Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DMZ2112" data-source="post: 6264291" data-attributes="member: 78752">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.</blockquote>

Verification