D&D 5E Can you concentrate on a spell while resting?

[Uchawi]

Resting is a general rule, because it is the default rule everyone uses (even classes that don't use spells). Concentration is the specific rule in this case, because we are using the concentration rules to modify the resting rules. As a rule of thumb, whichever rule is used by less people is the more specific one.

That is not my take, because for general and specific rules to take precedence, the rules must share something in common. So either rest has to mention concentration or vice versa.

But it is a topic worthy of a separate post. So I will just agree to disagree.

 

[dwayne]

After looking over the rules of concentration and short and long rest, the only rest that would break concentration is long rest short does not. At some point in a ,long rest you become incapacitated (sleep) even elves because even if is is only for 4 hours of the rest it still interrupts the concentration.

 

[Lalato]

After looking over the rules of concentration and short and long rest, the only rest that would break concentration is long rest short does not. At some point in a ,long rest you become incapacitated (sleep) even elves because even if is is only for 4 hours of the rest it still interrupts the concentration.

The issue with short rests and concentration lies with classes that regain spell slots during a short rest. How do you resolve concentrating on a spell and regaining the same spell slot?

My line of thinking leads me to gain no benefits of rest while concentrating on a spell. Yes, you can take a "short rest", but you don't get anything from it. Your allies might, but you don't. It's the trade off for extended concentration.

 

[dwayne]

A short rest (nothing more strenuous than eating, drinking, reading, and tending to wounds) does not interfere with gaining things back even while concentrating (Casting another spell that requires concentration, so it can be cast as long as you do not have to concentrate on the spell your casting while concentrating on the other), Taking damage, and Being incapacitated or killed so it takes a lot to break concentration and a short rest you are doing almost nothing just very light stuff and are fully awake so there is nothing to break it and you gain all the benefits of the short rest. For someone to say you don't then in that case you would not be able to move or attack while concentrating which requires a lot more than just a short rest.

 

[Lalato]

We're not talking about how strenuous it is. We're talking about the mechanical benefit of the short rest and how it aligns with the mechanics of concentrating on a spell. Can you regain the spell slot that was used while still concentrating on a spell? This is a mechanics question... not a level of activity question.

I'm going with no, you can't regain that spell slot while still "using" it. And in order to simplify things... I'm going further and saying you can't regain any other benefits. That said, I have no problem with people deciding that this is too extreme and going a more lenient route.

 

[Ranes]

The issue with short rests and concentration lies with classes that regain spell slots during a short rest. How do you resolve concentrating on a spell and regaining the same spell slot?

My line of thinking leads me to gain no benefits of rest while concentrating on a spell. Yes, you can take a "short rest", but you don't get anything from it. Your allies might, but you don't. It's the trade off for extended concentration.

I think that is a sound line of reasoning. Consider it yoinked.

 

[dwayne]

Yes you can still gain the benefits of a short rest while concentrating on a spell is no different than a for example a bard doing his thing and being able to gain the benefit. You all are making a big deal out of a few minor benefits its not like you gain back all your lost spells its only a few point in the case of a sorcerer or energy and things. Its a way for a group to keep going if need be with out taking a complete rest to regain a bit of power they expanded. I would have to say what you all are proposing by not letting them to regain or benefit from it is overly heavy handed. Just watch them errata this and you all will find I was right, I was in the play test for this like others maybe on here and think the rules speak for them selves.

 

[professorDM]

Yeah, as a cheesey rules exploiter. If I were to even countenance letting a character keep a sacrifice creature around to keep a hex going, I'm going to require something more substantial rather rhan a totally insignificant worm or squirrel.

Yeah, I'm not sure I'd call it rule-exploiting. At least not with any real negative connotation. Sure, such finagling can seem trite or cheesy or manipulative, but it can also be indicative of good role-playing.

Whatever character you're playing exists in some world, a world of the 5th edition designers and your DM's making. It's imperative on players to understand that world and the laws that govern it. I wouldn't penalize or berate a player who was trying, however creatively or exhaustively, to understand that world. I think it makes the game all the richer. If a player wants to understand the logic behind magic and specific spells, I don't think there's anything wrong with that.

These inquiries can, of course, put a lot of stress on the DM to actually flesh out and understand and intelligibly respond to questions about her or his world, but that's what being a DM is all about. (It's also about balancing the fun and involvement of all the players at the table, and while sure, a particularly inquisitive or self-absorbed player could take up too much of the DM's time and energy on such finely delineated concerns, I don't think such concerns are in and of themselves bad, so long as they're respectfully vetted and weighed within concern for the fun of everyone involved.)

All that said, the rules surrounding the Hex and Hunter's Mark spells seem poorly framed---allow the spell to be transferred upon the target's death (allowing for whatever size "target" deemed appropriate), or allow the spell's magic to be maintained throughout its duration without a target, or disallow the transferring of the spell beyond one target in the first place. It seems to me a bit hokey to both allow transference and yet to say that it can't be transferred to anything you can carry "because that breaks the rules."