• The Infractions Forum is available for public view. Please note that if you have been suspended you will need to open a private/incognito browser window to view it.

How common is the 15 minute workday?

jimthegray

Registered User
Validated User
In almost twenty years, and three editions of D&D, I have never once seen the 15 minute workday.

I mean, I'm sure it happens. Just not in my experience.
conversely I have almost never seen it not happen,
it is not a huge issue with me but I tend to prefer 4th over 3.5 if I have to play 3.5 I prefer pathfinder
 

JoshR

Registered User
Validated User
Never seen it happen in classic D&D. I've seen leanings toward it in 4e; one group I play with starts looking for opportunities for a long-rest whenever the group uses a couple dailies and some healing surges in an encounter. But it's never actually played out as 1 encounter and then rest. Particularly in dungeon sessions.
 

jimthegray

Registered User
Validated User
Never seen it happen in classic D&D. I've seen leanings toward it in 4e; one group I play with starts looking for opportunities for a long-rest whenever the group uses a couple dailies and some healing surges in an encounter. But it's never actually played out as 1 encounter and then rest. Particularly in dungeon sessions.
rarely see it in 4th but in 3.5 it is common, really there is no reason to ever have a non caster character other then of course role playing concept reasons , so it is common for such parties to rest often
 

Old Geezer

Active member
Banned
That's how I took it. I also took from OG's writings that that's a misunderstanding of what The Game actually is - The Referee (or DM if you wanna be all fancy about it) sets up the scenario and the players run through it.

Part of the Scenario is the Random Encounter Tables(RET), the Map of the Dungeon and the Encounter Key - and that once the party starts the Scenario the die is cast and the Ref gets to see what happens in his sandbox.

Changing the RET in the middle of the game would be tantamount to altering the Order of Battle (OoB - what troops are available in a campaign/battle) in the middle of a wargame - it's not fair of the ref to suddenly decide that Side A has aircover after-all when the Scenario started aircover wasn't available. And that's the mild version.

Randomly adding in powerful flying creatures just because the party was smart is like deciding that the Union troops in an Antidum game suddenly get an A-10 to strafe the enemy lines with.

* applause * Exactly right, that lad.
 

Supplanter

Retired User
I don't think I get how random encounter risk in itself discourages 15MAD.

I'm seeing it stated as, "In classic editions, if you try to leave as soon as your finite resources start to dwindle, you risk random encounters on the way out. Random encounters are dangerous and worthless because monsters aren't worth much XP from the publication of Supplement 1 until 3e comes out. So it's better to press on."

But how does the conclusion follow?

1. If you press on, you will further deplete resources.
2. You still risk random encounters on the way out of the dungeon. But because of (1.), you'll be even less able to handle them, at the margin.

I totally believe 15MAD was less of a problem in classic editions. I played and DMed those, and 15MAD didn't strongly feature. I just think it has to be other factors that drove it. (And probably also, because leveling was slower, our groups were mostly low-level, so you were low on spells and hit points before you even entered the dungeon. :D)


Jim
 

Blackknight1239

Registered User
Validated User
I don't think I get how random encounter risk in itself discourages 15MAD.

I'm seeing it stated as, "In classic editions, if you try to leave as soon as your finite resources start to dwindle, you risk random encounters on the way out. Random encounters are dangerous and worthless because monsters aren't worth much XP from the publication of Supplement 1 until 3e comes out. So it's better to press on."

But how does the conclusion follow?

1. If you press on, you will further deplete resources.
2. You still risk random encounters on the way out of the dungeon. But because of (1.), you'll be even less able to handle them, at the margin.

I totally believe 15MAD was less of a problem in classic editions. I played and DMed those, and 15MAD didn't strongly feature. I just think it has to be other factors that drove it. (And probably also, because leveling was slower, our groups were mostly low-level, so you were low on spells and hit points before you even entered the dungeon. :D)


Jim
It's the same risk, but without a reward. Now, I've never played old-school D&D, but from what I understand, you don't get stuff until you grab all the gold and get out. So, either you fight more, and get something for it, or you fight more, and get nothing. Pretty sure that'll keep you in the dungeon.

Generally, while I think 15-minute Days are a design flaw, they are largely a function of the attitudes of the players and DM. If the players buy into the idea that they need to always be pressing on, or if a DM runs a campaign where the players are mostly reacting, then you're barely going to see it. But if the players always have the initiative, or if the DM doesn't treat retreat as a massive failure point, then you will see it a lot more. Daily resources only work well when the players aren't in the driver's seat of deciding when that day ends, and people are more likely to do it the more powerful spells become.
 

Old Geezer

Active member
Banned
I don't think I get how random encounter risk in itself discourages 15MAD.

I'm seeing it stated as, "In classic editions, if you try to leave as soon as your finite resources start to dwindle, you risk random encounters on the way out. Random encounters are dangerous and worthless because monsters aren't worth much XP from the publication of Supplement 1 until 3e comes out. So it's better to press on."

But how does the conclusion follow?

1. If you press on, you will further deplete resources.
2. You still risk random encounters on the way out of the dungeon. But because of (1.), you'll be even less able to handle them, at the margin.

I totally believe 15MAD was less of a problem in classic editions. I played and DMed those, and 15MAD didn't strongly feature. I just think it has to be other factors that drove it. (And probably also, because leveling was slower, our groups were mostly low-level, so you were low on spells and hit points before you even entered the dungeon. :D)


Jim
Partly, probably. But at least for us playing OD&D, there was an expectation that fighters could actually, you know, FIGHT, instead of just protecting the magic users long enough for the magic users to win the battle. We actually used to say things like "save your spells, the fighters can handle this."
 

Dweller in Darkness

Excelsior
Validated User
In third edition and 3.5, you're basically holding the party's survival over their heads. The group can go nova in the first room, then go back to the village/camp and rest, but with an RET there's no guarantee the trip back will be safe, and the party could be left vulnerable.

(I should clarify - we don't play with XP in my game, but rather three successful "missions" = 1 level up. Consequently, solving a mission with as few encounters as possible is a good thing.)
 

Supplanter

Retired User
It's the same risk, but without a reward. Now, I've never played old-school D&D, but from what I understand, you don't get stuff until you grab all the gold and get out. So, either you fight more, and get something for it, or you fight more, and get nothing. Pretty sure that'll keep you in the dungeon.
This doesn't work. It's a bigger risk rather than the same risk, and the reward is uncertain. The statistical payoff of continuing ex ante isn't necessarily positive.

I think an under-appreciated contributor is that, when characters are more disposable, you're more inclined to press on in hope of the big score. If you get the big score, great! If not, it's only death.

Partly, probably. But at least for us playing OD&D, there was an expectation that fighters could actually, you know, FIGHT, instead of just protecting the magic users long enough for the magic users to win the battle. We actually used to say things like "save your spells, the fighters can handle this."
Heh. Yeah, there is that. Since I only played 3.x one time, and was a Dwarf Fighter for that session, I never got to experience Caster Supremacy. I was only ever familiar with Mascot Casters. ;) (Not clerics, mind you. People liked having clerics around.) Our only experience with what passed for high-level play back then was in my frat brother's intentionally Monty Haul campaign, where we got up to around 7th or 8th level. By then we had wands and stuff - Monty Haul campaign! - so we tended to just keep on keeping on. It helped that it was a very clever dungeon so we were eager to see the next thing.


Jim
 

MelanisZbri

Member
RPGnet Member
In third edition and 3.5, you're basically holding the party's survival over their heads. The group can go nova in the first room, then go back to the village/camp and rest, but with an RET there's no guarantee the trip back will be safe, and the party could be left vulnerable.
Except once you reach Rope Trick (level 5 or so, level 8 without any metamagic), you aren't travelling anywhere to rest, and RETs become either obvious in their fiat-ness (not only is there an encounter, but the critters figure out there's a dimensional space above their head somewhere and stick around to do something about it) or become obsolete. Then higher levels you get to scry & fry (or simply teleport to safety/rest - which is an emerging issue with our PF group at the moment).
 
Top Bottom