D&D 5E How many short rests per long rest?

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Fenris447]

Most parties I play in usually do between 1 and 2 SRs between LRs. As a DM, I'm inclined to allow 3, even 4 if the situation really called for it. I'd rather they push through with SRs instead of breaking up the narrative tension by taking an 8 hour break. But I can't recall ever actually having more than 2 happen at my table.

I don't have a better solution to the way SRs and LRs work, but I do crave something better. Even in a well-designed dungeon where the party is properly conserving their resources, sometimes a long rest becomes necessary right in the middle of it all. Maybe it's personal laziness as a DM, but I don't like the idea of having to rewrite the rest of the dungeon to react to the players' 8 hour break, even if the players have done everything right so far.

(Spoilers for Descent into Avernus) Take Vanthampur Villa for example. The party conserved their resources and played smart, and still needed a LR halfway through the assault. The adventure even has them level up halfway through! And yet there's nothing in the book addressing the fact that most, if not all parties, would have to take that break during the whole attack. No mention of how the whole compound would react. For me, that means that either the book has left something out, or the world reacts unrealistically (in this case, by not reacting at all). This isn't the worst thing in the world, but it is one of my few small frustrations with 5e's design.

 

[FrogReaver]

@FrogReaver - What if I'm not using combat as the sole measure of utility?

Then we all know that anything that doesn't follow the new-Vancian path will have less versatility - and thus less utility. Adding short rests per day won't fix that problem for the warlock.

And not using damage as the sole tool of comparison?

Well, in terms of casters it's basically one concentration slot per combat. Most spells are either damage or concentration. I focus on damage because of the concentration limitation. Not solely damage.

I'm not arguing with your DPR math, I just don't find it as important as you do.

You should. The game is designed such that each level of spell should be more or less equal to another spell of that level. DPR just gives us a number to compare to non-spells with.

Nor, I suspect, did the game designers. Your numbers might suggest otherwise when it comes to rest ratios, but your numbers aren't the only tool in the toolbox.

In a discussion about the Number of short rests - what other tool than Numbers would be able to tell you that?

 

[cmad1977]

DPR is a useless metric for RPGs. Great for WoW and computer games.
Bottom line: 1-2 short rests/long rest. No limit on the amount the players can take.
If your players are taking a short rest after every encounter(NOT BATTLE, because encounters are NOT all fights)... that’s a DM issue.

 

[FrogReaver]

No.

Show your work, do a spreadsheet. Show how it works across levels, classes, and with 6-8 encounters.

Otherwise, it's cherrypicking. Because we know how the game is designed. The burden isn't on me, both because we know how the game is designed, we know the RAW, and I know how tables work.

GIGO. If you want to look at it with a sense of intellectual curiosity, feel free to do the work (I'm not going to)*. If you want to argue because you think you're going to win something or other, find someone else.

*Seriously- it would be interesting for DPR people. Others have asked for it in other threads, but it would take work. Your assertions are ... just that. And? Not every person is a DPR person.

It's easy to dismiss others work - when you yourself are unwilling to do any.

Just another case of - if it's not perfect and all encompassing it means nothing. I think we need a name for that - maybe - philosophy of dismissing.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

The problem I had with short rests is their length: 1-hour in an active exploration mode is a lot of time and if all players are not in need of a short rest, it push the short-rest-based classes to argue to take one while the rest want to continue onward.

So to avoid having to deal with OoC discussions about the pros and cons of taking a 1 hour short rest, I changed it to require only 5 minutes (but requires 1 use of healer's kit to spend HD) with a cap of 2 SR per long rest. So a player that feel he needs a SR to regain slots or health, he only need to ask for a short 5 minutes breaks, which most other players will allow. No need to have the whole party short-resting at the same time or going solo while the others rest.

So:
Short rest
- 5 minutes break, need 1 use of Healer's Kit to spend HD, max 2 times in a day.
Long rest

• 6 hours, Interruption breaks it (no matter the length of said interruption), 1 per day.
• Recover Con score + level HP and half total HD, can spend 1 use of Healer's kit to spend HD (no Healer's kit dependency if resting in a comfortable place).
• Poisoned or diseased creatures must make a Con check against DC 15 to benefit from long rest. (check made at the end of the rest)
• Sleeping in any armor requires a Con check against 10 to benefit from long rest.
• Food and water spent at the start of the Long Rest.
• Sleeping in environmental hazard requires a Con check against DC 13 to benefit from long rest. A tent and a nice fire gives advantage on the roll.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Blue]

As others have already noted, you aren't missing anything.

BUT (I like big buts and I cannot lie) the game is balanced on the 2:1 short rest to long rest ratio. AFAICT, any tinkering etc. should take that into account.

I disagree. Partially.

I will agree that short rest resource recovery to long rest resource recovery is balanced at 2 short rests per long rest.

BUT, I think that short rest resource recovery to at-will resources is balanced 2-3 encounters per short rest.

So any tinkering needs to take both into account.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Sword of Spirit]

Anecdotaly, here's how my group's party works out:

Battle Master Fighter (dual wielder)
Swashbuckler Rogue
Fiend/Blade Warlock (Polearm Master with quarterstaff and house ruled to two-handed, d6, finesse)
Lore Bard
Warrior-Mage (custom full caster fighter/wizard blend)

We're still low level and in dungeons so far we're likely to get a smaller number of more dangerous encounters (let's say 3 or 4). The party is likely to take about 2 short rests during that time. If it's a real meat-grinder they might need to take 3, and there may have been one day with more encounters where they took 4, but I'm not sure.

The warlock kicks butt. Part of it is the unintended synergy of my finesse quarterstaff with a blade pact warlock.

The fighter is just solid. They don't really stand out, and I think they are actually being outdamaged by the warlock and the rogue, but some of that is because the player didn't optimize at all compared to the rest of the group (for example, 16 in both Str and Dex).

The bard has been mostly party support and skill master, with a Spell Sniper eldritch blast for a token damage contribution.

Warrior-Mage has the lowest damage contribution other than the bard, but he has excellent tanking with high AC and shield, and his major contribution is probably the wizard spell list utility.

The rogue rocks, even with the smaller number of encounters per day disfavoring at-will classes. Part of it is very good stats and a magic weapon, and part of it is just the solid rogue package with sneak attack most turns. She probably has the highest damage per turn in the group.

As I said, just some anecdotes. Maybe someone will find it useful.