D&D 5E D&D Unboxing Starter Set Video is on Youtube

[baradtgnome]

Yep. That's why I hope they didn't change the wording for the short rest, which is at least an hour. Wanna rest a hour and half, go ahead it's a short rest. Two hours? A short rest. Three hours, still just a short rest. That's why it's vaguely called a short rest, not an hour-long rest. It's a rest that takes at least an hour, but longer if you want it to, and here's what happens when you take that rest.

I'm a bit confused that this wasn't the answer to the question in the video, because, to me, that's obviously the rules as intended.

Well said. A thoughtful approach to a pragmatic solution.

 

[DDNFan]

So effectively the proper way to play the game is not to play by the rules, because apparently resting two hours instead of one is considered a cheesy exploit.

There's a name for that : Stormwind fallacy.

If resting more than once breaks the game because of one unlimited healing ability, and makes level 1 basic fighters unkillable regenerating troll monsters, the proper solution is to accuse those who play by the rules of playing a boring game (or maybe being cheesy min maxers, because their characters choose not to enter combat until they are fully healed when they have the choice not to), instead of actually designing the game with limited daily healing in mind and building class abilities around that.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Well said. A thoughtful approach to a pragmatic solution.

I don't think it's any better a solution than "random encounters! DMG alt rules!", personally.

Which is to say, sure, it works, but it feels like a patch. Why can't the players determine that a short rest is over after an hour and then they start a new one five minutes later? Because the DM says so? Great, the DM could say a lot of things.

Ultimately, we're still left with the underlying issue of chaining short rests being more attractive than just TAKING a short rest, and a patch that says "you, er, can't do that" isn't satisfying to me. But maybe I'll find other things work against this or that it's not as big a deal as all that.

 

[DDNFan]

Well said. A thoughtful approach to a pragmatic solution.

How is it thoughtful to pick up somebody else's game design mess each and every session? They had a perfectly fine version of Second Wind in the final playtest, and they screwed it up and now are even admitting that taking more than one short rest breaks the game in other ways as well.

Even the life cleric can't heal up past 50% HP for free after chaining multiple short rests.

Con 10 + level 1 fighter, is equivalent to AD&D 2nd edition Con 19+. That's a supernatural level of constitution, awarded to every level 1 fighter.

 

[DDNFan]

I don't think it's any better a solution than "random encounters! DMG alt rules!", personally.

Which is to say, sure, it works, but it feels like a patch. Why can't the players determine that a short rest is over after an hour and then they start a new one five minutes later? Because the DM says so? Great, the DM could say a lot of things.

Ultimately, we're still left with the underlying issue of chaining short rests being more attractive than just TAKING a short rest, and a patch that says "you, er, can't do that" isn't satisfying to me. But maybe I'll find other things work against this or that it's not as big a deal as all that.

Telling DMs to work around a level 1 fighter ability is worse than a patch, it's a cop out, passing the buck, dropping the ball, whatever analogy. You might be more forgiving than I am, but I gave them feedback on this, and so did others, so they have no excuse.

DMs shouldn't have to add houserules for the game not to be broken, after a two year public playtest. If their assumption was that chaining short rests would break the game, they needed to put a hard limit on the refresh time between short rests as well. At which point they should have just put Second Wind back to Temp HP, which didn't have this problem, or any narrative ones either. Make it a reaction that gives temp HP which is narrated as adrenalin surge and not actual healing, and it worked.

Instead, we get this non-answer that it's the DM's fault if he doesn't railroad his players around this bug in the most basic of all classes in Basic D&D.

 

[jadrax]

I am wondering if Second Wind would be more thematic if you could one use it when Bloodied (at half hit points or less).

 

[Matt James]

There's really a pretty stark difference in how various groups play. It's something I need more help in understanding, but I just have never run into a major issue changing things I see as unbalanced, or unfit for my campaigns. Someone is free to bring up their concerns about it, or even argue their point at the table, but once my DM ruling is rendered, that's that and we move on.

It sounds like those that have a significant problem with this don't have that same dynamic. If you and your group finds a significant issue with one mechanic, is it really beyond everyone to change the way it works and move on? Do you not play the game to solve problems, kill monsters, and create a cool story?

 

[SkidAce]

So effectively the proper way to play the game is not to play by the rules, because apparently resting two hours instead of one is considered a cheesy exploit.

There's a name for that : Stormwind fallacy.

If resting more than once breaks the game because of one unlimited healing ability, and makes level 1 basic fighters unkillable regenerating troll monsters, the proper solution is to accuse those who play by the rules of playing a boring game (or maybe being cheesy min maxers, because their characters choose not to enter combat until they are fully healed when they have the choice not to), instead of actually designing the game with limited daily healing in mind and building class abilities around that.

But perhaps you should consider that what you say above is not mine or anyone else's intent.

I think we are playing by the rules. A short rest is a short rest, hour or more is the only definition we currently know. So my players have to wait for the water level in a submerged room to lower, it takes 2.5 hours, they say "we take a short rest" I say "okay".

There was no statement of anything being a "cheesy exploit", nor was anyone accused of anything (that I saw). Don't put words in my mouth.

Never attribute to malice what can be explained by a difference in opinion...

 

[I'm A Banana]

I am wondering if Second Wind would be more thematic if you could one use it when Bloodied (at half hit points or less).

I like the thought there, but it only changes the issue a bit. Rather than healing up to full, the character just heals up to half. And if [MENTION=66111]Cybit[/MENTION] 's indication that this is more than just the Fighter is anything to go on, it won't solve the underlying issue.

Still, I like the way you're thinking better than I like the "if you want to ruin your game go right ahead" perspective on it. Some tweaks to the ability might just be enough of a solution. Making it regained on an extended rest rather than a short rest seems like a simple way to fix it to me, and could be applied to all similar abilities.

It sounds like those that have a significant problem with this don't have that same dynamic. If you and your group finds a significant issue with one mechanic, is it really beyond everyone to change the way it works and move on? Do you not play the game to solve problems, kill monsters, and create a cool story?

You or me or anyone else can do that without spending a dollar on 5e. Lets not imagine that this game is the only way that it is possible to do realize this goal, and so it is on every player to fix all the issues every time.

Which isn't to say that 5e needs to be the Perfect Game, either. It's going to have issues. It'll be more constructive to recognize those issues than to sweep them under the table, I feel.

For me, heals you can replenish with a short rest being more effective than a short rest creates an issue that simply saying "don't take more than one short rest in a row!" doesn't actually fix in any fundamental way. You need to nerf the healing abiltiies, or jack up the power of a short rest. Which isn't a table fix, it's a systemic fix. Not that table fixes can't patch it just fine.

 

[sidonunspa]

I like the thought there, but it only changes the issue a bit. Rather than healing up to full, the character just heals up to half. And if [MENTION=66111]Cybit[/MENTION] 's indication that this is more than just the Fighter is anything to go on, it won't solve the underlying issue.

Still, I like the way you're thinking better than I like the "if you want to ruin your game go right ahead" perspective on it. Some tweaks to the ability might just be enough of a solution. Making it regained on an extended rest rather than a short rest seems like a simple way to fix it to me, and could be applied to all similar abilities.



You or me or anyone else can do that without spending a dollar on 5e. Lets not imagine that this game is the only way that it is possible to do realize this goal, and so it is on every player to fix all the issues every time.

Which isn't to say that 5e needs to be the Perfect Game, either. It's going to have issues. It'll be more constructive to recognize those issues than to sweep them under the table, I feel.

For me, heals you can replenish with a short rest being more effective than a short rest creates an issue that simply saying "don't take more than one short rest in a row!" doesn't actually fix in any fundamental way. You need to nerf the healing abiltiies, or jack up the power of a short rest. Which isn't a table fix, it's a systemic fix. Not that table fixes can't patch it just fine.

I would not bet on that

Note that the cleric's channel divinity is charged on a short rest or long rest according to the cleric character sheet... I'm willing to bet they did the same to the paladin's lay on hands