D&D 5E Long rest, interrupted, is that bad?

[Particle_Man]

Am I right in assuming that if you are 7 hours into a long rest, and have to fight a combat, then you have to start all over again (rest for 8 more hours, for a total of 15 hours) or get none of the benefit of the long rests? That is rough on spellcasters!

 

[jodyjohnson]

At least Wizards will get their Arcane Recovery back. That doesn't take a Long Rest just a day.

 

[evileeyore]

The DM has to ask themselves this question:

"What is my purpose in interrupting a long rest before it is 'completed'?"


Firstly, for me, I wouldn't care if the rest was interrupted at hour 7. I might not give the characters back everything for the fight, but after the fight? If the rest was interrupted and turned into a long encounter (fleeing, chasing, whatever), then I'd stop at giving back say 1/2 of what the PCs should be regaining. If not, then after a few more minutes, some post fight clean-up, I'd give them back the rest.

 

[Agamon]

Only if the fighting lasts longer than an hour.

If the rest is interrupted by a period of strenuous activity - at least 1 hour of fighting, casting spells, or similar adventuring activity - the characters must begin rest again to gain any benefit from it.

 

[Particle_Man]

Only if the fighting lasts longer than an hour.

Nobody fights for longer than an hour in a D&D encounter though (600 rounds of combat!), so probably the interpretation is "fighting" at all, not "fighting for an hour". I admit that strictly speaking the comma is ambiguous, but I stand by this interpretation.

 

[Agamon]

Nobody fights for longer than an hour in a D&D encounter though (600 rounds of combat!), so probably the interpretation is "fighting" at all, not "fighting for an hour". I admit that strictly speaking the comma is ambiguous, but I stand by this interpretation.

Lol, yeah, my quote is missing a word, you may be right. It's one hour of walking, plus fighting, spellcasting, etc.

I thought it was an hour of activity, including fighting, but yeah, the hour looks like it's meant to just be for walking.

 

[Savage Wombat]

The DM has to ask themselves this question:

"What is my purpose in interrupting a long rest before it is 'completed'?"

It's relevant if the party is trying to "get away with something" by resting in an unsafe area. In other words, if the DM planned the adventure with them only resting by going back to town, and they try to sleep in the dungeon - it's wandering monster roulette time.

It works with old-school dungeon crawling campaigns. It doesn't in some other sorts of games.

 

[am181d]

From a common sense stand point, I can't imagine penalizing players for an interrupted long rest. If they rest for 7 hours, then get in a fight for 10 minutes, then finish their rest, I think that's fine -- although I wouldn't allow them to recover resources expended during the rest.

 

[evileeyore]

It's relevant if...

It's only relevant if it fits with the DM's plans and purpose.

 

[Kobold Stew]

If interrupted, the adventurers would get the benefits of a short rest (assuming that they have rested for at least an hour).

One reason to enforce the rule, I expect, is to counter the 5-minute-workday experience. If downtime is a luxury (and not something achieved trivially), players have an incentive to invest limited resources (spells, healing potions) wisely, and not blow them all on an encounter-by-encounter basis.

Obviously, not all table play that way, but it's a common enough trope that there may have been a desire to resist it. (and, since the DM controls all and can interpret what's written freely, it sonly resistance, and not prohibition.)

That's my sense.