you read the title. this a homebrew rule I came up with and I want to share it with you. you can use it if you want, you can poke hole in it, you can add your own house rules......
down to business. axe short rest. everything that recharges over a sort rest now recharges at the start of the encounter.
coffelocks can no longer take 8 short rests because there are no short rests to take
monks and warlocks don't have to feel bad when they ask for a short rest, because nobody else needs one, and taking an hour of downtime completely messes up anything time related
so waddaya thinK?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Pronouns: Any/All
About Me: Godless monster in human form bent on extending their natural life to unnatural extremes /general of the goose horde /Moderator of Vinstreb School for the Gifted /holder of the evil storyteller badge of no honor /king of madness /The FBI/ The Archmage of I CAST...!
Alignment: Lawful Evil
Fun Fact: i gain more power the more you post on my forum threads. MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!
Edit: Adjusting tone, Sorry. That doesn't fix a problem, there are more people that need short rests than that woefully short list. If you're having problems with certain people wanting to take too many, discuss that with the players or don't allow them to complete more than a reasonable amount per day, but don't break it worse by disallowing an integral function of 5e.
Edit: Adjusting tone, Sorry. That doesn't fix a problem, there are more people that need short rests than that woefully short list. If you're having problems with certain people wanting to take too many, discuss that with the players or don't allow them to complete more than a reasonable amount per day, but don't break it worse by disallowing an integral function of 5e.
valid points. alright lets make an edit (this is why I make these things)
howsabout, keep short rests, but only for the hit dice thing. ki points, pact magic spell slots, and anything else that recharges over a short rest now recharges at the start of every encounter
(that's how somethings functioned in 4th edition if you can believe it)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Pronouns: Any/All
About Me: Godless monster in human form bent on extending their natural life to unnatural extremes /general of the goose horde /Moderator of Vinstreb School for the Gifted /holder of the evil storyteller badge of no honor /king of madness /The FBI/ The Archmage of I CAST...!
Alignment: Lawful Evil
Fun Fact: i gain more power the more you post on my forum threads. MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!
(that's how somethings functioned in 4th edition if you can believe it)
No, 4th edition had the same short/long rest recharge as 5th. The key differences were
A short rest was 5 minutes.
Every class had resources of both types.
They were very careful about what types of abilities could be had on a short rest (taking multiple short rests in a row was perfectly legal, there was just very little reason to do it because 'take short rest, use short rest power, take short rest' didn't gain you anything significant).
Are coffelocks an actual problem that need solving so badly that it's worth breaking the rest system over your knee? If you ever encounter a player in real life who wants to use that exploit (I never have), politely but firmly tell them they can't. Because you said so. Problem solved.
Coffeelocks aren't real. They are just an internet theorycraft that assumes finishing a long rest without sleeping wouldn't reset sorcery points. DMs are not going to allow that and no player would really want to try it as anything more than a joke. With this change, Fighters would get their Action Surge and their Second Wind at the start of every encounter. Wizards would get their Arcane Recovery when the next fight starts. Etc.. It would speed up the in-game clock but I see no practical reason for doing this.
When it comes to things new players see on the internet (like the coffeelock) just let your players know that anything they can do the NPCs can do as well. (And more since they sometimes get legendary actions, lair actions, etc..) Then ask them "Are you sure you want to do this?". If the answer is yes, well.... enjoy fighting a lich with 100,000 sorcery points.
you read the title. this a homebrew rule I came up with and I want to share it with you. you can use it if you want, you can poke hole in it, you can add your own house rules......
down to business. axe short rest. everything that recharges over a sort rest now recharges at the start of the encounter.
coffelocks can no longer take 8 short rests because there are no short rests to take
monks and warlocks don't have to feel bad when they ask for a short rest, because nobody else needs one, and taking an hour of downtime completely messes up anything time related
so waddaya thinK?
I've got an easier way - do not allow the optional multiclassing rule into your game.
Let's be clear from my part, I prefer multiclassing and do allow it in my games. However, if these combos - which are largely internet lore, and based on a misreading of the rules anyway - are something the DM doesn't want all they have to do is say, 'sorry multiclassing is an optional rule like flanking or massive damage which we won't be using in our game'.
You don't need to break the game to 'fix' these theoretical 'broken' builds.
I mean in reference to the Sorcerer/Warlock multiclass build known as coffeelock - have you ever had a player character get exhausted? Exhaustion is brutal and seriously hampers a character's ability to do stuff. Even greater restoration requires massive amounts of materials to sustain and keep someone from being affected.
Realisitically, if a player came to me wanting to run such a build in this way (for exploits), they wouldn't be joining the table. I'm not the DM for them - restrictions contrary to popular commentary are in my opinion vital as a path to both creative solutions and challenges that are overcome to be 'worthy' of completing a hero's journey.
(that's how somethings functioned in 4th edition if you can believe it)
No, 4th edition had the same short/long rest recharge as 5th. The key differences were
A short rest was 5 minutes.
Every class had resources of both types.
They were very careful about what types of abilities could be had on a short rest (taking multiple short rests in a row was perfectly legal, there was just very little reason to do it because 'take short rest, use short rest power, take short rest' didn't gain you anything significant).
yes, but other things, such as a dragonborn's breath weapon, and 4th editions equivalent of 1st level spells recharged at the start of an encounter
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Pronouns: Any/All
About Me: Godless monster in human form bent on extending their natural life to unnatural extremes /general of the goose horde /Moderator of Vinstreb School for the Gifted /holder of the evil storyteller badge of no honor /king of madness /The FBI/ The Archmage of I CAST...!
Alignment: Lawful Evil
Fun Fact: i gain more power the more you post on my forum threads. MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!
What's to stop a Way of Mercy monk, or a Celestial Warlock, from infinitely healing the party every encounter? They'd gain all their resources back every time.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I know what you're thinking: "In that flurry of blows, did he use all his ki points, or save one?" Well, are ya feeling lucky, punk?
What's to stop a Way of Mercy monk, or a Celestial Warlock, from infinitely healing the party every encounter? They'd gain all their resources back every time.
And that's why 4e was careful about what could be recharged on a short rest.
And that's why 4e was careful about what could be recharged on a short rest.
Wasn't 4th edition the least popular of all D&D editions? While 5th edition has been the most popular. (Of course 5th did have the advantage of being the one you could readily purchased during the pandemic.) Why would we want to make 5th more like 4th?
Wasn't 4th edition the least popular of all D&D editions? While 5th edition has been the most popular. (Of course 5th did have the advantage of being the one you could readily purchased during the pandemic.) Why would we want to make 5th more like 4th?
Just because something failed doesn't mean you can't learn from it.
What happened with 5th edition is that they borrowed certain concepts from 4th edition (such as at-will cantrips, short rests, and ritual casting) and failed to consider "why was this built the way it was". This means they made mistakes which they could have avoided with a better understanding of what they were borrowing from.
This doesn't mean you shouldn't make changes. It means you should understand what you're changing before you change it.
The way I run it is: 1x Long rest and max 3x Short Rest in any given 24 hour period of game time with Short Rests a minimum of 3 hours apart. Short Rests happily referrred to as Breakfast, Lunch and Dinner and Long rest as Bedtime. You can take your breakfast, lunch and dinner rests whenever you want as long as at least 3 hours of game time has passed between them. It works great and the players like it, but as its only one tables experience other tables results may vary.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
* Need a character idea? Search for "Rob76's Unused" in the Story and Lore section.
And that's why 4e was careful about what could be recharged on a short rest.
Wasn't 4th edition the least popular of all D&D editions? While 5th edition has been the most popular. (Of course 5th did have the advantage of being the one you could readily purchased during the pandemic.) Why would we want to make 5th more like 4th?
Because 4th was better designed in certain appreciable ways, like character resource economy. You're equating commercial success to design quality and that's just a nonsense proposition.
Because 4th was better designed in certain appreciable ways, like character resource economy. You're equating commercial success to design quality and that's just a nonsense proposition.
"Design quality" is a matter of personal opinion. "Commercial success" is a measure of tracking multiple people's opinions.
"Design quality" is a matter of personal opinion. "Commercial success" is a measure of tracking multiple people's opinions.
Commercial success indicates the version is better in some way that causes people to buy it, but that doesn't mean all ways. In any case, the point of looking at how other editions resolved a problem is not "okay, we should copy that", it's "okay, what problem are they trying to solve, and is it a problem with edition".
The people who designed 4th edition knew that short rests had the potential to be a problem, and they solved it by making sure that any ability that would be a balance problem if people could do it a hundred times a day... didn't recover on a short rest. That mostly means that an ability that recharges on a short rest should not provide healing (except indirectly, such as allowing the target to spend hit dice) or apply a buff that lasts for longer than the length of a short rest.
For the most part, 5e has in fact followed that paradigm, but because it wasn't done explicitly, problems have crept in. Some examples:
The warlock is a problem in any situation where it can cast a beneficial spell with a pact magic slot with a duration exceeding 1 hour. On the base warlock list that's not much -- hex is pretty much it, and as a concentration spell with a target of self, not a big deal -- but it does mean some spells that would be thematic, such as animate dead, cannot be on the warlock list, and it does have some multiclass implications.
The coffeelock is a problem because it lets you trade a short rest resource for a buff (metamagic points or spell slots) that lasts until your next long rest.
The mercy monk and celestial warlock are a problem because they can heal others off of a short rest resource.
Second Wind on a fighter is a bit of a problem but because it's personal, not much of one.
Because 4th was better designed in certain appreciable ways, like character resource economy. You're equating commercial success to design quality and that's just a nonsense proposition.
"Design quality" is a matter of personal opinion. "Commercial success" is a measure of tracking multiple people's opinions.
That's... Really obviously not what commercial success is. You just listed a reason 5e was successful that had nothing to do with anyone's opinions. Did the pandemic happen because 5e was better than 4e? Is that why Stranger Things aired when it did? Did 5e's superiority cause the podcast boom that swept Critical Role to success (hint: Critical Role wasn't even playing 5e until Wizards paid them)? No? None of that makes any sense? Then I guess we might have to consider the possibility commercial success might contain a few factors other than people's opinions.
I am genuinely begging people to go play a different game and get some perspective about 5e's relative quality. There's definitely some things it does well, but there's equally many things it does very poorly, like resource economy.
you read the title. this a homebrew rule I came up with and I want to share it with you. you can use it if you want, you can poke hole in it, you can add your own house rules......
down to business. axe short rest. everything that recharges over a sort rest now recharges at the start of the encounter.
coffelocks can no longer take 8 short rests because there are no short rests to take
monks and warlocks don't have to feel bad when they ask for a short rest, because nobody else needs one, and taking an hour of downtime completely messes up anything time related
so waddaya thinK?
Pronouns: Any/All
About Me: Godless monster in human form bent on extending their natural life to unnatural extremes /general of the goose horde /Moderator of Vinstreb School for the Gifted /holder of the evil storyteller badge of no honor /king of madness /The FBI/ The Archmage of I CAST...!
Alignment: Lawful Evil
Fun Fact: i gain more power the more you post on my forum threads. MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!
Edit: Adjusting tone, Sorry. That doesn't fix a problem, there are more people that need short rests than that woefully short list. If you're having problems with certain people wanting to take too many, discuss that with the players or don't allow them to complete more than a reasonable amount per day, but don't break it worse by disallowing an integral function of 5e.
valid points. alright lets make an edit (this is why I make these things)
howsabout, keep short rests, but only for the hit dice thing. ki points, pact magic spell slots, and anything else that recharges over a short rest now recharges at the start of every encounter
(that's how somethings functioned in 4th edition if you can believe it)
Pronouns: Any/All
About Me: Godless monster in human form bent on extending their natural life to unnatural extremes /general of the goose horde /Moderator of Vinstreb School for the Gifted /holder of the evil storyteller badge of no honor /king of madness /The FBI/ The Archmage of I CAST...!
Alignment: Lawful Evil
Fun Fact: i gain more power the more you post on my forum threads. MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!
No, 4th edition had the same short/long rest recharge as 5th. The key differences were
Druid Wildshape probably needs short rest too. Moon Druids would be very powerful at every encounter.
Are coffelocks an actual problem that need solving so badly that it's worth breaking the rest system over your knee? If you ever encounter a player in real life who wants to use that exploit (I never have), politely but firmly tell them they can't. Because you said so. Problem solved.
No, but the rest system is an actual problem.
Coffeelocks aren't real. They are just an internet theorycraft that assumes finishing a long rest without sleeping wouldn't reset sorcery points. DMs are not going to allow that and no player would really want to try it as anything more than a joke. With this change, Fighters would get their Action Surge and their Second Wind at the start of every encounter. Wizards would get their Arcane Recovery when the next fight starts. Etc.. It would speed up the in-game clock but I see no practical reason for doing this.
When it comes to things new players see on the internet (like the coffeelock) just let your players know that anything they can do the NPCs can do as well. (And more since they sometimes get legendary actions, lair actions, etc..) Then ask them "Are you sure you want to do this?". If the answer is yes, well.... enjoy fighting a lich with 100,000 sorcery points.
I've got an easier way - do not allow the optional multiclassing rule into your game.
Let's be clear from my part, I prefer multiclassing and do allow it in my games. However, if these combos - which are largely internet lore, and based on a misreading of the rules anyway - are something the DM doesn't want all they have to do is say, 'sorry multiclassing is an optional rule like flanking or massive damage which we won't be using in our game'.
You don't need to break the game to 'fix' these theoretical 'broken' builds.
I mean in reference to the Sorcerer/Warlock multiclass build known as coffeelock - have you ever had a player character get exhausted? Exhaustion is brutal and seriously hampers a character's ability to do stuff. Even greater restoration requires massive amounts of materials to sustain and keep someone from being affected.
Realisitically, if a player came to me wanting to run such a build in this way (for exploits), they wouldn't be joining the table. I'm not the DM for them - restrictions contrary to popular commentary are in my opinion vital as a path to both creative solutions and challenges that are overcome to be 'worthy' of completing a hero's journey.
DM session planning template - My version of maps for 'Lost Mine of Phandelver' - Send your party to The Circus - Other DM Resources - Maps, Tokens, Quests - 'Better' Player Character Injury Tables?
Actor, Writer, Director & Teacher by day - GM/DM in my off hours.
I can get behind that, I just dunno if the fix for it should be primarily based around smiting this One Weird Trick nobody actually uses.
yes, but other things, such as a dragonborn's breath weapon, and 4th editions equivalent of 1st level spells recharged at the start of an encounter
Pronouns: Any/All
About Me: Godless monster in human form bent on extending their natural life to unnatural extremes /general of the goose horde /Moderator of Vinstreb School for the Gifted /holder of the evil storyteller badge of no honor /king of madness /The FBI/ The Archmage of I CAST...!
Alignment: Lawful Evil
Fun Fact: i gain more power the more you post on my forum threads. MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!
What's to stop a Way of Mercy monk, or a Celestial Warlock, from infinitely healing the party every encounter? They'd gain all their resources back every time.
I know what you're thinking: "In that flurry of blows, did he use all his ki points, or save one?" Well, are ya feeling lucky, punk?
Incorrect. 'Encounter' powers recharged on a short rest. It was just assumed that there would be a short rest after every encounter.
And that's why 4e was careful about what could be recharged on a short rest.
Wasn't 4th edition the least popular of all D&D editions? While 5th edition has been the most popular. (Of course 5th did have the advantage of being the one you could readily purchased during the pandemic.) Why would we want to make 5th more like 4th?
Just because something failed doesn't mean you can't learn from it.
What happened with 5th edition is that they borrowed certain concepts from 4th edition (such as at-will cantrips, short rests, and ritual casting) and failed to consider "why was this built the way it was". This means they made mistakes which they could have avoided with a better understanding of what they were borrowing from.
This doesn't mean you shouldn't make changes. It means you should understand what you're changing before you change it.
The way I run it is: 1x Long rest and max 3x Short Rest in any given 24 hour period of game time with Short Rests a minimum of 3 hours apart. Short Rests happily referrred to as Breakfast, Lunch and Dinner and Long rest as Bedtime. You can take your breakfast, lunch and dinner rests whenever you want as long as at least 3 hours of game time has passed between them. It works great and the players like it, but as its only one tables experience other tables results may vary.
Because 4th was better designed in certain appreciable ways, like character resource economy. You're equating commercial success to design quality and that's just a nonsense proposition.
"Design quality" is a matter of personal opinion. "Commercial success" is a measure of tracking multiple people's opinions.
Commercial success indicates the version is better in some way that causes people to buy it, but that doesn't mean all ways. In any case, the point of looking at how other editions resolved a problem is not "okay, we should copy that", it's "okay, what problem are they trying to solve, and is it a problem with edition".
The people who designed 4th edition knew that short rests had the potential to be a problem, and they solved it by making sure that any ability that would be a balance problem if people could do it a hundred times a day... didn't recover on a short rest. That mostly means that an ability that recharges on a short rest should not provide healing (except indirectly, such as allowing the target to spend hit dice) or apply a buff that lasts for longer than the length of a short rest.
For the most part, 5e has in fact followed that paradigm, but because it wasn't done explicitly, problems have crept in. Some examples:
That's... Really obviously not what commercial success is. You just listed a reason 5e was successful that had nothing to do with anyone's opinions. Did the pandemic happen because 5e was better than 4e? Is that why Stranger Things aired when it did? Did 5e's superiority cause the podcast boom that swept Critical Role to success (hint: Critical Role wasn't even playing 5e until Wizards paid them)? No? None of that makes any sense? Then I guess we might have to consider the possibility commercial success might contain a few factors other than people's opinions.
I am genuinely begging people to go play a different game and get some perspective about 5e's relative quality. There's definitely some things it does well, but there's equally many things it does very poorly, like resource economy.