I think that giving all spellcasters pact magic instead of the typical spellcasting system would make the game more balanced and thematic. Maybe sorcerer could use the DMG spell points variant with the pact magic slots and sorcery points turned into spell points. At later levels, non-warlocks could get the ability to at will cast lower level spells like they're cantrips (some spells like *ahem* shield would have to be revised for this idea) to give the feeling of mastery over mundane magic as well as to make lower leveled spells useful with the pact magic system. Half casters could get an equal number of pact slots as full casters but at less of a level and no eventual arcanums. Also hunter's mark would need to be a class feature for this to not be too oppressive on ranger. There would have to be new multiclassing rules with this form of spellcasting, likely just adding the levels (half for half casters) of the spellcasting classes together to determine pact magic level.
Giving casters pact magic in addition makes them short rest based, which fixes much of the issues they have with the current resting system where they have too much power. It makes their utility have a much bigger cost while still maintaining it. In addition, it's just far easier for new players. No more different levels of slots to manage just "this is a cantrip, you can spam it", and "this is a leveled spel, you can't just spam itl".
Why are we suggesting this? I didn't see a reason why everyone should be pact-based beyond vague assertions that short rests are good (they're not) and magical utility should be curtailed. Please clarify the goal of this proposal, as well as clarifying why spellcasting classes that gain no class features save for spellcasting should give up the majority of their spellcasting with absolutely no gain or benefit in return.
Spellcasters are by far the most powerful classes in the game due to the current spell casting design. Too keep them balanced you have to try and run a unnaturally large number of encounters each day. Currently they work where they do less consistent damage in the early levels with a few big ticket moves, then they fairly quickly reach the point where all they do are big ticket moves every round, round after round for every encounter. They are not remotely balanced now. with pact magic it is easier to balance them as the number of spells they cast are meant to get them through a encounter or two and not the whole day. They would effectively work like every other class a consistent source of damage, and a few one off big moves.
4e dud this already, with At Will/Encounter/Daily abilities. Everybody seemed to hate it. Why would switching to a more complicated, less functional system of 'Encounter' powers, i.e. pact magic, work any better now than it did in 4e?
Short rests don't work. They just don't. The more I play this game the more convinced I am that short rests ate just bad. At no point do you have an hour to sit around on your thumbs doing jack-all, but you DON'T have eight hours instead. It never makes sense to sit on your keister farting off for an hour in enemy territory - either you're secure enough for a full rest or you're not secure enough for any rest at all.
Short rests don't work. They just don't. The more I play this game the more convinced I am that short rests ate just bad. At no point do you have an hour to sit around on your thumbs doing jack-all, but you DON'T have eight hours instead. It never makes sense to sit on your keister farting off for an hour in enemy territory - either you're secure enough for a full rest or you're not secure enough for any rest at all.
Whether you take a short rest or a long rest isn't about how secure your position is, it's about how much time you have. You can only benefit from one long rest per twenty-four hour period, so it's not just eight hours, it's potentially up to twenty-four, and more things happen the longer you wait. Short rests are fine; they're just incompatible with the kind of GM who puts the entire world on pause while the PCs wait around.
That's exactly the problem. Most GMs tick the clock regardless of what the players are doing, especially in high tension situations. Spending an hour licking your own butthole cat-style to recharge your stuff generally means you lose whatever Thing you're currently pursuing. Short rests only, only, ONLY make even the remotest sense in a Classic Dungeon Crawl where there's no timer on your movement but retreating from the dungeon means it repopulates and all your progress is lost. In any other situation you push forward with whatever resources you have and pray it's enough, or you concede, retreat, and take your proper rest.
Short rests also work for mysteries where it’s a lot about clue finding. They also work in other situations. Just because the clock keeps ticking doesn’t mean it always matters.
Why are we suggesting this? I didn't see a reason why everyone should be pact-based beyond vague assertions that short rests are good (they're not) and magical utility should be curtailed. Please clarify the goal of this proposal, as well as clarifying why spellcasting classes that gain no class features save for spellcasting should give up the majority of their spellcasting with absolutely no gain or benefit in return.
I know I don't say this often, but I agree with Yurei.
One thing I think that is important about spellcasting is that each class that uses it uses it in a slightly different way. Wizards study to get magic and they have more spells and versatility. Sorcerers have innate magic and sorcery points as well as a fair amount of spells. Warlocks get their magic from a pact, and there limited amounts of spellcasting feels like a good way to represent that the amount of times they can channel their patrons power isn't infinite. In fact, the amount of power they can call down from their patron is limited by the power of their connection with their patron and that patrons power in general.
Don't get me wrong, I like Pact Magic. In fact, In think it's really cool. But giving it to every class makes each spellcaster feels same--y, and removes necessary distinctions between spellcasters. Each spellcaster should feel different and new when you play them. If all spellcasters all use the same Pact Magic system, then where are the big differences between playing a Warlock and a Sorcerer? Why would I play a Wizard if I had already used the exact same system for all the other spellcasting classes? 5e has distinctions between spellcasters that are not just lore related, but mechanical too. If you remove the biggest differentiating factors between different spellcasting classes to give them all Pact Magic, then it will remove the variety, fun, and just plain differentness of playing a new spellcaster. I just don't see why this change would be worth it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explainHERE.
4e dud this already, with At Will/Encounter/Daily abilities. Everybody seemed to hate it. Why would switching to a more complicated, less functional system of 'Encounter' powers, i.e. pact magic, work any better now than it did in 4e?
Short rests don't work. They just don't. The more I play this game the more convinced I am that short rests ate just bad. At no point do you have an hour to sit around on your thumbs doing jack-all, but you DON'T have eight hours instead. It never makes sense to sit on your keister farting off for an hour in enemy territory - either you're secure enough for a full rest or you're not secure enough for any rest at all.
Why key off of a bad mechanic?
4e had some of this mechanic but it had a lot of other issues with it as well. One it was very rules heavy making it hard for new players to learn, two it didn't just make all classes use a at will, encounter, daily power structure but all the powers had a very similar feel to them. Your at will would be 1w+minor effect, your encounter was going to be 2w+minor effect etc. It felt very gamey, the rules did not help build the setting they helped build a game. But that does not mean things could not be learned from it, its ritual magic system was really solid, balancing classes along the same recovery system is useful.
The problem with short rests is that they made them an hour instead of sticking with 4es 5 minutes, as yes at a hour its hard not to justify not just taking a long rest outside the can only take one per 24 hour dynamic. Yes, ytes time is passing in the world but saying you have a hour to blow but not 8 every day is hard to justify and it requires a lot on the DMs side.
If they care about balance which I don't think they do they would line up all the classes using the same recovery system, either base it all around short rests or all around long rests. Once you have some classes based around short and some around long it just wont work across various tables, for every table that has enough encounters to make the long rest classes actually manage thier resources there will be 6 tables that have one encounter per day. So turning all casters into a short rest mechanic system works. You could also turn all non casters into a long rest system. But for reasons I can not comprehend people always rebel against non casters doing anything past what a middle aged fat dude can do.
One thing I think that is important about spellcasting is that each class that uses it uses it in a slightly different way. Wizards study to get magic and they have more spells and versatility. Sorcerers have innate magic and sorcery points as well as a fair amount of spells. Warlocks get their magic from a pact, and there limited amounts of spellcasting feels like a good way to represent that the amount of times they can channel their patrons power isn't infinite. In fact, the amount of power they can call down from their patron is limited by the power of their connection with their patron and that patrons power in general.
Don't get me wrong, I like Pact Magic. In fact, In think it's really cool. But giving it to every class makes each spellcaster feels same--y, and removes necessary distinctions between spellcasters. Each spellcaster should feel different and new when you play them. If all spellcasters all use the same Pact Magic system, then where are the big differences between playing a Warlock and a Sorcerer? Why would I play a Wizard if I had already used the exact same system for all the other spellcasting classes? 5e has distinctions between spellcasters that are not just lore related, but mechanical too. If you remove the biggest differentiating factors between different spellcasting classes to give them all Pact Magic, then it will remove the variety, fun, and just plain differentness of playing a new spellcaster. I just don't see why this change would be worth it.
Do sorcerers and wizards feel different, do druids feel different from wizards, how about bards.
They all use a very similar spell casting system, the only difference is known vs prepared. I suspect if they all used the pact system they would feel just as different as the spell casting classes do now. Maybe i'm misreading them but i think they are just suggesting a small number of spells per short rest, and the spells automatically upcast. Every other difference would remain, learning from a patron, from books natural casting. Each class would get a invocation substitute that emphasized their class design, sorcerers with metamagic, druids with wild shape, bard with a seriously improved inspiration mechanic etc. The hard part would be coming up with what the more generic wizard/priest would get.
Do sorcerers and wizards feel different, do druids feel different from wizards, how about bards.
Yes, they do. Some spellcasters have prepared spells, some don't. Some have more spells known, others don't. Some have systems like Sorcery Points, while others have features like Bardic Inspiration. I could go on but I think I've made my point. Anyways, just because you think there aren't enough distinctions between different types of spellcasting classes in 5e, doesn't mean you should remove all those distinctions to make them all use the same system. If we are going to have the spellcasting system be changed, it should be to make it even more different from class to class. I don't see how you can complain about spellcasters feeling too alike in 5e and then argue that 1DD should make them even more alike because that totally helps solve the problem.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explainHERE.
Short rests often don't make sense. Long rests aren't always reasonable. There are ways for DMs to adjust their adventures to solve some problems. Those methods take a lot of work and experience. The same methods won't work for every story. Ticking clocks get old. So does fighting 10 rooms of orcs. So does having only one fight a day. Some dungeons restock if you leave them. Some wouldn't make sense to. Every option to fix things, means losing a different option. We all just want to make better stories that flow the way we envision them, but are constrained by the rules.
The balance problem (both mechanical and story) isn't short rests or long rests, it's that every ability uses different rules.
4e tried to fix that but failed. It was too much change, too fast. Every power felt the same, and none of it felt like DnD. The proposal in this thread would fix some of that. It would draw on classic DnD mechanics, and give the freedom for DMs to craft unique adventures every time. Because you would always know what your characters could do. Whether you had one encounter or 10 in a day.
But it would also take away some of the individuality of classes. You'd lose flavor for the freedom of adventure design and realism.
You could go the other way and make martials stronger. Give them leveled abilities like spells that regenerate on long rests. Let them also have a large pool of different abilities. DnD has definitely limited their creativity when it comes to making up things a martial can do. But then they would just feel like wizards with swords.
You could do what other games do and make everything a skill roll. Want to disarm someone? Make a roll. Want to cast a spell? Make a roll. Want to use your secret vampire power? Make a roll. The only limit is what you can do in a turn and your success rate. But that's not very DnD either.
I have no solution to offer that doesn't ruin some other part of the game.
Here's a hot take for the hot take: I like At-Will/Encounter/Daily. It's a clean system with some decent wiggle room, there's potential in it. But you can't bass-ackwards shovel it into 5e. Pact Magic is trying to turn spellcasting into an Encounter power and it fails miserably. Warlocks basically don't get to cast, ever, because of the aforementioned idiotic pointlessness of short rests. Even in the unlikely scneario that an entire party is keyed off of short rests, that party would be better served pushing through most of the time because I've never once met a single DM that didn't delight in inflicting some fresh disaster on players who tried to short rest for any reason beyond 'we're traveling, we may as well." Try to short rest in anything other than Unofficial Downtime and you lose your objective. It just ain't good.
Here's a hot take for the hot take: I like At-Will/Encounter/Daily. It's a clean system with some decent wiggle room, there's potential in it. But you can't bass-ackwards shovel it into 5e. Pact Magic is trying to turn spellcasting into an Encounter power and it fails miserably. Warlocks basically don't get to cast, ever, because of the aforementioned idiotic pointlessness of short rests. Even in the unlikely scneario that an entire party is keyed off of short rests, that party would be better served pushing through most of the time because I've never once met a single DM that didn't delight in inflicting some fresh disaster on players who tried to short rest for any reason beyond 'we're traveling, we may as well." Try to short rest in anything other than Unofficial Downtime and you lose your objective. It just ain't good.
Because I love warlocks, and monks and fighters and short rest abilities and understand their point as a GM I make sure short rests are prominent and not punished. In fact, I run what I refer to as "narrative rest rules" where the length of a short rest or long rest shift to match the pace of the adventure to ensure that the party always gets 2 to 3 short rests per 1 long rest and has at least 1 or 2 encounters between each short rest to make those abilities prominent and better the balance of the game. But that is just how I run my games.
Edit: as a player I am almost universally disapointed with how rests are handled and how many other players freak out about taking short rests. When I push them to rest as a warlock they all regularly accuse me of meta gaming or they fear the GM's wrath, so I am NOT the norm that is 100% sure.
Edit2: however, however, if all classes relied on short rests the same way monks and warlocks do you can be pretty sure that players would rest more and would get pretty pissy with their gm's constantly punishing them for using an intended mechanic.
Edit3: However, however, HOWEVER, we also don't know yet how they are handling warlocks. So far the only short rest ability recovery we see comes in at level 7 in Bard and it is only for bardic inspiration. We could see them still have some short rest recovery abilities, but not make entire classes like the warlock hyper reliant on them and make it for more minor abilities.
Monk I can still see recovering on short rests all their ki with the way the rules are going making monks a lot stronger martial class in general.
All good points again. It's a real dilemma. Also, dang Yurei, I'm sorry you've had those DM experiences. I never delight in ruining a player's class core function or inflicted undue difficulty. The only times I've ever interrupted any rest is if I've given fair warning that a place is not safe, or very rare plot moments where time is of the essence. It should always be telegraphed well so they can plan their resources and risk Sounds like you've had some antagonistic DMs. That stinks.
Dear God no people play wizard because they want to be like doctor strange they need to cast spells you can't do that playing warlock because it has to few spell slots and sorcerer did not get enough spells. Wizard let's players be awsome mages . I honestly don't like taking away core feature of any class and wizards whole thing is spells.
"Hey, we're gonna try a thing where no spellcaster gets more than 3 spell slots, but they're all maximum level and they come back on a short rest."
"......okay. I mean, I guess I'm willing to try it. Frankly I'm kinna jazzed, I can't wait to see all the cool new class features the spellcasting classes get to make up for this. It should be a cool experiment at least."
"What?! Noo! Why in the name of all the dead gods of Wildspace would we give spellcasters class features?! Their class feature is Spellcasting!"
"..............you're getting rid of almost all spellcasting. You can't say to a wizard "you can only cast three spells a day" and expect them to still be content with getting, like...four whole class features, including their subclass. If you want to cut way back on the game's magic, then the magic classes are GONNA need stuff to compensate."
"Noooooooooooo! They have magic! They don't need anything else! Sure they've got just a wee little bit less, but - "
"Yeah, nah. 'Very Dissatisfied.' Try again, please. You can't take away eighty percent of a class and then replace it with nothing."
"But - "
"No buts. VD. Back to the drawing board, team."
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please do not contact or message me.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I think that giving all spellcasters pact magic instead of the typical spellcasting system would make the game more balanced and thematic. Maybe sorcerer could use the DMG spell points variant with the pact magic slots and sorcery points turned into spell points. At later levels, non-warlocks could get the ability to at will cast lower level spells like they're cantrips (some spells like *ahem* shield would have to be revised for this idea) to give the feeling of mastery over mundane magic as well as to make lower leveled spells useful with the pact magic system. Half casters could get an equal number of pact slots as full casters but at less of a level and no eventual arcanums. Also hunter's mark would need to be a class feature for this to not be too oppressive on ranger. There would have to be new multiclassing rules with this form of spellcasting, likely just adding the levels (half for half casters) of the spellcasting classes together to determine pact magic level.
Giving casters pact magic in addition makes them short rest based, which fixes much of the issues they have with the current resting system where they have too much power. It makes their utility have a much bigger cost while still maintaining it. In addition, it's just far easier for new players. No more different levels of slots to manage just "this is a cantrip, you can spam it", and "this is a leveled spel, you can't just spam itl".
Its not a bad idea, but I think it would require a big spell overall as most spells upcast poorly.
Why are we suggesting this? I didn't see a reason why everyone should be pact-based beyond vague assertions that short rests are good (they're not) and magical utility should be curtailed. Please clarify the goal of this proposal, as well as clarifying why spellcasting classes that gain no class features save for spellcasting should give up the majority of their spellcasting with absolutely no gain or benefit in return.
Please do not contact or message me.
Spellcasters are by far the most powerful classes in the game due to the current spell casting design. Too keep them balanced you have to try and run a unnaturally large number of encounters each day. Currently they work where they do less consistent damage in the early levels with a few big ticket moves, then they fairly quickly reach the point where all they do are big ticket moves every round, round after round for every encounter. They are not remotely balanced now. with pact magic it is easier to balance them as the number of spells they cast are meant to get them through a encounter or two and not the whole day. They would effectively work like every other class a consistent source of damage, and a few one off big moves.
Okay.
4e dud this already, with At Will/Encounter/Daily abilities. Everybody seemed to hate it. Why would switching to a more complicated, less functional system of 'Encounter' powers, i.e. pact magic, work any better now than it did in 4e?
Short rests don't work. They just don't. The more I play this game the more convinced I am that short rests ate just bad. At no point do you have an hour to sit around on your thumbs doing jack-all, but you DON'T have eight hours instead. It never makes sense to sit on your keister farting off for an hour in enemy territory - either you're secure enough for a full rest or you're not secure enough for any rest at all.
Why key off of a bad mechanic?
Please do not contact or message me.
Whether you take a short rest or a long rest isn't about how secure your position is, it's about how much time you have. You can only benefit from one long rest per twenty-four hour period, so it's not just eight hours, it's potentially up to twenty-four, and more things happen the longer you wait. Short rests are fine; they're just incompatible with the kind of GM who puts the entire world on pause while the PCs wait around.
That's exactly the problem. Most GMs tick the clock regardless of what the players are doing, especially in high tension situations. Spending an hour licking your own butthole cat-style to recharge your stuff generally means you lose whatever Thing you're currently pursuing. Short rests only, only, ONLY make even the remotest sense in a Classic Dungeon Crawl where there's no timer on your movement but retreating from the dungeon means it repopulates and all your progress is lost. In any other situation you push forward with whatever resources you have and pray it's enough, or you concede, retreat, and take your proper rest.
Please do not contact or message me.
Short rests also work for mysteries where it’s a lot about clue finding. They also work in other situations. Just because the clock keeps ticking doesn’t mean it always matters.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I know I don't say this often, but I agree with Yurei.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.One thing I think that is important about spellcasting is that each class that uses it uses it in a slightly different way. Wizards study to get magic and they have more spells and versatility. Sorcerers have innate magic and sorcery points as well as a fair amount of spells. Warlocks get their magic from a pact, and there limited amounts of spellcasting feels like a good way to represent that the amount of times they can channel their patrons power isn't infinite. In fact, the amount of power they can call down from their patron is limited by the power of their connection with their patron and that patrons power in general.
Don't get me wrong, I like Pact Magic. In fact, In think it's really cool. But giving it to every class makes each spellcaster feels same--y, and removes necessary distinctions between spellcasters. Each spellcaster should feel different and new when you play them. If all spellcasters all use the same Pact Magic system, then where are the big differences between playing a Warlock and a Sorcerer? Why would I play a Wizard if I had already used the exact same system for all the other spellcasting classes? 5e has distinctions between spellcasters that are not just lore related, but mechanical too. If you remove the biggest differentiating factors between different spellcasting classes to give them all Pact Magic, then it will remove the variety, fun, and just plain differentness of playing a new spellcaster. I just don't see why this change would be worth it.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.4e had some of this mechanic but it had a lot of other issues with it as well. One it was very rules heavy making it hard for new players to learn, two it didn't just make all classes use a at will, encounter, daily power structure but all the powers had a very similar feel to them. Your at will would be 1w+minor effect, your encounter was going to be 2w+minor effect etc. It felt very gamey, the rules did not help build the setting they helped build a game. But that does not mean things could not be learned from it, its ritual magic system was really solid, balancing classes along the same recovery system is useful.
The problem with short rests is that they made them an hour instead of sticking with 4es 5 minutes, as yes at a hour its hard not to justify not just taking a long rest outside the can only take one per 24 hour dynamic. Yes, ytes time is passing in the world but saying you have a hour to blow but not 8 every day is hard to justify and it requires a lot on the DMs side.
If they care about balance which I don't think they do they would line up all the classes using the same recovery system, either base it all around short rests or all around long rests. Once you have some classes based around short and some around long it just wont work across various tables, for every table that has enough encounters to make the long rest classes actually manage thier resources there will be 6 tables that have one encounter per day. So turning all casters into a short rest mechanic system works. You could also turn all non casters into a long rest system. But for reasons I can not comprehend people always rebel against non casters doing anything past what a middle aged fat dude can do.
Do sorcerers and wizards feel different, do druids feel different from wizards, how about bards.
They all use a very similar spell casting system, the only difference is known vs prepared. I suspect if they all used the pact system they would feel just as different as the spell casting classes do now. Maybe i'm misreading them but i think they are just suggesting a small number of spells per short rest, and the spells automatically upcast. Every other difference would remain, learning from a patron, from books natural casting. Each class would get a invocation substitute that emphasized their class design, sorcerers with metamagic, druids with wild shape, bard with a seriously improved inspiration mechanic etc. The hard part would be coming up with what the more generic wizard/priest would get.
Yes, they do. Some spellcasters have prepared spells, some don't. Some have more spells known, others don't. Some have systems like Sorcery Points, while others have features like Bardic Inspiration. I could go on but I think I've made my point. Anyways, just because you think there aren't enough distinctions between different types of spellcasting classes in 5e, doesn't mean you should remove all those distinctions to make them all use the same system. If we are going to have the spellcasting system be changed, it should be to make it even more different from class to class. I don't see how you can complain about spellcasters feeling too alike in 5e and then argue that 1DD should make them even more alike because that totally helps solve the problem.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.I agree with everyone.
Yep, everyone.
Short rests often don't make sense. Long rests aren't always reasonable. There are ways for DMs to adjust their adventures to solve some problems. Those methods take a lot of work and experience. The same methods won't work for every story. Ticking clocks get old. So does fighting 10 rooms of orcs. So does having only one fight a day. Some dungeons restock if you leave them. Some wouldn't make sense to. Every option to fix things, means losing a different option. We all just want to make better stories that flow the way we envision them, but are constrained by the rules.
The balance problem (both mechanical and story) isn't short rests or long rests, it's that every ability uses different rules.
4e tried to fix that but failed. It was too much change, too fast. Every power felt the same, and none of it felt like DnD. The proposal in this thread would fix some of that. It would draw on classic DnD mechanics, and give the freedom for DMs to craft unique adventures every time. Because you would always know what your characters could do. Whether you had one encounter or 10 in a day.
But it would also take away some of the individuality of classes. You'd lose flavor for the freedom of adventure design and realism.
You could go the other way and make martials stronger. Give them leveled abilities like spells that regenerate on long rests. Let them also have a large pool of different abilities. DnD has definitely limited their creativity when it comes to making up things a martial can do. But then they would just feel like wizards with swords.
You could do what other games do and make everything a skill roll. Want to disarm someone? Make a roll. Want to cast a spell? Make a roll. Want to use your secret vampire power? Make a roll. The only limit is what you can do in a turn and your success rate. But that's not very DnD either.
I have no solution to offer that doesn't ruin some other part of the game.
idk, this just feels like a horrid idea overall tbh
Here's a hot take for the hot take: I like At-Will/Encounter/Daily. It's a clean system with some decent wiggle room, there's potential in it. But you can't bass-ackwards shovel it into 5e. Pact Magic is trying to turn spellcasting into an Encounter power and it fails miserably. Warlocks basically don't get to cast, ever, because of the aforementioned idiotic pointlessness of short rests. Even in the unlikely scneario that an entire party is keyed off of short rests, that party would be better served pushing through most of the time because I've never once met a single DM that didn't delight in inflicting some fresh disaster on players who tried to short rest for any reason beyond 'we're traveling, we may as well." Try to short rest in anything other than Unofficial Downtime and you lose your objective. It just ain't good.
Please do not contact or message me.
Because I love warlocks, and monks and fighters and short rest abilities and understand their point as a GM I make sure short rests are prominent and not punished. In fact, I run what I refer to as "narrative rest rules" where the length of a short rest or long rest shift to match the pace of the adventure to ensure that the party always gets 2 to 3 short rests per 1 long rest and has at least 1 or 2 encounters between each short rest to make those abilities prominent and better the balance of the game. But that is just how I run my games.
Edit: as a player I am almost universally disapointed with how rests are handled and how many other players freak out about taking short rests. When I push them to rest as a warlock they all regularly accuse me of meta gaming or they fear the GM's wrath, so I am NOT the norm that is 100% sure.
Edit2: however, however, if all classes relied on short rests the same way monks and warlocks do you can be pretty sure that players would rest more and would get pretty pissy with their gm's constantly punishing them for using an intended mechanic.
Edit3: However, however, HOWEVER, we also don't know yet how they are handling warlocks. So far the only short rest ability recovery we see comes in at level 7 in Bard and it is only for bardic inspiration. We could see them still have some short rest recovery abilities, but not make entire classes like the warlock hyper reliant on them and make it for more minor abilities.
Monk I can still see recovering on short rests all their ki with the way the rules are going making monks a lot stronger martial class in general.
All good points again. It's a real dilemma. Also, dang Yurei, I'm sorry you've had those DM experiences. I never delight in ruining a player's class core function or inflicted undue difficulty. The only times I've ever interrupted any rest is if I've given fair warning that a place is not safe, or very rare plot moments where time is of the essence. It should always be telegraphed well so they can plan their resources and risk Sounds like you've had some antagonistic DMs. That stinks.
Dear God no people play wizard because they want to be like doctor strange they need to cast spells you can't do that playing warlock because it has to few spell slots and sorcerer did not get enough spells. Wizard let's players be awsome mages . I honestly don't like taking away core feature of any class and wizards whole thing is spells.
That's the other crux of the issue, really.
"Hey, we're gonna try a thing where no spellcaster gets more than 3 spell slots, but they're all maximum level and they come back on a short rest."
"......okay. I mean, I guess I'm willing to try it. Frankly I'm kinna jazzed, I can't wait to see all the cool new class features the spellcasting classes get to make up for this. It should be a cool experiment at least."
"What?! Noo! Why in the name of all the dead gods of Wildspace would we give spellcasters class features?! Their class feature is Spellcasting!"
"..............you're getting rid of almost all spellcasting. You can't say to a wizard "you can only cast three spells a day" and expect them to still be content with getting, like...four whole class features, including their subclass. If you want to cut way back on the game's magic, then the magic classes are GONNA need stuff to compensate."
"Noooooooooooo! They have magic! They don't need anything else! Sure they've got just a wee little bit less, but - "
"Yeah, nah. 'Very Dissatisfied.' Try again, please. You can't take away eighty percent of a class and then replace it with nothing."
"But - "
"No buts. VD. Back to the drawing board, team."
Please do not contact or message me.