun for me... which reduces their fun.

Not necessarily

2. Provide the players with a more balanced system to use that encourages the play style you want... thus both you and the players are having more fun.

Yes possibly, but the existing system has mechanisms for promoting the 'preferred play style' and I REALLY don't think adding more rules increases the fun.

A mechanical solution adds to the game, a social solution removes something.

I disagree COMPLETELY. A mechanical solution adds to the RULES, and provides another system for players to try and optimise/exploit and for the DM to deal with. A social system means that your communicating and improving the group dynamic. Sometimes yes that might mean that you have to sacrifice a bit of your fun for someone else to increase their fun. Life is all about compromise, and if Infocynic's players can't or won't see that, well I'm not sure what - but it's at that point that he/she has to make the decision about whether or not to continue the game.

Absolutely there are a whole bunch of steps and solutions and I'm not stopping anyone from adopting them. What I'm saying is that used correctly the system already provides those tools and doesn't need any new rules to achieve the desired effect - the desired effect being everyone getting to enjoy the game as much as possible in the confines of their group.

 

[lordkiwi]

@Goblyns_Hoard: I do spend most of my time DMing, but I'd rather find a way to let the players make full use of the system while still playing the game I want to play.

I'm not saying the 'one encounter work day' wouldn't annoy me as a GM (although it's never come up), I'd definatly try to stop it since it's disruptive to making a decent plot. If the players are going to exploit something it may as well support my game instead of disrupting it.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, different groups will want to solve the problem differently. My preference is a rules fix while I can see that some other people (like yourself) would find that too intrusive (getting your hand held by the rules too much maybe?)

Lord Kiwi,

 

[bardolph]

Well, after reading this entire thread and other suggestions in the House Rules forum, I'm setting the bar at 4 encounters per day ("hard" as classified by level +2 counts double) Less than that and you earn less XP, 5 or more and you get a small amount of bonus XP (to all encounters that day). They're immune from penalty if they have a good plot reason for stopping early, but not if they just mismanaged their resources.

I appreciate the comments that the narrative could drive this, but short of making the bad guys win, game over, I'm not sure that making the encounters more difficult will really accomplish anything. And yes, they might be a little more difficult if you're missing 10% of your experience all the time (3 encounters), but you should be able to make that up with a 5-encounter day once you learn to manage resources better.

You can actually accomplish the exact same goals with narrative carrots. For example, using the "stop the evil cultists" example, perhaps the cultists have a certain number of hostages, which they sacrifice at a rate of 1 per day. When the PCs complete the scenario, they get bonus XP for each hostage they save. Obviously, the faster they complete the scenario, the more bonus XP they get from saving the hostages.

Or perhaps the cultists release some minor demons, again at a rate of 1 per day (or whatever). The demons create some storyline problems (burning Joe's farm, stealing Alice's goat or whatnot), and results in an XP penalty at quest's end.

Or perhaps the Lord of the Castle has promised a reward to the PCs, but the evildoers rob one of the Lord's caravans on day X, which includes the PCs reward money.

Or, if the PCs are taking out rooms in the dungeon one by one, maybe the cultists recognize the danger and pack up and leave while the PCs are resting. Or maybe they lay down traps and alarms, or move stuff around while they are gone, or maybe they take all their valuable treasure and hide it in the woods somewhere, so they can make a quick escape when the PCs return.

It seems, infocynic, that if your problem is that your players metagame too much for your tastes, the solution can't be to metagame right back at them. The only thing you're doing is presenting more rules for them to try to exploit. What you want to do is engage their imaginations more, so that they get swept up in the story and don't care so much for metagaming.

This doesn't always mean you have to rewrite the whole module. Just throw in a few surprises whenever the PCs give the enemies time to strategize. You don't have to make up systems or rules for this, you just have to be able to improvise a little. If time can work in the PCs favor, by allowing them to rest and recharge, then time can also work against the PCs, by giving the bad guys more time to plot and scheme.