D&D 5E The Resting Mechanics - What Works Best?

[overgeeked]

Now I see what you're advocating. About the only real wrinkle I see with this solution is the Warlock getting both spell slots back after a short rest (which in principle could mean every five minutes if we dramatically shorten the short rest). Some sort of fix would be needed there, I expect, but I do see now both what the notion is and what it's meant to address.

I'm really appreciating this thread: I'm learning a lot from all the different approaches (and justifications for them) people have.

Sure, but that's also why you only allow 2-3 short rests per day. To keep things from going insane. I do 3 short rests per day and you can take a short rest as an action. This lets fighters, monks, etc get to feel as cool as the casters when doing those big boss nova fights. But doesn't let warlocks (or monks or fighters) get infinite resources. That's the opposite of the point.

Right, but if one wants to tamp down the relative power of all casters compared to the martial classes, the Warlock remains un-tamped in this scenario, doesn't it? So if a DM wants to re-jigger rest mechanics to make the martial classes more attractive to players, I would expect to need some kind of of fix for the Warlock. Not vis-à-vis other casters, mind you--just vis-à-vis the martial classes.

No?

Hence the limit on short rests per day.

 

[jmartkdr2]

Right, but if one wants to tamp down the relative power of all casters compared to the martial classes, the Warlock remains un-tamped in this scenario, doesn't it? So if a DM wants to re-jigger rest mechanics to make the martial classes more attractive to players, I would expect to need some kind of of fix for the Warlock. Not vis-à-vis other casters, mind you--just vis-à-vis the martial classes.

No?

If you assume that caster is always better, then sure - but I've found it's not that simple. The weakest classes (monk, ranger) have plenty of magic, after all. Ranger especially gets nerfed by this if you're not careful.

Fighters, IME, are much more powerful than warlocks.

 

[Flamestrike]

The problem mostly stems from two things. First, the game is balanced around an assumed 6-8 encounters per day, so anything less than that throws off game balance.

Only for that one adventuring day (AD), and the closer you get to 6 hard encounters/AD, the smaller that gap (between long and short rest classes) is.

It's likely not even noticeable at 4-5 Hard/ deadly encounters/AD (presuming 2 short rests taken).

Single encounter AD's, it becomes noticeable, but a DM can then simply design the next AD with 8+ encounters, and provide plenty of opportunity to Short rest during that AD, throwing the spotlight on the Short rest classes.

A good example is simply throwing the odd Dungeon level (or similar) with a definitive 'Doom clock' attached (stop the ritual by midnight, or else really bad thing X happens). Give the PCs 6 (in game) hours to complete the mission, stack the dungeon with a dozen combat, social and environmental challenges, and you're done.

You can then have AD's on either side of that AD with 0-2 encounters only, and the median of 6 or so per day is met (and every PC has had a chance to shine).

People seem to think 'it must be 6-8 every single day' and that's not the case at all. Just aim for that as a median, with variable days scattered around and you'll be fine (and it'll actually enhance your game).

 

[overgeeked]

Only for that one adventuring day (AD), and the closer you get to 6 hard encounters/AD, the smaller that gap (between long and short rest classes) is.

Right. The game is balanced for 6-8 encounters per day. A lot if DMs don’t want to have that many combats per day. Ever. So it creates the problem addressed by fiddling with rests.

It's likely not even noticeable at 4-5 Hard/ deadly encounters/AD (presuming 2 short rests taken).

Single encounter AD's, it becomes noticeable,

It’s noticeable around 4/day. Anything less and it’s glaringly obvious.

but a DM can then simply design the next AD with 8+ encounters, and provide plenty of opportunity to Short rest during that AD, throwing the spotlight on the Short rest classes.

The DM could. But why? If the point is to slow things down, have fewer fights per day and keep the fights interesting, piling on more fights the next day defeats the purpose.

A good example is simply throwing the odd Dungeon level (or similar) with a definitive 'Doom clock' attached (stop the ritual by midnight, or else really bad thing X happens). Give the PCs 6 (in game) hours to complete the mission, stack the dungeon with a dozen combat, social and environmental challenges, and you're done.

Sounds like a game I wouldn't want to play. Combat is the most boring part of D&D. Hackfest D&D is the least interesting thing to do with the game.

You can then have AD's on either side of that AD with 0-2 encounters only, and the median of 6 or so per day is met (and every PC has had a chance to shine).

People seem to think 'it must be 6-8 every single day' and that's not the case at all. Just aim for that as a median, with variable days scattered around and you'll be fine (and it'll actually enhance your game).

Or adjust the rests, as that’s the point if the thread, to balance the mechanics around fewer fights.

 

[Lanefan]

Right. But I don't remember ever running such a game or playing in one. Perhaps as I kid. And I don't think I'm alone ion this, a lot of people don't play such endless dungeon crawls. Sure, there will be some dungeons, but three fight for a dungeon seems plenty.

Three fights in a dungeon is a mighty small (or very de-populated) dungeon.

Look at any of a bunch of BX-1e modules - there's way more in those dungeons than just three fights.

 

[Flamestrike]

Right. The game is balanced for 6-8 encounters per day. A lot if DMs don’t want to have that many combats per day. Ever. So it creates the problem addressed by fiddling with rests.

No, not per Day. Per Adventuring day.

An [adventuring day] can be a week or even a month of in game time. Its simply the arbitrary amount of time between a 'long rest' recharge of abilities.

It’s noticeable around 4/day. Anything less and it’s glaringly obvious.

Barely noticeable. And again, simply have another adventuring day a mass battle where the enemy come in waves, an arena, the PCs being chased and upable to long rest, or a good old fashioned dungeon level with a dozen encounters, and no chance to long rest.

On the shorter 'days' long rest heavy classes shine. On the longer 'days' short rest heavy classes shine.

The DM could. But why?

Because its the DMs job to ensure balance, just like its the DMs job to balance individual encounters (you dont go throwing Balors at 1st level PCs).

You're part entertainer, part adjudicator, part showman, part story teller, and part secret puppet master.

Sounds like a game I wouldn't want to play. Combat is the most boring part of D&D. Hackfest D&D is the least interesting thing to do with the game.

Dude; Combat is literally 90 percent of DnD's rules. It has an entire chapter devoted to it, 90 percent of all spells are combat related, as are 90 percent of all class features, and the entire Monster manual. RAW it's the only way to earn XP and progress. Encounter design, adventuring day XP budgets etc.

The exploration and social pillars get a paragraph or two in the entire CRB's. The only Narrativist mechanic in DnD is the inspiration mechanic, and that tends to be ignored or forgotten by most groups.

DnD is a combat game. Probably due to its origins as a Wargame, but hey. I dont doubt you find Combat boring, but critiquing the game for including combat is a little like critiquing Monopoly for having money and a banker.

Or adjust the rests, as that’s the point if the thread, to balance the mechanics around fewer fights.

Adjusting the rests doesn't change the 6-8 encounters per adventuring day expectation one iota.

Remember, an adventuring day is not an 'in game' day, and it is not an out of game session. It's simply the [arbitrary amount of time] between a [long rest recharge of class features]. It could be an game week, a month, a year or whatever you want it to be.

You still need just as many fights per adventuring day, even when you adjust the rest mechanic with the gritty rest variant or whatever.

 

[overgeeked]

Dude; Combat is literally 90 percent of DnD's rules. It has an entire chapter devoted to it, 90 percent of all spells are combat related, as are 90 percent of all class features, and the entire Monster manual. RAW it's the only way to earn XP and progress. Encounter design, adventuring day XP budgets etc.

That doesn’t mean combat needs to be 90% of the game as played. Judging from the rest of your post you’re not reading mine and not interested in discussion. Tschüss.

 

[Flamestrike]

That doesn’t mean combat needs to be 90% of the game as played. Judging from the rest of your post you’re not reading mine and not interested in discussion..

I literally addressed the entire content of your post, and in some detail.

And I never said 'Combat has to be 90 percent of the game' as played. I said it's 90 percent of the rules of the game you're playing, with the social and exploration pillars a tacked on afterthought. You can play the game however you want, that's a critique of the game, not of how you're playing it (although it might explain your frustrations with the system you're playing seeing as your expectations are not actually met by the rules you're using).

Again, you're conflating [day] with [adventuring day] in much the same way people conflate [session ending] with [everyone gets a long rest].

Altering the rest mechanic (i.e. when -in game- Long rests are granted) does nothing to change the fact you still need 6 or so encounters (and around 2 short rest recharges) in between those long rests for a median balance.

Altering the 6 encounter/ 2 short rest paradigm would require a complete do-over of 5E (making abilities per Encounter, instead of per short/ long rest) and is far more work than simply changing rest frequency in game.

 

[tetrasodium]

Because its the DMs job to ensure balance, just like its the DMs job to balance individual encounters (you dont go throwing Balors at 1st level PCs).

You're part entertainer, part adjudicator, part showman, part story teller, and part secret puppet master.

It's the system's job to empower said gm with mathematical baselines & reasonable expectations that fit within the toolbox it provides the gm. 6-8 encounters with the disparate recovery needs & expectations of the various classes alongside a lazk of support other than constant doom clocks fails at that.

 

[Flamestrike]

It's the system's job to empower said gm with mathematical baselines & reasonable expectations that fit within the toolbox it provides the gm. 6-8 encounters with the disparate recovery needs & expectations of the various classes alongside a lazk of support other than constant doom clocks fails at that.

That's one opinion.

Another opinion is it does work, you're just bad at making it work.

I mean you are empowered as a DM. From changing rest frequencies (and the game gives you 2 options, and guidance on this very point) all the way to 'Nope, Rocks fall and you all die. Lets watch TV instead'

Or if you're not empowered as DM, ask yourself why, because it's not the stuff written in the books that is leading to that problem.