Dungeons and Dragons

318 readers

1 users here now

A place for D&D (and related systems) discussion, rules lawyering, minmaxing, art, anecdotes, homebrew reviews, and more!

No sharing of copyrighted material. Please keep it SFW.

CC licensed 5.1 D&D 5e Core Rules

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

troyunrau

Another way to manage player resources - Merric's Musings (merricb.com)

submitted 2 years ago by troyunrau to c/dnd

2 comments fedilink hide all child comments

tl;dr: tell the players on advance how many encounters to expect, so they can budget their resources.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] PowerSeries 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I categorically disagree. The players can't know this, as the GM doesn't even know this.

However the characters can learn how large of a force they might be engaging, and use that to pace themselves. GM's can make this information available and reliable to players who seek this out.

What I mean by making it available includes throwing the information at them enough times that if it's missing they notice. So freely give the ranger "looks like a band of between 20 to 30 orcs based on the footprints and camp left behind". Or whatever.

And try and avoid screwing them over for using that info, I.e. "this isn't even my final form" can be bullshit unless you foreshadow it.

And now you have the characters making in game plans based on in game info, and interacting more with the world to make those plans. That seems a lot better than telling the players how many encounters you planned.

[–] troyunrau 1 points 2 years ago

What I mean by making it available includes throwing the information at them enough times that if it’s missing they notice.

Ah yes, the good old "rule of three" -- every hint has to be dropped three times before someone in the party notices. If that fails, you can also resort to the tried and true "are you sure you want to assault the dragon's lair without a rest?" direct prompting :)

I don't necessarily agree with the article either. I like my random encounter tables which include both combat and non-combat encounters. But I did think it was interesting.

In some ways, it could be a session zero discussion: "I will, on average, assume three encounters per day, one of which will be scaled to be difficult." You lose realism by setting those sorts of constraints, but in the end it is still a game. Probably. ;)