D&D 5E Warlock, Hex, and Short Rests: The Bag of Rats Problem

[Caliban]

The literal 'bag of rats' is not actually used, needed, or even desired for multiple reasons already covered. The fact that you keep bringing it up to support your position after it's been discounted only proves the weakness of your stance.

But "jumping through hoops" gain an advantage is very common in D&D. Take proficiency in athletics, take shield mastery - you have jumped through sufficient hoops to do a bonus action "shove" to prone your opponent and give yourself momentary advantage. Doesn't always work, but it's a benefit when it does.

Buying better armor - you jumped through a hoop for an advantage.

Taking Great Weapon master and the Great Weapon style from your class - you jumped through hoops to do more damage with heavy weapons.

There are countless other examples. Finding and using combinations of spells, feats, and abilities to give yourself a benefit (even a minor one) is just part of the game. Some of the "hoops" are just easier or more obvious than others.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I read something during the playtest to the effect that they knew they needed to include elements that reward players who like to feel that they just know the game better than others do by being able to find a reward. Some people really enjoy that sort of thing. (3.x was practically built on tge idea, IMO).

BUT... They were hoping to avoid it being a problem. This could possibly explain why this kind of thing exists, but the game supports the DM who wants to do away with it. I'm not sure I think this particular one was done "on purpose" but I think the reason they haven't clarified or errata'd it is because it works fine either way, and makes those who like "rules mastery" happy.

Sent from my LG-D852 using EN World mobile app

 

[Caliban]

They probably didn't include this precise combination on purpose. It's what I would call an "emergent property".

 

[MrHotter]

Some of the "hoops" are just easier or more obvious than others.

And some of the 'hoops' end up looking more like exploits. 5E has been pretty good at avoiding 'must have' builds that pull together different abilities and required items to let players make super characters, and many of us just want to avoid unintended power jumps that are discovered after the rules came out. Some things get erratad or clarified, and other things are still left up to the DM to rule on.

If a DM feels that a player should not start the adventuring day with all their spell slots and a spell already held in concentration, then I would hope that a player would not think they should start rules lawyering to try to keep it. That's why many DMs like to see what kinds of things a player may try to do and see if they would need to house rule anything before it even comes up. Even those of us who play with friends instead of at AL games can end up with a player who wants to push the limits of what a DM may allow.

 

[Ovinomancer]

I assume you're responding to me?

The literal 'bag of rats' is not actually used, needed, or even desired for multiple reasons already covered. The fact that you keep bringing it up to support your position after it's been discounted only proves the weakness of your stance.

Yes, hence the "or surrogate". I'm quite aware that the bag of rats is a figurative tool, not a literal one.

But "jumping through hoops" gain an advantage is very common in D&D. Take proficiency in athletics, take shield mastery - you have jumped through sufficient hoops to do a bonus action "shove" to prone your opponent and give yourself momentary advantage. Doesn't always work, but it's a benefit when it does.

Buying better armor - you jumped through a hoop for an advantage.

Taking Great Weapon master and the Great Weapon style from your class - you jumped through hoops to do more damage with heavy weapons.

There are countless other examples. Finding and using combinations of spells, feats, and abilities to give yourself a benefit (even a minor one) is just part of the game. Some of the "hoops" are just easier or more obvious than others.

Buying armor nor making class choices are jumping through hoops like a four part, double rest effort that spends game time every session to achieve. And really, it's the latter part that raises my irritation level high enough to care. I don't want to waste even the few moments it's takes to ask every morning "hey, guys, can I do my rat trick* this morning?"

*figurative, not literal.

 

[Caliban]

I don't want to waste even the few moments it's takes to ask every morning "hey, guys, can I do my rat trick* this morning?"

*figurative, not literal.

Well, like I said earlier. The opposition to this is more philosophical than rules based. Good to see you are finally being honest about it rather than nattering on about RAW to justify your preference.

Personally I think it's a bit of an over reaction to not even want to spend a few moments on something that may give a player a relatively minor benefit when it works. But that's just my opinion.

Ultimately it's always up to the DM to allow or disallow something.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Well, like I said earlier. The opposition to this is more philosophical than rules based. Good to see you are finally being honest about it rather than nattering on about RAW to justify your preference.

Personally I think it's a bit of an over reaction to not even want to spend a few moments on something that may give a player a relatively minor benefit when it works. But that's just my opinion.

Ultimately it's always up to the DM to allow or disallow something.

Man, you totally crushed that strawman. With that level of skill in debating yourself, I'm sure you don't need me.

 

[Caliban]

Man, you totally crushed that strawman. With that level of skill in debating yourself, I'm sure you don't need me.

I'm honestly confused by this statement. I don't believe I was making a strawman argument - so either you don't understand what the term means, or I don't.

 

[ThePolarBear]

If it was intended, then essentially it's a "jump through hoops to achieve expected power levels" thing. If a higher level warlock is expected to carry around a bag of rats, or a surrogate, and cast, kill, rest so that he's at the baseline intended power level, that's just bad design. Give the warlock hex for free at the beginning of the day and just move on. No need to waste play time to achieve maximum potential.

It's an exploit that requires specific thinking (bag of rats is a clue) to achieve. If the rule wasn't in place, there's no way any warlock player would consider waking up, casting hex on a rat, killing the rat, and then taking a short rest. It's only the exploit that makes that attractive, and only if your interest is to game a minor benefit. Hence the thinking of the game as a game.

I should have specified a couple of things, but as "i can't think" meant " i have no time to", so please excuse if i was sort of brief and ended up cutting short important parts of the question.

I meant to ask how is the ability to mantain Concentration over a Short/Long Rest - that is the major issue - more than the particular situation of bag of rats + Warlock + Hex - that is an exageration - is bad design or an exploit and metagame.

ANYWAY.

How does the fact that the rules model the world of D&D to allow such a thing "metagaming"? It is an exploit - by definition you are using the rules at your advantage. But so is the character doing. It's not metagaming more then a fighter attacking over pulling a lever because he knows he is better at attacking. It does not make that anything worth chastizing.

Using wings to fly is nothing more than playing the game - bringing plans to open an industry producing airplanes is bad metagaming, however - You make your character act with knowledge he should not have.

The player is exploiting rules, but from the character perspective it's something that is just a natural conclusion of said rules. The rules work this way (if the DM allows).

If i found out that not eating meat makes me feel better, why should i eat meat? If i find out that charging the phone to 99% makes my charge last longer than 100%, why should i charge it to 100%? If i found out that not eating meat while charging the phone makes me go 1 mph faster on average, why should i not do so? Prehaps i would go over the speed limit, and then it would not be a good idea... but if i can, why not?

Naturally i'm not using borrowed powers from near godlike entities but if the electric company or the Automobile industry were to get this secret, there would be repercussions. Prehaps. Still it's not "gaming the rules" anymore than what i know that i can get away from. And again, people try every day to break the limits of our percieved existance. Flying machines are common nowadays because someone took on themselves to challenge the limits of the rules themselves.

If the DM says "ok", there's no metagame with your meaning: The character already knew how the things worked. If the DM says "no", the thing simply won't work: the rules do not work that way, the character might have tried because things apparently could but don't, or didn't try at all because the rules were clear and known and tested.

Or better: Every single action a player makes the character take IS METAGAMING WITH YOUR MEANING.

Metagaming is necessary. It's part of the game. It's intrinsic in this sort of games. The character, in this case, already has said knowledge. How is this metagaming using this knowledge? How is me playing my character "metagaming" because he has the ability to know and piece together such informations?

I'm an Evoker. Magic Missile is evocation, i have an ability to do make each missile do more damage, i'm using magic missile to destroy a single target. Or i'm unable to because that's a calculation that my player did and end up being better than other options?
I'm a Fighter. I can grapple people so they can't move. I can also put people down in prone position so they have to get up to be effective. I can do both! Or not, because that's a calculation that my player did and end up being better than other options?
I'm a Warlock. I can Hex a creature and, as long as i maintain concentration, the spell continues lingering even after the creature is dead or very badly beaten, at which point i can redirect the effect to another creature. I regain the ability to cast my spells with just a little rest. I cannot do so to any kind of creature between when i wake up and breakfast because that's apparently something that it's part of a cosmic game and not something that i live day to day.

It's not a reason, really, expecially compared with other possible reasons - you can't regain your spells you are concentrating on | you can't rest while concentrating | you can't do so because your patron would not allow you to waste his powers on such an insignificant task.

It's metagaming - no, it's not. It's just playing the game, same as every other possibility ever.
You regard it as an exploit - i agree. In the broad sense it's an exploit, same as the unsleeping Sorcerer. And I would not allow the bag of rats every morning same as the unsleeping sorcerer, or the Simulacrum chain or whatever - and mind you i still allow all of this, just consequences are harsh. If the player manages to make a good point for the situation and is ready to face consequences: Go ahead. You have been warned and told what the consequences could be and why. It's a limited use card in your book, use it wisely and all will be ok.

But metagaming? I really can't see how this is metagaming any more than everyting else that normally happens in a D&D game, starting from "i'll attack now since i'm level 5 and i have extra attack so i attack twice". Heck, planning progression for multiclassing is usally a worse offender!!!

So... why pointing it out? It's just like saying "because it's bad design and part of how the game plays out"

Prehaps it's just me thinking that pretty much the "bad" metagaming is making a character act on informations he could not have (and just the first example i can think of right now) and can't see how this kind of metagame is not to be expected to any extent.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I have no problem with Warlock's maintaining concentration through a short (or long) rest to maintain Hex through its duration. Otherwise, why have that duration when the rests are somewhat expected.

I do have an issue with the rest and then I rest attitude. For me, the characters must actively break the previous rest before having another one. If there is no clear break of activity, it is still the same rest.

Super reasonable.

I agree with he part about concentration. IMO, it is clear RAW and RAI that you can keep concentration up through a rest and regain slots, and I can't see any RAW based arguement against the "KO a hexed critter and then short rest" part that people object to.

I agree that something has to happen between rests, too.

I have a question about that, though. What about this scenario:

Party has reached level 5, leveled up, is on an adventure in the wilds.

First thing in the am, the warlock and ranger go out to hunt down some food for the next few days or later that day, whatever.
Warlock and his familiar bag a rabbit, right off, ranger and his per bag a small deer.

Warlock uses Hex, because he knows he will have full spell power back after he and the ranger cook their spoils and salt them for storage or whatever (a short rest IMO can definately include cooking some food).

Finds that the spell is more powerful than before, and will last all day. Does his thing, rests, and finds that his full spell power returns to him, and Hex is still going.

Now, is this a problem? What if hunting and checking traps have been part of the routine anyway, before this?

Certainly a warlock with a predator familiar, like a bird of prey, will be a great hunter of small game, so why not?

Does making and eating breakfast need to be part of a long rest? I've never thought of it as such.

Just curious.