D&D 5E What a DM has to do in 5E

[DMZ2112]

That's not really selling D&Dnext to those of us who are actually running functional skill challenges.

I'm not in sales.

But we've had this discussion before, Pemerton, and if I'm not misremembering we come down in more or less the same place. I'm fully aware the skill challenge rules can be salvaged -- I'd just hate to see Wizards make another butterfingered attempt to do so.

 

[Mistwell]

I've had a problem with the 5 minute day in D&D Next.

My solution was to hit the party while they were resting, with wandering monsters. One hour is a long time to hang out in a dangerous area, and they were not even being careful about the room they chose.

The party should have toasted the skeletons that hit them, but their poor positioning, lack of spells, and lack of hit points made it a real mess for them.

In addition, when they hit a couple rooms of a lair of creatures and then back off, I organize the creatures in response, and they tend to all gather in one big area and sometimes plan an ambush for the possibility of the party coming back in an hour.

Since then, it hasn't been quit as much a problem. My players tend to prefer to clear entire lairs now, and only rest afterwards at a more secure location further away.

But I can see it still being a problem somewhat.

 

[Lokiare]

To say the least. "The dramatic chase" is one of the most fundamental tropes of fantasy/action adventure. Stagnant evasion and pursuit rules that are tantamount to "opposed Athletics rolls...ok you're caught/you escape" doesn't pass muster. If it doesn't follow some form of Freytag's Dramatic Structure (Rising Action > Climax > Falling Action > Denouement) with mechanically introduced and GM-framed dramatic complications and adversity (a la Indiana Jones), then the "dramatic" portion of "the dramatic chase" is lost...rendering the whole practice pointless. If its not exciting and doesn't feature the same rises, falls, setbacks and rallies of combat then either the mechanics or the GM is insufficient to the task (possibly both).

Needless to say, I won't ever run another system, that is supposed to make the action/adventure genre manifest, which doesn't incorporate legitimate resolution mechanics and GMing principles that let me run a dramatic chase. The easiest (and best in my estimation) way to attain this is via conflict resolution, but we've yet to see any indication of unified conflict resolution mechanics for 5e.

I agree, if you can't make tactical choices to get ahead or catch those people in the chase or get away (if they are chasing you) then you might as well just flip a coin or roll a single opposed check.

What we need is a non-combat resolution system that provides choices and allows for tactical thinking. There will always be the flip a coin die roll for those that want that.

I've had a problem with the 5 minute day in D&D Next.

My solution was to hit the party while they were resting, with wandering monsters. One hour is a long time to hang out in a dangerous area, and they were not even being careful about the room they chose.

The party should have toasted the skeletons that hit them, but their poor positioning, lack of spells, and lack of hit points made it a real mess for them.

In addition, when they hit a couple rooms of a lair of creatures and then back off, I organize the creatures in response, and they tend to all gather in one big area and sometimes plan an ambush for the possibility of the party coming back in an hour.

Since then, it hasn't been quit as much a problem. My players tend to prefer to clear entire lairs now, and only rest afterwards at a more secure location further away.

But I can see it still being a problem somewhat.

What happens when they use teleport to get to a safe place or throw up an illusionary wall to rest in a cul de sac or any number of options that make it easy to rest and illogical for the DM to interrupt them?

We all know the DM can mitigate anything in D&D with the clever use of story telling, however it can ruin the story or even the play experience of the party.

For instance after clearing half a dungeon the party Strength character moves some rubble to block the corridor to the part of the dungeon they haven't explored. Then all of a sudden half way through their extended rest they interrupted by the same kinds of monsters in the dungeon. After taking them out and later clearing the rest of the dungeon they find out there are no other exits and they didn't find any fresh tracks going out. So it breaks their immersion in the game.

Throwing up a wall of stone in front of a door or using something like stone shape (not sure if its in 5E yet, but it will be) to create a safe resting place is common. So the DM will definitely have to deal with the 5 minute work day, and the only thing that really happens is the players get more clever and the DM has to get more unrealistic to stop them.

Unless of course you explain the problem and just tell them flat out no resting in dungeons.

 

[Jester David]

What happens when they use teleport to get to a safe place or throw up an illusionary wall to rest in a cul de sac or any number of options that make it easy to rest and illogical for the DM to interrupt them?

Well, if they're burning the wizard's only 7th-level spell to get out (and another to get back) and risking the 54% chance of a mishap on the return then they're probably pretty tapped for resources.

 

[Mistwell]

What happens when they use teleport to get to a safe place

It's a 7th level spell. I doubt we will get to the level where it can be used (13) for years, and once we do, it will be the mage's one and only 7th level spell slot. No really a concern for me.

or throw up an illusionary wall to rest in a cul de sac

So you're in the military, and the enemy just entered your base, killed a bunch of your friends, and is now holding up to rest so they can kill the rest of you. And you what, just sit there?

No, you react to the threat.

If a wall just appeared out of nowhere in your house, you'd notice, and start poking at it right away, with all your friends preparing to attack.

And, I think that is usually a concentration spell, so they won't be resting if they do. In fact, I think ALL illusions that can create a wall are concentration...so not even possible given it's the mage who needs to rest the most.

We all know the DM can mitigate anything in D&D with the clever use of story telling, however it can ruin the story or even the play experience of the party.

Creatures reacting logically to things trying to destroy them does not ruin the story or the experience, it enhances it. You've yet to demonstrate anything that would be harmful to the story or experience.

For instance after clearing half a dungeon the party Strength character moves some rubble to block the corridor to the part of the dungeon they haven't explored. Then all of a sudden half way through their extended rest they interrupted by the same kinds of monsters in the dungeon. After taking them out and later clearing the rest of the dungeon they find out there are no other exits and they didn't find any fresh tracks going out. So it breaks their immersion in the game.

I don't do that, I've mentioned previously I think this is a mistaken interpretation of what wandering monsters are, and it's not a concern.

Throwing up a wall of stone in front of a door or using something like stone shape (not sure if its in 5E yet, but it will be) to create a safe resting place is common.

They players have just as much trouble getting out as something else has getting in. If they players can just break it down, so can a creature. Again, if a wall appeared in your house, wouldn't you react to it? Particularly if you think there is a known killer who wants you dead behind that wall?

So the DM will definitely have to deal with the 5 minute work day, and the only thing that really happens is the players get more clever and the DM has to get more unrealistic to stop them.

You've yet to show me anything unrealistic. You claim it, but you have not shown it. So far it's more realistic, which is a feature and not a bug. If you go into somethings lair, start killing intelligent creatures and then stop to rest, the remainder of the creatures there will react appropriately to gather together, send for help, flee, prepare an ambush, prepare traps, mass assault you, etc.. That's what intelligent creatures would logically do in response to such a threat that has suddenly paused in the midst of their lair.

 

[pemerton]

I've had a problem with the 5 minute day in D&D Next.

My solution was to hit the party while they were resting, with wandering monsters.

<snip>

In addition, when they hit a couple rooms of a lair of creatures and then back off, I organize the creatures in response, and they tend to all gather in one big area and sometimes plan an ambush for the possibility of the party coming back in an hour.

What happens when they use teleport to get to a safe place or throw up an illusionary wall to rest in a cul de sac or any number of options that make it easy to rest and illogical for the DM to interrupt them?

<snip>

Throwing up a wall of stone in front of a door or using something like stone shape (not sure if its in 5E yet, but it will be) to create a safe resting place is common. So the DM will definitely have to deal with the 5 minute work day

I think rather than saying "the DM will definitely have to deal with the 5 minute work day", it's more helpful to look at the range of options available to the players, and hence the range of techniques the GM might want to use to control pacing.

Mistwell describes some pacing devices: wandering monsters, and adapting post-rest encounters to hit more heavily to soak up more of the players' recovered resources.

If teleport, rope trick, stone shape etc are part of the game, then hopefully the DMG will talk about how to handle that from the point of view of pacing and preventing excessive caster power from nova-ing.

We all know the DM can mitigate anything in D&D with the clever use of story telling, however it can ruin the story or even the play experience of the party.

For instance after clearing half a dungeon the party Strength character moves some rubble to block the corridor to the part of the dungeon they haven't explored. Then all of a sudden half way through their extended rest they interrupted by the same kinds of monsters in the dungeon. After taking them out and later clearing the rest of the dungeon they find out there are no other exits and they didn't find any fresh tracks going out. So it breaks their immersion in the game.

<snip>

the DM has to get more unrealistic to stop them.

I don't think it's a given that pacing techniques need be "unrealistic" or immersion-breaking. Someone (I think [MENTION=6690511]GX.Sigma[/MENTION]) recently posted Rodney Thompson saying something like "In D&Dnext the situation isn't resolved with the encounter, but with the adventure". If that's going to be more than just a slogan, presumably they are going to give guidance on how to handle it.

Of course it's a further question whether one wants a game in which the unit of play is the adventure and not the encounter; or which has spells like teleport et al which give the players a degree of mechanical control over pacing. But I think those ships have well and truly sailed!

 

[Lokiare]

I think rather than saying "the DM will definitely have to deal with the 5 minute work day", it's more helpful to look at the range of options available to the players, and hence the range of techniques the GM might want to use to control pacing.

Mistwell describes some pacing devices: wandering monsters, and adapting post-rest encounters to hit more heavily to soak up more of the players' recovered resources.

If teleport, rope trick, stone shape etc are part of the game, then hopefully the DMG will talk about how to handle that from the point of view of pacing and preventing excessive caster power from nova-ing.

I don't think it's a given that pacing techniques need be "unrealistic" or immersion-breaking. Someone (I think @GX.Sigma ) recently posted Rodney Thompson saying something like "In D&Dnext the situation isn't resolved with the encounter, but with the adventure". If that's going to be more than just a slogan, presumably they are going to give guidance on how to handle it.

Of course it's a further question whether one wants a game in which the unit of play is the adventure and not the encounter; or which has spells like teleport et al which give the players a degree of mechanical control over pacing. But I think those ships have well and truly sailed!

The overall point is that the DM will have to deal with it one way or the other.

 

[DMZ2112]

Does anyone else think the "five-minute workday" is a feature, not a bug? I never once had a problem with the five-minute workday until D&D3 introduced the concept of the "four-encounter workday." And even after that misguided bit of design, I had far more trouble with players whining when I introduced a fifth encounter to a day of adventuring than I did with players trying to rest after each encounter. Particularly in D&D4 -- woe betide the dungeon master who "tricks" his party into using their precious dailies before the final battle of the day.

What utter [expletive redacted].

The fact is that PCs /should/ have the option of resting after every combat. It's the smart choice, and denying it for rules reasons is illogical. But there are real, logical consequences to taking that kind of risk in a hostile area, and considering those consequences and planning for them is part of play!

Does anyone really believe that the Tomb of Horrors, or the Temple of Elemental Evil, or the crash site in the Barrier Peaks were meant to be crawled through in four-encounter chunks, leaving the dungeon after each one? For that matter, does anyone believe that they were meant to be conquered entirely in a single day?

No! You fight until you are tired, and then you make a judgment. Can we risk another combat before turning back? Should we save what strength we have in case we encounter a patrol on the way back to the entrance? Can we risk leaving the dungeon at all? That door looks sturdy -- should we spike it and stand watches while we get a night's sleep here? This is the /game/, people -- it's not just a string of combats with the dungeon master reading text at you between them, no matter what the Living campaigns and D&D Encounters would have you believe.

The only thing that matters in encounter design is in-universe reason. When you design an encounter, that encounter should exist for a reason that is logical within the framework of your adventure and your fantasy setting. The party's level is irrelevant. The number of encounters they have already had that day is irrelevant. The party makeup is irrelevant.

If you /choose/ to consider these irrelevancies there is nothing specifically wrong with that -- it can make the game a lot more playable -- but adventures designed around them are sterile and always have been. D&D3 may have made the problem worse but it's not like the problem did not pre-exist the D20 SRD.

 

[SkidAce]

Does anyone else think the "five-minute workday" is a feature, not a bug? I never once had a problem with the five-minute workday until D&D3 introduced the concept of the "four-encounter workday." And even after that misguided bit of design, I had far more trouble with players whining when I introduced a fifth encounter to a day of adventuring than I did with players trying to rest after each encounter. Particularly in D&D4 -- woe betide the dungeon master who "tricks" his party into using their precious dailies before the final battle of the day.

What utter [expletive redacted].

The fact is that PCs /should/ have the option of resting after every combat. It's the smart choice, and denying it for rules reasons is illogical. But there are real, logical consequences to taking that kind of risk in a hostile area, and considering those consequences and planning for them is part of play!

Does anyone really believe that the Tomb of Horrors, or the Temple of Elemental Evil, or the crash site in the Barrier Peaks were meant to be crawled through in four-encounter chunks, leaving the dungeon after each one? For that matter, does anyone believe that they were meant to be conquered entirely in a single day?

No! You fight until you are tired, and then you make a judgment. Can we risk another combat before turning back? Should we save what strength we have in case we encounter a patrol on the way back to the entrance? Can we risk leaving the dungeon at all? That door looks sturdy -- should we spike it and stand watches while we get a night's sleep here? This is the /game/, people -- it's not just a string of combats with the dungeon master reading text at you between them, no matter what the Living campaigns and D&D Encounters would have you believe.

The only thing that matters in encounter design is in-universe reason. When you design an encounter, that encounter should exist for a reason that is logical within the framework of your adventure and your fantasy setting. The party's level is irrelevant. The number of encounters they have already had that day is irrelevant. The party makeup is irrelevant.

If you /choose/ to consider these irrelevancies there is nothing specifically wrong with that -- it can make the game a lot more playable -- but adventures designed around them are sterile and always have been. D&D3 may have made the problem worse but it's not like the problem did not pre-exist the D20 SRD.

I agree completely.

 

[Evenglare]

So I remember when I use to DM 3.5E, I had to counter all kinds of shenanigans. I had to counter players trying to:

• Take advantage of the 5 minute work day (blowing all their limited use features and then resting to restore them about 5 minutes into the work day).
• Use overpowered spells (Scry and Die tactics, etc...etc...)
• Abuse Limited Wish and Wish spells.
• Spells and Magic items that instantly destroyed things.
• Etc...etc...

I know off the top of my head the DM will have to deal with the 5 minute work day, save or die spells, short rests (fighters now get stuff too), several very powerful spells like wish.

So what kinds of things will the DM have to deal with in 5E?

As a side question, why did you not limit your spells/magic items and give the players free reign in 3.5? Almost every instance I see of people having trouble with 3.5 is the GM not restricting things. Instead of having to deal with these over powered things, why give the players access to them in the first place if it was going to ruin your game or make it very very hard for you to manage?