D&D 5E Tedium for balance. Should we balance powerful effects with bookkeeping?

[Lanefan]

Have you ever known a group where one person tracks everyone's encumbrance or components? I've never even heard of such a group. That works fine for some aspects, like mapping, but it certainly isn't a panacea for tedium.

The post I was replying to (maybe indirectly) was talking about some players tracking all the minutae of information the party learned, something the poster "didn't care" about doing and saw as tedious. Along with mapping and treasury, this sort of thing is essential; even more so in a game where post-game logs aren't done and the party's info is reliant on player memory and note-taking.

And if only one person is interested in doing this, that one person is inevitably - and IMO unfairly - going to get stuck with it; because in the end everyone is going to want that it be done even if they can't be arsed to do it themselves.

Personally, I do not miss the days when we had to hole up for several rests while the cleric cast cure after cure, just so we could get on with the adventure.

See, to me this is a good example of something that has been sadly lost over the editions; because while you're holed up the enemies are doing stuff (or are themselves recovering, whichever). You're also vulnerable to environmental effects (if outdoors) and wandering threats during that time. You're also burning through food and water, if such aren't easily replenishable by forage or spell.

On a broader scale, having to hole up now and then makes adventuring take longer in the fiction, slowing (even if only slightly) the ridiculous pace of PC advancement vs in-game time.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Have you ever known a group where one person tracks everyone's encumbrance or components? I've never even heard of such a group. That works fine for some aspects, like mapping, but it certainly isn't a panacea for tedium.

It isn't as though they removed spell components from the game, they're just optional (except for costly components). If your group likes tracking components, just rule that component pouches and implements don't remove the need for components. If you like recovering 1d4 HP on a long rest, do that. As long as it's fun for your group, it isn't an issue.

Personally, I do not miss the days when we had to hole up for several rests while the cleric cast cure after cure, just so we could get on with the adventure.

That's what downtime is for, and it can just as much fun if you design for it.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Same difference. The core is what the game is about. If it's not core to the design, then it doesn't really matter. Especially with something like realism, how do you implement that without it being core (apart from the occasional head nod, which still exist)?

Why bother with the head nods then? To manipulate people into buying a game that doesn't do what they want, because in some ways it kind of looks like it does?

 

[Umbran]

I would say getting the Mcguffin is no less real than anything else the party is doing.

"Real" in the sense that you are responding to is, "the thing the players actually care about."

This is the issue with McGuffins - they are usually not intrinsically motivating. The players usuall don't care about the McGuffin itself. They care about what happens after they get the McGuffin.

Any time you are gating progress behind a McGuffin is a place to ask, "Do I really need this gate?"

 

[Umbran]

Why bother with the head nods then?

Because many things in RPGs are not all-or-nothing. You may give a head nod because a little bit of the thing you are nodding to is valuable, but much more than that isn't.

 

[nevin]

That's what downtime is for, and it can just as much fun if you design for it.

we had fun with downtime back in 1e. Some of us like that stuff.

 

[Fanaelialae]

That's what downtime is for, and it can just as much fun if you design for it.

Agree to disagree. There's nothing wrong with downtime but it doesn't belong in the middle of an adventure just because you took a few unlucky Crits IMO.

 

[nevin]

Agree to disagree. There's nothing wrong with downtime but it doesn't belong in the middle of an adventure just because you took a few unlucky Crits IMO.

its not a video game. The players taking a week down because the fighter got nearly killed or did get killed and they have to resolve that is perfectly within normal game play. How freaking boring to have a continue button everytime the party hits a roadblock.

 

[bloodtide]

this is comically absurd logic.

But still solid logic.

Tell a player "you have to keep track of the number of arrows your character has" and "suddenly" players don't want to be archers anymore. Perfect balance check.

Er...what? The fact that people think it's a bad idea means it's a good idea? That's...curious logic, to say the least.

Tedium and RP are both bad tools for discouraging players from using degenerate strategies. Because most players have a pretty high tolerance for tedium, especially if they get rewarded for doing so. Making rules that are annoying and cumbersome to use just means everyone has to wait for those things to finish being done before they get to play. How is that effective game design?

Well, voting is complex. And like I say the question is oddly worded.

 

[Asisreo]

From the replies, this could actually be a big problem for OneD&D.

If WoTC doesn't even know their balancing system is being completely ignored, they may lean into it.

Imagine a spell that required a 50,000 gp material component cost and was practically Wish with no downsides, and players were instantly using it with no time or narrative consequences.

Then of course it'd be completely broken. That's probably why Simulacrum and Forcecage are allowed to exist.