D&D (2024) The Problem with Healing Powercreep

[The Sigil]

the only time it was a matter of counting every last hour like you describe was when the party told the gm "we don't care, we are taking a rest until something stops it". The vast vast majority of the time it was handled like so:
Bob: I think we should head back to town and rest up
Party: yea
Gm: ok... So after [whatever] you make it back to town and rest up over a few days feeling ready for the next adventure. During that time [events]

Occasionally you'd be on an adventure "on the clock" and would have to figure out how much you can heal, but in my experience the above was more or less correct.

Actually, now that I think about it, the above sounds more or less like "taking a long rest" under the current rules. The only difference is that "taking a long rest" in 1E was measured in days/weeks, while in 5E it's measured by rule at "8 hours."

While a lot of people seem to laugh at Gygax's advice on p.37 of the 1E DMG, "YOU CAN NOT HAVE A MEANINGFUL CAMPAIGN IF STRICT TIME RECORDS ARE NOT KEPT," is it possible those that don't like long rests may be agreeing with him? I don't think the issue is actually the "long rest" mechanic so much as the "8 hour" definition.

I will admit here that while I'm usually not strict about time in my campaigns, I do feel that the passage of time adds weight to the proceedings. In my last 5E campaign, I explicitly told the players during Session 0 that I wasn't going to use the 5E time intervals for "long rests" (8 hours) and "short rests" (1 hour). Instead, I was going to use "safe house rests" (resting at the inn in a friendly, peaceful village) and "unsafe rests" (on the trail, behind a spiked dungeon door, etc.) and that I would adjudicate the duration of the rests (hours, days, weeks) when they ask for a rest and tell them beforehand how long getting the rest would take. (I did this because "peaceful rest" like you can get in a safehouse is a much different animal than "stressful rest" like you'd get in a dungeon and IMO it's less about the quantity of the rest and more about the quality).

Mechanically, the rests functioned more or less identically to what is written in 5E. I don't think there was any other mechanical effect; if the players holed up in a dungeon behind a spiked door and I told them an "unsafe rest" (short rest) would take them 4 hours (instead of 1 hour) - I didn't make 4 times the rolls for wandering monsters or cause them to consume four times normal rations, for example. They chose to take fewer short rests even when the adventure wasn't "on a clock" because psychologically, the idea of spending "4 hours" to rest seemed weightier than taking a "1 hour" break.

If I'm not keeping strict track of time, who cares if I label the amount of time that passes "4 hours" versus "1 hour?" Nobody.

I do want to keep stricter track of time in future campaigns, but I found it interesting that just saying, "yeah the time isn't 1 hour but 4 hours" for a short rest was enough to change the psychology of rests - and therefore of healing - even though since I wasn't keeping track of time, the time units were like points on Whose Line Is It Anyway ("everything's made up and the points don't matter").

Just thought I'd throw that realization in here. If you're not doing strict time-keeping, do the time labels on rests really matter?

 

[tetrasodium]

Occasionally you'd be on an adventure "on the clock" and would have to figure out how much you can heal, but in my experience the above was more or less correct.

Actually, now that I think about it, the above sounds more or less like "taking a long rest" under the current rules. The only difference is that "taking a long rest" in 1E was measured in days/weeks, while in 5E it's measured by rule at "8 hours."

While a lot of people seem to laugh at Gygax's advice on p.37 of the 1E DMG, "YOU CAN NOT HAVE A MEANINGFUL CAMPAIGN IF STRICT TIME RECORDS ARE NOT KEPT," is it possible those that don't like long rests may be agreeing with him? I don't think the issue is actually the "long rest" mechanic so much as the "8 hour" definition.

I will admit here that while I'm usually not strict about time in my campaigns, I do feel that the passage of time adds weight to the proceedings. In my last 5E campaign, I explicitly told the players during Session 0 that I wasn't going to use the 5E time intervals for "long rests" (8 hours) and "short rests" (1 hour). Instead, I was going to use "safe house rests" (resting at the inn in a friendly, peaceful village) and "unsafe rests" (on the trail, behind a spiked dungeon door, etc.) and that I would adjudicate the duration of the rests (hours, days, weeks) when they ask for a rest and tell them beforehand how long getting the rest would take.

Mechanically, the rests functioned more or less identically to what is written in 5E. I don't think there was any other mechanical effect; if the players holed up in a dungeon behind a spiked door and I told them an "unsafe rest" (short rest) would take them 4 hours (instead of 1 hour) - I didn't make 4 times the rolls for wandering monsters or cause them to consume four times normal rations, for example. They chose to take fewer short rests even when the adventure wasn't "on a clock" because psychologically, the idea of spending "4 hours" to rest seemed weightier than taking a "1 hour" break.

If I'm not keeping strict track of time, who cares if I label the amount of time that passes "4 hours" versus "1 hour?" Nobody.

I do want to keep stricter track of time in future campaigns, but I found it interesting that just saying, "yeah the time isn't 1 hour but 4 hours" for a short rest was enough to change the psychology of rests - and therefore of healing - even though since I wasn't keeping track of time, the time units were like points on Whose Line Is It Anyway ("everything's made up and the points don't matter").

Just thought I'd throw that realization in here. If you're not doing strict time-keeping, do the time labels on rests really matter?

It matters because of what was lost and you skipped over it while tossing a throw rug over the loss. Instead of the players talking to the GM and the two agreeing that some flavor of recovery as discussed is reasonable under [these] conditions the players just do it and declare any complications a bluff on the part of the gm.... On the off chance their rest gets interrupted they just try try try again until the gm folds or invokes fiat

 

[FrogReaver]

Occasionally you'd be on an adventure "on the clock" and would have to figure out how much you can heal, but in my experience the above was more or less correct.

Actually, now that I think about it, the above sounds more or less like "taking a long rest" under the current rules. The only difference is that "taking a long rest" in 1E was measured in days/weeks, while in 5E it's measured by rule at "8 hours."

While a lot of people seem to laugh at Gygax's advice on p.37 of the 1E DMG, "YOU CAN NOT HAVE A MEANINGFUL CAMPAIGN IF STRICT TIME RECORDS ARE NOT KEPT," is it possible those that don't like long rests may be agreeing with him? I don't think the issue is actually the "long rest" mechanic so much as the "8 hour" definition.

I will admit here that while I'm usually not strict about time in my campaigns, I do feel that the passage of time adds weight to the proceedings. In my last 5E campaign, I explicitly told the players during Session 0 that I wasn't going to use the 5E time intervals for "long rests" (8 hours) and "short rests" (1 hour). Instead, I was going to use "safe house rests" (resting at the inn in a friendly, peaceful village) and "unsafe rests" (on the trail, behind a spiked dungeon door, etc.) and that I would adjudicate the duration of the rests (hours, days, weeks) when they ask for a rest and tell them beforehand how long getting the rest would take. (I did this because "peaceful rest" like you can get in a safehouse is a much different animal than "stressful rest" like you'd get in a dungeon and IMO it's less about the quantity of the rest and more about the quality).

Mechanically, the rests functioned more or less identically to what is written in 5E. I don't think there was any other mechanical effect; if the players holed up in a dungeon behind a spiked door and I told them an "unsafe rest" (short rest) would take them 4 hours (instead of 1 hour) - I didn't make 4 times the rolls for wandering monsters or cause them to consume four times normal rations, for example. They chose to take fewer short rests even when the adventure wasn't "on a clock" because psychologically, the idea of spending "4 hours" to rest seemed weightier than taking a "1 hour" break.

If I'm not keeping strict track of time, who cares if I label the amount of time that passes "4 hours" versus "1 hour?" Nobody.

I do want to keep stricter track of time in future campaigns, but I found it interesting that just saying, "yeah the time isn't 1 hour but 4 hours" for a short rest was enough to change the psychology of rests - and therefore of healing - even though since I wasn't keeping track of time, the time units were like points on Whose Line Is It Anyway ("everything's made up and the points don't matter").

Just thought I'd throw that realization in here. If you're not doing strict time-keeping, do the time labels on rests really matter?

I take the view that it’s far easier to fictionally justify consequences to longer rests. I believe your players intuitively recognized this and that’s why they tended to take fewer short rests.

 

[pemerton]

I'm not a fan of 4e's Healing Surges from a thematic standpoint. You're telling me the power of a deity cannot heal you unless you have reserves?

Of course they can. That's what Cure X Wounds spells do. (In technical terms, surgeless healing.)

But Healing Word is about the cleric speaking words of support (infused by divine charisma), not laying on of hands (which is what paladins do, and which is surgeless for the recipient though not the paladin, who gives of their own essence).

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Healing surges were one of the better ideas of 4e, and I wish they had kept them. Not all healing needs rely on healing surges/hit dice, but I think more than currently does should. For example I think it is pretty wild that one can just heal limitless amount of HP with healing potions, and there is no risk of overdose or the body just not being able to otherwise cope with it.

 

[AnotherGuy]

Of course they can. That's what Cure X Wounds spells do. (In technical terms, surgeless healing.)

But Healing Word is about the cleric speaking words of support (infused by divine charisma), not laying on of hands (which is what paladins do, and which is surgeless for the recipient though not the paladin, who gives of their own essence).

The way I prefer it is if you're gonna have hit points being a catch-all for encouragement hit points and stamina, then introduce a wound track which deals with actual "meat"

What I liked about 4e is the disease track despite my feeling it was too weak/easily overcome. This led to 5e's exhaustion track which helped me better cement what I wanted out of the game.

4e's innovations certainly breathed new ideas into the game and for that I will always appreciate its contribution.

 

[Staffan]

The way I prefer it is if you're gonna have hit points being a catch-all for encouragement hit points and stamina, then introduce a wound track which deals with actual "meat"

I maintain that the explanation for D&D hit points (at least for humanoids) that makes the most sense is Aura.

 

[azabaro]

While a lot of people seem to laugh at Gygax's advice on p.37 of the 1E DMG, "YOU CAN NOT HAVE A MEANINGFUL CAMPAIGN IF STRICT TIME RECORDS ARE NOT KEPT," is it possible those that don't like long rests may be agreeing with him? I don't think the issue is actually the "long rest" mechanic so much as the "8 hour" definition.

I don’t think so, because Gygax wrote that in the context of a certain mode of play (or rather, overlapping modes of play) which aren’t common these days. The first involves a concern with logistics - you’re concerned about how long supplies you’ve brought with you (rations, light sources, etc.) can last, and in that sense you’re concerned about time on an hour-by-hour if not (10-minute) turn-by-turn basis. The second involved treating the campaign as being massively multiplayer, with different players adventuring at different times in a shared world. You had to know if a group had previously raided the kobold warrens and how long ago that was so you’d know how much time the kobolds have had to prepare for another visit, or if all their good treasure had been plundered or extorted out of them.

Rest and healing times had some interaction with that. If your Fighter went into the dungeon Sunday night and came out with only 12 of their 30 HP and someone proposed another expedition on Wednesday night, then (following Gygax’s suggestion that 1 campaign day should be assumed for every real day) your Fighter would have had only 3 days to heal. At 1E healing rates, you’d be back up to only 15 HP unless you’d made arrangements to seek additional healing - perhaps having to blow some of your hard-earned haul from Sunday. Or you could pass and wait until you’d fully healed in just over 2 weeks, but who knows how many opportunities you’d be ceding to other adventurers while you recuperated…

 

[pemerton]

The way I prefer it is if you're gonna have hit points being a catch-all for encouragement hit points and stamina, then introduce a wound track which deals with actual "meat"

The problem with that, from a game design and game play perspective, is that people then want to come up with ways to circumvent the hit points and get straight to the meat (sneak attack, crits, attacking people while they're asleep, etc).

That can in turn be countered by building in sub-systems that give PCs Conan-like awareness and reflexes, to avoid those threats. But that makes for mechanically complex play.

 

[jmartkdr2]

Well, yes; combat being made both swingier and riskier than 5e has it is a laudable goal.

Only if you don't want narrative roleplay.

Or you need to not completely rely on Clerical healing and instead look more to medium-term resting (as in, days but not weeks), potions, herbs, and other means of hit point recovery.

Nah, can't take short rests when your dead. If everyone dies in combat, the game stops.