Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 8258301" data-attributes="member: 6704184">Intelligence wasn't brought up before the above quote. It's not about intelligence.It is common sense that the game has abstractions, and that within the abstracted nature of a Long Rest, having a quick fight doesn't preclude finishing the rest if the rules say that it doesn't. Which they do. "No more than an hour" is quite obviously there to give the DM guidance on the difference between a short interruption, and constant or prolonged interruption. Only overthinking the minute wording and thinking literalistically can lead to a problem with this rule. The point being, the rules might sometimes lead to wierd cases, if taken as if written in legalese, rather than just eyeballing it and making a judgement call that doesn't obviously fly in the face of what you've read. The point is to use the rules as a guide, not as laws.This fits my experience. People without such technical expertise have no issue whatsoever reading the 5e books, while people who are either coming from very very technical games, or who have a strong background in things like coding or legalese naturally read the rules as if they were written for them, rather than for the first group, and various aspects of the books make it hard to parse for them as a result. Like the idea of describing things via templating and graphic design being easier to understand. It is the opposite, for a lot of people. There is no way to write a phb that will be equally easy for both you and for my friend Mike, who in spite of dyslexia very rarely gets rules wrong in 5e, but had immense trouble with 4e.Those are both cases of someone just not actually reading the rules of their character abilities. Neither has complex rules, nor is either remotely unclear in the text. And intelligence has nothing to do with it. It's just a reality of people reading something for reference that some folks will skip over things even though they are trying to get everything.Of course they can. The two phrases are used differently within the text. The only people I have ever seen get it wrong are people who are very prone to overthinking rather than just taking the text at face value.They didn't, though.It's not at all. It rather shows that you are conflating your preferences with something greater than your preferences.</blockquote>

Verification