D&D General Short vs Long Rests and 5.24E

[el-remmen]

I'm still of the opionion that if you can rest for 1 hour then it should be safe (and quiet) for 8 hours so why don't you just long rest.

Because frequently it hasn’t been 24 hours since the last one?

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

Because frequently it hasn’t been 24 hours since the last one?

OTOH, if they could safely rest 8 hours, then why not 24 hours!

 

[el-remmen]

OTOH, if they could safely rest 8 hours, then why not 24 hours!

Sure. It must be pretty damn safe then. But I am from a school of play where unless you are in town or settled land the longer you wait around the greater chance monsters find you.

And even if that weren’t the case, at my table I am pretty sure an in-character argument would arise from the half of the party who does not feel like sitting around for an extra 16 hours.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

OTOH, if they could safely rest 8 hours, then why not 24 hours!

If you just sit around and rest all day then the princess will be moved to another castle before you get there to rescue her.

 

[Demetrios1453]

If you just sit around and rest all day then the princess will be moved to another castle before you get there to rescue her.

But if you rest long enough, eventually they will run out of castles to move the princess to, and will be forced to move her to where you're resting!

 

[tetrasodium]

If you just sit around and rest all day then the princess will be moved to another castle before you get there to rescue her.

Conveniently enough for those wanting to abuse short rest novas that is an empty threat that blows back on the GM. The PCs don't particularly "need" anything from the NPCs in the world where that princess exists (food, shelter, gear, consumables, magic items, etc). Sure the GM could hold back things like that & force the party to stick with the starting gear the inept monsters are designed to challenge, but the further they go down that kinda path the deeper you go into "GM-Alice always runs a crapsack world instead of letting us ever save the day or be heroes."

A solution that only replaces serious problem A with serious problem B is not a solid one

 

[Xeviat]

I'm just waiting for the poor barbarian (PB) who has a metagaming ally (MA), probably a bard, who gets snarky as the barbarian transitions from 5e to the totally-backwards-compatible 5.5e . . .

PB: I'm exhausted. Let's take a rest.

MA: Indeed! Some sleep will surely help you get more angry! Twice, even!

PB: Huh? You're making me angry right now.

MA: Whoa! We just sat down. Can you be raging so soon?

PB: Well, yeah. I used to rage twice a day. Now I can rage more if we take a short rest.

MA: That's fortuitous. Did you raise your cortisol? To another "level," one might say? Or is this a new and improved "edition" of my barbarian friend?

PB: What are you talking about? Will you just let me relax, please?

MA: Take it easy! I'll take watch twice for you, friend. Once for your anger-sleep, and once for the beauty-sleep you've obviously been neglecting. Mayhaps a lullaby? "Every breath you take, every move you make, every smile you fake . . . "

A genre savvy Bard is a funny idea!

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

Conveniently enough for those wanting to abuse short rest novas that is an empty threat that blows back on the GM. The PCs don't particularly "need" anything from the NPCs in the world where that princess exists (food, shelter, gear, consumables, magic items, etc). Sure the GM could hold back things like that & force the party to stick with the starting gear the inept monsters are designed to challenge, but the further they go down that kinda path the deeper you go into "GM-Alice always runs a crapsack world instead of letting us ever save the day or be heroes."

A solution that only replaces serious problem A with serious problem B is not a solid one

In that case, the DM can just make every encounter deadly enough that the PCs have a good chance of losing, nova or no nova. If the players aren't interested in engaging with the story, then a campaign ending TPK is no great loss.

 

[DEFCON 1]

There are no amount of rules adjustments that can be made to slow down the optimizing player who forsakes the narrative in order to win the board game of D&D. They will always find a way to min-max at the expense of story.

WotC, like the rest of us, should not waste our time trying to stop them, for they cannot be stopped

 

[tetrasodium]

In that case, the DM can just make every encounter deadly enough that the PCs have a good chance of losing, nova or no nova. If the players aren't interested in engaging with the story, then a campaign ending TPK is no great loss.

Is that a Joke? You started with dismissing the original problems caused by players abusing excessive rests in a system designed to guarantee successful 5mwd. From there you highlighted a path that simply leads to the GM-Alice being blamed for the resulting crapsack world as a solution for bad design & when told that substituting serious problem A for serious problem B you suggest that GM-Alice grow herself the set of horns that come with a moniker like "Killer GM".

The MAD style arms race you are suggesting only ends in animosity & everyone loses