Pathfinder 1E This is why pathfinder has been successful.

[pemerton]

All that needs to happen is that players need to be aware that there are penalties for abusing the idea of the 15MAD.

<snip>

I think that one of the big psychological hurdles you have to overcome is a willingness to punish your players for poor strategic choices.

<snip>

Therefore as a DM I think it's important to have a vision of what 'good' play is and enforce that vision with real consequences for the players.

I agree this is one option. What it will tend to do is make strategic choices a focus of play. That can be good or bad, depending on what one is looking for from an RPG. For someone who finds the strategic and operational side of play somewhat dull, it may be better to have other approaches to the 15 min day - like reducing the importance of daily resources, or putting various de jure or de facto limits on the players' ability to access them.

Different approaches for different playstyles.

The 15MAD only works in campaigns where the game world is static, unchanging, and unresponsive.

In my experience, this is not true. The 15 minute day can also work in a game in which the gameworld is responsive and not-static, but in which the focus of the PCs' attention (say, some ancient and uninhabited ruins, protected by magic that only high level spell casters - such as the PCs - can penetrate) is not likely to change much over the course of days and weeks.

My own world, which is the real world, is not particularly static, but it is equally true that few of my deadlines are so hard that a day here or there in the course of working towards them is going to matter. The same thing can often be true in an RPG (and [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION] makes this point well).

NPCs who will kill the hostages. NPCs who will pack up their stuff and go somewhere else if the PCs give them time to escape.

These sorts of cases have been discussed in another current thread on the Legacy forum.

And again it is a playstyle thing. In my game, I would never have the NPCs kill the hostages offscreen in circumstances in which the players are committed to having their PCs rescue them. It would be too anticlimactic. If the hostages are going to die, it is going to be in circumstances where the PCs are about to rescue them, and fail.

Get the spellcasters to hold back 20% of their spells "just in case" and invest another 20% of their spells in non-combat utility (that may or may not come in handy that day)

In my experience this can produce a degree of frustration, if the players are continually committing resources that they rarely need to call on.

Again, I think this is a playstyle matter. The more that players enjoy the planning, operational and strategic side of play, the more they will enjoy this sort of "being clever" even if they never, or only rarely, get to cash in their cleverness. For those who find operational issues a distraction from the real game, I would look to other solutions for the 15 minute day - or, alternatively, I would embrace it as part of play (which I have certainly done in mid-to-high level Rolemaster games).

 

[BryonD]

In my experience, this is not true. The 15 minute day can also work in a game in which the gameworld is responsive and not-static, but in which the focus of the PCs' attention (say, some ancient and uninhabited ruins, protected by magic that only high level spell casters - such as the PCs - can penetrate) is not likely to change much over the course of days and weeks.

My own world, which is the real world, is not particularly static, but it is equally true that few of my deadlines are so hard that a day here or there in the course of working towards them is going to matter.

I have seen this.

IMO it falls outside the 15MAD complaint.
The key complaints are typically that the flow of the plot becomes controlled by player retreats rather than the plot itself, and the party always being a full strength.
And those are both fair critical comments. And as seems to be agreed, if those are a problem the DM can solve them with dynamic activity.

But if the world already is as you describe here, then the plot is already controlling the pace at a level that matches the 15MAD "problem", so 15MAD becomes moot on that.
And if the world is already as you describe here, then the key encounters should anticipate a full strength party. So again the issue of 15MAD is moot.

To me 15MAD is one of those issues under which 3E/PF simply does not have training wheels. It is a problem that can happen. But it is also a problem that can be fully avoided through skill and experience on the DM's part.

I am currently running Kingmaker and I find it a rather pleasant mix of spread out slow paced bits for which the party only needs to be ready for the odd random encounter and nice "mini-dungeons" here and there for which some resource and time management become temporarily important.

 

[Hussar]

To me 15MAD is one of those issues under which 3E/PF simply does not have training wheels. It is a problem that can happen. But it is also a problem that can be fully avoided through skill and experience on the DM's part.

Wow. Could you be any more condescending there? It's not that the problem doesn't exist, we're just too crappy in our DMing skill to avoid the issue. :boggle:

Here's a thought. Since you accept that the problem exists, why not fix the problem in the first place and give us poor, pitiful excuses for DM's a break?

 

[BryonD]

Wow. Could you be any more condescending there? It's not that the problem doesn't exist, we're just too crappy in our DMing skill to avoid the issue. :boggle:

I think you are reading that with a bit of a thin skin there.

I expect EVERY DM, myself included, has to learn to get there.

Here's a thought. Since you accept that the problem exists, why not fix the problem in the first place and give us poor, pitiful excuses for DM's a break?

Show me a better mousetrap that doesn't sacrifice game quality for people who ARE capable of handling it as is and I'll be there.

But I'm not going to sacrifice what I have now.

And, I strongly think that treating "pitiful excuses for DM's" as if they can never be anything but " pitiful excuses for DM's" will assure that they remain "pitiful excuses for DM's". The part you miss here is I strongly believe that every DM starts weak and can become very strong, but short cuts and corner-cutting are counter productive to that benefit.

 

[IronWolf]

Here's a thought. Since you accept that the problem exists, why not fix the problem in the first place and give us poor, pitiful excuses for DM's a break?

Well the tools are already there to keep any of this from being an issue as several have noted in this thread.

 

[Mallus]

Could you be any more condescending there?

Well, he hasn't started in with the t-ball comparisons yet...

And now, on the topic of 15MAD and later editions encounter design...

One thing I've noticed is the time it takes to resolve combats in 3e/Pathfinder/4e offers a powerful disincentive to using random encounters. They simply took too long. The resource attrition wasn't worth the session play time-attrition. I barely used any random encounters in my long-running 3e campaign, and not at all in my 4e one. Why I did use were big, set-piece battles (and a whole lot of rules-free conversation!).

So I avoided the 15MAD by virtue of making almost every combat encounter nova-worthy. In 3e this tipped the balance even farther in favor of the casters. In 4e, it didn't. However, running AD&D recently has really been eye-opening; quickly-resolved random encounters add a lot to the game by reintroducing time as a resource, and simply by offering a wider variety and greater number of enemies to engage with (I know people have been making this point for years now....).

 

[Hussar]

To be fair, our group bypassed the 15 MAD as well. Liberal use of consumables (healing sticks and such), lots of scrolls, and using Reserve feats pretty much put paid to the whole concept.

IOW, we abandoned Vancian casting almost entirely, and started getting through 6-8 encounters/adventuring day.

Or, I can look at the group now, where our 1st level 4e party went through 4 solid encounters (Chaos Scar A1 - Stick in the Mud) all without using any consumables or resting.

Same result, less props. Works for me. But, then, apparently I'm just using crutches, so I guess I'll have to resign myself to my own mediocrity.

 

[IronWolf]

Same result, less props. Works for me. But, then, apparently I'm just using crutches, so I guess I'll have to resign myself to my own mediocrity.

I wouldn't say that at all. Different systems for different people. I have no issues that 3.x or Pathfinder is not your preferred game or as enjoyable to you as a 4e game might be. To say the game one doesn't like though is broken is where I take exception.

I am not a huge fan of 4e, but I certainly wouldn't ever say it is broken or the people playing 4e are doing it wrong. It just isn't my game of choice when 3.x/Pathfinder better fits my style.

Both games are good systems and different enough that people are going to be drawn to one over the other as their preference. That choice does not mean the other is inferior or broken.

 

[BryonD]

Well, he hasn't started in with the t-ball comparisons yet...

You mean as in a game that has been made easier for beginners?

 

[BryonD]

I am not a huge fan of 4e, but I certainly wouldn't ever say it is broken or the people playing 4e are doing it wrong. It just isn't my game of choice when 3.x/Pathfinder better fits my style.

completely agree.