• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

D&D 5E Out of the Abyss OOC


log in or register to remove this ad


Kobold Stew said:
OOC: Interrupting Long Rests.
CB: so I understand that any fighting interrupts a long rest (I've seen people dispute that, but I agree that's both the meaning and the intention of the rule.) Does that mean that if we do not participate in this fight, we could still benefit from the long rest? If that were so, then it may be strategic for only some of us to engage in the fight. Just thinkin' out loud, here.
Good question. I get where you're coming from because yesterday when I reviewed the long rest rule, I immediately frowned. The sentence syntax in that section is vague and potentially opens the door to grammarian quibbling. Not that you are quibbling. Or a grammarian. :D

My baseline gut reaction to your question is a fairly staunch no. First, I think the mere fact of the fight regardless of actual involvement is stressful enough such that it disqualifies the long rest. Could I vehemently argue the opposite? Absolutely. "Hey, my wood elf was engrossed in attuning her new McGuffin and never drew her battle axe once or cast a spell during that kobold ambush! How come I'm being penalized for not doing anything?! That's a nonsensical result." Dispersions upon Justice Scalia's "mere factual innocence" aside, combat is stressful. Participating in it is adrenaline-laden. So is watching it occur to your colleagues and friends.

Second, I don't want to disincentivize participation in encounters. If we go with a rule that permits me to individually adjudicate whether one character benefits from a long rest because he remained asleep or hid whilst others went on the attack, it makes it easy for players to externalize their increased rate of survival onto others. I think that's unfair.

Third, it'd create administrative uncertainty. We'd start fielding these sorts of questions: "Did Johnny get his spell slots back when the otyugh attacked that last long rest?" And: "Does casting one racial cantrip reeeeeally mean I lose the benefit of my long rest? C'mon, mang!" My strong preference as DM in a PbP environment is to avoid confusion and increase transparency and clarity whenever feasible. Confusion leads to delay, and delay in a PbP leads to a dearth of gaming.

Fourth, you guys are a group. A party. A cohesive unit. My preference, when possible, is to treat you as a group. This is D&D, though. It isn't always possible to treat you as a group. That's why we have class abilities. And individualized equipment. And initiative. And an emphasis on roleplay. Here, however, we're talking about a provision in the rule that dispenses with a long rest when that rest is interrupted while the group, as a whole, was encamped. In that situation, I'm comfortable saying the party as a whole either does or does not benefit from the long rest.
 
Last edited:




I am curious to know my players' thinking on this issue. If it turns out four out of five of you really prefer individual adjudication on interrupted long rest, I'd like to know. Frankly, it's a factor in my thought process.
 


I am curious to know my players' thinking on this issue. If it turns out four out of five of you really prefer individual adjudication on interrupted long rest, I'd like to know. Frankly, it's a factor in my thought process.

I think it depends on the situation at hand. If Buppido was the only enemy, and Brinn managed to take him out in a surprise round, then I think logically the rest can be considered UNinterrupted for those who didn't act. But if I know that there is combat about and I've been asked to roll an initiative, then I'm all in--action or no, the short or long rest is kaput.

My .02.

Oh.. I'm back! :)
 


Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top