Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 7244053" data-attributes="member: 71699">In practice at the table, I find that it does indeed mean something. As a DM, I don't like to be forced to distort my narratives. The 24 hour long rest has proven long enough that interruptions are easy to narrate: preventing individuals from abusing it.In the end, it is 100% up to the DM whether or not characters can rest. A DM can always interrupt one. Jasper cannot hold up the bar unless I let him. And for me the 24 hour long rest - and then not another for at least 24 hrs, for a 48 hour minimum cycle - let's me manage that in a way that feels natural. Additionally, it helps the background world out by halving the number of strategic spell casts. (So only 1/2 the availability of Raise Dead etc.) I find that very helpful. Also deals with L's Tiny Hut quite well.24 hours is also enough time that background events can meaningfully leave characters behind. I tried 48 hour long rests, but that was far too long. The impact was negative on the narrative, because eventually we had to let the characters rest and when they did too much time was forced to elapse.The issue I have with the OPs concept is that I think what's needed is a balance of longer resting time, and longer between rests. Not solely one or the other because eventually what happens is the longest time frame ends up forcing the pacing to itself.</blockquote>