TL:DR -- Long rest is good, but it has really changed campaigns in a negative way.
Sorry, for the provocative title, but this is more a post of unintended consequences. And I have to start admitting I am a bit of a grumpy old man :) I have been playing D&D since around 1977 and I also study systems and logic. And I also have the habit of journaling campaigns. I was looking at an old campaign, and the adventuring took years. And the biggest difference is 100% changes in the rules system. And I realized that it is a good lesson in the rule of unintended consequences. In 5e, I am part of two current campaigns:
* Curse of Strahd -- Player -- about 20 sessions at the table, we are in Amber temple. We are 8th level, and we are in the 10th day of campaign time.
* Elanon -- DM -- Party is 6th level and it just passed midnight and they are now on day 15.
What changed? Time in campaign is really used in large chunks by three things: Travel time, downtime activities, and recovery. Except 5e no longer has the last. In the old days, we would crawl out of the dungeon with a few hit points and then spend 3-4 weeks recovering (was 1hp/day or 1hp+Con bonus/day). Then we had to train for the level we gained. Now, I like the 5e Long Rest concept. I realize it is unrealistic. The rogue can jump off a 5 story building, break her leg, and 8 hours later is ready to dash again... But it really speeds the table! We used to take 20 mins calculating total hp down, how many heal slots/day, etc. it would take to get the full party back to max. Now, its 10 seconds: "You take a long rest, now what?"
But it does have an effect on the game. Over the years, artificial aging has also been nerfed or removed (Anyone remember the old Ghost that aged you 1d4 x 10 years with every touch). And the game has also removed changes to stats of aging.
%e also made it harder to make potions, scrolls, and magic items. Those were the largest drain on time in some of our campaigns. I realize the 4e rules unbalanced, and agree with the changes. But the results are that the players no longer choose to spend time on this. And the published adventures, with timelines, wider occurrences, etc. seem to have trained the players to not consider downtime activities.
Other unintended consequences: Characters no longer meet as many NPC's. In the old days, they would set up a base, build a keep or tower, meet the suppliers, craftsmen, and others in the area and interact with them while they forged weapons, armor, potions, and other magic items. Wizards would spend months researching new spells. And they would get a sense of home and place. By 10th level, many groups had spent 10 years together, and their wealth was in physical possessions ,that could be attacked :), rather than gems carried from place to place.
In 5e, it is possible to have a party of 10th level that is still the equivalent of 21 years old with no home, and no long term relationships with bartenders, food merchants, builders, and the officials in the their region. Why would the local ruler trust a "bunch of kids that showed up 3 weeks ago" and have not earned his trust. And, unfortunately, the same can happen within the party. It is easier to quell the tensions when they arise by saying you have been together for years. You have learned to talk through these things. But now, a sometimes problem player can say: "I've only known you for a month; all my socks are older and I don't have any investment in staying with you..." Long term parties age and through aging, build reputations and ties.
Basically, the fast pace lowers relationship building, trust, and removes a lot of adventure hooks and motivations that used to be "organic" in campaign design.
I realize the older style of play is possible, but in the time I have been playing 5e, it rarely happens. As a DM, I have tried to encourage it, but it rarely happens.
Again, I think 5e rules are vastly superior. But as a DM, we need to be aware of the unintended consequences, and think about how this affects our campaigns.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
--
DM -- Elanon -- Homebrew world
Gronn -- Tiefling Warlock -- Amarath
Slim -- Halfling Cleric -- CoS (future Lord of Waterdeep 😁)
Downtime is largely pointless as it's only a few seconds of real time. The real problem is that you level up way too fast..
But Mearls surveys said games should be playable in one year.... So you level up fast enough to go from level one to level 20 in one year of game time.
5th edition hasn't changed anything about how my campaigns play out - I still run things just like I would run AD&D, same stories, same pacing, some level of NPC interaction and involvement.
The one thing that is different? How much the players get to feel their characters improvement because their character got better or learn something new (as opposed to the player feeling the character's improvement through making a new alliance or getting a new piece of equipment).
If you go by the encounter guidelines and run 6 encounters of medium difficulty per day a character will reach level ten in like 2-3 weeks. That's the real problem.
You can of course give PCs a month off every level to artificially extend how long it's been, but they still went from nobodies to town heroes in a little over 2 weeks work.
If you go by the encounter guidelines and run 6 encounters of medium difficulty per day a character will reach level ten in like 2-3 weeks. That's the real problem.
You can of course give PCs a month off every level to artificially extend how long it's been, but they still went from nobodies to town heroes in a little over 2 weeks work.
The encounter guidelines don't actually say how many adventuring days per week the characters should have, so the problem you are having is that you've chosen a number that you don't like and are not choosing a different number instead.
Plus, real people can go from "nobody" to "town hero" in a single act (example: man runs into burning building to save child), so I don't see what the problem is with fantasy characters doing the same, especially given the world they live in has more opportunities for heroism thanks to monsters being a real thing.
I think its also a shift in the fiction that motivates the kinds of stories we tell. As i recall OD&D drew very heavily on pulp serials- distinct stories about the many and varied adventures of heroes that are motivated by things they always need more of: wealth, glory etc. Those adventures want a lot of time to pass so as to emulate an adventuring career- how the farmer with his fathers sword became an army commanding king of men.
But these days the stories we tell are inspired by a very different genre. Epic Fantasy Stories frequently take place over a couple of months or a year, like the Hobbit or LOTR, look at Dragonlance for another example of this. We tend to gravitate towards focused plots with big incoming consequences and resolutions- this isnt the story of a bunch of adventurers its the story of that time we saved the world.
Anime often pushes this further, with people growing immensely in a few short weeks, or developing the bulk of their power during major fights. I know its a huge influence on the way I play.
I'm just saying you can spend like a month in the underdark and walk away 20th level.
Basically I don't like the idea that you should be leveling up every time you go on an adventure. In essence this is a dislike of Mearls concept of finishing a game in a year. Which makes sense if you are trying to sell campaign adventures every year, but less sense if you and your friends are getting together to play in games that aren't these campaign books.
Part of this is how cool I thought it was when I played in a shadowrun game where the game had been going on for five + years. Where D&D begins to break down with higher levels and reaches the point where you just need to retire at level 20.
I think most people put too much stock in what the books say should happen. Run the game you and the rest of the group wants to play. The players set the pace not the rules.
@Windrunner: Totally agreed. I played an old-school D&D campaign for the first time last year (1974 rules + Chainmail and Greyhawk) and it was a trip. I really liked it, but yeah, it was a different game from 5th on a lot of levels. Thankfully the older games are still very playable; they just might not have the same mass appeal as 5th Ed, thanks to streamlining, marketing, reputation, y'know, all that good stuff. At some point I plan to run a Swords and Wizardry thing for my Friday night regulars, just so they can experience the joy of slow grow old school campaign play.
In essence this is a dislike of Mearls concept of finishing a game in a year.
Part of this is how cool I thought it was when I played in a shadowrun game where the game had been going on for five + years. Where D&D begins to break down with higher levels and reaches the point where you just need to retire at level 20.
It's not "Mearls' concept", it's the most given answer for the survey question given to all willing to answer it as to how long they tend to play one campaign for, and an attempt (that I have to say has failed, and it appears to be entirely because people that didn't play high-level previously haven't bothered trying it out now and just arbitrarily cut their game of at level 10-12) to get people actually playing through the entire range of the game before their campaign times out.
And maybe it's just me, but Shadowrun (any version, I've played them all) breaks down just as bad, if not worse, than 5th edition D&D does when played over time - the real difference is that D&D has much more predictable character effectiveness because level 20 is level 20, give or take a plus here or there, but 200 karma spent one way can be hugely different from 200 karma spent another way.
There is plenty of flexibility in the DMG for leveling and pacing. For one of my groups I'm using milestone leveling instead of xp tracking. This helps me control how they level based on the scope of what they're doing in regards to my larger story. This way I can have them advance thru the first couple levels rather quickly and then level slowly to make it feel more realistic instead of level every dungeon. Hope this helps.
Dont like milestone leveling. Mostly because I am pro- PC choice so it could take like 15 or 20 sessions to get back to the main story or that may be abandoned completely.
Having been there for almost as many years I really don't mind.
The action side of the game is focused on combat and interactions that are dice challenges. You can serve that need and then give the background and calendar as much, or little, time as needed to advance. As the DM you control the plot, so "nothing happened for a few months until..." is always a great kick in to a new adventure.
I make use of that, downtime activities, mandated leveling downtime, etc. and healthy communication with my players to move the calendar along. I've always felt that the game, novels, etc. moved people quickly up the level scale vs. time scale if you didn't pay attention - but it's always been easy as pie to add in time. I don't need the system to tell me that my players are mandated to need X weeks of downtime between adventures. That's on me as plot and pacing.
I'm the DM. I control if there are goblins to hunt.
In more practical and friendly terms, one of the key components to all three games I'm running is communication. Before people make a character I let them know that I prefer a bit of downtime and the passage of years in a healthy campaign story. That the adventures are the peak moments, but then the characters return to a normal life of whatever they do. Study spells, practice the blade, build a network of informants, train guards for the castle they just built. Whatever.
So when something ends I just tell the players something along the lines of "Hey, I'd like to push the calendar forward a few months of time between now and our next session. Let me know what your characters would like to do in the downtime, and what plot threads they might investigate and pick up as the next adventure. Thanks!"
...and then we do it. It's part of the agreement and social contract of fun that I put forward. No big deal at all.
I simply enjoy being able to pursue any hook the party desires and allowing them that freedom. So you hear about orcs raiding towns and you know where lost treasure is and you still need to confront the Druids parents that game him up. Basically planting seeds for future adventures that the PCs can choose to go on. Sure eventually you can let the hooks disappear and the PCs can come to rest, but I enjoy that much more than just going, you go on the single adventure I had plan, you rest, now you go on the yet other single adventure I planned so you can rest some more and go on yet a third single adventure I planned.
I'm new to DMing, and coming back to the game after being away since childhood. I have to admit, I'm struggling to see the point of downtime. This could be because I've chosen to run a published campaign as a first-time DM, or maybe because I've played too many video games over the years. What does downtime do for you? The OP mentioned the rogue falling off a building and breaking her leg, taking a long rest, and then being ready to jump back into action the next day. I agree that's a little too much for most people's suspension of disbelief, but am I missing something else here? Is there a benefit to the downtime activities that I'm missing?
It depends on the campaign, but gear, wealth, information, and stories.
Gear: You can make your own items. Mundane and magical. In a campaign where magical services are not top-tier this let's players build the item they want vs. waiting for it in a horde.
Wealth: They can play their trades to earn coin, safely, and use it to buy things.
Information: Characters can expand their networks, learn more about new rumors, research in an ancient library, etc. and find new/deeper information that applies to the very next adventure.
Stories: By doing something other than adventure the character gets depth. Perhaps they are helping their family? Perhaps they are working? Perhaps they are just being idle? They still meet people and get exposed to stuff. It can be a side email conversation, a quick roleplay session, etc. but you can go through some life events that the play of the game does not really focus on and give even greater reason for the adventure that follows.
It's really a bit of "you get what you make of this." especially given that the 5e rules are a bit light in this department.
There is nothing wrong with a nonstop adventure that gives a full 20 levels in a year. Not at all! I just find the extra benefits of time passing worth it.
If the rogue isn't getting magical healing for that broken leg from the party cleric....well why isn't the rogue getting magical healing from the party cleric???? Broken bones are best handled like that. Especially if the party is the type that will go, "we leave him and go to the goblin lair." Usually the game works best to assume the bone heals from magical healing.
In most campaigns earing wealth is largely irrelevant as you can only buy mundane things that you can easily buy with the gold you earn from adventuring. Also raiding a goblin cave is faster and more gold earning than downtime activities. (Otherwise why go adventuring to begin with). IF there are no goblins to hunt this week, then there had better be no goblins magically show up in a cave the following week after our "downtime." If you let them buy magical items, it might give a reason for gold, but they could earn a lot more gold from adventuring, so other story elements are needed.
Information works if the PCs have another hook, but if they have a hook, it seems silly to force them to wait x amount of time before they can pursue that hook.
All of this still has the issue that the PCs could be level 20 in like a month of nonstop adventure. Adding mandatory downtime doesn't really help the situation that the PCs reached max level in a month of actual activity, no matter how many arbitrary days you put between them.
The main point of downtime is that the world doesn't always need to be saved, and it gives the PCs a chance to do something else and let the world progress. I do think it makes more sense to have longer downtime at higher levels where the PCs are the guys solving world shattering threats. At low level it doesn't make a lot of sense. The guy who two days prior decided to go adventuring comes back to town and decides to wait a week to go back adventuring because he wants to go back to doing what he did prior to deciding that was boring and adventuring would be fun.
Also a lot of the time PCs have to pay for rooms and other expenses so it makes more sense to force those once the PCs can actually afford them.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
TL:DR -- Long rest is good, but it has really changed campaigns in a negative way.
Sorry, for the provocative title, but this is more a post of unintended consequences. And I have to start admitting I am a bit of a grumpy old man :) I have been playing D&D since around 1977 and I also study systems and logic. And I also have the habit of journaling campaigns. I was looking at an old campaign, and the adventuring took years. And the biggest difference is 100% changes in the rules system. And I realized that it is a good lesson in the rule of unintended consequences. In 5e, I am part of two current campaigns:
* Curse of Strahd -- Player -- about 20 sessions at the table, we are in Amber temple. We are 8th level, and we are in the 10th day of campaign time.
* Elanon -- DM -- Party is 6th level and it just passed midnight and they are now on day 15.
What changed? Time in campaign is really used in large chunks by three things: Travel time, downtime activities, and recovery. Except 5e no longer has the last. In the old days, we would crawl out of the dungeon with a few hit points and then spend 3-4 weeks recovering (was 1hp/day or 1hp+Con bonus/day). Then we had to train for the level we gained. Now, I like the 5e Long Rest concept. I realize it is unrealistic. The rogue can jump off a 5 story building, break her leg, and 8 hours later is ready to dash again... But it really speeds the table! We used to take 20 mins calculating total hp down, how many heal slots/day, etc. it would take to get the full party back to max. Now, its 10 seconds: "You take a long rest, now what?"
But it does have an effect on the game. Over the years, artificial aging has also been nerfed or removed (Anyone remember the old Ghost that aged you 1d4 x 10 years with every touch). And the game has also removed changes to stats of aging.
%e also made it harder to make potions, scrolls, and magic items. Those were the largest drain on time in some of our campaigns. I realize the 4e rules unbalanced, and agree with the changes. But the results are that the players no longer choose to spend time on this. And the published adventures, with timelines, wider occurrences, etc. seem to have trained the players to not consider downtime activities.
Other unintended consequences: Characters no longer meet as many NPC's. In the old days, they would set up a base, build a keep or tower, meet the suppliers, craftsmen, and others in the area and interact with them while they forged weapons, armor, potions, and other magic items. Wizards would spend months researching new spells. And they would get a sense of home and place. By 10th level, many groups had spent 10 years together, and their wealth was in physical possessions ,that could be attacked :), rather than gems carried from place to place.
In 5e, it is possible to have a party of 10th level that is still the equivalent of 21 years old with no home, and no long term relationships with bartenders, food merchants, builders, and the officials in the their region. Why would the local ruler trust a "bunch of kids that showed up 3 weeks ago" and have not earned his trust. And, unfortunately, the same can happen within the party. It is easier to quell the tensions when they arise by saying you have been together for years. You have learned to talk through these things. But now, a sometimes problem player can say: "I've only known you for a month; all my socks are older and I don't have any investment in staying with you..." Long term parties age and through aging, build reputations and ties.
Basically, the fast pace lowers relationship building, trust, and removes a lot of adventure hooks and motivations that used to be "organic" in campaign design.
I realize the older style of play is possible, but in the time I have been playing 5e, it rarely happens. As a DM, I have tried to encourage it, but it rarely happens.
Again, I think 5e rules are vastly superior. But as a DM, we need to be aware of the unintended consequences, and think about how this affects our campaigns.
--
DM -- Elanon -- Homebrew world
Gronn -- Tiefling Warlock -- Amarath
Slim -- Halfling Cleric -- CoS (future Lord of Waterdeep 😁)
Bran -- Human Wizard - RoT
Making D&D mistakes and having fun since 1977!
Downtime is largely pointless as it's only a few seconds of real time. The real problem is that you level up way too fast..
But Mearls surveys said games should be playable in one year.... So you level up fast enough to go from level one to level 20 in one year of game time.
I'm really confused by this...
5th edition hasn't changed anything about how my campaigns play out - I still run things just like I would run AD&D, same stories, same pacing, some level of NPC interaction and involvement.
The one thing that is different? How much the players get to feel their characters improvement because their character got better or learn something new (as opposed to the player feeling the character's improvement through making a new alliance or getting a new piece of equipment).
If you go by the encounter guidelines and run 6 encounters of medium difficulty per day a character will reach level ten in like 2-3 weeks. That's the real problem.
You can of course give PCs a month off every level to artificially extend how long it's been, but they still went from nobodies to town heroes in a little over 2 weeks work.
I think its also a shift in the fiction that motivates the kinds of stories we tell. As i recall OD&D drew very heavily on pulp serials- distinct stories about the many and varied adventures of heroes that are motivated by things they always need more of: wealth, glory etc. Those adventures want a lot of time to pass so as to emulate an adventuring career- how the farmer with his fathers sword became an army commanding king of men.
But these days the stories we tell are inspired by a very different genre. Epic Fantasy Stories frequently take place over a couple of months or a year, like the Hobbit or LOTR, look at Dragonlance for another example of this. We tend to gravitate towards focused plots with big incoming consequences and resolutions- this isnt the story of a bunch of adventurers its the story of that time we saved the world.
Anime often pushes this further, with people growing immensely in a few short weeks, or developing the bulk of their power during major fights. I know its a huge influence on the way I play.
I'm just saying you can spend like a month in the underdark and walk away 20th level.
Basically I don't like the idea that you should be leveling up every time you go on an adventure. In essence this is a dislike of Mearls concept of finishing a game in a year. Which makes sense if you are trying to sell campaign adventures every year, but less sense if you and your friends are getting together to play in games that aren't these campaign books.
Part of this is how cool I thought it was when I played in a shadowrun game where the game had been going on for five + years. Where D&D begins to break down with higher levels and reaches the point where you just need to retire at level 20.
I think most people put too much stock in what the books say should happen. Run the game you and the rest of the group wants to play. The players set the pace not the rules.
She/Her College Student Player and Dungeon Master
@Windrunner: Totally agreed. I played an old-school D&D campaign for the first time last year (1974 rules + Chainmail and Greyhawk) and it was a trip. I really liked it, but yeah, it was a different game from 5th on a lot of levels. Thankfully the older games are still very playable; they just might not have the same mass appeal as 5th Ed, thanks to streamlining, marketing, reputation, y'know, all that good stuff. At some point I plan to run a Swords and Wizardry thing for my Friday night regulars, just so they can experience the joy of slow grow old school campaign play.
https://dreadweasel.blogspot.com/
There is plenty of flexibility in the DMG for leveling and pacing. For one of my groups I'm using milestone leveling instead of xp tracking. This helps me control how they level based on the scope of what they're doing in regards to my larger story. This way I can have them advance thru the first couple levels rather quickly and then level slowly to make it feel more realistic instead of level every dungeon. Hope this helps.
Dont like milestone leveling. Mostly because I am pro- PC choice so it could take like 15 or 20 sessions to get back to the main story or that may be abandoned completely.
Having been there for almost as many years I really don't mind.
The action side of the game is focused on combat and interactions that are dice challenges. You can serve that need and then give the background and calendar as much, or little, time as needed to advance. As the DM you control the plot, so "nothing happened for a few months until..." is always a great kick in to a new adventure.
I make use of that, downtime activities, mandated leveling downtime, etc. and healthy communication with my players to move the calendar along. I've always felt that the game, novels, etc. moved people quickly up the level scale vs. time scale if you didn't pay attention - but it's always been easy as pie to add in time. I don't need the system to tell me that my players are mandated to need X weeks of downtime between adventures. That's on me as plot and pacing.
That only works of you are going to strictly force the PCs to do little until you decide the next adventure hook happens.
What if they all decide to go hunt goblins during downtime?
I'm the DM. I control if there are goblins to hunt.
In more practical and friendly terms, one of the key components to all three games I'm running is communication. Before people make a character I let them know that I prefer a bit of downtime and the passage of years in a healthy campaign story. That the adventures are the peak moments, but then the characters return to a normal life of whatever they do. Study spells, practice the blade, build a network of informants, train guards for the castle they just built. Whatever.
So when something ends I just tell the players something along the lines of "Hey, I'd like to push the calendar forward a few months of time between now and our next session. Let me know what your characters would like to do in the downtime, and what plot threads they might investigate and pick up as the next adventure. Thanks!"
...and then we do it. It's part of the agreement and social contract of fun that I put forward. No big deal at all.
I simply enjoy being able to pursue any hook the party desires and allowing them that freedom. So you hear about orcs raiding towns and you know where lost treasure is and you still need to confront the Druids parents that game him up. Basically planting seeds for future adventures that the PCs can choose to go on. Sure eventually you can let the hooks disappear and the PCs can come to rest, but I enjoy that much more than just going, you go on the single adventure I had plan, you rest, now you go on the yet other single adventure I planned so you can rest some more and go on yet a third single adventure I planned.
I'm new to DMing, and coming back to the game after being away since childhood. I have to admit, I'm struggling to see the point of downtime. This could be because I've chosen to run a published campaign as a first-time DM, or maybe because I've played too many video games over the years. What does downtime do for you? The OP mentioned the rogue falling off a building and breaking her leg, taking a long rest, and then being ready to jump back into action the next day. I agree that's a little too much for most people's suspension of disbelief, but am I missing something else here? Is there a benefit to the downtime activities that I'm missing?
Leave the gun. Take the cannoli.
What are the benefits of downtime activities?
It depends on the campaign, but gear, wealth, information, and stories.
Gear: You can make your own items. Mundane and magical. In a campaign where magical services are not top-tier this let's players build the item they want vs. waiting for it in a horde.
Wealth: They can play their trades to earn coin, safely, and use it to buy things.
Information: Characters can expand their networks, learn more about new rumors, research in an ancient library, etc. and find new/deeper information that applies to the very next adventure.
Stories: By doing something other than adventure the character gets depth. Perhaps they are helping their family? Perhaps they are working? Perhaps they are just being idle? They still meet people and get exposed to stuff. It can be a side email conversation, a quick roleplay session, etc. but you can go through some life events that the play of the game does not really focus on and give even greater reason for the adventure that follows.
It's really a bit of "you get what you make of this." especially given that the 5e rules are a bit light in this department.
There is nothing wrong with a nonstop adventure that gives a full 20 levels in a year. Not at all! I just find the extra benefits of time passing worth it.
If the rogue isn't getting magical healing for that broken leg from the party cleric....well why isn't the rogue getting magical healing from the party cleric???? Broken bones are best handled like that. Especially if the party is the type that will go, "we leave him and go to the goblin lair." Usually the game works best to assume the bone heals from magical healing.
In most campaigns earing wealth is largely irrelevant as you can only buy mundane things that you can easily buy with the gold you earn from adventuring. Also raiding a goblin cave is faster and more gold earning than downtime activities. (Otherwise why go adventuring to begin with). IF there are no goblins to hunt this week, then there had better be no goblins magically show up in a cave the following week after our "downtime." If you let them buy magical items, it might give a reason for gold, but they could earn a lot more gold from adventuring, so other story elements are needed.
Information works if the PCs have another hook, but if they have a hook, it seems silly to force them to wait x amount of time before they can pursue that hook.
All of this still has the issue that the PCs could be level 20 in like a month of nonstop adventure. Adding mandatory downtime doesn't really help the situation that the PCs reached max level in a month of actual activity, no matter how many arbitrary days you put between them.
The main point of downtime is that the world doesn't always need to be saved, and it gives the PCs a chance to do something else and let the world progress. I do think it makes more sense to have longer downtime at higher levels where the PCs are the guys solving world shattering threats. At low level it doesn't make a lot of sense. The guy who two days prior decided to go adventuring comes back to town and decides to wait a week to go back adventuring because he wants to go back to doing what he did prior to deciding that was boring and adventuring would be fun.
Also a lot of the time PCs have to pay for rooms and other expenses so it makes more sense to force those once the PCs can actually afford them.