D&D 5E Long or short rests? What is better?

[Corwin]

You caught something I wasn't trying to hide. Good for you.

Yeah. I tend to smell out strawmen rather quickly.

I'm talking about arguments against "balance" by people who don't understand what balance is about.

You should probably start by defining what exactly you mean by "balance", first. If you are going to trot out a personal metric with which to size people up. Good luck with that.

How much I play 5e is irrelev[a]nt because the post you originally made was system-non-specific.

...he says on a 5e specific forum, in a thread tagged with "[5E]" in the title, and where the OP mentions only 5e. Are you sure you are in the right place?

 

[Xeviat]

I prefer short rests for the reasons you said. Also, I believe short rests lend themselves to a more exciting, fast paced game. They also serve a slow paced with a variety of class types; if you only have one encounter every few days, then wizards and primary spell casters can do a lot more than fighters.

I feel long rests are okay if you're doing traditional dungeon crawls and have sections of the adventure that need to be completed or failed in one day. The five minute workday doesn't exist here because he caster players know they need to conserve.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Corwin]

I'm the DM too and I often find it odd that people complain about balance, and then literally work to create balance. You wouldn't give one player all the spotlight would you? No? Then you created balance. Good job.

Hold up. So now you are agreeing with my original post. That practical table "balance" is achieved via spotlight management. Good for you, getting on board. Awesome.

 

[discosoc]

I think the concept of a short rest is fine, but it shouldn't be tied to class abilities. Spending HD to heal up, for example, is a pretty nice feature. It's just that when you have some classes balanced on short rests, and others balanced on long rests, the DM now needs to take that into considering when pacing encounters.

 

[Sunseeker]

Yeah. I tend to smell out strawmen rather quickly.

Yeah, I'm a little slow at figuring out who needs to be put on my ignore list though.

 

[Corwin]

Looks like shidaku underhandedly quoted me, then immediately put me on ignore, so I am unable to see what they said. Low behavior, if you ask me. Shame on them.

If whatever was said is inappropriate, I'd appreciate if someone would report it. Since I cannot. Thanks.

 

[DaviMMS]

Looks like shidaku underhandedly quoted me, then immediately put me on ignore, so I am unable to see what they said. Low behavior, if you ask me. Shame on them.

If whatever was said is inappropriate, I'd appreciate if someone would report it. Since I cannot. Thanks.

He just said he would put you on his ignore list. No insults were made.

Sent from my SM-G900M using EN World mobile app

 

[Corwin]

He just said he would put you on his ignore list. No insults were made.

Thanks. Disappointed not even a half-hearted effort to define "balance" first. But not surprising, either. Its something easy to demand, but impossible to actually define. Oh well. Ignore works both ways, thankfully.

 

[DaviMMS]

Just to try to finish the "What is balance" discussion, something that was not meant to be focus of the thread, here I am specificaly talking about combat balance.

Although I agree that spotlight balance is more important than combat balance, I think spotlight depends much more on the DM and players than on the actual mechanics of the game.

I find that DnD 5e (haven't played other editions) is quite simplistic when related to anything outside of combat and anyone with a couple of skill proficiencies (that every class has) can contribute enough to participate in those activities, although the skill monkey classes and builds are obviously at advantage here.

Even without skills or some other kind of mechanical support, players can contribute to the roleplay and exploration pillars, while combat have much more mechanical limitations. Anyone reading the book can see that.

So, for me, in a talk about mechanics, combat balance is more relevant than spotlight balance (that do not depend so much on the mechanics).

Sent from my SM-G900M using EN World mobile app

 

[mellored]

The big thing I like about dislike about long rest is that it's a full reset. Doesn't matter how much damage you took, or how many resources you exhausted, one-night sleep and you're suddenly all better. Recovery should happen in stages.
The thing I don't like about short rest is how they split the party. The monk wants to take a breather after a battle, but the druid and rogue want to push on.


So I would like to see them blended together into a "rest". Something where you can take a quick breather and everyone can regain some (1/4?) of their resources. To fully recover you need multiple rests, which cannot be done in rapid succession (1 rest per 12 hours?).

For instance.

When you rest, you regain...
1/2 of your hit dice (round up). You can also spend them. (No hit points otherwise).
1/4 of your maximum ki (which is now twice as much).
1 pact magic spell (2 at level 11. You have twice as many slots), and 1 Mystic Arcanum (2 at level 20).
Expanded spell slots of combined level equal to your caster level. (wizards and land druids recover more, paladins and rangers recover 1/2).
1/4 your sorcerer points.
Second wind OR action surge. (both at fighter 14).
1 your battle master dice (2 at level 15).
ect... (not sure if those are balanced).