They didn't ignore the 2 hour limitation. They still had to sleep 6 hours in an 8 hour window of time, and the other party members still had to cover those 6 hours they were asleep.
If they had spent those extra 2 hours sleeping (so they get a full 8 hours, like normal people) they'd also be "still resting, but saying that you aren't" since they finished the long rest after the first 6 hours of sleep.
Yes, they did ignore the 2 hour limitation; they were on watch for 4 hours during their party's collective long rest period.
If they had spent those extra 2 hours sleeping, they wouldn't be "still resting, but saying that they aren't" - they'd just be "still resting"; there is a reason why the game says a long rest is "at least 8 hours long" instead of saying "is 8 hours long."
There's no such thing as a "collective long rest". The rules don't care what your companions are up to while you rest.
I highly doubt that's the reason the rules say "at least 8 hours", but I'll admit that as written, you could defend that ruling. I just dislike that it has completely nonsensical results (retroactively takes away their rest) and the only upside is that you can claim you're following the letter of the law.
There isn't a collective rest. A party member can stay watch all 8 hours, especially if they are not injured, have no need to regain spells, and you aren't requiring them to sleep during the long rest.
The game is written assuming that when the party is resting, the party is resting, because it is a party-based game. That's what I mean when I say "collective long rest" - the stuff that is going on when the players at the table have decided a long rest is happening.
And "My character is not actually participating in the long rest because of mechanic X and technicality Y" is shenanigans, not the intended use of the rules.
The game is written assuming that when the party is resting, the party is resting, because it is a party-based game. That's what I mean when I say "collective long rest" - the stuff that is going on when the players at the table have decided a long rest is happening.
And "My character is not actually participating in the long rest because of mechanic X and technicality Y" is shenanigans, not the intended use of the rules.for
Hold on. First you take the phrase "at least 8 hours" extremely literally to argue that players are technically breaking the rules. Now you care about the spirit of the rules. Which is it?
There's nothing in the rules about resting as a group. The resting rules apply to all creatures, not just the players, so saying it's a party-based game isn't relevant, and doesn't change what the rules actually say.
There isn't even an upside to the staggered sleeping scheme. It takes longer, and if the party gets attacked after 9 hours, not everyone will be rested. They're always better off taking their long rests simultaneously if they can find a way to not get ambushed.
Hold on. First you take the phrase "at least 8 hours" extremely literally to argue that players are technically breaking the rules. Now you care about the spirit of the rules. Which is it?
There's nothing in the rules about resting as a group. The resting rules apply to all creatures, not just the players, so saying it's a party-based game isn't relevant, and doesn't change what the rules actually say.
There isn't even an upside to the staggered sleeping scheme. It takes longer, and if the party gets attacked after 9 hours, not everyone will be rested. They're always better off taking their long rests simultaneously if they can find a way to not get ambushed.
There is no "which is it?" I care about the spirit of the rules, and have been consistent on that the entire time - you seem to be confused because I believe the spirit of the rules is clearly indicated by the fact that the phrasing used is what it is, rather than something else, which means phrases like "at least 8 hours" are intended to actually matter.
There doesn't have to be anything in the rules about resting as a group, and it isn't relevant to point out that the resting rules apply to all creatures - the game is written assuming it is being played with a DM and with a party of characters, so the rules language is - unless is specifies otherwise - from the point of view of how the rules work for the DM and a party of characters.
As for "isn't even an upside", that's completely nonsensical. From my interpretation (that the limits put in the rest rules aren't just wasted word count that can be avoided by arbitrarily saying 'this 2 hours of watch is before my long rest' or the like), to the interpretation that allows the staggered sleeping schedule, the upside is this: There is no period of the rest during which the entire 3-person party is asleep and without anyone standing watch.
To use an analogy to show what I'm getting at as clearly as I can, let's say you've got a budget that allows you to spend $10 on lunch. The budget says that money is meant to cover both your food (analog to sleep), and your beverage (analog to watch). I'm saying it's obviously not intended that you spend $2 on a beverage right before lunch, and then $10 on your lunch, even though you can hold up a receipt that says $10 instead of $12 - which is the equivalent of what this rest schedule with hours of watch that are arbitrarily not part of the rest is.
There is no "which is it?" I care about the spirit of the rules, and have been consistent on that the entire time - you seem to be confused because I believe the spirit of the rules is clearly indicated by the fact that the phrasing used is what it is, rather than something else, which means phrases like "at least 8 hours" are intended to actually matter.
I'm confused because the most straightforward reading of "at least 8 hours long" is that you only have to meet the requirements of a long rest for 8 hours. The only way to conclude that there's no long rest in a period of 6 hours of sleep and 4 hours of watch is to be really pedantic. There's clearly a period of downtime in there that's at least 8 hours long and contains no more than 2 hours of light activity; it just doesn't include the last 2 hours of standing watch. In fact, it can't include them, because the rules define a long rest as having no more than 2 hours of light activity.
It makes no sense that sleeping 6 hours and standing watch for 2 counts as a long rest if you go get into fights afterwards but not if you choose to keep standing around. There's no reason to think such a nonsensical result is intended.
If you want to talk about the spirit of the rules, I have lots of reason to believe Jeremy Crawford would rule in favor of the players here. A rule that has unintuitive results and punishes the players for doing reasonable things is a bad rule and serves no purpose.
"Rules enable you and your players to have fun at the table. The rules serve you, not vice-versa." -DMG p.235
"Often, players ask whether they can apply a skill proficiency to an ability check. If a player can provide a good justification for why a character's training and aptitude in a skill should apply to the check, go ahead and allow it, rewarding the player's creative thinking." -DMG p.239
"Regardless of what’s on the page or what the designers intended, D&D is meant to be fun, and the DM is the ringmaster at each game table. The best DMs shape the game on the fly to bring the most delight to his or her players. Such DMs aim for RAF, “rules as fun.” We expect DMs to depart from the rules when running a particular campaign or when seeking the greatest happiness for a certain group of players. Sometimes my rules answers will include advice on achieving the RAF interpretation of a rule for your group. I recommend a healthy mix of RAW, RAI, and RAF!" -Sage Advice Compendium, The Role of Rules
1) I'm confused because the most straightforward reading of "at least 8 hours long" is that you only have to meet the requirements of a long rest for 8 hours. The only way to conclude that there's no long rest in a period of 6 hours of sleep and 4 hours of watch is to be really pedantic. There's clearly a period of downtime in there that's at least 8 hours long and contains no more than 2 hours of light activity; it just doesn't include the last 2 hours of standing watch. 2) In fact, it can't include them, because the rules define a long rest as having no more than 2 hours of light activity.
3) It makes no sense that sleeping 6 hours and standing watch for 2 counts as a long rest if you go get into fights afterwards but not if you choose to keep standing around. There's no reason to think such a nonsensical result is intended.
4) If you want to talk about the spirit of the rules, I have lots of reason to believe Jeremy Crawford would rule in favor of the players here. A rule that has unintuitive results and punishes the players for doing reasonable things is a bad rule and serves no purpose.
Added numbers so my responses can be directly matched to what they are response to.
1) You've got the pedantry backwards. 6 hours sleep and 4 hours watch is excluded as a valid long rest by a plain reading of the text - since the limit is 2 hours of watch. It's through pedantry that one can create the divide that cuts those 4 hours of watch into 2 "during" and 2 "before" the rest.
2) Which is exactly why I consider the whole rest schedule as presented to be violating the spirit of the rules.
3) What doesn't make sense is standing around for a while, then standing around longer without any noteworthy activity between, and calling that two separate occasions of standing around instead of one. Which is why my interpretation of rest rules includes that the characters are just resting longer rather than again if they haven't actually done anything but rest.
4) I agree that an unintuitive rule that punishes players for doing reasonable things is bad - which is why I firmly oppose the dramatic changes that were made to the resting rules; they used to make sense and be usable, and now they just plain don't work in some cases that they used to.
I also agree that Crawford wouldn't oppose a DM intentionally skirting the rules for their own groups benefit, whether that skirting takes the form of my outright "I'm not using that rule as errata'd" or the form of "I'm using the rules, but the rules don't actually say that characters can't arbitrate which hours of watch aren't part of their long rest so the 2-hour limit rule doesn't actually mean anything."
My PHB specifically says: A long rest is a period of extended downtime, at least 8 hours long, during which a character sleeps or performs light activity: reading, talking, eating, or standing watch for no more than 2 hours.
So according to that, you may spend the whole time reading, talking and eating and do not actually need to sleep at all. The only thing of those you are limited on is you must not stand watch for more than 2 hours.
As far as I can tell, the rules state the party rests for 8 hours. The reason for the 8 hour period is so that all players have an equal amount of time to have an encounter. Four players @ 2 hours each is 8 hours. You can be picking your nose, but you don't have to be on watch.
An elf is in a trance for 4 hours. He or she cannot be on a watch and can be surprised like any other creature. Don't like it? Tough. The trance gives him the rest of 8 hours, but not the rest to regain abilities that require a long rest.
An elf in a trance can be on watch, but he/she automatically fails perception checks (as he's/she's not focused on events, but rather regenerating his/her essence). Thus, he or she can be surprised by any event.
Since the rules are like the Pirate's Code, it really doesn't matter. Any which way, what the DM declares, goes.
There is just no way an Elf with a passive perception of say 15ish can be sitting by the guy on watch and completely miss something just because he isn't "on watch".
My PHB specifically says: A long rest is a period of extended downtime, at least 8 hours long, during which a character sleeps or performs light activity: reading, talking, eating, or standing watch for no more than 2 hours.
So according to that, you may spend the whole time reading, talking and eating and do not actually need to sleep at all. The only thing of those you are limited on is you must not stand watch for more than 2 hours.
That is the old wording. The PHB was updated to mandate sleep.
But it is entirely possible. If one player says they are going to go hunt do you now forbid the party from taking a long rest just because one party member decides to do something else?
Or what if I want to suddenly explore the noise we hear? Are you going to say I can't do that or make the entire party's long rest restart because I wondered off?
Basically you are saying if the party wants to stand and plan they can't have anyone on watch or else they can't complete a long rest without leaving a period where no one is on watch. So do they have to walk ten feet before you will let them start a long rest without being penalized?
But it is entirely possible. If one player says they are going to go hunt do you now forbid the party from taking a long rest just because one party member decides to do something else?
Personally, I say no, but then the hunter isn't getting a long rest.
So what you are saying with your anology is that anyone who gets a discount on lunch (Elf Trance) can actually spend more on beverages (watch)?
Yes I know you aren't but your anology does work to support a longer watch time as well.
Your comparison is invalid. What does lunch have to do with drinks? I drink during my "lunch," but I also drink when I'm on "not lunch."
A long rest requires 8 hours on no more than light activity. I assume that some form of sleep/trance is involved. The PHB states no more than 2 hours on watch.
As a DM, if a player wants to stay on a watch for 8 hours while the rest of the party rests, I'm okay with it, but the "watch player" doesn't gain any "long rest" benefits. You also have to remember exhaustion rules.
So what you are saying with your anology is that anyone who gets a discount on lunch (Elf Trance) can actually spend more on beverages (watch)?
Yes I know you aren't but your anology does work to support a longer watch time as well.
Your comparison is invalid What does lunch have to do with drinks? I drink during my "lunch," but I also drink when I'm on "not lunch."
A long rest requires 8 hours on no more than light activity. I assume that some form of sleep/trance is involved.
As a DM, if a player wants to stay on a watch for 8 hours while the rest of the party rests, I'm okay with it, but the "watch player" doesn't gain any "long rest" benefits. You also have to remember exhaustion rules.
It's the Anology Aaron used so he established it. I was going with that he said.
But it is entirely possible. If one player says they are going to go hunt do you now forbid the party from taking a long rest just because one party member decides to do something else?
Personally, I say no, but then the hunter isn't getting a long rest.
Right. But if you don't require sleep during a long rest, a fighter who is uninjured would not need a long rest.
There's no such thing as a "collective long rest". The rules don't care what your companions are up to while you rest.
I highly doubt that's the reason the rules say "at least 8 hours", but I'll admit that as written, you could defend that ruling. I just dislike that it has completely nonsensical results (retroactively takes away their rest) and the only upside is that you can claim you're following the letter of the law.
There isn't a collective rest. A party member can stay watch all 8 hours, especially if they are not injured, have no need to regain spells, and you aren't requiring them to sleep during the long rest.
The game is written assuming that when the party is resting, the party is resting, because it is a party-based game. That's what I mean when I say "collective long rest" - the stuff that is going on when the players at the table have decided a long rest is happening.
And "My character is not actually participating in the long rest because of mechanic X and technicality Y" is shenanigans, not the intended use of the rules.
Added numbers so my responses can be directly matched to what they are response to.
1) You've got the pedantry backwards. 6 hours sleep and 4 hours watch is excluded as a valid long rest by a plain reading of the text - since the limit is 2 hours of watch. It's through pedantry that one can create the divide that cuts those 4 hours of watch into 2 "during" and 2 "before" the rest.
2) Which is exactly why I consider the whole rest schedule as presented to be violating the spirit of the rules.
3) What doesn't make sense is standing around for a while, then standing around longer without any noteworthy activity between, and calling that two separate occasions of standing around instead of one. Which is why my interpretation of rest rules includes that the characters are just resting longer rather than again if they haven't actually done anything but rest.
4) I agree that an unintuitive rule that punishes players for doing reasonable things is bad - which is why I firmly oppose the dramatic changes that were made to the resting rules; they used to make sense and be usable, and now they just plain don't work in some cases that they used to.
I also agree that Crawford wouldn't oppose a DM intentionally skirting the rules for their own groups benefit, whether that skirting takes the form of my outright "I'm not using that rule as errata'd" or the form of "I'm using the rules, but the rules don't actually say that characters can't arbitrate which hours of watch aren't part of their long rest so the 2-hour limit rule doesn't actually mean anything."
My PHB specifically says: A long rest is a period of extended downtime, at least 8 hours long, during which a character sleeps or performs
light activity: reading, talking, eating, or standing watch for no more than 2 hours.
So according to that, you may spend the whole time reading, talking and eating and do not actually need to sleep at all. The only thing of those you are limited on is you must not stand watch for more than 2 hours.
As far as I can tell, the rules state the party rests for 8 hours. The reason for the 8 hour period is so that all players have an equal amount of time to have an encounter. Four players @ 2 hours each is 8 hours. You can be picking your nose, but you don't have to be on watch.
An elf is in a trance for 4 hours. He or she cannot be on a watch and can be surprised like any other creature. Don't like it? Tough. The trance gives him the rest of 8 hours, but not the rest to regain abilities that require a long rest.
An elf in a trance can be on watch, but he/she automatically fails perception checks (as he's/she's not focused on events, but rather regenerating his/her essence). Thus, he or she can be surprised by any event.
Since the rules are like the Pirate's Code, it really doesn't matter. Any which way, what the DM declares, goes.
There is just no way an Elf with a passive perception of say 15ish can be sitting by the guy on watch and completely miss something just because he isn't "on watch".
But it is entirely possible. If one player says they are going to go hunt do you now forbid the party from taking a long rest just because one party member decides to do something else?
Or what if I want to suddenly explore the noise we hear? Are you going to say I can't do that or make the entire party's long rest restart because I wondered off?
Basically you are saying if the party wants to stand and plan they can't have anyone on watch or else they can't complete a long rest without leaving a period where no one is on watch. So do they have to walk ten feet before you will let them start a long rest without being penalized?
So what you are saying with your anology is that anyone who gets a discount on lunch (Elf Trance) can actually spend more on beverages (watch)?
Yes I know you aren't but your anology does work to support a longer watch time as well.
Yes an Elf can spent 4 hours of light activity, since he/she needs only 4 hours of Trance.
The UA Mystic (the 3rd one - which might make it into XGtE), has an ability that allows it to take a Long Rest, but not have to sleep.
You have to have that ability, to not have to sleep.
If you have that ability, Then you don't have to sleep.
Everybody else has to sleep (with minor exceptions like warforged and elves).
Otherwise it's the classic "the rules don't say I can't".
2 "B" or not 2 "B" , that is the question my kitty avatar's Tail is secretly signing. You can see it, I know you can.