D&D General My Best and Simplest Homebrew Rule: Nerfed Long Rests

I don't care about the time thing, except insofar that it kind of bugs me that 1st level adventurers can head to the dungeon and come back a week later 3rd or 4th level.
yeah I mixed some home brew down time stuffto streatch it out... and you could not take a long rest AND down time at the same time... so it streached a bit... we hit 9thish level (start at 3rd) and it had been almost 10 years. travel was also time consuming
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Vaalingrade

Legend
I don't care about the time thing, except insofar that it kind of bugs me that 1st level adventurers can head to the dungeon and come back a week later 3rd or 4th level.
That's because 1-2 are secret 0 levels they put in knowing most people don't like them but knowing their then-target audience did, so they exist with the caveat of promising we'll be allowed to ditch them in a session or two.

If they had just provided optional 0 levels and normal 1-2, they could have afforded pacing.
 

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
Honestly I think the easiest solution is "Long Rests can only occur in a place of both safety and comfort." It's solves the overland travel encounter nova problem, and forces the party to actually leave the dungeon to rest and deal with the consequences on their next delve.
But what will throw off the ratio of short rests to long rests, changing the balance between classes. Same problem as the Gritty Rest variant.
 


Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
That's true. the solution to that problem is to eliminate the difference (but obviously that is a much more extensive game design challenge).
Yeah. As much as I find some flaws in the OP's approach, it can still work with a the same ratio adjustments - they were giving out half a long rest, so only giving out one short rest can keep things in balance.

On the other hand, looking how newer materials are updating short rest abilities to PROF times per long rest, it may be that 2024 may look at consolidating to just one type of rest and eliminating this issue at it's root.
 

Nutation

Explorer
Because the system any other way is broken. The PC selects how much they are willing to exert their character.
...
Now imagine an 11th level fighter, burning 1 HD per round for 3 additional attacks. Its much too powerful that way. The PC decides at what level they are activating it at.
You can decide your own house rules, of course, but you are effectively charging HD for at-will or always-on abilities. It generates logical oddities. A fighter/monk using Action Surge to Dash would have to decide how far, because that is level-dependent. A fighter/rogue using it for Stealth would have to decide whether to use Expertise or not.
Edit: I can probably construct similar situations with sorcery points or ki points. But, if your players understand and buy into this, not a problem.
 
Last edited:

In general, short-rest-based and long-rest-based classes even out after about three straight days of adventuring.
This, then, would seem to be the primary point of (possible) failure, based on my experience with players who favor long-rest-based classes. They will not want to engage in three straight days of adventuring...ever, if they can avoid it. In general, they won't want to engage in two straight days of adventuring if they can avoid it, but that's not as easy to sell.

Or, to put it in a more pithy way, the "five minute workday" problem becomes replaced with the "weekend warrior" problem: adventuring is confined to (at most) two-day chunks, with a full 24-hour rest between such chunks.
 




Immoralkickass

Explorer
I don't like it, its obviously nerfing the players, and players dont like nerfs. Plus, most people have trouble remembering too many house rules.

A better way to do it is be more liberal with giving out Exhaustion levels. Long distance travel at fast pace? Exhaustion. Lack of food/water? Exhaustion. Long rest in poor conditions? Exhaustion. This monster over here? Has an ability that gives you Exhaustion.

Once the PCs have more than 1 stack of Exhaustion, it takes multiple Long Rests to get rid, but they can still try to power through stuff if they feel confident, or simply dont mind the risk.
 

Do people not want resource management???
Nes. Yo. Naybe.

It's sort of like inventory tetris. The idea of having to carefully manage your inventory so you can maximize your usage of it sounds great. In practice, unfortunately, it's mostly tedious and frustrating. Resource management often hits the same notes: the idea seems cool, but in practice it generally feels like you managed resources in order to avoid being punished, rather than managing resources so you could do well.

And that's sort of the crux of a lot of mechanics like this (spell components, for example, are in a similar boat in most games, though I hear Torchbearer actually uses them extremely well.) Making them have teeth almost always makes them feel like doing chores so you can avoid bad things, which sucks the fun out of participating. Most other proposed "fixes" for powerful casters, such as spell failure chance or a constant risk of magic blowing up and doing bad things (sometimes very bad things) very frequently cashes out as "jump through hoops to avoid suffering" rather than "rise to this fun challenge in order to be awesome!"

But as a DM, I do, especially because I want to be able to challenge my players without resorting to high CR monsters that are less narratively appropriate.
Then, IMO, you are barking up the wrong tree entirely. You challenge your players by presenting them with situations where they cannot calculate a clear correct action, and must instead make difficult value judgments. Changing the rest mechanics simply alters one of the variables in the calculation, rather than making it so calculation is not useful. And, as part of that change, you run rather a great risk of teaching your players to avoid taking risks and avoid engaging in adventures that involve time pressure, because they are (by definition) rewarded with greater chances of success when they avoid such pressures.

I don't like it, its obviously nerfing the players, and players dont like nerfs. Plus, most people have trouble remembering too many house rules.

A better way to do it is be more liberal with giving out Exhaustion levels. Long distance travel at fast pace? Exhaustion. Lack of food/water? Exhaustion. Long rest in poor conditions? Exhaustion. This monster over here? Has an ability that gives you Exhaustion.

Once the PCs have more than 1 stack of Exhaustion, it takes multiple Long Rests to get rid, but they can still try to power through stuff if they feel confident, or simply dont mind the risk.
....Exhaustion is so much worse than the proposed house rule, I'm...genuinely shocked anyone would think it was a better alternative.

One level of exhaustion essentially makes combat a non-starter. Two doubles down on that (speed halved), and three makes doing literally anything suck (because you have universal disadvantage). Being liberal with Exhaustion is basically just nerfing everyone in highly randomized ways, and forcing them to rest even more often than the proposed house rule.

Exhaustion as written in 5e is even more a "neat idea, dull/anti-fun execution" than resource management normally ends up. There's an extremely good reason 5e doesn't use the exhaustion rules very much; they suck and are really, really not fun.
 

AnotherGuy

Adventurer
You can decide your own house rules, of course, but you are effectively charging HD for at-will or always-on abilities. It generates logical oddities. A fighter/monk using Action Surge to Dash would have to decide how far, because that is level-dependent. A fighter/rogue using it for Stealth would have to decide whether to use Expertise or not.
Edit: I can probably construct similar situations with sorcery points or ki points. But, if your players understand and buy into this, not a problem.
I hear you, but it's not a concern at our table. The player who utilises it most plays the battlemaster/wizard and he absolutely loves it.

On the other side of the coin it also allows you to upscale Magic Missile to a 2nd level slot or Fireball to a 4th level spell slots still at the cost of 1HD or 2HD respectively. Having tried numerous resting systems I can honestly say this is the best fit for us.

The PCs are currently 13TH, and this system allows for many days of travel without your typical Long Rests. We have 2 other major changes
(1) Odd numbered abilities mean something.
(2) Feats have been reworked dramatically.
The benefit being that most PCs have 1-3 additional HD.

For long journeys (for instance Undermountain) the choice between using a HD for Hit Points or to use an ability becomes a meaningful choice. As a DM I can run grittier adventures which I prefer, and its a better simulation model for me between recuperation, exhaustion and using one's abilities. As a player you have greater freedom.

We have been using this system for over 2 years and experienced it at a variety of levels with multiple mini-campaigns and with a number of classes (except monks which are banned at my table).

I don't expect it to work for every table. It needs to match one's DMing style.
 


Hit Points, Spell Slots, Hit Dice, Ki Points, Sorcery Points, Combat Maneuvers, Bardic Inspiration...etc
The whole game is about resource management.
That is certainly one perspective on it, and I don't mean that facetiously. Viewing the game as a logistical puzzle is one of the ways people derive joy from it.

It's far from the only way, even when it comes to the mechanics of the game. I, personally, am not super keen on a lot of that. I prefer the tactical considerations over the logistic ones when it comes to the nitty-gritty details of mechanics, and I much prefer the moral/ethical challenges to either of those previous things. (By "moral/ethical," I mean having to make difficult choices where you don't know which result you truly want, and must decide where your loyalties lie or what actually matters to you.)
 

But what will throw off the ratio of short rests to long rests, changing the balance between classes. Same problem as the Gritty Rest variant.
In my experience gritty rests don't do that, quite the opposite. At least for me it is far easier to maintain the balance with gritty rests.
 

On the other hand, looking how newer materials are updating short rest abilities to PROF times per long rest, it may be that 2024 may look at consolidating to just one type of rest and eliminating this issue at it's root.

Which is a terrible idea. I don't necessarily mind getting rid of two different types of rests, but they're going into exactly the wrong direction with this. If there was only one type of rest, it should be one that refreshes a fraction of your resources and then you could (time permitting) stack those to refresh everything. But one rest type that just refreshes everything is a terrible idea. It is exactly this all or nothing nature of long rests which causes the problems.
 

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
Which is a terrible idea. I don't necessarily mind getting rid of two different types of rests, but they're going into exactly the wrong direction with this. If there was only one type of rest, it should be one that refreshes a fraction of your resources and then you could (time permitting) stack those to refresh everything. But one rest type that just refreshes everything is a terrible idea. It is exactly this all or nothing nature of long rests which causes the problems.
Yeah, I'm not particularly thrilled with this direction either. I was just mentioning that this seems to be where they are headed.
 

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
In my experience gritty rests don't do that, quite the opposite. At least for me it is far easier to maintain the balance with gritty rests.
Just to understand, you are saying that you had an easier time maintaining the ratio of usually two short rests per long rest using the gritty rest rules? That you averaged towards two overnights (short rests) and then a week of downtime (long rest) in your adventures?

I'd find that very confining in adventure design, to try to encourage exactly three days adventuring then a week of down time. I found that in general there were a lot more overnights then there was downtimes, so the ratio of short rests to long rests was very different.
 

Just to understand, you are saying that you had an easier time maintaining the ratio of usually two short rests per long rest using the gritty rest rules? That you averaged towards two overnights (short rests) and then a week of downtime (long rest) in your adventures?

I'd find that very confining in adventure design, to try to encourage exactly three days adventuring then a week of down time. I found that in general there were a lot more overnights then there was downtimes, so the ratio of short rests to long rests was very different.

Well, it isn't of course isn't always exactly two short per one long, (though I think it is rather close) but for how I pace stuff, it works for maintaining both rests as useful. I understand people often have issues with having short rests happening often enough or even at all. With gritty that is not a problem.

With the normal rests the both rests have very similar identity. Both are basically things that can be done 'on the field'. How I run gritty, the long rest is basically a small bit of downtime in a safe location. It gives it very different place as far as the pacing goes than the short rest.

I think @NotAYakk explains how it works very well in post #4 of this thread.
 

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top