No it doesn't. Under this rule there's no assumption that you get a long rest every day. You get a rest every day. Whether or not it qualifies as a long rest depends on what you did that day (and possibly previous days).
So basically you need to pass a certain threshold of XP to refresh your spells and features, limiting the amount of long rests per characted level. In a certain way that actually makes sense, but it kinda feels rigid.
It is, but in the end, if you want to solve the long rest vs short rest vs no rest issues with D&D, you need to remove options, because given the choice, no-one is going to actually play the way the game designers expect it to be played.
BG3 solves this issue by making short rests very easy and not costly, limiting them to 2 per long rest AND making long rests cost items. Imagine if every time you took a long rest it used up 5 gold from food and shelter costs.
BG3 solves this issue by making short rests very easy and not costly, limiting them to 2 per long rest AND making long rests cost items. Imagine if every time you took a long rest it used up 5 gold from food and shelter costs.
It would become rapidly irrelevant? You'd need scaling items.
Which is not to say that you couldn't do something like that. I'd probably do something like
Potion of Recovery (Variable)
Allows completing a rest quickly. Effect depends on rarity
Common (50 gp): Allows a tier 1 character to finish a short rest in a minute, or a long rest in a night. Allows a tier 2 character to finish a short rest in an hour.
Uncommon (250 gp): Allows a tier 2 character to finish a short rest in a minute, or a long rest in a night. Allows a tier 3 character to finish a short rest in an hour.
Rare (2,500 gp): Allows a tier 3 character to finish a short rest in a minute, or a long rest in a night. Allows a tier 4 character to finish a short rest in an hour.
Very Rare (25,000 gp): Allows a tier 4 character to finish a short rest in a minute, or a long rest in a night.
If I'm using a 5th level pact slot I cast Spirit Shroud for the 2d8 radiant damage per hit.
I'm just chiming in with a big HELL YEAH for hexlocks using spirit shroud. If you take the feat or invocation that gives you advantage on concentration checks, it's especially effective.
That would actually be lower DPR:
Blade-Pact + Spirit Shroud = 2 attacks, with 1d8+5+1d6 (lifedrinker) + 2d8 on a hit with 0.65 chance to hit = 28.6 DPR
EB + AB + new Hex (5th level slot) = 3 attacks with 1d10+5 on a hit with 0.65 chance + 3d6 at 0.96 chance = 30.5 DPR
For SR I understand and see it like a break in the day, that is normal. What is not normal is the unlimited usage of it. Set a limit (like 2) and as optional divide the remaining active hours (16 subtracting de 8 hours of LR per 24 hours) by that limit +1 rounding down to set the time required to use a SR again (in this case once each 5 hours).
Then add a shorter (5-10 minutes) Healing Rest for rolling hit dice and some casting (ritual, prayer of healing, etc.).
For LR is as easy as making them harder to complete. In hostile areas (the LR is supposed to be used at calm places) make an encounter roll each hour, for a LR are 7 rolls (as last 8 hours), very probably there will be an encounter interrupting (and reseting) the LR, with the extra danger that players can be get by surprise (attackers stealth vs guard perception). Come on, there are creatures patrolling the place, not glued to the floor.
The key thing to understand about long rest classes vs short rest classes is that it is fundamentally impossible to balance different numbers of encounters per rest. There are four choices:
Make all classes use the same resource recovery mechanism, a la 4e.
Eliminate the concept of a long rest -- for practical purposes, all abilities recover between encounters, or maybe even faster. This is, honestly, what most games other than D&D do.
Make encounters per rest not variable. This requires basing the ability to rest on a measure that actually scales with encounters, such as xp gain or reaching waypoints.
About point 2, other games I played is the opposite, only existing the Long Rest. It is a very RPG gaming style trying to bring realism, so probably those other games you mention are more headed like tactical combat games.
If have to use the point 1, grant every SR resource type an extra, in some cases like those totally recovered at SR could by simply x3, others recovered 1 per SR (like channel divinity) maybe add the PB, and remove the SR.
About point 2, other games I played is the opposite, only existing the Long Rest.
Non-D&D games? I can think of games that have per-mission recovery, but that's pretty much equivalent to "recover every encounter" because a mission is generally one giant encounter.
If I'm using a 5th level pact slot I cast Spirit Shroud for the 2d8 radiant damage per hit.
I'm just chiming in with a big HELL YEAH for hexlocks using spirit shroud. If you take the feat or invocation that gives you advantage on concentration checks, it's especially effective.
That would actually be lower DPR:
Blade-Pact + Spirit Shroud = 2 attacks, with 1d8+5+1d6 (lifedrinker) + 2d8 on a hit with 0.65 chance to hit = 28.6 DPR
EB + AB + new Hex (5th level slot) = 3 attacks with 1d10+5 on a hit with 0.65 chance + 3d6 at 0.96 chance = 30.5 DPR
So, of note, you can actually have a d10 weapon with pact of the blade which would add around 1.3 total damage to your calc for 29.9, That is using your 5th level slot which playtest 5 didn't get till level 17, which would be 4 attacks with EB+AB. And technically the way to add more would be to find a way to use your bonus action. The only way to do this is with two-weapon fighting of course which the issue would be you couldn't use your CHA instead of dex or strength with your attack roll AND it would need to be a simple weapon... so basically a dagger. Doing THIS with a 16 dex would result in a 55% chance to add an additional 1d4+1d8 to the attack or an extra 4.2 total bringing you to 32.8.
But the 4 attacks with EB would be 1d10+5 on a 65% chance with a 98% chance with 3d6 would be 37.9. So ya, but I think this is a big sign of the issues with pact of the blade still. Which is something I noted back then as well. They did a lot to make it better, but it still lagged behind the others pretty hard.
About point 2, other games I played is the opposite, only existing the Long Rest.
Non-D&D games? I can think of games that have per-mission recovery, but that's pretty much equivalent to "recover every encounter" because a mission is generally one giant encounter.
I.e. MERP. It is not every encounter, as mentioned is a very RPG style not supposing anything that about numbering the things. Anytime anything could happen, not written anywhere how many whatever thing awaits. Of course there is a mission with characters and etc., but then it's up to players how to face it. Rest when you can, take cautions, etc. In fact all those "encounter per rest or daily" and more about numbering what would be casual things was new for me when I got into D&D community. Never though it was or it could be quantified.
Man. It's almost like I pointed out repeatedly when the new warlock dropped that short rests make no sense within both the mechanical and narrative structures of the game - either you have plenty of time for a long rest or you don't have time for a rest of any sort at all. Combine that with the fact that the 'enemy' side always, always, ALWAYS gains more from any given rest than you do, and it's almost like overreliance on short rests is a serious hindrance instead of a strength..........
Which is why the low-mid levels are the ones that need to be fixed. Preferably not by becoming another Vancian caster - they have their place, but that place isn't EVERY place.
There's the compatibility issue. When the base mechanic of all spellcasters is the same, they can multiclass relatively easily, it's the features like metamagic or smites that give spellcasting classes unique twists.
There should be more breaks on multiclassing instead of the current state of can i build the ultimate power machine system it is. So that's a positive imo.
Man. It's almost like I pointed out repeatedly when the new warlock dropped that short rests make no sense within both the mechanical and narrative structures of the game - either you have plenty of time for a long rest or you don't have time for a rest of any sort at all. Combine that with the fact that the 'enemy' side always, always, ALWAYS gains more from any given rest than you do, and it's almost like overreliance on short rests is a serious hindrance instead of a strength..........
No I wasn't, and no I'm not. The idea players have that you can sit on your ass doing jack-all for an hour ten to sixteen times per adventuring day absolutely for free, without any risk whatsoever of being attacked and interrupted in hostile territory or without the forces they're trying to combat doing anything at all with the days and weeks and months and years of totally free unopposed time the players are giving up is terminally stupid, it has always been terminally stupid, and it will always be terminally stupid.
You can yell about Unfair Time Pressure and Hostile DMing all you want, but the solution to players over-gameifying rests is to make the world react realistically to time. If the players want to squander theirs, cool - the BBEG will thank them for their generous gift of copious unopposed time to progress its Dastardly Plan while it's hanging them over the lava bit.
Instead of saying "Annabelle the mayor is sick, she needs medicine within the week or she won't make it" and then allowing the party to spend six months skulking through woods you designed to get done in three sessions because they insist on long resting twice after every dice roll they make, say "Your efforts were too little too late; the mayor has succumbed to her sickness and the town blames you for your unwillingness to fetch what she needed. What do you do?"
BG3 solves this issue by making short rests very easy and not costly, limiting them to 2 per long rest AND making long rests cost items. Imagine if every time you took a long rest it used up 5 gold from food and shelter costs.
It would become rapidly irrelevant? You'd need scaling items.
Which is not to say that you couldn't do something like that. I'd probably do something like
Potion of Recovery (Variable)
Allows completing a rest quickly. Effect depends on rarity
Common (50 gp): Allows a tier 1 character to finish a short rest in a minute, or a long rest in a night. Allows a tier 2 character to finish a short rest in an hour.
Uncommon (250 gp): Allows a tier 2 character to finish a short rest in a minute, or a long rest in a night. Allows a tier 3 character to finish a short rest in an hour.
Rare (2,500 gp): Allows a tier 3 character to finish a short rest in a minute, or a long rest in a night. Allows a tier 4 character to finish a short rest in an hour.
Very Rare (25,000 gp): Allows a tier 4 character to finish a short rest in a minute, or a long rest in a night.
If going for a system like this, it's simpler to just make everything non-regenerating and have different potions to recover different resources. So e.g. a potion that recovers 1d4 levels worth of spellslots = 50gp, one that recovers 2d4 = 250 gp, one that recovers 3d4 = 750 gp etc...
Instead of saying "Annabelle the mayor is sick, she needs medicine within the week or she won't make it" and then allowing the party to spend six months skulking through woods you designed to get done in three sessions because they insist on long resting twice after every dice roll they make, say "Your efforts were too little too late; the mayor has succumbed to her sickness and the town blames you for your unwillingness to fetch what she needed. What do you do?"
See the problem with arguing with you, is that you seem to exist in a world of only complete and utter hyperbole. The vast majority of tables do not play like you do and don't want to play like you do, your way is not THE RIGHT WAY, it is just one way of playing, and one which many people on these boards have told you they have no interest or desire to play. So WotC would be utterly stupid to design their game around the way you play it, because that would turn off a lot of players who don't find that way fun or enjoyable and would choose to go do something else instead if force to play your way.
I said many times, don’t mix tables with rules, as they are no the same. The question is the direction of the base rules, must be more RPG or more tactical combat? But, at the same time, provide options for the other side.
In a RPG direction the Short Rest would be limited or non-existent, and the Long Rest would be harder to complete, specially in hostile area. Then currently is much work for DM to balance it. But as we have in DMG options for some things, we need more options for many other things.
Continuing with the Rest system, if we take the new Long Rest is absurd, so you are at the edge of death (1 HP), burned, corroded with acid, sick…and after 8 hours of rest, voilà you are in perfect state, ah and you recovered all the hit dice for more healing after with Short Rests. Damn what an useful rest. But then in DMG we have rules about healing that are the ones I apply, can only heal with hit dice, and recover half on Long Rest, for a more normal healing rate (and even in this case is faster than normal, but OK). I am thinking on adding some homebrew, like adding extra healing per hit die rolled if the party have a character with Medicine proficiency, adding its PB. We need options instead delegating all on DM.
Same as many posters in this thread, I will be very disappointed if the designers walked back on the bigger changes introduced in these playtests. I was expecting this new iteration to be more substantial than just a Band-Aid/fresh coat of paint.
No I wasn't, and no I'm not. The idea players have that you can sit on your ass doing jack-all for an hour ten to sixteen times per adventuring day absolutely for free, without any risk whatsoever of being attacked and interrupted in hostile territory or without the forces they're trying to combat doing anything at all with the days and weeks and months and years of totally free unopposed time the players are giving up is terminally stupid, it has always been terminally stupid, and it will always be terminally stupid.
You can yell about Unfair Time Pressure and Hostile DMing all you want, but the solution to players over-gameifying rests is to make the world react realistically to time. If the players want to squander theirs, cool - the BBEG will thank them for their generous gift of copious unopposed time to progress its Dastardly Plan while it's hanging them over the lava bit.
Instead of saying "Annabelle the mayor is sick, she needs medicine within the week or she won't make it" and then allowing the party to spend six months skulking through woods you designed to get done in three sessions because they insist on long resting twice after every dice roll they make, say "Your efforts were too little too late; the mayor has succumbed to her sickness and the town blames you for your unwillingness to fetch what she needed. What do you do?"
This is a massively straw man set of examples, and not at all reflective of any play I have seen, participated in, or heard of. If this has been your experience, then you’ve definitely been at some very interesting and- more to the point- unconventional tables. The scope you are attacking is almost literally impossible for anyone to actually consider, in part because long rests do not function the way you’re outlining.
Now, if we dial things back simply to the consideration of taking an hour to refresh within an enemy stronghold, that is a point that can strain realism a bit, but it is also a fairly commonly accepted break from reality in various pieces of media and particularly in games that the players/characters have some opportunity to refresh themselves in the midst of a long run. As you yourself have outlined, a DM does have tools to manage these breaks, but by the same token if the DM didn’t communicate that they wanted to run a hardcore survival campaign, the DM can simply manage the narrative around the odd break.
Really, realism of time progression is one of the most fundamental suspensions of disbelief in any narrative; in the vast majority of stories things will either happen “just in time” or “just too late”, whereas reality is highly unlikely to conform to such narrow margins. Complaining that a game whose base premise is to function as an interactive narrative follows such narrative conventions arguably misses the point of the exercise.
And yet weren't the last couple pages of discussion about "fixing" rests with unnatural gameified arbitrary rules because otherwise players cannot be trusted not to be jerks and abuse rests to the point of warping the game?
The people who claim to like Pact Magic only do so because they abuse short rest mechanics to more or less turn Pact Magic into a per-encounter resource - and then they yell at traditional casters for "having too many resources" and breaking the daily encounter economy.
Spoilers: there is no such thing as a "daily encounter economy" without time. If time doesn't exist and the world is utterly in stasis whenever a PC isn't interacting with it the way you all keep pushing for, you will never fix the fifteen minute workday and over-resting will always break your games. There's absolutely no reason the PCs shouldn't just pause the world after every single encounter and take a full rest, after all. Why wouldn't they? They have god-like powers of total veto over causality and entropy, why wouldn't they use it?
Same as many posters in this thread, I will be very disappointed if the designers walked back on the bigger changes introduced in these playtests. I was expecting this new iteration to be more substantial than just a Band-Aid/fresh coat of paint.
Respectfully, this might have been a case of letting expectations get too high. They’ve been pretty clear from the outset that they’re content with where the 5e system is at overall and that this was not going to be a new edition. I’ll admit, I initially figured that was more just them tossing around buzzwords at the outset, but what we’ve seen since does match what they said. They’re looking for what things can be patched within the existing structure, rather looking to implement a whole new one. Whether you think that’s good or bad for the game is of course a matter of personal preference, but looking back they have fairly consistently talked about this as more 5.5 than 6e.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
BG3 solves this issue by making short rests very easy and not costly, limiting them to 2 per long rest AND making long rests cost items. Imagine if every time you took a long rest it used up 5 gold from food and shelter costs.
It would become rapidly irrelevant? You'd need scaling items.
Which is not to say that you couldn't do something like that. I'd probably do something like
That would actually be lower DPR:
Blade-Pact + Spirit Shroud = 2 attacks, with 1d8+5+1d6 (lifedrinker) + 2d8 on a hit with 0.65 chance to hit = 28.6 DPR
EB + AB + new Hex (5th level slot) = 3 attacks with 1d10+5 on a hit with 0.65 chance + 3d6 at 0.96 chance = 30.5 DPR
How can the time be divided by encounters??
For SR I understand and see it like a break in the day, that is normal. What is not normal is the unlimited usage of it. Set a limit (like 2) and as optional divide the remaining active hours (16 subtracting de 8 hours of LR per 24 hours) by that limit +1 rounding down to set the time required to use a SR again (in this case once each 5 hours).
Then add a shorter (5-10 minutes) Healing Rest for rolling hit dice and some casting (ritual, prayer of healing, etc.).
For LR is as easy as making them harder to complete. In hostile areas (the LR is supposed to be used at calm places) make an encounter roll each hour, for a LR are 7 rolls (as last 8 hours), very probably there will be an encounter interrupting (and reseting) the LR, with the extra danger that players can be get by surprise (attackers stealth vs guard perception). Come on, there are creatures patrolling the place, not glued to the floor.
The key thing to understand about long rest classes vs short rest classes is that it is fundamentally impossible to balance different numbers of encounters per rest. There are four choices:
About point 2, other games I played is the opposite, only existing the Long Rest. It is a very RPG gaming style trying to bring realism, so probably those other games you mention are more headed like tactical combat games.
If have to use the point 1, grant every SR resource type an extra, in some cases like those totally recovered at SR could by simply x3, others recovered 1 per SR (like channel divinity) maybe add the PB, and remove the SR.
Non-D&D games? I can think of games that have per-mission recovery, but that's pretty much equivalent to "recover every encounter" because a mission is generally one giant encounter.
So, of note, you can actually have a d10 weapon with pact of the blade which would add around 1.3 total damage to your calc for 29.9, That is using your 5th level slot which playtest 5 didn't get till level 17, which would be 4 attacks with EB+AB. And technically the way to add more would be to find a way to use your bonus action. The only way to do this is with two-weapon fighting of course which the issue would be you couldn't use your CHA instead of dex or strength with your attack roll AND it would need to be a simple weapon... so basically a dagger. Doing THIS with a 16 dex would result in a 55% chance to add an additional 1d4+1d8 to the attack or an extra 4.2 total bringing you to 32.8.
But the 4 attacks with EB would be 1d10+5 on a 65% chance with a 98% chance with 3d6 would be 37.9. So ya, but I think this is a big sign of the issues with pact of the blade still. Which is something I noted back then as well. They did a lot to make it better, but it still lagged behind the others pretty hard.
I.e. MERP. It is not every encounter, as mentioned is a very RPG style not supposing anything that about numbering the things. Anytime anything could happen, not written anywhere how many whatever thing awaits. Of course there is a mission with characters and etc., but then it's up to players how to face it. Rest when you can, take cautions, etc. In fact all those "encounter per rest or daily" and more about numbering what would be casual things was new for me when I got into D&D community. Never though it was or it could be quantified.
Man. It's almost like I pointed out repeatedly when the new warlock dropped that short rests make no sense within both the mechanical and narrative structures of the game - either you have plenty of time for a long rest or you don't have time for a rest of any sort at all. Combine that with the fact that the 'enemy' side always, always, ALWAYS gains more from any given rest than you do, and it's almost like overreliance on short rests is a serious hindrance instead of a strength..........
Please do not contact or message me.
There should be more breaks on multiclassing instead of the current state of can i build the ultimate power machine system it is. So that's a positive imo.
You were wrong then and now.
No I wasn't, and no I'm not. The idea players have that you can sit on your ass doing jack-all for an hour ten to sixteen times per adventuring day absolutely for free, without any risk whatsoever of being attacked and interrupted in hostile territory or without the forces they're trying to combat doing anything at all with the days and weeks and months and years of totally free unopposed time the players are giving up is terminally stupid, it has always been terminally stupid, and it will always be terminally stupid.
You can yell about Unfair Time Pressure and Hostile DMing all you want, but the solution to players over-gameifying rests is to make the world react realistically to time. If the players want to squander theirs, cool - the BBEG will thank them for their generous gift of copious unopposed time to progress its Dastardly Plan while it's hanging them over the lava bit.
Instead of saying "Annabelle the mayor is sick, she needs medicine within the week or she won't make it" and then allowing the party to spend six months skulking through woods you designed to get done in three sessions because they insist on long resting twice after every dice roll they make, say "Your efforts were too little too late; the mayor has succumbed to her sickness and the town blames you for your unwillingness to fetch what she needed. What do you do?"
Please do not contact or message me.
If going for a system like this, it's simpler to just make everything non-regenerating and have different potions to recover different resources. So e.g. a potion that recovers 1d4 levels worth of spellslots = 50gp, one that recovers 2d4 = 250 gp, one that recovers 3d4 = 750 gp etc...
See the problem with arguing with you, is that you seem to exist in a world of only complete and utter hyperbole. The vast majority of tables do not play like you do and don't want to play like you do, your way is not THE RIGHT WAY, it is just one way of playing, and one which many people on these boards have told you they have no interest or desire to play. So WotC would be utterly stupid to design their game around the way you play it, because that would turn off a lot of players who don't find that way fun or enjoyable and would choose to go do something else instead if force to play your way.
I said many times, don’t mix tables with rules, as they are no the same. The question is the direction of the base rules, must be more RPG or more tactical combat? But, at the same time, provide options for the other side.
In a RPG direction the Short Rest would be limited or non-existent, and the Long Rest would be harder to complete, specially in hostile area. Then currently is much work for DM to balance it. But as we have in DMG options for some things, we need more options for many other things.
Continuing with the Rest system, if we take the new Long Rest is absurd, so you are at the edge of death (1 HP), burned, corroded with acid, sick…and after 8 hours of rest, voilà you are in perfect state, ah and you recovered all the hit dice for more healing after with Short Rests. Damn what an useful rest. But then in DMG we have rules about healing that are the ones I apply, can only heal with hit dice, and recover half on Long Rest, for a more normal healing rate (and even in this case is faster than normal, but OK). I am thinking on adding some homebrew, like adding extra healing per hit die rolled if the party have a character with Medicine proficiency, adding its PB. We need options instead delegating all on DM.
Same as many posters in this thread, I will be very disappointed if the designers walked back on the bigger changes introduced in these playtests. I was expecting this new iteration to be more substantial than just a Band-Aid/fresh coat of paint.
This is a massively straw man set of examples, and not at all reflective of any play I have seen, participated in, or heard of. If this has been your experience, then you’ve definitely been at some very interesting and- more to the point- unconventional tables. The scope you are attacking is almost literally impossible for anyone to actually consider, in part because long rests do not function the way you’re outlining.
Now, if we dial things back simply to the consideration of taking an hour to refresh within an enemy stronghold, that is a point that can strain realism a bit, but it is also a fairly commonly accepted break from reality in various pieces of media and particularly in games that the players/characters have some opportunity to refresh themselves in the midst of a long run. As you yourself have outlined, a DM does have tools to manage these breaks, but by the same token if the DM didn’t communicate that they wanted to run a hardcore survival campaign, the DM can simply manage the narrative around the odd break.
Really, realism of time progression is one of the most fundamental suspensions of disbelief in any narrative; in the vast majority of stories things will either happen “just in time” or “just too late”, whereas reality is highly unlikely to conform to such narrow margins. Complaining that a game whose base premise is to function as an interactive narrative follows such narrative conventions arguably misses the point of the exercise.
And yet weren't the last couple pages of discussion about "fixing" rests with unnatural gameified arbitrary rules because otherwise players cannot be trusted not to be jerks and abuse rests to the point of warping the game?
The people who claim to like Pact Magic only do so because they abuse short rest mechanics to more or less turn Pact Magic into a per-encounter resource - and then they yell at traditional casters for "having too many resources" and breaking the daily encounter economy.
Spoilers: there is no such thing as a "daily encounter economy" without time. If time doesn't exist and the world is utterly in stasis whenever a PC isn't interacting with it the way you all keep pushing for, you will never fix the fifteen minute workday and over-resting will always break your games. There's absolutely no reason the PCs shouldn't just pause the world after every single encounter and take a full rest, after all. Why wouldn't they? They have god-like powers of total veto over causality and entropy, why wouldn't they use it?
Please do not contact or message me.
Respectfully, this might have been a case of letting expectations get too high. They’ve been pretty clear from the outset that they’re content with where the 5e system is at overall and that this was not going to be a new edition. I’ll admit, I initially figured that was more just them tossing around buzzwords at the outset, but what we’ve seen since does match what they said. They’re looking for what things can be patched within the existing structure, rather looking to implement a whole new one. Whether you think that’s good or bad for the game is of course a matter of personal preference, but looking back they have fairly consistently talked about this as more 5.5 than 6e.