16 5th level spell slots might be a little strong.
but crucially not all in the same encounter.
16 5th spell slots throughout an adventuring day is a lot. The Warlock list isn’t as shenanigan friendly as the wizard list, but with this many easy access 5th level spells per day I’m sure many will find something exploitive to do. In most dungeons you could keep Armor of Agathys up in between battles and still start any combat with full slots. You could also keep a party of four under the invisibility spell for the majority of a dungeon.
I haven't voted because what I want isn't an option. Which is for the designers to get over 2 irrational fears that they seem to have. The first is giving the Warlock thier 3rd spell pact slot much earlier, like 5th or 6th level. The second is to erase all mentions of "when there are none remaining" on recharge mechanics and replace it with the words " this cannot allow the character to go above the maximum as shown on their class chart". In my experience, hoarding happens not because players feel they don't have enough, but because they are afraid to be caught with zero. It's an important distinction that needs to be understood, since the current recharge mechanics require players to go to that point they want to avoid at all costs, which means a lot of them might never use thier recharge mechanic at all.
Well it would still mean that at level 9 you get to cast 6 level 5 spells in the span of 5 minutes.
That would also mean that Sorcerers multiclassing into Warlock would get to refill their Sorcery points ridiculously fast.
Hmm. Yeah, that IS a pickle. Those sorcerers always throws a monkey into the gears...
Easiest solution? The one that sorcerers will hate? Have pact magic be "special" and not mix with other sources of magic power. Oil and water. Cats and dogs. Tomatoes and whipped cream. It would completely gut the Coffeelock meta. But, uhm, how do I put this diplomatically? I might not be very upset to see it go? :)
But yeah, you're right. Poke one piece of the jenga tower, and everything starts to wobble.
Game design is hard, you guys! Can't we have someone else do it? :)
16 5th level spell slots might be a little strong.
In a single go? Oh, I absolutely agree with that, Ain! Just like a current level 17 warlock would have after three short rests, right? Or 20 after four short rests. See where I'm going? :)
But in this model, you don't have 16 at any time. You're limited to your total slots. So, most of the time, you would go into a situation with two slots, maybe three, before level 17. The difference lies in when you can regain slots - can you do it by asking everyone to stop for lunch, or can you do it while the rogue checks for traps and the fighter tells the long-suffering cleric about this racing horse she saw down in the village earlier?
So, IS it 16 5th level spell slots? Yes, but no. Maybe. Potentially.
Or, the warlock would feel freed to use these slots on smaller things, like casting Expeditious Retreat to win a footrace back in town, or Enthrall to put a group of hobgoblins in a stupor while the rogue planted evidence in their camp, or any other situation where where a warlock would have spells with no upcast option that they really wanted to use but felt they shouldn't, before.
They're not 5th level slots. They're 1st to 5th level slots, yeah? :)
Well it would still mean that at level 9 you get to cast 6 level 5 spells in the span of 5 minutes.
That would also mean that Sorcerers multiclassing into Warlock would get to refill their Sorcery points ridiculously fast.
I'm not a fan of fast refills on slots.
This is why I elect for just more variety of spammables with invocations and more variety in upgrading pacts as you level up.
Because what is a warlock? It's not a spellcaster. At least not a naturally gifted spellcaster. It doesn't have in innate connection to God. It does not have magic coursing through it's veins. It's not paid through years of study.
It's a CONTRACT. With very specific terms and conditions. You do X or give up Y you get Z.
The more you do your patron's bidding , the more likely your patron will reward you.
As such, your powers are generally associated with their terms of your CONTRACT (pact) and that is flavored by the type of PATRON you have.
More and more spell slots being given is weird within the terms of a contract.
I want the warlock to have spells and variation, but the archetype would say you get some very specific and powerful abilities that were outlined in clause 7:2 paragraph E. and are strictly limited to ONLY the power in clause....
I haven't voted because what I want isn't an option. Which is for the designers to get over 2 irrational fears that they seem to have. The first is giving the Warlock thier 3rd spell pact slot much earlier, like 5th or 6th level. The second is to erase all mentions of "when there are none remaining" on recharge mechanics and replace it with the words " this cannot allow the character to go above the maximum as shown on their class chart". In my experience, hoarding happens not because players feel they don't have enough, but because they are afraid to be caught with zero. It's an important distinction that needs to be understood, since the current recharge mechanics require players to go to that point they want to avoid at all costs, which means a lot of them might never use thier recharge mechanic at all.
In fairness to them, part of why it feels like the 3rd slot comes so late is because we get the 2nd slot earlier than their formula would dictate. If they stuck to cantrip scaling we wouldn't get that 2nd slot until 5th. I think 5th is probably too early for the 3rd slot, 7th or 9th seems more reasonable. And then move the 4th slot down to 15th level.
I would definitely agree with removing the restriction on only using Magical Cunning when you're out of Pact Magic slots. It should be more like Arcane Recovery or Natural Recovery, you just can't use it to exceed your normal max. And can we please come up with a better name than Magical Cunning? Something with "Eldritch" in it seems appropriate, yes?
The more you do your patron's bidding , the more likely your patron will reward you.
Technically, this isn't accurate. While there's no explicit in-game explanation for the growth of the warlock's powers, the game assumes whatever agreement or contract was made between the warlock and their patron was completed before gameplay begins. This has been discussed in various threads in the Warlock forum (folks [like me] wondering if a warlock can lose their powers - consensus is no, they can't, because they've been granted in perpetuity in exchange for whatever the warlock's already done).
Now, the DM and/or player can certainly choose to make the contract an open/in-progress one, in which your statement makes sense. But per the game designers, the rules were written on the assumption that the character does not owe their patron anymore actions.
Because what is a warlock? It's not a spellcaster. At least not a naturally gifted spellcaster. It doesn't have in innate connection to God. It does not have magic coursing through it's veins. It's not paid through years of study.
Bob. Give me that cake back. You had the perfect opportunity to use the quote! But, I'm a compassionate and reliable friend, so I will be your hidden prompter. (Like the phantom of the opera, but without all that other awfulness. Only the good Andrew Lloyd Webber parts.)
The more you do your patron's bidding , the more likely your patron will reward you.
Technically, this isn't accurate. While there's no explicit in-game explanation for the growth of the warlock's powers, the game assumes whatever agreement or contract was made between the warlock and their patron was completed before gameplay begins. This has been discussed in various threads in the Warlock forum (folks [like me] wondering if a warlock can lose their powers - consensus is no, they can't, because they've been granted in perpetuity in exchange for whatever the warlock's already done).
Now, the DM and/or player can certainly choose to make the contract an open/in-progress one, in which your statement makes sense. But per the game designers, the rules were written on the assumption that the character does not owe their patron anymore actions.
Ok, fine, but the point is, it's a cheap way to get power and with explicit terms and conditions.
Plus, to be frank, the pact magic and spammables are what differentiate the warlock from other casters.
They don't have levels and they shouldn't be relying on them.
Otherwise we have 5 classes of casters and every one of them has the same spell slots, same progression, and generally all behave the same way with very minor nitpicky ability differences.
Edit: also a lot of the reason warlocks feel so limited is because they don't get enough of anything. The invocations are generally weak and don't scale, the magic slots aren't enough to compensate, and the pacts are just laughable for how stingy they are. I mean why bother with chain when find familiar is there for everyone and a ritual spell? FFS. And tome is for one spell slot. It feels like you're trading your soul for a wizard's damned post-it note.
The more you do your patron's bidding , the more likely your patron will reward you.
Technically, this isn't accurate. While there's no explicit in-game explanation for the growth of the warlock's powers, the game assumes whatever agreement or contract was made between the warlock and their patron was completed before gameplay begins. This has been discussed in various threads in the Warlock forum (folks [like me] wondering if a warlock can lose their powers - consensus is no, they can't, because they've been granted in perpetuity in exchange for whatever the warlock's already done).
Now, the DM and/or player can certainly choose to make the contract an open/in-progress one, in which your statement makes sense. But per the game designers, the rules were written on the assumption that the character does not owe their patron anymore actions.
Ok, fine, but the point is, it's a cheap way to get power and with explicit terms and conditions.
Plus, to be frank, the pact magic and spammables are what differentiate the warlock from other casters.
They don't have levels and they shouldn't be relying on them.
Otherwise we have 5 classes of casters and every one of them has the same spell slots, same progression, and generally all behave the same way with very minor nitpicky ability differences.
Good luck hammering out explicit terms and conditions with a Great Old One.
The Channel Divinity route would be, "recover all uses on long rest, and 1 use on short rest?"
How many base slots do you feel the warlock would need to sustain a vaguely-defined adventuring day, with that model of spell-slot recovery?
Probably something like this:
Warlock Level
Pact Slots
1
1
2
2
3-4
2 (+1)
5-8
3 (+1)
9-10
4 (+1)
11-13
5 (+1)
14-16
6 (+1)
17-19
7 (+1)
20
7 (+8)
(Sorry it's so big. I thought making it in Docs would make it look nicer. Apparently it refuses to shrink.) The chart does not include short rest recovery slots. The +1 is a free casting of your Patron Spell (as seen in UA 5) The +8 includes the free casting plus Eldritch Master.
I based the Pact progression on a combination of 2014 Warlock and half-caster progression for anyone curious.
The more you do your patron's bidding , the more likely your patron will reward you.
Technically, this isn't accurate. While there's no explicit in-game explanation for the growth of the warlock's powers, the game assumes whatever agreement or contract was made between the warlock and their patron was completed before gameplay begins. This has been discussed in various threads in the Warlock forum (folks [like me] wondering if a warlock can lose their powers - consensus is no, they can't, because they've been granted in perpetuity in exchange for whatever the warlock's already done).
Now, the DM and/or player can certainly choose to make the contract an open/in-progress one, in which your statement makes sense. But per the game designers, the rules were written on the assumption that the character does not owe their patron anymore actions.
Ok, fine, but the point is, it's a cheap way to get power and with explicit terms and conditions.
Plus, to be frank, the pact magic and spammables are what differentiate the warlock from other casters.
They don't have levels and they shouldn't be relying on them.
Otherwise we have 5 classes of casters and every one of them has the same spell slots, same progression, and generally all behave the same way with very minor nitpicky ability differences.
Good luck hammering out explicit terms and conditions with a Great Old One.
Nyarlathotep and I sat down last week and we both agree that this representation of contracts is equitable.
Cthulhu is a bit harder to get an answer from. He mumbles a lot.
The more you do your patron's bidding , the more likely your patron will reward you.
Technically, this isn't accurate. While there's no explicit in-game explanation for the growth of the warlock's powers, the game assumes whatever agreement or contract was made between the warlock and their patron was completed before gameplay begins. This has been discussed in various threads in the Warlock forum (folks [like me] wondering if a warlock can lose their powers - consensus is no, they can't, because they've been granted in perpetuity in exchange for whatever the warlock's already done).
Now, the DM and/or player can certainly choose to make the contract an open/in-progress one, in which your statement makes sense. But per the game designers, the rules were written on the assumption that the character does not owe their patron anymore actions.
Ok, fine, but the point is, it's a cheap way to get power and with explicit terms and conditions.
Plus, to be frank, the pact magic and spammables are what differentiate the warlock from other casters.
They don't have levels and they shouldn't be relying on them.
Otherwise we have 5 classes of casters and every one of them has the same spell slots, same progression, and generally all behave the same way with very minor nitpicky ability differences.
Edit: also a lot of the reason warlocks feel so limited is because they don't get enough of anything. The invocations are generally weak and don't scale, the magic slots aren't enough to compensate, and the pacts are just laughable for how stingy they are. I mean why bother with chain when find familiar is there for everyone and a ritual spell? FFS. And tome is for one spell slot. It feels like you're trading your soul for a wizard's damned post-it note.
To be perfectly fair, Warlocks (generally speaking) are Warlocks because they took the easy way out by calling up an otherworldly kingpin to get some perks rather than studying magic and learning to master it on their own terms for years. And most patrons aren't interested in making their Warlocks more powerful than themselves. So from a work ethic point of view, Warlocks getting the short end of the stick compared to Wizards makes some sense.
Not disagreeing.
That's why the spammables you don't get access to the top shelf magics, but you get to the all you can eat buffet of select lesser magics.
Plus in earlier versions as many points out it was a baster class.
The game seriously doesn't appreciate that this is the only class that has 2 wildly different variables to define the class. (Pact and patron)
16 5th level spell slots might be a little strong.
but crucially not all in the same encounter.
16 5th spell slots throughout an adventuring day is a lot. The Warlock list isn’t as shenanigan friendly as the wizard list, but with this many easy access 5th level spells per day I’m sure many will find something exploitive to do. In most dungeons you could keep Armor of Agathys up in between battles and still start any combat with full slots. You could also keep a party of four under the invisibility spell for the majority of a dungeon.
if the warlock is getting the prescribed number of short rests in a 6-8 encounter day, wouldn't they have AoA up fairly regularly anyway? this is just conveniencing the group so that they don't have to stop and the warlock doesn't have to beg. looking at it a different way, it's like a 1-minute ritual. which has me thinking...
what if Magical Cunning was instead a feature that allowed prepared spells to be (up)cast with an open pact slot (but without expending that slot) through concentration on a short-cut ritual over 1-minute? then it could stipulate no concentration spells: invisibility, fly, spider climb, summon, etc. the effect would still be 1-minute of time and a resulting spell but now it's fully out-of-combat focused for utility and buffs (armor of agathys, tongues, remove curse, etc), although the slot remains in case of emergencies (assuming 2014 x2 pact slots early game, instead of Halcyonesse's adjusted x1). no more 16 5th-level spells... unless the party rests occasionally.
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!
I haven't voted because what I want isn't an option. Which is for the designers to get over 2 irrational fears that they seem to have. The first is giving the Warlock thier 3rd spell pact slot much earlier, like 5th or 6th level. The second is to erase all mentions of "when there are none remaining" on recharge mechanics and replace it with the words " this cannot allow the character to go above the maximum as shown on their class chart". In my experience, hoarding happens not because players feel they don't have enough, but because they are afraid to be caught with zero. It's an important distinction that needs to be understood, since the current recharge mechanics require players to go to that point they want to avoid at all costs, which means a lot of them might never use thier recharge mechanic at all.
In fairness to them, part of why it feels like the 3rd slot comes so late is because we get the 2nd slot earlier than their formula would dictate. If they stuck to cantrip scaling we wouldn't get that 2nd slot until 5th. I think 5th is probably too early for the 3rd slot, 7th or 9th seems more reasonable. And then move the 4th slot down to 15th level.
I would definitely agree with removing the restriction on only using Magical Cunning when you're out of Pact Magic slots. It should be more like Arcane Recovery or Natural Recovery, you just can't use it to exceed your normal max. And can we please come up with a better name than Magical Cunning? Something with "Eldritch" in it seems appropriate, yes?
If the formula hurts gameplay then the formula needs to be either adjusted or thrown out. But I feel there might be a middle ground if balance needs to hold back the 3rd pact slot until 7th level. Go back to the previous UA Warlock and take some of their stuff - specifically the Fiend patron ability to cast one spell off the patron list per day without using a pact slot. Make this a core feature for every patron gained at level 3, which will help differentiate each patron a little more, potentially help cover the low level warlock's lack of total spells without becoming too unbalanced (since the bonus only recharges on a long rest they could even grant a second use at a higher level if needed). Perhaps change Pact of the Tome's bonus spell slot to this?
Of course, I also like Critical Role's house rule changing shirt rests to 15 minutes - short enough to be taken more often but long enough to not be free. An hour IS too long, and breaks my sense of immersion. Fred can break the rules of reality but I can't catch my breath without taking a full hour? It doesn't take that long in the real world, dammit!
Either you get no short rests a day because you're actually adventuring and time is real, or you get so many short rests per day that your "short rest recharge" abilities are at-will abilities in all but name. There is no in between. Short rests are bad broken game design and they will never work "as intended", unless you bully your DM into making your entire party invulnerable to all harm and intervention for an hour, twelve times per day.
You keep saying it but you’re wrong. I have had multiple, several year long games as a warlock, with different gms. I get short rests a reasonable amount. I’ve had days where I get 2. But 1 is rarely a issue.
are there times I absolutely would not be able to take them, or taking them would be a huge cost plot wise? Absolutely. But not every game is like that. Most games have half an hour to an hour where you can mend wounds between situations, especially city breaks/travel. Hell even in dungeons, unless there is literal time pressure, it can be done if done smart. Illusions/clever tactics to find time to bandage wounds. And sometimes those times should also cost the players. It leads to interesting narrative and tactical decisions.
yea you have a point that there are times where short rests just shouldn’t be an option. But that should not be every single game ever played. That should be specific. If I was playing a game and consistently over the course of several sessions, short tests were not possible, then I would be having polite words.
Every class has hit die. They should be given a chance to use it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
16 5th spell slots throughout an adventuring day is a lot. The Warlock list isn’t as shenanigan friendly as the wizard list, but with this many easy access 5th level spells per day I’m sure many will find something exploitive to do. In most dungeons you could keep Armor of Agathys up in between battles and still start any combat with full slots. You could also keep a party of four under the invisibility spell for the majority of a dungeon.
I haven't voted because what I want isn't an option. Which is for the designers to get over 2 irrational fears that they seem to have. The first is giving the Warlock thier 3rd spell pact slot much earlier, like 5th or 6th level. The second is to erase all mentions of "when there are none remaining" on recharge mechanics and replace it with the words " this cannot allow the character to go above the maximum as shown on their class chart". In my experience, hoarding happens not because players feel they don't have enough, but because they are afraid to be caught with zero. It's an important distinction that needs to be understood, since the current recharge mechanics require players to go to that point they want to avoid at all costs, which means a lot of them might never use thier recharge mechanic at all.
Hmm. Yeah, that IS a pickle. Those sorcerers always throws a monkey into the gears...
Easiest solution? The one that sorcerers will hate? Have pact magic be "special" and not mix with other sources of magic power. Oil and water. Cats and dogs. Tomatoes and whipped cream. It would completely gut the Coffeelock meta. But, uhm, how do I put this diplomatically? I might not be very upset to see it go? :)
But yeah, you're right. Poke one piece of the jenga tower, and everything starts to wobble.
Game design is hard, you guys! Can't we have someone else do it? :)
I'm not a fan of fast refills on slots.
This is why I elect for just more variety of spammables with invocations and more variety in upgrading pacts as you level up.
Because what is a warlock? It's not a spellcaster. At least not a naturally gifted spellcaster. It doesn't have in innate connection to God. It does not have magic coursing through it's veins. It's not paid through years of study.
It's a CONTRACT. With very specific terms and conditions. You do X or give up Y you get Z.
The more you do your patron's bidding , the more likely your patron will reward you.
As such, your powers are generally associated with their terms of your CONTRACT (pact) and that is flavored by the type of PATRON you have.
More and more spell slots being given is weird within the terms of a contract.
I want the warlock to have spells and variation, but the archetype would say you get some very specific and powerful abilities that were outlined in clause 7:2 paragraph E. and are strictly limited to ONLY the power in clause....
In fairness to them, part of why it feels like the 3rd slot comes so late is because we get the 2nd slot earlier than their formula would dictate. If they stuck to cantrip scaling we wouldn't get that 2nd slot until 5th. I think 5th is probably too early for the 3rd slot, 7th or 9th seems more reasonable. And then move the 4th slot down to 15th level.
I would definitely agree with removing the restriction on only using Magical Cunning when you're out of Pact Magic slots. It should be more like Arcane Recovery or Natural Recovery, you just can't use it to exceed your normal max. And can we please come up with a better name than Magical Cunning? Something with "Eldritch" in it seems appropriate, yes?
Technically, this isn't accurate. While there's no explicit in-game explanation for the growth of the warlock's powers, the game assumes whatever agreement or contract was made between the warlock and their patron was completed before gameplay begins. This has been discussed in various threads in the Warlock forum (folks [like me] wondering if a warlock can lose their powers - consensus is no, they can't, because they've been granted in perpetuity in exchange for whatever the warlock's already done).
Now, the DM and/or player can certainly choose to make the contract an open/in-progress one, in which your statement makes sense. But per the game designers, the rules were written on the assumption that the character does not owe their patron anymore actions.
Bob. Give me that cake back. You had the perfect opportunity to use the quote! But, I'm a compassionate and reliable friend, so I will be your hidden prompter. (Like the phantom of the opera, but without all that other awfulness. Only the good Andrew Lloyd Webber parts.)
"What is a warlock? A miserable little pile of INVOCATIONS! But enough talk..." (Maybe referencing a quote from a game. Maybe.)
Ok, fine, but the point is, it's a cheap way to get power and with explicit terms and conditions.
Plus, to be frank, the pact magic and spammables are what differentiate the warlock from other casters.
They don't have levels and they shouldn't be relying on them.
Otherwise we have 5 classes of casters and every one of them has the same spell slots, same progression, and generally all behave the same way with very minor nitpicky ability differences.
Edit: also a lot of the reason warlocks feel so limited is because they don't get enough of anything. The invocations are generally weak and don't scale, the magic slots aren't enough to compensate, and the pacts are just laughable for how stingy they are. I mean why bother with chain when find familiar is there for everyone and a ritual spell? FFS. And tome is for one spell slot. It feels like you're trading your soul for a wizard's damned post-it note.
How about "Mortgage"? :P
I also kind of like "Propitiation", or "Borrow Power"?
Good luck hammering out explicit terms and conditions with a Great Old One.
Probably something like this:
Warlock Level
Pact Slots
1
1
2
2
3-4
2 (+1)
5-8
3 (+1)
9-10
4 (+1)
11-13
5 (+1)
14-16
6 (+1)
17-19
7 (+1)
20
7 (+8)
(Sorry it's so big. I thought making it in Docs would make it look nicer. Apparently it refuses to shrink.)
The chart does not include short rest recovery slots.
The +1 is a free casting of your Patron Spell (as seen in UA 5)
The +8 includes the free casting plus Eldritch Master.
I based the Pact progression on a combination of 2014 Warlock and half-caster progression for anyone curious.
Starting at 1 and ending at 5. But you'd get 3 slots at 5th level, and 4 at ~8th level, and 5th ~13th level.
It must contain the word "Eldritch". It is the law.
Nyarlathotep and I sat down last week and we both agree that this representation of contracts is equitable.
Cthulhu is a bit harder to get an answer from. He mumbles a lot.
... "Respelldritch?"
"Eldritch Recovery" is fiiine, I guess... But I'm still going to call it Patron's Favourite in my increasingly bewildering headcanon...
Not disagreeing.
That's why the spammables you don't get access to the top shelf magics, but you get to the all you can eat buffet of select lesser magics.
Plus in earlier versions as many points out it was a baster class.
The game seriously doesn't appreciate that this is the only class that has 2 wildly different variables to define the class. (Pact and patron)
if the warlock is getting the prescribed number of short rests in a 6-8 encounter day, wouldn't they have AoA up fairly regularly anyway? this is just conveniencing the group so that they don't have to stop and the warlock doesn't have to beg. looking at it a different way, it's like a 1-minute ritual. which has me thinking...
what if Magical Cunning was instead a feature that allowed prepared spells to be (up)cast with an open pact slot (but without expending that slot) through concentration on a short-cut ritual over 1-minute? then it could stipulate no concentration spells: invisibility, fly, spider climb, summon, etc. the effect would still be 1-minute of time and a resulting spell but now it's fully out-of-combat focused for utility and buffs (armor of agathys, tongues, remove curse, etc), although the slot remains in case of emergencies (assuming 2014 x2 pact slots early game, instead of Halcyonesse's adjusted x1). no more 16 5th-level spells... unless the party rests occasionally.
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!
If the formula hurts gameplay then the formula needs to be either adjusted or thrown out. But I feel there might be a middle ground if balance needs to hold back the 3rd pact slot until 7th level. Go back to the previous UA Warlock and take some of their stuff - specifically the Fiend patron ability to cast one spell off the patron list per day without using a pact slot. Make this a core feature for every patron gained at level 3, which will help differentiate each patron a little more, potentially help cover the low level warlock's lack of total spells without becoming too unbalanced (since the bonus only recharges on a long rest they could even grant a second use at a higher level if needed). Perhaps change Pact of the Tome's bonus spell slot to this?
Of course, I also like Critical Role's house rule changing shirt rests to 15 minutes - short enough to be taken more often but long enough to not be free. An hour IS too long, and breaks my sense of immersion. Fred can break the rules of reality but I can't catch my breath without taking a full hour? It doesn't take that long in the real world, dammit!
You keep saying it but you’re wrong. I have had multiple, several year long games as a warlock, with different gms. I get short rests a reasonable amount. I’ve had days where I get 2. But 1 is rarely a issue.
are there times I absolutely would not be able to take them, or taking them would be a huge cost plot wise? Absolutely. But not every game is like that. Most games have half an hour to an hour where you can mend wounds between situations, especially city breaks/travel. Hell even in dungeons, unless there is literal time pressure, it can be done if done smart. Illusions/clever tactics to find time to bandage wounds. And sometimes those times should also cost the players. It leads to interesting narrative and tactical decisions.
yea you have a point that there are times where short rests just shouldn’t be an option. But that should not be every single game ever played. That should be specific. If I was playing a game and consistently over the course of several sessions, short tests were not possible, then I would be having polite words.
Every class has hit die. They should be given a chance to use it.