D&D (2024) Long rests getting better but GM needs still not being considered

[Flamestrike]

So far we've not seen a way that the GM can say"no

Start with a session zero chat of 'dont try and abuse the 5MWD or else.' Get player consensus on this. If after agreeing, they try anyway...

Players: (clearly seeking to abuse the 5MWD) We fall back and Long rest.
DM: You get a good nights sleep, but none of the benefits of a long rest.
Players: But..
DM: No buts about it. Ask me again in... oh I dont know... say 5 or 6 more encounters.

 

[Irlo]

IMO: There should be levels of rest.
I.e.

Poor rest: regain hit dice (spend the ones you have first) and half your spells.
Moderate rest: as written
Comfortable rest: also regain 2 levels of exhaustion.

Possibly tie in something like getting a level of exhaustion when you drop to 0. And have Rangers/survival checks can also help make rest more comfortable.

I like that a lot. I would consider allowing interruptions to the long rest to down-grade the quality a step rather than eliminating the benefits completely. And I can see background traits to mitigate poor rests (soldier - sleeps anywhere).

 

[Irlo]

If the Doom Clock (or, less dramatically, a Consequence for the Passage of Time) is a bluff, no rules are going to help the DM resolve that situation.

Whatever long rest rules are in place, it's best to give the players agency to decide when and where to try to rest. The DM doesn't need to exert control to approve or deny the attempt. They'll fail or succeed based on circumstances and based on random encounter rolls, if appropriate for the environment. If it's a dangerous place, there will be interruptions. If the DM is just saying it's dangerous but presents no dangers to the PCs, then that's a DM problem that doesn't have a rules-based solution.

 

[Olrox17]

IMO: There should be levels of rest.
I.e.

Poor rest: regain hit dice (spend the ones you have first) and half your spells.
Moderate rest: as written
Comfortable rest: also regain 2 levels of exhaustion.

Possibly tie in something like getting a level of exhaustion when you drop to 0. And have Rangers/survival checks can also help make rest more comfortable.

I think this idea has merit. Sometimes, as a DM, you'd really wish to grant the party a rest to regain a portion of their HP (besides what HD and spells can do, ofc), but also don't want them to regain all of their long rest abilities and spells because that would allow them to destroy the rest of the adventure/dungeon.

 

[mellored]

The 5e warlock might the closest to a 4e AEDU class.

Part of the problem of 4e was that EVERY class was a warlock.

I mean, I had fun playing it for years. But I definitely don't want to go all the way back to AEDU again. Only a few steps closer.

Still, backwards compatability means it can't change much. So i doubt the number of spell slots will change, and thus the daily power won't either.

Having a few level of rest however seems perfectly backwards compatabile.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Start with a session zero chat of 'dont try and abuse the 5MWD or else.' Get player consensus on this. If after agreeing, they try anyway...

Players: (clearly seeking to abuse the 5MWD) We fall back and Long rest.
DM: You get a good nights sleep, but none of the benefits of a long rest.
Players: But..
DM: No buts about it. Ask me again in... oh I dont know... say 5 or 6 more encounters.

I am not a fan of a 5mwd, but I would walk right then and there

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Part of the problem of 4e was that EVERY class was a warlock.

Meanwhile I wish 6e would be based on exactly that... every class being warlock

2 subclasses that can be mix and match
a bunch of mini feats that can augment or add little things
good at will abilities
a growing list of abilities with a small set of (per encounter/short rest) uses that scale to a point.
at later levels a few BIG game changing daily abilities

 

[Olrox17]

Part of the problem of 4e was that EVERY class was a warlock.

I mean, I had fun playing it for years. But I definitely don't want to go all the way back to AEDU again. Only a few steps closer.

Still, backwards compatability means it can't change much. So i doubt the number of spell slots will change, and thus the daily power won't either.

Having a few level of rest however seems perfectly backwards compatabile.

Yeah, that's a common complaint with AEDU, and one the devs tried to address with the 4e Essentials. I really like AEDU and see the 5e Warlock as the best designed class of the edition, but obviously YMMV.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I am not a fan of a 5mwd, but I would walk right then and there.

Yeah the idea the DM is breaking the trust as much as the players allegedly "abusing" the 5MWD there.

The DM's response should be "Didn't we agree not to abuse the 5MWD?" and then actual conversation about it, because I don't for even a FRACTION OF SECOND believe the players would genuinely go directly to abusing the 5MWD after agreeing not to. That's not how humans act in a social situation. The reality would be that the session 0 had failed to get the players and the DM on the same pages as to what constituted "abuse". Also the DM clearly isn't as familiar with 5E as he thinks, because 6-8 encounters is not actually how 5E is intended to be balanced. This was literally explained at some length in a video with I believe Jeremy Crawford in like, 2018. I might even be able to dig it up. He says 5E is intended to actually function well with 1, 3, 5 encounters, it's not married to 6-8 "normal" encounters. Now, I think if Crawford is being honest and we should assume he is, then he messed up badly by including both Short Rest and Long Rest characters (pick a lane buddy!), and making short rest an hour, but that's a separate issue.

In general I think the suggestions that this be solved with play style stuff or "agreements" are kind of missing the point of the thread. This is not something impossible to solve mechanically. It's not something that's an issue in every game.

I really do think step 1 to resolving this issue is probably to get all/most classes on the same page re: long/short rest. By far the easiest way to do that, is simply to multiply Short Rest-refilling resources by x3 (i.e. +200% for two imagined Short Rests) and make them Long Rest. It's also nice because you can kind of apply it "ad hoc" as it's a very simple rule of thumb.

Once you've done that, it's a lot easier to look at what's gained from a Long Rest, and how a Long Rest should and should not work. It does temporarily make the "nova" issue worse, but I dunno, I think any attempt to retain Short and Long classes whilst fixing the resting issues I definitely agree 5E has is somewhat doomed.

(The alternative is to remove Short Rests the opposite way, by making SR resources just renew out of combat but there be less of them, but I think that's a lot trickier to design right.)

 

[AnotherGuy]

So it seems like WotC is still behind which is not surprising tbh as they're too busy trying to figure out how to monetise the game

At our table we have
a short rest (+/-1 hour) - standard
a travel rest (8 hours) - restores half your HD or removes 1 level of exhaustion; and
a long rest (24 hour period) - restores all hit points, HD and class/race features - and removes all exhaustion
A long rest can only be had if you're not having to watch your back constantly.

HD have more uses at our table.