D&D 5E (2014) Concentration while Short Resting

[Caliban]

I've not redefined anything.

... I saw the easy fix of just not interpreting rest working that way, and decided I would go with that to prevent any of the stated issues from happening.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

The text being not explicit leaves it open to interpretation without redefining said text.

...and I thought you said we can stop, so why haven't you? Make up your mind; engage me in conversation, or stop replying to my posts.

 

[Caliban]

The text being not explicit leaves it open to interpretation without redefining said text.

...and I thought you said we can stop, so why haven't you? Make up your mind; engage me in conversation, or stop replying to my posts.

I said "we can stop here", referring to that particular exchange, because you were being disingenuous. I see no point in continuing a conversation when you insist on pretending you aren't doing something that you clearly are doing. I'm not going to waste my time an energy playing semantic games about it.

You didn't like the standard interpretation of the rules, so you are using a different interpretation. Which is fine, it solves a problem for you. Just be honest and call it what it is - you changing the rule because you didn't like what you saw as gaming the system. Doing otherwise just causes confusion and makes a reasonable discussion of the rules more difficult.

I use house rules all the time for my home campaign, there's nothing wrong with them. Just call it what it is.

And I will reply to your posts as I see fit. It's a public forum.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

You didn't like the standard interpretation of the rules, so you are using a different interpretation.

My interpretation is no more, nor any less, "standard" than anyone else's that has been presented thus far.

 

[Caliban]

My interpretation is no more, nor any less, "standard" than anyone else's that has been presented thus far.

There you go again.

 

[Mouseferatu]

While I don't necessarily agree with, or use the same specific details, as Aaron, I have to say that I don't consider his rules or conclusions to be either disingenuous or to run in opposition to any "standard" interpretation. I frankly agree with him that rests aren't meant to be chained, and it would never even have occurred to me that the rules meant to imply that they should be if I hadn't seen it argued here.

The difference is, I don't worry about the exact specifics of what constitutes having done "enough" between rests. I'm quite comfortable simply making a DM judgment call about it. But letting people to a long + short rest as one, or getting the benefits of both? Nope.

 

[Caliban]

While I don't necessarily agree with, or use the same specific details, as Aaron, I have to say that I don't consider his rules or conclusions to be either disingenuous or to run in opposition to any "standard" interpretation. I frankly agree with him that rests aren't meant to be chained, and it would never even have occurred to me that the rules meant to imply that they should be if I hadn't seen it argued here.

The rules don't imply or state that they should be or that they shouldn't be chained. The rules don't care.

The difference is, I don't worry about the exact specifics of what constitutes having done "enough" between rests. I'm quite comfortable simply making a DM judgment call about it. But letting people to a long + short rest as one, or getting the benefits of both? Nope.

And that's your call as a DM, as it should be. The rules themselves don't have a stance on the topic, they just list what benefits you get from each and specify that you can't get a benefit from more than one long rest in a 24 hour period. That's it.

And as I've said earlier, this whole topic is making a mountain out of a mole hill. 90% of the time it's not going to make a difference if they take a long+short rest or not.

 

[Werebat]

I see that I have sown much chaos here... This has been a good day.

 

[Werebat]

There's nothing in the rules that says the elephants can't climb trees. Therefore, a moon druid in the shape of an elephant can climb up a tree and hide there.

 

[Caliban]

There's nothing in the rules that says the elephants can't climb trees. Therefore, a moon druid in the shape of an elephant can climb up a tree and hide there.

That's what we have DM's for.

Besides, in a fantasy world? There might very well be a tree big enough and/or an elephant small enough that such a thing seems reasonable.

"Tell me what happened again?"

"Well...you know those magic beans? "

"What? No, what are you talking about?"

"Oh..well, we caught some suspicious types coming out of the sewer tunnels and gave them a fine for trespassing. This foppish fellow talked Joe into accepting these, well, these magic beans instead. Convinced all of us in the squad it was a good deal. Well...Joe planted one of them and it grew into a giant tree."

"A tree...from beans?"

"Hand to god sir."

"This better not be another drop bear story."

"Of course not! I wouldn't be alive to tell you about it if it was! No, this time it was an elephant that fell on him!"

"An elephant. Out of a tree."

"It was a big tree sir. And then it turned into this smelly hobo and he ran off before I could apprehend him."

"...You expect me to believe that?"

"I tell you sir, ever since those adventurers showed up, it's been a madhouse around here."