Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DDNFan" data-source="post: 6327045" data-attributes="member: 6776483">You could drop those other 1000 grains right next to the first pile and call them two piles, because they aren't merged into a single continuous whole.That's not what we're discussing. You can merge two one hour periods into a single logical two hour period called &quot;a single short rest&quot;. No one is disputing that.What we're saying is that, if you have two hours of rest, + one nanosecond in between of &quot;non-rest activity&quot;, then that's two rests, not one. And there is no rule that can be added that is not worse than the problem it is trying to solve (spamming second wind or refreshing spell slots), that won't add very arbitrary and railroady restrictions on perfectly reasonable PC behavior.They are going to have to errata this. The definition what consistutes a short rest does not refer to nor impose any restriction on taking multiple short rests, one after another.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DDNFan, post: 6327045, member: 6776483"] You could drop those other 1000 grains [I]right next[/I] to the first pile and call them two piles, because they aren't merged into a single continuous whole. That's not what we're discussing. You can merge two one hour periods into a single logical two hour period called "a single short rest". No one is disputing that. What we're saying is that, if you have two hours of rest, + one [U]nanosecond [/U]in between of "non-rest activity", then that's [I]two [/I]rests, not one. And there is no rule that can be added that is not worse than the problem it is trying to solve (spamming second wind or refreshing spell slots), that won't add very arbitrary and railroady restrictions on perfectly reasonable PC behavior. They are going to have to errata this. The definition what consistutes a short rest does not refer to nor impose any restriction on taking multiple short rests, one after another. [/QUOTE]

Verification