D&D (2024) 4e design in 5.5e ?

[Lanefan]

I've often had it that Potions of Giant Strength are partly made of spinach.....

 

[darjr]

I don't see short rest going away. In fact I'd ask that a claim like that come with some kind of citation.

 

[darjr]

I've often had it that Potions of Giant Strength are partly made of spinach.....

And giant toenail clippings.

 

[Charlaquin]

I don't see short rest going away. In fact I'd ask that a claim like that come with some kind of citation.

Abilities that recover on a short rest have been gradually getting replaced with the same ability, usable a number of times equal to your proficiency bonus between long rests. See the change to the Bladesinger between SCAG and Tasha’s, or from the PHB dragonborn to the previewed Fizban’s dragonborn. If this trend continues, it wouldn’t be surprising to see all such abilities receive similar changes in the 2024 revised core books. That doesn’t necessarily mean short rests themselves will go away - I expect you’ll still have them for spending hit dice, and I dearly hope at least Warlocks willl still recover their pact magic spell slots on a short rest. But I don’t think it’s a crazy assumption to think most if not all once per short rest based abilities will get changed to prof bonus per long rest abilities.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

There was a lot of space between 5 minutes and 1 hour that WotC could have explored. I'm not sure why they settled on 1 hour. I do wonder whether it will change in the revision, but I see WotC more likely abandoning short rests entirely in favor of putting everyone on the same full rest schedule.

This is possible, but I think it somewhat unlikely. For a lot of extant things, they can fix it, but what could they possibly do with the Warlock class that would break free of its short-rest dependence? Fighter will probably be easier (tie Action Surge etc. to half your proficiency bonus, rounded down), but Battle Master would be very awkward as it stands. You currently get more than your proficiency bonus' worth of Superiority Dice for each short rest (at least until very high level, where it balances out). That would require getting PB squared per long rest, which...well, that's gonna make for huge early novas and then a really really boring remainder of the day.

So I'm not sure if they can divorce things from the short rest absolutely 100%--not while keeping backwards compatibility with prior content. I strongly suspect that the "50th anniversary" update will heavily reduce dependence on short rests, but I dunno if they've got the gumption to totally ditch them.

Perhaps I'm wrong though! Maybe there will be some kind of new recharge mechanic that won't give Warlocks/Battle Masters/etc. infinite resources, but will give them the resources they need to keep up. E.g. maybe once a day they can just regain all Warlock slots/Superiority Dice, and instead of being a crappy capstone, getting extra slots/dice due to rolling initiative will be a baseline feature. At this point, it's all speculative--but if you've watched the new subclasses as they come out, they definitely are moving further and further away from using short-rest abilities and into using PB-per-long-rest abilities.

 

[darjr]

Hmmmm.... maybe it'd be the thing that might get short rest reduced to 5 minutes. That I would like.

 

[Stalker0]

I have never had problems with 5e difficulty... only with the default rest mechanics.

Right but this was not my point.

The original statement made was that the discussion of difficulty is ultimately irrelevant because the DM can always add more monsters.

My counterpoint is that such an addition does have a cost to the overall narrative. Things like:

• Why are there so many monsters in this area all of a sudden?
• Why are dragons such a big deal of if 4 low level people can take one on?

Now a small narrative cost a good DM can (and does) deal with. The question becomes when does that narrative cost require DM tweaks that remove some of the immersiveness and enjoyment from the game?

Ultimately all of this is to say.... difficulty does matter. Its not a rigid line, and that line can move table to table....but there is a general range where difficulty is "appropriate" and a range where it is not. The ability to add additional monsters does not change this fact. Therefore, a discussion of an edition's difficulty is a very relevant topic, and cannot be dismissed off hand.

 

[darjr]

Yeh I will agree with you on that point, that kind flexibility really wasn't there for any of us

I don't agree. I've run old style games. Dropping full healing at long rest with and limit hit dice use at short rests goes a long way. The other is the use of the idea of "Skills like saving throws". Skills as saving throws helps with 3rd and 4th (if you dump skill challenges in 4th).

but a full rebuild required for all of us? naw.

 

[Stalker0]

Several fans of 4e have stated in this thread that the name "healing surge" failed to convey the fiction they represented well, so I doubt you'll get much counter-argument on your point here.

I always liked the name "reserves" myself.

 

[Garthanos]

I don't agree. I've run old style games. Dropping full healing at long rest with and limit hit dice use at short rests goes a long way. The other is the use of the idea of "Skills like saving throws". Skills as saving throws helps with 3rd and 4th (if you dump skill challenges in 4th).

but a full rebuild required for all of us? naw.

I said they did not provide flexibility for any of us, that you do not care about that flexibility does not mean they gave it to you or me.