log in or register to remove this ad

 

D&D 5E Making Every Class "Short Rest"-based?

Should all classes be based on short-rests for recover of features, etc.?


  • Total voters
    25

DND_Reborn

Legend
Someone might have already done this, but I didn't have any luck searching for it, so here we are.

I've recently been pondering the idea of turning every class into a short-rest based class so features would all be regained on a short rest.
Long rests would still replenish hit points and half hit dice, etc., but that would be it.

Obviously, a lot of changes would be required, so I was curious if others found the idea appealing or not?

Thanks!
 

log in or register to remove this ad

guachi

Adventurer
Some time in 2015 I turned every class into a long rest class. I might have been able to keep the short/long rest as it was written but I really didn't trust myself to balance the game. Players with with short rest PCs loved it. They were vastly more likely to use their abilities, which is what I wanted. Players with long rest PCs weren't really affected. There was less tension to rest just so some PC could get abilities back, though there was still resting to recover HP (10 minutes instead of 1 hour).

I voted "do the opposite" but I certainly wouldn't object to playing a game where everyone was on a short rest.
 

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/They)
Some time in 2015 I turned every class into a long rest class. I might have been able to keep the short/long rest as it was written but I really didn't trust myself to balance the game. Players with with short rest PCs loved it. They were vastly more likely to use their abilities, which is what I wanted. Players with long rest PCs weren't really affected. There was less tension to rest just so some PC could get abilities back, though there was still resting to recover HP (10 minutes instead of 1 hour).
That’s funny, I’m exactly the opposite of your players. I never hesitate to use short rest abilities (though I try not to use them more than once per encounter) because they’re easy to get back. Long rest abilities I have a hard time evaluating when to use them because I can’t easily predict how long an adventuring day will be and taking a long rest is a much bigger commitment.

I’m all for making all classes short rest based. I low-key hate daily ability recovery.
 

If anything I prefer they all be long rest oriented. It doesn't really matter to me in principle, but I'm not satisfied with either Monks or Warlocks in their current form and rebalancing the 2 and a half short rest classes seems more reasonable than rebalancing everything else.

However I voted "Other" because I think all classes should get something back on a short rest. Features like Wizard Arcane Recovery or Bardic Inspiration (after level 5) make it so that even the unharmed group members get some benefit when someone desperately needs rest.
 

guachi

Adventurer
The first campaign I made everyone long rest had anywhere from 1 to 12 encounters in the adventuring day. Classes were Ranger x2, Sorcerer, Monk, Druid, Wizard, Paladin, Rogue, Barbarian (though not all at the same time). The 12 encounter day had everyone running on fumes (the rogue wasn't in the game at the time). The 1 encounter day was a blast as short rest focused characters like the monk went nuts. And he needed to considering all he had to face.
 

At the current stage of D&D, I think a character should be able to do their regular main trick at least once per encounter, with some classes going Nova once per game session.

IMHO, the warlock is basically the only reason the "short vs long rest" debate even exist. You can see that most multiclass combos revolve around their short rest mechanic. If the warlock was a "long rest"-type caster, I think most people would agree that non-caster classes should rely on short rest resources and casters on long rest resource management.

Edit: I am not advocating any changes to the warlock class per se. I'm just saying I think they are the odd caster that generates so much heat.
 
Last edited:

Galandris

Foggy Bottom Campaign Setting Fan
I'd rather have class getting their power back in sync than a mix, so even if I voter "make them all long rest based", I'd be interested in what you could create. My (slight) preference for LR based is because getting all powers back on SR would make spellcaster able to easily nova each fight, and there are already people who find them overpowered as is. The increase of power to the SR classes would need to be great if everyone became SR-based.
 


Ive been working on a variant just like this, although instead of SR based, the classes are all 'encounter' based.

Every class has 'Talents' [known/ readied] like 3.5's Warblade/ ToB classes, that refresh per encounter (with a limited 'in encounter' refresh option).

For casters, they're 'spells'. For martials, they're 'maneuvers'.

The number of maneuvers readied is based on character level (like Multiclass Spell Slots in 5E) but the [spells/maneuvers] known is based on class and level (again, like Spells known in 5E).

Spells/ maneuvers can be 'upcast' or used with a higher level talent slot, just like MC spellcasters.

Sticking with one class (say Fighter) gets you access to higher level talents, whereas MCing gets you access to a broader range of talents (again, just like MC spellcasters in 5e).
 

DND_Reborn

Legend
Ive been working on a variant just like this, although instead of SR based, the classes are all 'encounter' based.

Every class has 'Talents' [known/ readied] like 3.5's Warblade/ ToB classes, that refresh per encounter (with a limited 'in encounter' refresh option).

For casters, they're 'spells'. For martials, they're 'maneuvers'.

The number of maneuvers readied is based on character level (like Multiclass Spell Slots in 5E) but the [spells/maneuvers] known is based on class and level (again, like Spells known in 5E).

Spells/ maneuvers can be 'upcast' or used with a higher level talent slot, just like MC spellcasters.

Sticking with one class (say Fighter) gets you access to higher level talents, whereas MCing gets you access to a broader range of talents (again, just like MC spellcasters in 5e).
Sounds interesting. I'd be curious to see it when you're finsihed.
 

Sounds interesting. I'd be curious to see it when you're finsihed.

I've broken some spells into 'stances' (such as mirror image, mage armor, sanctuary etc) that are activated as a bonus action (along with ToB stances like Punishing sance, thicket of blades etc) plus pulling out certain class features (rage, divine grace, bardic inspiration etc) that also now function as 'stances'.

It's only at a rough outline at the moment.

The advantage of the system is that I can pretty easily allocate 'maneuvers' for martials, the same relative power level of 'spells' for casters, and the system (as a whole) becomes [encounters/rests per adventuring day] neutral (it doesnt matter if there is one, two or ten encounters in a day).

You can multiclass (slowing down access to higher level maneuvers/ spells known, just like MC spellcasters in 5E) to gain access to maneuvers/ spells from a different class.

Still playing around with how to work non combat/ utility [spells/ maneuvers] into the system, and how to deal with things like healing spells/ maneuvers that can be broken by spamming them repeatedly.

Current idea is to limit healing abilities to only work up to 1/2 max HP, and that at the end of each encounter (when maneuvers refresh) HP's are also restored to 1/2 max (if lower), with the underlying system mechanics working off the assumption that at the start of every encounter, the PCs will be at (at least) 1/2 max HP.

So you can heal 'in combat' by spamming a healing spell/ maneuver (to a maximum of 1/2 HP), but when the encounter is over, you simply refresh expended maneuvers, and your HP are restored to 1/2 Max as you gain your second wind/ bind wounds after the battle.

I also want to work a risk/ reward element into the game; both a 'wound level/ fatigue' mechanic (so the longer you push on, the more beat up you become) along with a built in 'escalation/ reward' mechanic, so the longer you push on you also gain a benefit (increased XP? access to a special escalation dice?). Still bouncing a few ideas around for this.

The goal would be to encourage players to continue, rather than encourage them to fall back and rest all the time... at a cost.
 

Also, you can create schools of [magic/ fighting] that gain access to specialist spells/ maneuvers, only available to that school.

So entire unique fighting styles, or schools of magic, with unique abilities/ manouvers/spells for each.
 




Unwise

Adventurer
That way lies 4th edition.

Once you put everybody on the same resource mechanic, the discrepancies become very obvious. The Battlemaster is tripping an enemy, the wizard is casting Wish to summon a castle in the sky. So things get tamed down and shifted around until everybody is equal, and the same. Everybody has at-will power and encounter powers of the same power level. But we still want people to be able to do super cool stuff sometimes, but not too often. So let's give them daily powers too. Now we have the standard At-will+Encounter+Daily structure of 4e that almost everybody railed against.

(Personally I liked 4e except for the HP bloat at later levels)
 


I think it would be easier to change the short-rest classes to the long-rest setup.

Triple the uses of all X per short rest abilities, and make them recharge on a Long rest is the way to go.

So a Battlemaster 3 has 3 Action surges, 3 Second winds, and 12 Superiority dice (d8s) that all come back on a long rest. Which (putting Action surge to one side) works out to:

  • 3d10+9 in self healing (25 points) and
  • 12d8 in bonus damage (54 points)

By contrast, a Paladin 3 has 3 x 1st level Slots (for smites) at 2d8 each, 3 channel divinities, 15 points of LoH. 1 Channel divinity can be used to regain a slot for an extra smite. So in addition to the 2 x channel divinities (and ability to spend slots on spells instead of smites for utility) he sits at

  • 15 points of healing (to anyone) which can also cure disease and poison
  • 4 smites of 2d8 (36 damage) or 12d8 (54) against Fiends and Undead.

So they're basically on par.

For casters:

A 3rd level Warlock has 6 x 2nd level spell slots, and a damn fine cantrip.

A Wizard has 4 x 1sts and 3 x 2nds (thanks to Arcane Recovery) - but a far better list to choose from, and also Rituals.

So again, roughly on par.

When you peer closely at the maths behind the game, the classes balance out at around that 2 short rest per Long rest frequency.

It's more work going the other way (making all classes short rest based) but it's much more balanced in that it cuts down on nova strikes, and removes the temptation to fall back and long rest all the time.
 

Composer99

Adventurer
I'm voting other. I'm inclined to say that most low-level abilities should refresh on a short or long rest basis, and then abilities in tier 3 and 4 should refresh on a long rest basis; with this refresh schedule being more or less uniform.

My thinking here is that ideally the game is agnostic to pacing - if a table plays a fifteen-minute-workday and another table routinely plays twelve-encounter-day meatgrinders and another table plays adventure days that vary widely between them, a more-or-less uniform recovery schedule can accommodate any of these styles more easily than discrepant recovery schedules can. Likewise, this agnosticism makes using variant rules - say, longer rest periods for a grittier game or shorter ones for a more heroic one - easier to dial up or down.

If one were to implement a more uniform schedule based on short or long rests, it might be desirable to have a "strategic"/daily resource that is expended to fuel short-rest recovery. The number of these available could be dialed up or down depending on how heroic or down-to-earth you want the game to be.

(Suffice to say I'm not particularly concerned about this pacing/recovery mechanic resembling, or not resembling, 4e.)

Alternately, either a completely uniform short/long or long rest would be satisfactory. As long as (a) the game is agnostic to pacing and (b) it's easier to tinker with pacing to hit your table's desired playstyle.
 


Level Up!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top