Using daily XP Budgets as a Long Rest limiter

[diplomancer]

Just what it says on the lid. Has anyone tried to do that? Basically telling the group at the very beginning: "to get a Long Rest, you've got to get to your daily XP budget. Narratively, you can sleep anytime you want, but the benefits of a Long Rest are decoupled entirely from that, and happen only once you've reached your XP budget".

The idea here is basically to stop parties (and specially LR classes) from wasting resources on not-that-difficult fights and then begging the party and DM for an opportunity to Long Rest. It would still give the DM flexibility to make one big extra deadly fight when he wants to, or have a bunch of medium encounters instead.

Would it work? What would be its drawbacks (apart from the extra work for the DM who prefers to use milestone levelling will have to put in)?

Small explanation... in my experience the problems with having LR classes, SR classes, and resourceless classes don't come exactly from a playstyle where DMs put up very difficult fights that require Novas, but from players who like pressing the buttons on their character sheets without any thought of conservation of resources. This suggestion would solve that issue, I believe, without creating party friction, which comes when the LR classes use up almost all their resources in 2-3 encounters, even when not needed, and then want to Long Rest. If there is no narrative reason to keep going, most people are usually willing to go along with them and Long Rest than to say "well, I'm totally fine and can keep going still for a long time". (even when playing LR classes, I prefer to conserve my resources on the idea that they should be used as needed, not just for the joy of using them)

[JackPhoenix]

It discourages the use of LR-based resources for anything unrelated to combat.

[diplomancer]

It discourages the use of LR-based resources for anything unrelated to combat.

Hmm. True. But that is not necessarily a negative thing. You're still going to use them when they're necessary to achieve your goals, but you will not waste them when a resourceless class could have done it instead.

And remember, DMG also has options of gaining XPs without combat encounters, either by achieving story milestones or overcoming noncombat challenges. The DM can still use those tools.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Meh. I have two (possibly personal) things I dislike about it--

1. It requires actually calculating and using XP/XP budgets. Which I stopped doing a long time ago in favor of fixed-rate leveling and non-balanced encounters.
2. It makes every adventuring day the same. Which increases the amount of gamification the players end up doing. It also makes that "budget" a goal, not a "here's how much our test parties could generally take before being tapped out" warning threshold.

Consistency is actually the enemy here. The needs of the narrative might mean that yes, some days you have one REALLY BIG fight. And other days you have a different number of fights of various sizes. And it varies day to day, according to the needs of the narrative.

I think I'd almost prefer something more narrative--

Define a "Scene" as a set of narratively connected challenges (minimum 1) without a significant time skip. Define an "Arc" as a set of narratively connected Scenes between return to some form of stable camp. Between every two Scenes in the same Arc you get the benefit of a Short Rest. After each Arc, you get a Long Rest. And these can be done on the fly--just note that when you say "ok, you travel down the road toward FooTown" that's the end of the current Scene and the start of a new one. And when you return to town after a mission or take the effort to set up a well-defended camp (no, Tiny Hut doesn't cut it, at least not by itself), you get a Long Rest.

Yes, this means that the time it takes for a SR/LR are variable. And that they're unlikely to be interrupted (since that forces a new Scene and if you knew that was happening, they just didn't end the previous Scene). But it does decouple the rest cadence from the in-game time. Which naturally works in downtime. It's like a more flexible, narrative-friendly Gritty Realism.

------------

The other option to handling the mix of SR/LR classes is to give the LR classes more things back on a SR (and fewer LR resources to compensate). Make everyone get significant things back on both kinds of rests. Then everyone wants to take them and you're good.

[stoutstien]

Eh. Recovery is one of those things that the harder to try to nail down the worse it gets. Classes *should* have enough of a mix that it all comes out in the wash.

[diplomancer]

Meh. I have two (possibly personal) things I dislike about it--

1. It requires actually calculating and using XP/XP budgets. Which I stopped doing a long time ago in favor of fixed-rate leveling and non-balanced encounters.

Yes, I can see that being an issue. Though if you're using a VTT I think most of the job can be automated.


2. It makes every adventuring day the same. Which increases the amount of gamification the players end up doing. It also makes that "budget" a goal, not a "here's how much our test parties could generally take before being tapped out" warning threshold.

Not really. They are "the same" in that usually they will have around the same XP budget (with slight variations depending on the last fight), but they can be as intense as one big very deadly fight or as spread out as a bunch of easy encounters. And gamifying it can be avoided by simply not telling the players how many XPs they're getting each encounter, only at end of session/day. If they're experienced players, they will have a general idea of how much XP they've made so far, but not the precise ammount.


Consistency is actually the enemy here. The needs of the narrative might mean that yes, some days you have one REALLY BIG fight. And other days you have a different number of fights of various sizes. And it varies day to day, according to the needs of the narrative.

And that's the beauty of the idea, you can do precisely what you suggest here... and even if you have several days of not much happening, like on a long journey, characters are sleeping normally, but not getting their LR resources back.


It's like a more flexible, narrative-friendly Gritty Realism.

More or less what I had in mind, as well, just a way of doing it with the tools we already have... though admittedly with less focus on the narrative.

It's basically decoupling "the adventuring day" (a game concept) from "the day/night cycle" (a narrative concept), attributing to finishing an adventuring day the game concept of a Long Rest, and to the day/night cycle the narrative concept of sleeping.

[Gignere]

Current DM doesn’t go by a strict xp budget but he’ll say you guys can’t rest, both short and long, if he feels we haven’t had enough encounters between rests.

[Theodoxus]

IMO, long rests should only restore HPs, HD, and some exhaustion.

Then again, if I could come up with some mechanism to replicate mana instead of daily spell slots, that would be my go to - but outside of that, I don't really have any issue with all casters getting their slots back on a short rest. They're still limited by actions; combats aren't any larger/longer, so 3ish rounds is sufficient.

The place I have an issue with is martial competitiveness, since a Wizard at 5th level could throw out a fireball every combat, provided they got a rest every 2 encounters. (Though tbh, fighters like to chant 'fireball!' anyway, so letting someone else soften targets is always good.) But I think the ideal solution is to move Cleric, Sorcerer, and Wizard to the nuWarlock chassis, granting 'half caster' progression to 5th level spells, and then various forms of auto-generated Mystic Arcanum (Holy Mysterium for Clerics :smallwink:) I've not had a chance to work out the exact progression yet, but that's the basic concept.

So, this would change a Wizard from throwing a fireball every combat encounter from character level 5 to character level 9; which is about when most martials are more capable of also dealing with larger enemy parties. It smooths out the power curve; and since the Wizard is getting their spells back on a short rest, they're happier being able to toss out multiple 1st and 2nd level spells without crying over lack of a long rest.

[5eNeedsDarksun]

I see where you're going, and I share the concern. I'm not sure what you've described is the best way to keep immersion and not feel gamey. I've just told my players to expect to have 6-8 encounters and 2SRs per LR as the norm. This can vary up or down depending on the day, but they should be conserving resources and not going nova at the first opportunity. Enemies move and can interrupt rests. If they full-on retreat out of the dungeon then re-enforcements can be called.

The only thing I've house ruled in my current campaign to make it tougher to get around this limit is to eliminate the Tiny Hut spell. We haven't hit 5th level yet, so that hasn't been an issue.

I'd try to lean into tools already at the DMs disposal before I went the way the OP suggests.

[Amechra]

I haven't tried this, but what I have tried (and which gave good results) is setting limits on the situations when you can rest.

You're in a dungeon? You can only take short rests — you need to leave and rest outside to get a long rest.

[False God]

I just enforce the Long Rest rules, once per 24 hours, or only after 16 hours of waking. And having a world that keeps moving even when the players aren't.

Eventually they figure out that only fighting for 5 minutes and then putzing around for 23 hours is disadvantageous.

[Lord Vukodlak]

I just enforce the Long Rest rules, once per 24 hours, or only after 16 hours of waking. And having a world that keeps moving even when the players aren't.

Eventually they figure out that only fighting for 5 minutes and then putzing around for 23 hours is disadvantageous.

This is the way.

[5eNeedsDarksun]

I just enforce the Long Rest rules, once per 24 hours, or only after 16 hours of waking. And having a world that keeps moving even when the players aren't.

Eventually they figure out that only fighting for 5 minutes and then putzing around for 23 hours is disadvantageous.

This is a far more succinct and effective way of saying what I was trying to.

[LudicSavant]

Just what it says on the lid. Has anyone tried to do that? Basically telling the group at the very beginning: "to get a Long Rest, you've got to get to your daily XP budget. Narratively, you can sleep anytime you want, but the benefits of a Long Rest are decoupled entirely from that, and happen only once you've reached your XP budget".

The idea here is basically to stop parties (and specially LR classes) from wasting resources on not-that-difficult fights and then begging the party and DM for an opportunity to Long Rest. It would still give the DM flexibility to make one big extra deadly fight when he wants to, or have a bunch of medium encounters instead.

Would it work? What would be its drawbacks (apart from the extra work for the DM who prefers to use milestone levelling will have to put in)?

Small explanation... in my experience the problems with having LR classes, SR classes, and resourceless classes don't come exactly from a playstyle where DMs put up very difficult fights that require Novas, but from players who like pressing the buttons on their character sheets without any thought of conservation of resources. This suggestion would solve that issue, I believe, without creating party friction, which comes when the LR classes use up almost all their resources in 2-3 encounters, even when not needed, and then want to Long Rest. If there is no narrative reason to keep going, most people are usually willing to go along with them and Long Rest than to say "well, I'm totally fine and can keep going still for a long time". (even when playing LR classes, I prefer to conserve my resources on the idea that they should be used as needed, not just for the joy of using them)

I just always write some reason that there's time pressure (or something that serves a similar purpose) on my adventures.

Another system I've been having a ton of fun with lately (Fabula Ultima) just makes it so that long rests actually cost a precious resource in order to have any real benefit (e.g. just sleeping alone isn't enough).

[Cheesegear]

Just what it says on the lid. Has anyone tried to do that?

Kind of.


The idea here is basically to stop parties (and specially LR classes) from wasting resources on not-that-difficult fights and then begging the party and DM for an opportunity to Long Rest. It would still give the DM flexibility to make one big extra deadly fight when he wants to, or have a bunch of medium encounters instead.

Ideally, if the players are taking a Long Rest just for the Hell of it, you throw in a night-time ambush:
- A lot of hostiles will get Surprise.
- About half the party will have their armour off.

If you don't want to "let" the players have a Long Rest. Then don't "let" them. Generally, if the players are having a "5-minute adventuring day" and then staying in one place for 23 hours and 55 minutes...Only 8 hours of which provide a mechanical benefit...They're kind of forcing the DM's hand to make something happen. So, something has to happen.

The players are abusing the Long Rest mechanic. The DM has to...Disabuse them.


Small explanation... in my experience the problems with having LR classes, SR classes, and resourceless classes don't come exactly from a playstyle where DMs put up very difficult fights that require Novas, but from players who like pressing the buttons on their character sheets without any thought of conservation of resources.

In my experience, the players treat the DM like a robot, and they treat the world like a script:
- The DM can't/wont adapt to us sitting here for 23 hours and 55 minutes,
- The story/world/narrative can't advance unless we instigate it.

That is, the monsters in the next location don't exist until we activate them.
No.

In modern D&D (by which I mean the last five years, not 5e as a whole decade), a lot of players seem to believe that the world revolves around them - and yes, in a way, it does. And that the world, not the game, is "player-centric." Similarly, on some level, D&D is a story, it is a narrative. But it is a game, and the "Long Rest Button" can't be something that you can just push when you feel like it.

The DM isn't a robot, the DM isn't following a script. If it makes sense to do so, you can totally punish your players Long Resting in the wrong spot. Xanathar's has a bunch of encounters. Even ones so simple as:
"Yeah, so your bags have Rations in them. Two Brown Bears come to investigate."
"So...That campfire? ...A dozen Bandits are very interested in your ****."


If there is no narrative reason to keep going, most people are usually willing to go along with them and Long Rest...

Depending on the level and/or tier of play; There often is a narrative reason for hostiles to actually seek out the players.

But remember, D&D is a game. Not everything has to have narrative weight. If it makes sense, depending on your time limit, just have the party fight something. You can figure out the narrative weight later, if you have to.

Mostly, the problem stems from the players treating D&D like a video game, and treating the DM like a robot on a script. Which is certainly something that happens. There is such a thing as DMs who plan too much. And things can get very awkward when running a module, and the players want to Short- or Long Rest constantly. 'Cause modules usually don't account for that.

Unfortunately, the kicker is that you can't teach someone how to improvise. You can't teach a DM how to adapt to their players.
They just have to figure it out for themselves. So that's more or less where my advice ends.

If your players are waiting in a single location for 23 hours and 55 minutes (especially in the wild); That's called "Being a Target", and the DM should correct course accordingly. You have to "teach" players that staying in a single location is a risk. Even an 8 hour Long Rest needs to have some risk...But 23 hours and 55 minutes? ...Most of which time you're doing actually nothing for no mechanical or narrative benefit? Yeah. Time passes. The world moves around. The world doesn't stop because the players stop moving.

[Lunali]

I just enforce the Long Rest rules, once per 24 hours, or only after 16 hours of waking. And having a world that keeps moving even when the players aren't.

Eventually they figure out that only fighting for 5 minutes and then putzing around for 23 hours is disadvantageous.

While I agree with the sentiment, I hate it when anyone puts a 24 hour timer on things that are supposed to be daily. This makes it so you have to go to bed slightly later each subsequent day. I typically go with "you can't finish a long rest earlier than you started it on the previous day" as long as players don't try to game the system, effectively giving a 16 hour timer. If they do try to pull 5 minute adventuring day stuff, then 23 hours it is.