Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="miggyG777" data-source="post: 7908688" data-attributes="member: 6987582">Meant to be played, as in, according to how WotC describes it in the DMG and clearly balanced the mechanics around.What you seem to find confusing is me, describing how I feel the DMG guidelines are impacting the game, that I used to run in a different way.If I understand your approach correctly, you say, that I should regularly push the party to its limits in terms of resource management, which would be equal to running the recommended amount of encounters per long rest. That way the players will still conserve their resources when there are days with less encounters.The thing that bothers me about that is, that a level of arbitrariness is needed to create the constant feeling that the party is in a "warzone", as you have described earlier.Sometimes that just does not suit the scenario the players find themselves in. My players will infer that from the game-world.Then they will use long rests more readily, especially if the time constraints of the normal long rest are barely a factor. And rightfully so.If for you it is no problem to have stretches where encounters are merely something the party deals with easily, that is fine. I like them to be challenged in any scenario of play.But instead of handwaving the logics of the scenario and essentially trying to balance the resting mechanic by adjusting my encounters, as stated in the OP, by either making them harder or throwing more unpredictable attacks at them as you suggest, I just increase the cost of a long rest.The cost is time and it is always valuable, because the game world changes.That way I can have a scenario where the party could theoretically safely long rest at any time, but the party doesn't want to. As opposed to, them having to worry that some assassins are trying to murder them every night and that is why they conserve their resources.</blockquote>

Verification