There was a debate in my gaming group about this and thought I'd see about other opinions on it:
If the party hunkers down to take a Long Rest and after 4 hours it's interrupted, should a character get benefits of a Short Rest?
I wasn't trying to be able to use hit dice for healing, but for regaining spell slots (warlock) or any other abilities that reset with a Short Rest. The DM ruled that since we were trying for a Long Rest, it doesn't count as a Short Rest. It's more of a failed attempt and gain no benefits at all.
The rules don't say specifically, but the wording of the long rest description in the PHB makes it seem like if it gets interrupted, you have to start it over again to get anything.
If the rest is interrupted by a period of strenuous activity - at least 1 hour of walking, fighting, casting spells, or similar adventuring activity - the characters must begin the rest again to gain any benefit from it.
But I let my party get the benefit of a short rest if they were interrupted halfway through a long rest. Seems like the decent thing to do.
In the narrative, there isn't a "button" the characters press to do "Short rest" vs "long rest". They just rest, and slowly recover their abilities and hit points and features. It does not make sense to me that if the characters say "I'm going to rest for 2 hours" they get benefits, but if they say "I'm going to rest for 8 hours" and change their minds after 2 hours they get no benefit.
RAW, it's probably more like the "button" where you either get a rest or you don't.
For a take on it in a particular writing style, see "the angry GM" at https://theangrygm.com/hitting-the-rest-button/ . (Note - his writing style is exactly what it sounds like it would be.)
I'd say no, based on the official ruleset. Think about it this way: Suppose you're in between track events and you sit down and rest for an hour while staying awake. You regain some energy.
Now picture that you try to fall asleep, but are waken up after four hours. You are drowsy, and you'll not going to do well in whatever event you'll compete in.
Even if you don't think this rule is fair, 5th edition dungeons and dragons is made for simplicity. It's why advantage and disadvantage always cancel each other out.
In the end, I'd recommend following the player's handbook rules of the four hours not counting as a short rest, but remember one thing: whatever you decide, you're the dungeon master. Don't let your players boss you around and tell you what to do.
The by the books answer is you get no benefit to a rest until the end of a rest. No partial benefits.
You can always house rule it though. Otherwise your party might start taking 9 hour rests so they can short rest first.
Here's an idea for the party: nothing in the rules that I'm aware of says you can't take a short rest inside of a long rest, as long as you actually declare it. A long rest is eight hours, only six of which have to be spent sleeping. Make the first hour of your long rest a short rest. No need to make that hour before the long rest.
Personally, I endeavor as a DM to not create a situation in which the players feel like they would actually benefit from gaming the system like this.
I don't see that the rules really say much at all about distinctions between short and long rests other than the amount of time they require and what a character can do during them. I don't see that they need to be differentiated ahead of time. I don't see that an interrupted long rest that satisfies the requirements of a short rest cannot be counted as such. We can reasonably infer that an interrupted long rest doesn't work as a short rest because it isn't spelled out as such. Likewise, we can infer that if a character takes a period of downtime, at least 1 hour long, during which the character does nothing more strenuous than eating, drinking, reading, and tending to wounds, then a short rest has been accomplished.
As an aside, I also never really paid attention to the wording that you can do nearly an hour's worth of strenuous activity during the course of a long rest. That is a lot of interruption you can absorb while still getting the benefit of a long rest.
As an aside, I also never really paid attention to the wording that you can do nearly an hour's worth of strenuous activity during the course of a long rest. That is a lot of interruption you can absorb while still getting the benefit of a long rest.
I think it's there so that if you *are* ambushed in the middle of the night, you can deal with the threat (even 10 or 20 rounds of combat) and then just go back to sleep and finish your rest. You don't lose the benefits of the long rest just because you rolled a random encounter. :)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
There was a debate in my gaming group about this and thought I'd see about other opinions on it:
If the party hunkers down to take a Long Rest and after 4 hours it's interrupted, should a character get benefits of a Short Rest?
I wasn't trying to be able to use hit dice for healing, but for regaining spell slots (warlock) or any other abilities that reset with a Short Rest. The DM ruled that since we were trying for a Long Rest, it doesn't count as a Short Rest. It's more of a failed attempt and gain no benefits at all.
The rules don't say specifically, but the wording of the long rest description in the PHB makes it seem like if it gets interrupted, you have to start it over again to get anything.
But I let my party get the benefit of a short rest if they were interrupted halfway through a long rest. Seems like the decent thing to do.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
I'd go with yes, they get short rest benefits.
In the narrative, there isn't a "button" the characters press to do "Short rest" vs "long rest". They just rest, and slowly recover their abilities and hit points and features. It does not make sense to me that if the characters say "I'm going to rest for 2 hours" they get benefits, but if they say "I'm going to rest for 8 hours" and change their minds after 2 hours they get no benefit.
RAW, it's probably more like the "button" where you either get a rest or you don't.
For a take on it in a particular writing style, see "the angry GM" at https://theangrygm.com/hitting-the-rest-button/ . (Note - his writing style is exactly what it sounds like it would be.)
I'd say no, based on the official ruleset. Think about it this way: Suppose you're in between track events and you sit down and rest for an hour while staying awake. You regain some energy.
Now picture that you try to fall asleep, but are waken up after four hours. You are drowsy, and you'll not going to do well in whatever event you'll compete in.
Even if you don't think this rule is fair, 5th edition dungeons and dragons is made for simplicity. It's why advantage and disadvantage always cancel each other out.
In the end, I'd recommend following the player's handbook rules of the four hours not counting as a short rest, but remember one thing: whatever you decide, you're the dungeon master. Don't let your players boss you around and tell you what to do.
The by the books answer is you get no benefit to a rest until the end of a rest. No partial benefits.
You can always house rule it though. Otherwise your party might start taking 9 hour rests so they can short rest first.
This is exactly why I houseruled that you get a short rest if your long rest is interrupted.
Here's an idea for the party: nothing in the rules that I'm aware of says you can't take a short rest inside of a long rest, as long as you actually declare it. A long rest is eight hours, only six of which have to be spent sleeping. Make the first hour of your long rest a short rest. No need to make that hour before the long rest.
Personally, I endeavor as a DM to not create a situation in which the players feel like they would actually benefit from gaming the system like this.
I like the short rest if the long one is interrupted rule. I might steal that.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I don't see that the rules really say much at all about distinctions between short and long rests other than the amount of time they require and what a character can do during them. I don't see that they need to be differentiated ahead of time. I don't see that an interrupted long rest that satisfies the requirements of a short rest cannot be counted as such. We can reasonably infer that an interrupted long rest doesn't work as a short rest because it isn't spelled out as such. Likewise, we can infer that if a character takes a period of downtime, at least 1 hour long, during which the character does nothing more strenuous than eating, drinking, reading, and tending to wounds, then a short rest has been accomplished.
As an aside, I also never really paid attention to the wording that you can do nearly an hour's worth of strenuous activity during the course of a long rest. That is a lot of interruption you can absorb while still getting the benefit of a long rest.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
I think it's there so that if you *are* ambushed in the middle of the night, you can deal with the threat (even 10 or 20 rounds of combat) and then just go back to sleep and finish your rest. You don't lose the benefits of the long rest just because you rolled a random encounter. :)