Aren't the devs already set on getting rid of short rest mechanics? Isn't that the reason that Tasha's onwards Subclasses all get stuff recharged on long rest? If so, what's the consequence of this discussion for purposes of OneD&D?
There's only evidence that short rest dependency is being removed. However is mechanics may still use it(like hit die). Short rest is important for the "compatibility claims."
The theory would be to appease people who claim short rests are a problem by giving options to deal with it. And the people who don't have problems with rests will also have options.
I'm not sure what the solution is, but when both cost the same (nothing), then the "correct" answer is always Long Rest.
Well, let's modify both rests:
LONG rest: After finishing the long rest: That the first 15~20 minutes the group is "not warming up"/"stretching"/"sleepy"/"numb" (Disadvantage, or penalty of 1d4 points, on initiative rolls, acrobatics and/or perception), the rogues and rangers ( And maybe add Monks and/or Bards) don't suffer this penalty (Maybe to prevent them from taking advantage of it I'll only exempt them from those classes if they have a subclass chosen in it.)
SHORT break: Duration: 20 or 30 minutes. The cooldowns of certain traits can only be done 1-2 times per Long Rest/24 hours. (Maybe allow every 24 hours in case you can't take a long rest for X reasons, such as continuous interruption of these, suffering effects that prevent a character from sleeping, etc.)
in dnd "Time" isn't a stable metric. At its core the game is narrative and as such the narrative stretches and shrinks time. often we don't care about how long things happen it just becomes a vague issue. most tables don't count rounds outside of combat. a person searching a desk, room , loot pile isn't given a "time" until it makes a difference such as how much you can do while the Caster preforms their ritual.
So what does this mean for rests. In particular saying 10 Min or even an hour or 8 hours are meaningless without practical definitions. This is where other games or editions use generic phrases like "while in area of relative safety." For rpg s these phrases are usually more technically accurate than just saying when you take 10 min.
This is a good point. There's really no reason to tie short or long rests to specific amounts of time -- they're narrative and mechanical tools, and should be treated as such by the DM
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I'm not sure what the solution is, but when both cost the same (nothing), then the "correct" answer is always Long Rest.
The solution is to not use a time-based criterion for resting at all; you can rest when you reach a certain point in the adventure. This is, however, extremely gamist and thus a thing that would certainly be highly controversial.
I waffled back and forth on this one but I think the only real way to fix it is.
"Your DM decides when you get the effects of a long/short rest"
Could be 10 minutes while patching your wounds in the middle of a dungeon. Could be a bad nights sleep in the woods with predatory monsters encroaching on the camp. If I as the DM want to control the resources you have access to I already have all the tools I need to interrupt you or to just handwave what I need to. Best to empower me to do so instead of trying to create rules for something that is going to vary so widely from Scene to Scene.
As with everything else in D&D. Player tells DM what they are attempting, DM tells them if they are successful.
The issue with Short Rests is that you long rest too easily. Short resting can be fixed quiet easily by imposing more restrictions on Long Rest.
A party should only be able to gain the full benefits of a Long Rest once while adventuring and can not regain the full benefits of a long rest again until they long rest in a safe and comfortable location, like an Inn or in a town house. After resting in a suitable location, they regain their ability to perform a long rest while adventuring again; else wise long resting only staves off the effects of exhaustion.
This would make short rests something you actually have to use, rather than long resting between every encounter. Of course playing like this is not going to be for everybody, so I think it should be a variant rule rather than default.
in dnd "Time" isn't a stable metric. At its core the game is narrative and as such the narrative stretches and shrinks time. often we don't care about how long things happen it just becomes a vague issue. most tables don't count rounds outside of combat. a person searching a desk, room , loot pile isn't given a "time" until it makes a difference such as how much you can do while the Caster preforms their ritual.
So what does this mean for rests. In particular saying 10 Min or even an hour or 8 hours are meaningless without practical definitions. This is where other games or editions use generic phrases like "while in area of relative safety." For rpg s these phrases are usually more technically accurate than just saying when you take 10 min.
This is a good point. There's really no reason to tie short or long rests to specific amounts of time -- they're narrative and mechanical tools, and should be treated as such by the DM
I agree that Rosco made a good observation. However, it conflicts with the facts that spells and abilities in D&D all have a definite time duration, be it a instantaneous, a round, minute, 8 hours, etc. This is in contrast to those games where abilities last for "a scene", "a beat", or whatever. One would have to edit A LOT of spell and class feature entries to smooth over change to a narrative-based time system as used by non-D&D games. This is a case in which the wargamey roots of D&D clash with the story-telling direction of the TTRPG game, as metrics based on definitive distances and times are more in keeping with conventions of war games.
in dnd "Time" isn't a stable metric. At its core the game is narrative and as such the narrative stretches and shrinks time. often we don't care about how long things happen it just becomes a vague issue. most tables don't count rounds outside of combat. a person searching a desk, room , loot pile isn't given a "time" until it makes a difference such as how much you can do while the Caster preforms their ritual.
So what does this mean for rests. In particular saying 10 Min or even an hour or 8 hours are meaningless without practical definitions. This is where other games or editions use generic phrases like "while in area of relative safety." For rpg s these phrases are usually more technically accurate than just saying when you take 10 min.
This is a good point. There's really no reason to tie short or long rests to specific amounts of time -- they're narrative and mechanical tools, and should be treated as such by the DM
I agree that Rosco made a good observation. However, it conflicts with the facts that spells and abilities in D&D all have a definite time duration, be it a instantaneous, a round, minute, 8 hours, etc. This is in contrast to those games where abilities last for "a scene", "a beat", or whatever. One would have to edit A LOT of spell and class feature entries to smooth over change to a narrative-based time system as used by non-D&D games. This is a case in which the wargamey roots of D&D clash with the story-telling direction of the TTRPG game, as metrics based on definitive distances and times are more in keeping with conventions of war games.
And at how many tables do those actually get tracked down to the minute?
Do DMs have a timer running to determine when mage armor expires? Or is it mostly just, "it's mid-afternoon, it's probably close to running out -- I'll say it lasts through this combat and then is gone?" Even in time-crunch scenarios where 'every minute counts', no sane DM is tracking each individual non-combat round to determine when your pass without trace goes poof (it's 600 rounds, for the ones who have already lost their sanity and want to give it a try)
You wouldn't have to change spell durations to change rest durations
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
in dnd "Time" isn't a stable metric. At its core the game is narrative and as such the narrative stretches and shrinks time. often we don't care about how long things happen it just becomes a vague issue. most tables don't count rounds outside of combat. a person searching a desk, room , loot pile isn't given a "time" until it makes a difference such as how much you can do while the Caster preforms their ritual.
So what does this mean for rests. In particular saying 10 Min or even an hour or 8 hours are meaningless without practical definitions. This is where other games or editions use generic phrases like "while in area of relative safety." For rpg s these phrases are usually more technically accurate than just saying when you take 10 min.
I agree that Rosco made a good observation. However, it conflicts with the facts that spells and abilities in D&D all have a definite time duration, be it a instantaneous, a round, minute, 8 hours, etc. This is in contrast to those games where abilities last for "a scene", "a beat", or whatever. One would have to edit A LOT of spell and class feature entries to smooth over change to a narrative-based time system as used by non-D&D games. This is a case in which the wargamey roots of D&D clash with the story-telling direction of the TTRPG game, as metrics based on definitive distances and times are more in keeping with conventions of war games.
And at how many tables do those actually get tracked down to the minute?
Do DMs have a timer running to determine when mage armor expires? Or is it mostly just, "it's mid-afternoon, it's probably close to running out -- I'll say it lasts through this combat and then is gone?" Even in time-crunch scenarios where 'every minute counts', no sane DM is tracking each individual non-combat round to determine when your pass without trace goes poof (it's 600 rounds, for the ones who have already lost their sanity and want to give it a try)
You wouldn't have to change spell durations to change rest durations
I think you are misinterpreting my statement as an attack on yours. I am merely saying that we have conflicting gaming philosophies at work already in 5e: that of the wargame and that of the narrative game. Your suggestion makes sense; it tilts D&D towards being less of a wargame, which is fine with me, as long as someone else does the conversions for me. Like I said, though, the contrast between "definite time" and wivvly wobly "narrative time" does point to the wargame roots of D&D, which are somewhat beginning to fade anyway.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
There's only evidence that short rest dependency is being removed. However is mechanics may still use it(like hit die). Short rest is important for the "compatibility claims."
The theory would be to appease people who claim short rests are a problem by giving options to deal with it. And the people who don't have problems with rests will also have options.
Well, let's modify both rests:
LONG rest:
After finishing the long rest: That the first 15~20 minutes the group is "not warming up"/"stretching"/"sleepy"/"numb" (Disadvantage, or penalty of 1d4 points, on initiative rolls, acrobatics and/or perception), the rogues and rangers ( And maybe add Monks and/or Bards) don't suffer this penalty (Maybe to prevent them from taking advantage of it I'll only exempt them from those classes if they have a subclass chosen in it.)
SHORT break:
Duration: 20 or 30 minutes.
The cooldowns of certain traits can only be done 1-2 times per Long Rest/24 hours. (Maybe allow every 24 hours in case you can't take a long rest for X reasons, such as continuous interruption of these, suffering effects that prevent a character from sleeping, etc.)
This is a good point. There's really no reason to tie short or long rests to specific amounts of time -- they're narrative and mechanical tools, and should be treated as such by the DM
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
The solution is to not use a time-based criterion for resting at all; you can rest when you reach a certain point in the adventure. This is, however, extremely gamist and thus a thing that would certainly be highly controversial.
I waffled back and forth on this one but I think the only real way to fix it is.
"Your DM decides when you get the effects of a long/short rest"
Could be 10 minutes while patching your wounds in the middle of a dungeon. Could be a bad nights sleep in the woods with predatory monsters encroaching on the camp. If I as the DM want to control the resources you have access to I already have all the tools I need to interrupt you or to just handwave what I need to. Best to empower me to do so instead of trying to create rules for something that is going to vary so widely from Scene to Scene.
As with everything else in D&D. Player tells DM what they are attempting, DM tells them if they are successful.
The issue with Short Rests is that you long rest too easily. Short resting can be fixed quiet easily by imposing more restrictions on Long Rest.
A party should only be able to gain the full benefits of a Long Rest once while adventuring and can not regain the full benefits of a long rest again until they long rest in a safe and comfortable location, like an Inn or in a town house. After resting in a suitable location, they regain their ability to perform a long rest while adventuring again; else wise long resting only staves off the effects of exhaustion.
This would make short rests something you actually have to use, rather than long resting between every encounter. Of course playing like this is not going to be for everybody, so I think it should be a variant rule rather than default.
I agree that Rosco made a good observation. However, it conflicts with the facts that spells and abilities in D&D all have a definite time duration, be it a instantaneous, a round, minute, 8 hours, etc. This is in contrast to those games where abilities last for "a scene", "a beat", or whatever. One would have to edit A LOT of spell and class feature entries to smooth over change to a narrative-based time system as used by non-D&D games. This is a case in which the wargamey roots of D&D clash with the story-telling direction of the TTRPG game, as metrics based on definitive distances and times are more in keeping with conventions of war games.
And at how many tables do those actually get tracked down to the minute?
Do DMs have a timer running to determine when mage armor expires? Or is it mostly just, "it's mid-afternoon, it's probably close to running out -- I'll say it lasts through this combat and then is gone?" Even in time-crunch scenarios where 'every minute counts', no sane DM is tracking each individual non-combat round to determine when your pass without trace goes poof (it's 600 rounds, for the ones who have already lost their sanity and want to give it a try)
You wouldn't have to change spell durations to change rest durations
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I think you are misinterpreting my statement as an attack on yours. I am merely saying that we have conflicting gaming philosophies at work already in 5e: that of the wargame and that of the narrative game. Your suggestion makes sense; it tilts D&D towards being less of a wargame, which is fine with me, as long as someone else does the conversions for me. Like I said, though, the contrast between "definite time" and wivvly wobly "narrative time" does point to the wargame roots of D&D, which are somewhat beginning to fade anyway.