D&D 5E Limiting Short Rests

[Bacon Bits]

There is nothing inherent in a sandbox that precludes an evolving world with time-lines (and, thus, potential time-constraints). A good sandbox will have NPCs with agendas - who will actively seek to advance those agendas.

The point is that there's no mandatory timeline in D&D, not that I can't imagine a campaign where one exists. The point is that it's possible to have a campaign structured like Minecraft rather than Final Fantasy XIII-3.

I just find it very irritating that so many DMs feel like it's acceptable to effectively railroad the PCs by putting a clock on everything? Why are DMs feeling the need to limit resting? Honestly, I still haven't seen a good reason to limit short rests. People keep saying, "Oh, just put the PCs on a clock. Just make the world keep moving without them." Yeah, that's how you can do it, but why is it so necessary to limit resting? It's not like the Warlock is going to rest 4 hours in a row and get 10 spells for one encounter or something. Are the adventure and promise of XP and treasure not compelling enough for your campaigns? Are your short-rest characters obscenely overpowered or dominating play? Is the problem Leomund's Tiny Hut is makes resting too easy? What's the problem that short rests are causing?

It's not like there was no rest period in previous editions. Hell, in 4e, you got a short rest in 5 minutes. In 3.x, a short rest was however long it took to activate your wand of cure light wounds (or whatever) enough times to heal the party. We've been short resting for 15 years now, but that name or some other. Why is 5e's hour long rest throwing a wrench into your plans as a DM?

Is it just the fact that it's an hour? So drop the time limit! Make the duration of a short rest long enough to cool down, clean up, have a bite or a nap. Make it 5 minutes, or 30 minutes, or whatever. The time limit on a short rest is not the critical factor. The time limit is arbitrary. The important part of a short rest is that a) the player characters must be reasonably safe from attack, b) the player characters that rest are unable to do anything productive, and c) the NPCs are able to do things that are productive.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Krachek]

5ed is perfectly tune to offer 2 successive encounters, with almost no delay.
High level party could probably manage 3 or 4 encounters in a row once in a while.
Monster don't wait in line that the party say :" ok you can come now."

It will add some challenge: "we got to clear this patrol before the other one arrive, and we hope that the ogres are still drunks." Decide to take a short rest knowing that there is a bunch a drunk ogre in the nearby cave, is a gamble. If we take the short rest it will be easy, if they wake up before, it will go wrong, if we attack now it can worth the risk.

 

[happyhermit]

According to the RAW, characters can have as many short rests as they want in a single day?

What's to stop players from stopping to rest after every single encounter? Sure, the DM can interrupt them once or twice, but too many times and it will quickly look like sour grapes on the part of the DM.

While healing has an upper limit of HD, A warlock can get their spells back after every fight this way.

Anyone experimented with limiting the number of rests to X per day?

We have tried the optional resting rules (short rest = 8hrs). The players should ideally know that going in, obviously. It certainly did change the way the game played.

On the whole though, too many short rests has not been a problem due to in game factors.

I currently have a very well rested party in our Fri game.
They LOVE resting. Even when logic would indicate they should press on.
...
I predict this campaign will end as the hero's sleep through the apocalypse.

Not sure if you (and your players) actually consider this a problem. If you do, the optional resting rules are an option to consider.

Have you tried imposing some actual in game time limits, as opposed to implied ones? ie; So and so is to be hanged at high noon, or this will happen at the solar eclipse. Have you tried giving real numbers of things happening rather than % chances ie; BBEG "We will sacrifice one virgin ever day ..." or consequences to the party (less resources).

Also, are those things imperative to the players/characters in the game, would they rather be doing other things in that world, or doing things a different way. I know that doesn't help much with a strongly narrative game, but maybe the hooks aren't deep enough.

 

[happyhermit]

...
Point is: if the game offered real limits, the DM wouldn't need to come up with reason after reason AFTER REASON to deny them what the rules give them far too easily.

And if the game offered real limits, the DM would have to "give them reasons" as to why they got more short rests, if that is what they wanted in that particular game. "Far too easily" is a completely subjective statement.

 

[pming]

Hiya!

According to the RAW, characters can have as many short rests as they want in a single day?

What's to stop players from stopping to rest after every single encounter? Sure, the DM can interrupt them once or twice, but too many times and it will quickly look like sour grapes on the part of the DM.

While healing has an upper limit of HD, A warlock can get their spells back after every fight this way.

Anyone experimented with limiting the number of rests to X per day?

Any DM worth his salt doesn't care one way or the other how many "short rests" a party 'should get' in a day. He/she should be focusing on ignoring the pitiful pleas of the PC's and instead be focusing on presenting an engaging and believable setting.

If the PC's are exploring an old crypt...they can probably take long rests and not be disturbed. But if they are in an active goblin warren...they will probably be interrupted every 15 minutes, let alone a full hour! And no, that is not "sour grapes"...it's just stupid PC's and players who feel entitled to all their "renewable powers" any time they want. As I said...the world doesn't care what the PC's 'want' (nor their players). The world runs as the world runs, regardless of the desires of the PC's/Players.

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[S'mon]

Anyone experimented with limiting the number of rests to X per day?

I limit it to 3 short rests per long rest. Works fine.

I also make short rest 15 minutes. If anything, what I'm seeing is short rest PCs tending to set the tempo, rather than the traditional approach of resting when the wizard/cleric runs low on spells.

 

[Tony Vargas]

According to the RAW, characters can have as many short rests as they want in a single day?

What's to stop players from stopping to rest after every single encounter?

The usual suspects: wandering monsters, time pressure, wandering monsters, pushy NPCs, wandering monsters, rivals, wandering monsters, re-setting traps, wandering monsters, re-spawning monsters, wandering monsters...

..oh, and did I mention wandering monsters?

While healing has an upper limit of HD, A warlock can get their spells back after every fight this way.

Anyone experimented with limiting the number of rests to X per day?

They do take a whole hour. There's only so many hours in the day...

But, sure, there's a limit to long rests, a limit to short rest (must wait at least X hours before benefiting from a second short rest) wouldn't be unreasonable.


But, really, the root of the problem is that challenge is mapped to encounters/short rest/long rest, while rests are mapped to static time limits in hours. Even that wouldn't be as much of a problem, but you have different resource mixes across the classes, so you need this delicate ballet of real encounter, filler encounters, short rests, long rests, uncertainty, and expectations...

 

[Rhenny]

I just keep reminding my players, "Would a hero rest at a time like this?"

But seriously, as soon as the players become engrossed in the story and the world becomes dynamic and more about what happens as minutes, hours, days pass, the need to worry about limiting short rests will also fade.

I don't even worry about it. If the party wants to rest, fine. They give up 1 hour of time in the game world and there may or may not be consequences for that. One reason why I don't mind if they rest often is because I know that I can always challenge them with a deadly encounter if I want them to fear. Conversely, I can also use many smaller, less deadly encounters to get them to press on.

 

[Flamestrike]

You haven't ever played in a sandbox campaign? You know, where you just let the players explore the campaign setting and do what they want.

Why are they just 'exploring' and doing whatever they want?

There doesn't need to be some monolithic evil poised to destroy the multiverse that only a small group of [currently] level 1 adventurers can hope to foil.

No, but they must have some in game reason to hang out together, and delve into dungeons and fight monsters. One probably studied wizardry, and has a master/ fellow apprentices out there somewhere, and other is a member of an organised church heirarchy. These people have things going on in their lives. Friends. Family. Obligations. A reason why they are exploring. People to answer to.

Unless the campaign is a homeless, faceless, friendless, orphan with no connections to anyone or anything somehow finding reason to band up with four more homeless, faceless, friendless, orphans and spontaneously all deciding to explore the world for no good reason, Im sure you can come up with some kind of time limiting factor.

And if you cant, then use the longer rest variant.