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.
Why should anyone bother buying expensive new books if there's nothing new in any of those books and they're nothing but shitty gussied-up reprints of the same crap we've been using for ten years? If "The Community" refuses to allow the game to evolve, Wizards may as well terminate the entire property right now and shut down the servers, because the game is already dead. The corpse is simply stumbling along on inertia, that's all.
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.
I like pact magic and I can guarantee you, as a player and a DM, I would never allow or be part of a game that allowed for more than 2-3 short rests between long. Your generalizations are not only unfounded, they're unfair and hurt your case.
We've talked about this philosophy before. There are absolutely times in a campaign or focused mission when time (and environment) is so critical that even taking a long rest can be a challenge. But I cannot embrace the approach to D&D that, from level 1 to 20, has every single adventuring day so packed with breathless, time-sensitive issues that the players can never, ever, ever take a short rest. Again, maybe this is the way your group (and other groups) play - but it sounds exhausting and like it would become a grind very soon.
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.
What do you mean? I expect all the changes in the playtest material to be changes that the designers are comfortable with implementing and are on the table. I don't think wanting some of these changes is, in any way, "letting expectations get too high".
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?
They’ve more been about moving a primary resource such as spell slots out of short rests or at least making them last longer. Contrary to your “players abuse rests at every opportunity” narrative, the issue is that the occurrence of short rests is inconsistent, which will naturally skew performance of short rest oriented features. To a certain degree the issue, like many involving variable elements in D&D, is fundamentally insoluble due to the simple fact different people will run campaigns different ways. What is more readily addressed is the distribution of resources; Pact slots in this instance.
Once again, in spite of your assertion that people only like Pact slots when they can abuse them, that’s not the case. People enjoy them because they create a distinct style of caster compared to the full casters who all run on the same basic setup. Ergo the discussion of rebalancing the resources based around short rests.
And, on the topic of short rests, despite your once again fallacious application of absolutism, they do not “pause reality at the players’ whims”; as with pretty much every other part of the game, the players make their intention known to the DM, who then decides how things play out, usually with an eye to telling an engaging and enjoyable story. Sometimes the rest will go off without a hitch, sometimes it will be interrupted, sometimes there will be consequences to taking the time off. Short rests exist to balance the game, as does DM fiat over the narrative. Once more, I’ve yet to encounter a party that lobbies for short rests after every encounter, and the DM has the authority to shut down attempts to abuse the system. Obviously there is no way to guarantee every table will pull this off perfectly, but by the same token there’s no way to guarantee that a killer DM won’t run a party into the ground, so that’s simply an inherent shortcoming to the system, and not a reason to insist the entire concept of short rests must be eradicated.
It's not about ticking-clock time crunch all the time, Xukuri. It's about the utterly stupid idea players have that rests are "free" and that they are the only entities in the entire world that benefit from that rest. They just click Pause and the world freezes while they regain their resources, then Unpaise and go about their merry slaughter.
This idea is wrong, bad, and it makes good games worse and bad ones untenable.
The opposing force in any situation where that opposition is just about anything other than " the uncaring forces of Nature" should benefit *more* from the PCs resting than the PCs should. The opposing force gets the same healing and resource regeneration, but also gets to improve ots position relative to the party.
Party short-rested after infiltrating the stronghold and subduing some guards? The remaining guard force becomes aware of the intrusion and switches to high alert, permanently removing any element of surprise and making all subsequent fights much more difficult.
Party short rests in the middle of a dungeon? The denizens of that dungeon have time to start picking up on the party's presence and either avoid the dangerous adventurers or prepare traps and ambushes.
Party short rests during the Royal Gala they were tasked to guard against hostile assassins because the warlock wants more Detect Thoughts spells? Whoops - halfway through the shirking-of-their-mission, the assassins strike and successfully slay their unguarded target.
So on and so forth. The party doesn't get to pause the world - any time they give up, the opposing force of a given scene should be using. If the party has made hostile threats aware of their presence, why the hell should hostile threats sit around doing nothing when the party decides to ******** for an hour instead of adventure?
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.
Why should anyone bother buying expensive new books if there's nothing new in any of those books and they're nothing but shitty gussied-up reprints of the same crap we've been using for ten years? If "The Community" refuses to allow the game to evolve, Wizards may as well terminate the entire property right now and shut down the servers, because the game is already dead. The corpse is simply stumbling along on inertia, that's all.
anniversary. they're having one. new and returning players will be encouraged to see the rules are alive and being attended to, not abandoned. old players can reference the updated basic rules digital release to see base class changes. few if any will throw themselves upon d&d's funeral pyre before the funeral has been scheduled, but you make a good case for kind helpers to stand by.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: providefeedback!
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.
What do you mean? I expect all the changes in the playtest material to be changes that the designers are comfortable with implementing and are on the table. I don't think wanting some of these changes is, in any way, "letting expectations get too high".
I’m pretty sure everyone here wants at least some of the changes to go through, but looking back I think they were stress testing the response to large systemic changes at the outset, and given that they were making it a major point that this was not a new edition, it follows that they would ultimately not be looking to massively change how major facets of the game like spell prep work.
It's not about ticking-clock time crunch all the time, Xukuri. It's about the utterly stupid idea players have that rests are "free" and that they are the only entities in the entire world that benefit from that rest. They just click Pause and the world freezes while they regain their resources, then Unpaise and go about their merry slaughter.
This idea is wrong, bad, and it makes good games worse and bad ones untenable.
The opposing force in any situation where that opposition is just about anything other than " the uncaring forces of Nature" should benefit *more* from the PCs resting than the PCs should. The opposing force gets the same healing and resource regeneration, but also gets to improve ots position relative to the party.
Party short-rested after infiltrating the stronghold and subduing some guards? The remaining guard force becomes aware of the intrusion and switches to high alert, permanently removing any element of surprise and making all subsequent fights much more difficult.
Party short rests in the middle of a dungeon? The denizens of that dungeon have time to start picking up on the party's presence and either avoid the dangerous adventurers or prepare traps and ambushes.
Party short rests during the Royal Gala they were tasked to guard against hostile assassins because the warlock wants more Detect Thoughts spells? Whoops - halfway through the shirking-of-their-mission, the assassins strike and successfully slay their unguarded target.
So on and so forth. The party doesn't get to pause the world - any time they give up, the opposing force of a given scene should be using. If the party has made hostile threats aware of their presence, why the hell should hostile threats sit around doing nothing when the party decides to ******** for an hour instead of adventure?
That sounds more like an adversarial DM who is going to go out of his way to punish the party for even thinking about a short rest, or to put it better, someone not worth the tie to play with.
There are times when even a short rest can't be taken, but if it becomes every time the problem isn't the system, it's the person running the game.
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.
They have 2 paths, backwards compatible or significant change. I'm fine with either path but change in itself is not a virtue. If the change is not positive it should not be adopted. Make big changes, but I'm going to call out ones I think are bad, and compliment the ones I think are good.
It's not about ticking-clock time crunch all the time, Xukuri. It's about the utterly stupid idea players have that rests are "free" and that they are the only entities in the entire world that benefit from that rest. They just click Pause and the world freezes while they regain their resources, then Unpaise and go about their merry slaughter.
This idea is wrong, bad, and it makes good games worse and bad ones untenable.
The opposing force in any situation where that opposition is just about anything other than " the uncaring forces of Nature" should benefit *more* from the PCs resting than the PCs should. The opposing force gets the same healing and resource regeneration, but also gets to improve ots position relative to the party.
Party short-rested after infiltrating the stronghold and subduing some guards? The remaining guard force becomes aware of the intrusion and switches to high alert, permanently removing any element of surprise and making all subsequent fights much more difficult.
Party short rests in the middle of a dungeon? The denizens of that dungeon have time to start picking up on the party's presence and either avoid the dangerous adventurers or prepare traps and ambushes.
Party short rests during the Royal Gala they were tasked to guard against hostile assassins because the warlock wants more Detect Thoughts spells? Whoops - halfway through the shirking-of-their-mission, the assassins strike and successfully slay their unguarded target.
So on and so forth. The party doesn't get to pause the world - any time they give up, the opposing force of a given scene should be using. If the party has made hostile threats aware of their presence, why the hell should hostile threats sit around doing nothing when the party decides to ******** for an hour instead of adventure?
So the DM metagames and therefor taking a breather is bad.
I'd give your point some credence in that I've long said 1 hour is too long for a short rest. But in past discussions it almost did not matter how short the short rest was it still was too much time for the enemies who are constantly taking perfect actions behind the scenes with no breaks whatsoever. You were constantly saying 5 minutes oh my god if you can take 5 minutes you can take a long rest. where apparently your psychic always take actions behind the scenes 24/7 enemies drop the ball every time a party wastes 8 hours on a long rest but dear god 5 minutes how did you waste all that time. And the party man 16 hours straight no breaks every day, that is impressive and doesn't break immersion at all.
It's not about ticking-clock time crunch all the time, Xukuri. It's about the utterly stupid idea players have that rests are "free" and that they are the only entities in the entire world that benefit from that rest. They just click Pause and the world freezes while they regain their resources, then Unpaise and go about their merry slaughter.
This idea is wrong, bad, and it makes good games worse and bad ones untenable.
The opposing force in any situation where that opposition is just about anything other than " the uncaring forces of Nature" should benefit *more* from the PCs resting than the PCs should. The opposing force gets the same healing and resource regeneration, but also gets to improve ots position relative to the party.
Party short-rested after infiltrating the stronghold and subduing some guards? The remaining guard force becomes aware of the intrusion and switches to high alert, permanently removing any element of surprise and making all subsequent fights much more difficult.
Party short rests in the middle of a dungeon? The denizens of that dungeon have time to start picking up on the party's presence and either avoid the dangerous adventurers or prepare traps and ambushes.
Party short rests during the Royal Gala they were tasked to guard against hostile assassins because the warlock wants more Detect Thoughts spells? Whoops - halfway through the shirking-of-their-mission, the assassins strike and successfully slay their unguarded target.
So on and so forth. The party doesn't get to pause the world - any time they give up, the opposing force of a given scene should be using. If the party has made hostile threats aware of their presence, why the hell should hostile threats sit around doing nothing when the party decides to ******** for an hour instead of adventure?
I'm not sure I see anyone arguing short rests should always be "free." I understand the examples you give - I also nodded along with Ace's post above, in which the DM and the players find a balance between thrills, verisimilitude, and remembering the ultimate point of a game is to have fun.
And I think it's ultimately a case-by-case basis, rather than anything you can make sweeping pronouncements about. Sure, if the party casts rope trick or tiny hut while three levels down in the Dungeon of Ultimate Doom, chances are very good that any cognizant threats/foes will use the time to organize a strike or ambush. (Or perhaps even use their own caster to dispel the demiplane.) So that's the price of taking a rest - giving enemies a chance to organize. At the same time, NOT taking a rest could spell certain doom, so they take a rest. Which, for me, is kind of brilliant because it naturally builds tension at the table, gives both sides a breather to ratchet up tactics for the next encounter, and doesn't make the players think they're hopelessly doomed and without agency.
And while the warlock is somewhat unique in its dependence on short rests for efficacy, plenty of other classes depend on short rests for refreshes.
Again: I can easily imagine a scenario in which taking a short rest is more dangerous than not - but what I can't easily imagine is a campaign in which that's the norm for every single adventuring day, from level 1 to level 20. As others have pointed out, even bad guys have to sleep, poop, regain spells, etc.
Enemies in an area becoming aware of a loud, deeply unstealthy intrusion in their space - remember, we're talking about D&D parties here, no one has EVER successfully snuck into some place without trace in this game unless they were a lone rogue the other players didn't want 'stealing the spotlight' anyways - and deciding to take measures to defeat that intrusion?
Or a random group of third-level chuckle****s being given the truly god-like power to freeze all of Creation at a whim, stopping the clock on EVERYTHING, EVERYWHERE, in a way even the greatest of true deities is not able to fully replicate, so they may freely rest and recover their resources as they wish at any time, no matter how insane the idea of giving up hours and hours of the day might otherwise be?
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.
I like pact magic and I can guarantee you, as a player and a DM, I would never allow or be part of a game that allowed for more than 2-3 short rests between long. Your generalizations are not only unfounded, they're unfair and hurt your case.
We've talked about this philosophy before. There are absolutely times in a campaign or focused mission when time (and environment) is so critical that even taking a long rest can be a challenge. But I cannot embrace the approach to D&D that, from level 1 to 20, has every single adventuring day so packed with breathless, time-sensitive issues that the players can never, ever, ever take a short rest. Again, maybe this is the way your group (and other groups) play - but it sounds exhausting and like it would become a grind very soon.
Since 2014 we have had one time where a warlock used more than 3 short rests in a day. It was me and it was to spam cast walls of stone to help protect a village beset by zombies. It helped in the narrative but did not break the game in anyway. Us getting it done in a day instead of a few days was not a huge shift. While I conceptually dig the concept its not some power game thing as its something no one sees in any games. In fact its obvious this is not a issue despite the hyperbolic claims as the whole reason short rests are trying to be reduced is because people did not take enough.
Someone mentioned BG3 above. I personally think how they do short rests just works better. Take 2 a day, each time 1/2 your hit points are restored, short rest features are renewed and its basically instant. Go back to 4es 5 minute system as instant is kind of a silly narrative for a break. Give the 2 classes whose primary resource is based around it one extra minute long recovery per day. Balance spell numbers/ki amount around that.
Distinct style would be the Sorcerer as Power Points user instead spell slots, but the damn multi-class system prevents it.
In the previous survey I suggested to use Font of Magic as approach, while preserving the compatibility. It was allow to exchange any number of spell slots <-> Sorcery Points in one direction as free action per turn. And integrate the new Twinned Spell Metamagic into it.
Because everyone knows the Sorcerer should work this way to differentiate from the Wizard, every post I have seen about the rule in DMG is applied always and only to Sorcerer by all DM and players.
Someone mentioned BG3 above. I personally think how they do short rests just works better. Take 2 a day, each time 1/2 your hit points are restored, short rest features are renewed and its basically instant. Go back to 4es 5 minute system as instant is kind of a silly narrative for a break. Give the 2 classes whose primary resource is based around it one extra minute long recovery per day. Balance spell numbers/ki amount around that.
The main problem with a 5m short rest is how it interacts with spells with a duration of 10 minutes to 1 hour. Having a short rest break concentration would resolve it, though.
Someone mentioned BG3 above. I personally think how they do short rests just works better. Take 2 a day, each time 1/2 your hit points are restored, short rest features are renewed and its basically instant. Go back to 4es 5 minute system as instant is kind of a silly narrative for a break. Give the 2 classes whose primary resource is based around it one extra minute long recovery per day. Balance spell numbers/ki amount around that.
The main problem with a 5m short rest is how it interacts with spells with a duration of 10 minutes to 1 hour. Having a short rest break concentration would resolve it, though.
But that would then clash with Concentration spells you can hold for several hours, so that cuts both ways. Maybe go more towards something like 15 minutes? Enough time to lapse out the short durations, but not the ones meant to be held through multiple encounters.
Enemies in an area becoming aware of a loud, deeply unstealthy intrusion in their space - remember, we're talking about D&D parties here, no one has EVER successfully snuck into some place without trace in this game unless they were a lone rogue the other players didn't want 'stealing the spotlight' anyways - and deciding to take measures to defeat that intrusion?
Or a random group of third-level chuckle****s being given the truly god-like power to freeze all of Creation at a whim, stopping the clock on EVERYTHING, EVERYWHERE, in a way even the greatest of true deities is not able to fully replicate, so they may freely rest and recover their resources as they wish at any time, no matter how insane the idea of giving up hours and hours of the day might otherwise be?
This is why no one takes your arguments seriously. Sure when aggressively raiding a keep you likely wont get a short rest. But most people are not raiding a keep every adventuring day. I highly doubt even you play the game the way you are arguing.
Someone mentioned BG3 above. I personally think how they do short rests just works better. Take 2 a day, each time 1/2 your hit points are restored, short rest features are renewed and its basically instant. Go back to 4es 5 minute system as instant is kind of a silly narrative for a break. Give the 2 classes whose primary resource is based around it one extra minute long recovery per day. Balance spell numbers/ki amount around that.
The main problem with a 5m short rest is how it interacts with spells with a duration of 10 minutes to 1 hour. Having a short rest break concentration would resolve it, though.
But that would then clash with Concentration spells you can hold for several hours, so that cuts both ways. Maybe go more towards something like 15 minutes? Enough time to lapse out the short durations, but not the ones meant to be held through multiple encounters.
The longer ones are either 10 minutes or 1 hour plus. 10 minutes would cover the 10 minute ones. Though I'm not sure its that big of an issue that there are a small subset of spells that benefit from short rest recovery. If you can only cast 2 spells a rest having one spell with 5 minutes left on it while having full slots probably is not breaking the game. I could see armor of agathis being a issue since its 1 hour no concentration. But honestly I think that spell should have been on a 8 hour timer anyways. One hour is sort of weird design. The spell is not good enough for using an action in a fight, so its only used when you are ambushing people as otherwise you can't really count on a fight or being hit in a hour. The pact of the blade people its at least more likely as you will probably charge into melee. It just kind of feels like the warlocks version of mage armor, defense buff you slap on for the day before adventuring. And again like one spell maybe a couple others i'm not thinking of being a bit better here does not break things imo. You still wont be wizard powerful. Or bard, sorcerer powerful. likely not cleric or druid powerful, I don;t really play those classes though so making a wild guess there. Tons more spells break the game for full casters when you are on the 1-2 a day encounter model. And yeah if rests broke concentration it would "solve" it for 99% of the issue spells. Though I'm still not sure it would be a issue or just a nice perk that still is within a warlocks expected power levels. Play testing would hopefully work that out.
Edit to add, also maybe some of those spells should be nerfed to 1 minute duration or 5 minutes. Maybe flight is too good at 10 minutes for example.
All the people i know hated the new warlock. Anecdotes work like that. apparently enough people were in the hate it camp that they swapped it back.
So to satisfy my own curiosity I have 3 questions.
1. Have these players ACTUALLY played warlock?
2. If they had played a warlock, how regularly and often were you getting short rests?
3. Did they hate the change because they felt it was mechanically bad, or because of the loss in uniqueness?
I'm mainly asking this because I kind of feel like people disliked the IDEA of the change more than the actual change. Pact Magic is a fun idea that is poorly executed. I think people are far more looking at the fun concept than the gameplay.
Its actually a really good fix. At tables with 0 short rests the numbers of encounters they have will be small enough one refresh will cover it. At tables with more encounters there will be at least one normal short rest, so the extra would again still cover it. Add a few free cast invocations for people who need shield(which should probably be nerfed) or something and you are pretty much set.
While I have never seen it be a issue in play it does limit some spells that thematically fit like animate dead so they may also want to cap the total number of times you can regain spells per day. That being said I think a lot of those spells probably need to be changed. While the warlock can take it further if they had access to it the number of undead a wizard/necromancer can have going gets unwieldy at a table fast.
So to clarify, I don't have an issue with regaining all your pact slots once per day. My issue is keeping short rest casting. I generally think that short rest features are bad, however spellslots are even worse than most. It's too flexible a resource with too many problematic interactions. It's also kind of impossible to properly balance and prepare around. Making them based on long rest casting is the only way to fix this class outside of duck-taping it.
1. Yes both the 2014 and the playtest versions were played at out tables though not at the same time.
2. Varied per day, we had plenty of days where its just travel or something so like we might have one encounter which might not even be a fight. Other days they might get one. Some two. Overall probably one a day.
3.both. It mechanically worked alright for the pact of the blade character as spam casting shield was more in line with what they were doing, but they didn;t really feel very warlocky more a generic spell blade. Personally I think shield needs a massive nerf and casters need a big AC nerf. But so be it. For the tome player it felt to them mechanically like playing a bad wizard. They felt they would be better off just playing a wizard and saying i was trained by a devil. Which meant it lost alot of the warlock feel to it.
As for the last part, agree to disagree. I think long rest features are bad. They are what damage the game. Giving piles of abilities you are supposed to ration over a day only works if everyone plays the same number of encounters per day. Classes like fighters without these abilities just look like ass compared to a wizard where you only do 1-2 encounters per day after level 6 or so. The 2014 warlock was the only fullish caster that looked in line with martials for the most part. So to me it seems its the class that was working and it was due to its short rest feature.
It's because at it's core, it's a martial. Eldritch blast was on par with martial weapon attacks. Warlock was the only 'caster' that was essentially linear rather than quadratic. The difference between a D10+dex mod from a heavy crossbow and a D10+cha mod from a warlock is fluff. It was linear because spamming non-cantrips is not what it did, unlike the sorc and wizard.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
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.
Perhaps the survey responses to UA 6 will have an impact. What will the WotC design team do if the UA6 Ranger scores lower (or significantly lower) than the UA4 version? Or, pick your class, pick your feature, pick your rule.
I'm hoping they see that some of the proposed rule & class design changes may have scored low, not because the community dies not want change, but because the community doesn't want THAT PARTICULAR change. I believe many people may have scored certain features low simply because they felt the new feature was unbalanced- too strong, too weak. Or maybe not flavored quite right. Perhaps some new changes were good ideas that just needed FURTHER REVISION to be good. But, it seems that the designers can only interpret low scores as meaning "we don't like that idea ar all- go back to the way it was."
But I do say SEEMS. Because there are still a few UAs to come for PHB stuff. And Monsters & Spells have a huge affect on the viability of character options, and we've not seen what- if any- revisions they have in store for them. And sometimes they ignore the UAs and go completely a different way, as they said to have done with the 2014 Sorcerer (though granted, that was for a whole new Edition, rather than for a "revision edition".) But we will see, and what will be, will be.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Why should anyone bother buying expensive new books if there's nothing new in any of those books and they're nothing but shitty gussied-up reprints of the same crap we've been using for ten years? If "The Community" refuses to allow the game to evolve, Wizards may as well terminate the entire property right now and shut down the servers, because the game is already dead. The corpse is simply stumbling along on inertia, that's all.
Please do not contact or message me.
I like pact magic and I can guarantee you, as a player and a DM, I would never allow or be part of a game that allowed for more than 2-3 short rests between long. Your generalizations are not only unfounded, they're unfair and hurt your case.
We've talked about this philosophy before. There are absolutely times in a campaign or focused mission when time (and environment) is so critical that even taking a long rest can be a challenge. But I cannot embrace the approach to D&D that, from level 1 to 20, has every single adventuring day so packed with breathless, time-sensitive issues that the players can never, ever, ever take a short rest. Again, maybe this is the way your group (and other groups) play - but it sounds exhausting and like it would become a grind very soon.
What do you mean? I expect all the changes in the playtest material to be changes that the designers are comfortable with implementing and are on the table. I don't think wanting some of these changes is, in any way, "letting expectations get too high".
They’ve more been about moving a primary resource such as spell slots out of short rests or at least making them last longer. Contrary to your “players abuse rests at every opportunity” narrative, the issue is that the occurrence of short rests is inconsistent, which will naturally skew performance of short rest oriented features. To a certain degree the issue, like many involving variable elements in D&D, is fundamentally insoluble due to the simple fact different people will run campaigns different ways. What is more readily addressed is the distribution of resources; Pact slots in this instance.
Once again, in spite of your assertion that people only like Pact slots when they can abuse them, that’s not the case. People enjoy them because they create a distinct style of caster compared to the full casters who all run on the same basic setup. Ergo the discussion of rebalancing the resources based around short rests.
And, on the topic of short rests, despite your once again fallacious application of absolutism, they do not “pause reality at the players’ whims”; as with pretty much every other part of the game, the players make their intention known to the DM, who then decides how things play out, usually with an eye to telling an engaging and enjoyable story. Sometimes the rest will go off without a hitch, sometimes it will be interrupted, sometimes there will be consequences to taking the time off. Short rests exist to balance the game, as does DM fiat over the narrative. Once more, I’ve yet to encounter a party that lobbies for short rests after every encounter, and the DM has the authority to shut down attempts to abuse the system. Obviously there is no way to guarantee every table will pull this off perfectly, but by the same token there’s no way to guarantee that a killer DM won’t run a party into the ground, so that’s simply an inherent shortcoming to the system, and not a reason to insist the entire concept of short rests must be eradicated.
It's not about ticking-clock time crunch all the time, Xukuri. It's about the utterly stupid idea players have that rests are "free" and that they are the only entities in the entire world that benefit from that rest. They just click Pause and the world freezes while they regain their resources, then Unpaise and go about their merry slaughter.
This idea is wrong, bad, and it makes good games worse and bad ones untenable.
The opposing force in any situation where that opposition is just about anything other than " the uncaring forces of Nature" should benefit *more* from the PCs resting than the PCs should. The opposing force gets the same healing and resource regeneration, but also gets to improve ots position relative to the party.
Party short-rested after infiltrating the stronghold and subduing some guards? The remaining guard force becomes aware of the intrusion and switches to high alert, permanently removing any element of surprise and making all subsequent fights much more difficult.
Party short rests in the middle of a dungeon? The denizens of that dungeon have time to start picking up on the party's presence and either avoid the dangerous adventurers or prepare traps and ambushes.
Party short rests during the Royal Gala they were tasked to guard against hostile assassins because the warlock wants more Detect Thoughts spells? Whoops - halfway through the shirking-of-their-mission, the assassins strike and successfully slay their unguarded target.
So on and so forth. The party doesn't get to pause the world - any time they give up, the opposing force of a given scene should be using. If the party has made hostile threats aware of their presence, why the hell should hostile threats sit around doing nothing when the party decides to ******** for an hour instead of adventure?
Please do not contact or message me.
anniversary. they're having one. new and returning players will be encouraged to see the rules are alive and being attended to, not abandoned. old players can reference the updated basic rules digital release to see base class changes. few if any will throw themselves upon d&d's funeral pyre before the funeral has been scheduled, but you make a good case for kind helpers to stand by.
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: provide feedback!
I’m pretty sure everyone here wants at least some of the changes to go through, but looking back I think they were stress testing the response to large systemic changes at the outset, and given that they were making it a major point that this was not a new edition, it follows that they would ultimately not be looking to massively change how major facets of the game like spell prep work.
That sounds more like an adversarial DM who is going to go out of his way to punish the party for even thinking about a short rest, or to put it better, someone not worth the tie to play with.
There are times when even a short rest can't be taken, but if it becomes every time the problem isn't the system, it's the person running the game.
They have 2 paths, backwards compatible or significant change. I'm fine with either path but change in itself is not a virtue. If the change is not positive it should not be adopted. Make big changes, but I'm going to call out ones I think are bad, and compliment the ones I think are good.
So the DM metagames and therefor taking a breather is bad.
I'd give your point some credence in that I've long said 1 hour is too long for a short rest. But in past discussions it almost did not matter how short the short rest was it still was too much time for the enemies who are constantly taking perfect actions behind the scenes with no breaks whatsoever. You were constantly saying 5 minutes oh my god if you can take 5 minutes you can take a long rest. where apparently your psychic always take actions behind the scenes 24/7 enemies drop the ball every time a party wastes 8 hours on a long rest but dear god 5 minutes how did you waste all that time. And the party man 16 hours straight no breaks every day, that is impressive and doesn't break immersion at all.
I'm not sure I see anyone arguing short rests should always be "free." I understand the examples you give - I also nodded along with Ace's post above, in which the DM and the players find a balance between thrills, verisimilitude, and remembering the ultimate point of a game is to have fun.
And I think it's ultimately a case-by-case basis, rather than anything you can make sweeping pronouncements about. Sure, if the party casts rope trick or tiny hut while three levels down in the Dungeon of Ultimate Doom, chances are very good that any cognizant threats/foes will use the time to organize a strike or ambush. (Or perhaps even use their own caster to dispel the demiplane.) So that's the price of taking a rest - giving enemies a chance to organize. At the same time, NOT taking a rest could spell certain doom, so they take a rest. Which, for me, is kind of brilliant because it naturally builds tension at the table, gives both sides a breather to ratchet up tactics for the next encounter, and doesn't make the players think they're hopelessly doomed and without agency.
And while the warlock is somewhat unique in its dependence on short rests for efficacy, plenty of other classes depend on short rests for refreshes.
Again: I can easily imagine a scenario in which taking a short rest is more dangerous than not - but what I can't easily imagine is a campaign in which that's the norm for every single adventuring day, from level 1 to level 20. As others have pointed out, even bad guys have to sleep, poop, regain spells, etc.
What's more immersion-breaking, Dudeicus?
Enemies in an area becoming aware of a loud, deeply unstealthy intrusion in their space - remember, we're talking about D&D parties here, no one has EVER successfully snuck into some place without trace in this game unless they were a lone rogue the other players didn't want 'stealing the spotlight' anyways - and deciding to take measures to defeat that intrusion?
Or a random group of third-level chuckle****s being given the truly god-like power to freeze all of Creation at a whim, stopping the clock on EVERYTHING, EVERYWHERE, in a way even the greatest of true deities is not able to fully replicate, so they may freely rest and recover their resources as they wish at any time, no matter how insane the idea of giving up hours and hours of the day might otherwise be?
Please do not contact or message me.
Since 2014 we have had one time where a warlock used more than 3 short rests in a day. It was me and it was to spam cast walls of stone to help protect a village beset by zombies. It helped in the narrative but did not break the game in anyway. Us getting it done in a day instead of a few days was not a huge shift. While I conceptually dig the concept its not some power game thing as its something no one sees in any games. In fact its obvious this is not a issue despite the hyperbolic claims as the whole reason short rests are trying to be reduced is because people did not take enough.
Someone mentioned BG3 above. I personally think how they do short rests just works better. Take 2 a day, each time 1/2 your hit points are restored, short rest features are renewed and its basically instant. Go back to 4es 5 minute system as instant is kind of a silly narrative for a break. Give the 2 classes whose primary resource is based around it one extra minute long recovery per day. Balance spell numbers/ki amount around that.
Distinct style would be the Sorcerer as Power Points user instead spell slots, but the damn multi-class system prevents it.
In the previous survey I suggested to use Font of Magic as approach, while preserving the compatibility. It was allow to exchange any number of spell slots <-> Sorcery Points in one direction as free action per turn. And integrate the new Twinned Spell Metamagic into it.
Because everyone knows the Sorcerer should work this way to differentiate from the Wizard, every post I have seen about the rule in DMG is applied always and only to Sorcerer by all DM and players.
The main problem with a 5m short rest is how it interacts with spells with a duration of 10 minutes to 1 hour. Having a short rest break concentration would resolve it, though.
But that would then clash with Concentration spells you can hold for several hours, so that cuts both ways. Maybe go more towards something like 15 minutes? Enough time to lapse out the short durations, but not the ones meant to be held through multiple encounters.
This is why no one takes your arguments seriously. Sure when aggressively raiding a keep you likely wont get a short rest. But most people are not raiding a keep every adventuring day. I highly doubt even you play the game the way you are arguing.
The longer ones are either 10 minutes or 1 hour plus. 10 minutes would cover the 10 minute ones. Though I'm not sure its that big of an issue that there are a small subset of spells that benefit from short rest recovery. If you can only cast 2 spells a rest having one spell with 5 minutes left on it while having full slots probably is not breaking the game. I could see armor of agathis being a issue since its 1 hour no concentration. But honestly I think that spell should have been on a 8 hour timer anyways. One hour is sort of weird design. The spell is not good enough for using an action in a fight, so its only used when you are ambushing people as otherwise you can't really count on a fight or being hit in a hour. The pact of the blade people its at least more likely as you will probably charge into melee. It just kind of feels like the warlocks version of mage armor, defense buff you slap on for the day before adventuring. And again like one spell maybe a couple others i'm not thinking of being a bit better here does not break things imo. You still wont be wizard powerful. Or bard, sorcerer powerful. likely not cleric or druid powerful, I don;t really play those classes though so making a wild guess there. Tons more spells break the game for full casters when you are on the 1-2 a day encounter model. And yeah if rests broke concentration it would "solve" it for 99% of the issue spells. Though I'm still not sure it would be a issue or just a nice perk that still is within a warlocks expected power levels. Play testing would hopefully work that out.
Edit to add, also maybe some of those spells should be nerfed to 1 minute duration or 5 minutes. Maybe flight is too good at 10 minutes for example.
It's because at it's core, it's a martial. Eldritch blast was on par with martial weapon attacks. Warlock was the only 'caster' that was essentially linear rather than quadratic. The difference between a D10+dex mod from a heavy crossbow and a D10+cha mod from a warlock is fluff. It was linear because spamming non-cantrips is not what it did, unlike the sorc and wizard.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
Perhaps the survey responses to UA 6 will have an impact. What will the WotC design team do if the UA6 Ranger scores lower (or significantly lower) than the UA4 version? Or, pick your class, pick your feature, pick your rule.
I'm hoping they see that some of the proposed rule & class design changes may have scored low, not because the community dies not want change, but because the community doesn't want THAT PARTICULAR change. I believe many people may have scored certain features low simply because they felt the new feature was unbalanced- too strong, too weak. Or maybe not flavored quite right. Perhaps some new changes were good ideas that just needed FURTHER REVISION to be good. But, it seems that the designers can only interpret low scores as meaning "we don't like that idea ar all- go back to the way it was."
But I do say SEEMS. Because there are still a few UAs to come for PHB stuff. And Monsters & Spells have a huge affect on the viability of character options, and we've not seen what- if any- revisions they have in store for them. And sometimes they ignore the UAs and go completely a different way, as they said to have done with the 2014 Sorcerer (though granted, that was for a whole new Edition, rather than for a "revision edition".) But we will see, and what will be, will be.