Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 8744987" data-attributes="member: 7023840">I don't disagree ... but at 11th level, a Wizard gets a ton of spells from across the spectrum, as well as arcane recovery (which would be an additional 3 fifth level spells.... and the difference, again, is that the Wizard gets to blow out all their spells when they want to when the party doesn't take a short rest. That's the key difference.I often see this issue raised (this was also done by others) ... what about the short rest class going &quot;Nova.&quot; At high levels? And I'm like ... well, what if? Do you mean that they will be like a Paladin, having to choose if they're going to go all smite-y in this combat, or save it up for later? Or like a Wizard, blowing all their spells now?The resources were calculated on a basis that they would get 2 short rests ... and if they do, that's awesome! I love short rest characters. But when they don't, they seem dramatically underpowered. And the more short-rest dependent the class is, they worse it becomes.I honestly think that 90% of monk criticisms, for example, would be cured by just switching ki to 3x and long rest. They are probably the single class that's the most affected, btw. Warlocks have (arguably) the best cantrip and invocations. Fighters are great at combat without their short rest abilities. Monks, though, are 100% dependent on a short-rest mechanic to be useful.Personally, I just like the idea of having short rests ... but I've seen too many complaints, which is why I proposed the simplest way possible to get around the issue for tables that have it.But otherwise, I'd propose something similar to, &quot;You can take two short rests per long rest, but you must take an minute to do so&quot; (in order to avoid mid-combat short rests).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Snarf Zagyg, post: 8744987, member: 7023840"] I don't disagree ... but at 11th level, a Wizard gets a ton of spells from across the spectrum, as well as arcane recovery (which would be an additional 3 fifth level spells. ... and the difference, again, is that the Wizard gets to [I]blow out all their spells when they want to[/I] when the party doesn't take a short rest. That's the key difference. I often see this issue raised (this was also done by others) ... what about the short rest class going "Nova." At high levels? And I'm like ... well, what if? Do you mean that they will be like a Paladin, having to choose if they're going to go all smite-y in this combat, or save it up for later? Or like a Wizard, blowing all their spells now? The resources were calculated on a basis that they would get 2 short rests ... and if they do, that's awesome! I love short rest characters. But when they don't, they seem dramatically underpowered. And the more short-rest dependent the class is, they worse it becomes. I honestly think that 90% of monk criticisms, for example, would be cured by just switching ki to 3x and long rest. They are probably the single class that's the most affected, btw. Warlocks have (arguably) the best cantrip and invocations. Fighters are great at combat without their short rest abilities. Monks, though, are 100% dependent on a short-rest mechanic to be useful. Personally, I just like the idea of having short rests ... but I've seen too many complaints, which is why I proposed the simplest way possible to get around the issue for tables that have it. But otherwise, I'd propose something similar to, "You can take two short rests per long rest, but you must take an minute to do so" (in order to avoid mid-combat short rests). [/QUOTE]

Verification