Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Arial Black" data-source="post: 6960723" data-attributes="member: 6799649">Errm...pretty sure I was talking about a situation where you specifically had not done anything strenuous within the last hour...Eating/drinking/bandaging/etc. take far less than an hour to perform. Although you might not have had an hour when you weren't, say, travelling, you can certainly imagine that you've had the odd five minutes here and there in order to do those things.In fact, the only thing you actually need a full hour for is....rest!Of course, the DM may say that the party has been chased so closely by the enemy that, no, they haven't been able to stop for even five minutes. Well, if that's the case, if you ask the DM if you have done anything stressful during the last hour, then the DM can say that, yes, you've been 'travelling' for your very lives, so you don't get the benefit of a short rest.Earlier in this thread I quoted the rules about short rests, pointing out that the rules don't say you have to actually eat/drink/bandage during that specific hour in order to gain the short rest benefits, just that you can't have done anything more strenuous than those things.You seemed to be of the opinion that surely the RAI was that you actually do those things during that hour, because why would they mention them by name if that wasn't their clear intention?The answer is this: they knew that the game includes the long rest/short rest mechanics, and they expected PCs to be able to do stuff like eating/bandaging during that short rest hour if they wanted, but not actually force them to do those things in that specific hour. How should they word it? If they say that you must eat/bandage during that hour in order to benefit, then this would create the absurdity of not benefiting from eating/bandaging outside that hour! Imagine that my PC drinks from his canteen and eats some jerky while the party are travelling, and the snack lasts from 11:50 AM to 11:55. Then, the party leader decides to have an Officially Designated Short Rest (TM) at noon, during which the party has their Officially Approved Mandatory Snacks. Since my PC just ate only five minutes ago, I see no reason to eat again so soon. After the Official Short Rest, the DM gives the rest of the party the benefits of a Short Rest, but because my PC's snack was outside the Official Short Rest Hour (TM) my PC does not get the benefit.No. Just, no.But if the writers don't say that you can eat/bandage during the hour, then some DMs may interpret eating/bandaging/etc. as 'not resting', and therefore the PCs don't get the benefits because they didn't rest for a full hour; they were eating and bandaging instead of resting, right?So how could they word the rule to avoid either misunderstanding? Simples! Say that they can do stuff like eating/bandaging during the hour and it still counts as resting! Also, anything else, as long as it isn't more strenuous than those things!This doesn't take away the DM's agency! The players can certainly ask if they have done anything strenuous within the last hour, and if the DM thinks that they haven't even had five minutes to eat/bandage (for whatever reason) then he can tell them that they haven't had enough rest for a Short Rest, and even explain why! (The pygmies were one step behind you the whole time. Fey spoiled your food. There is a toilet paper shortage in the country. Whatever)</blockquote>

Verification