D&D 5E What interupts a long rest?

[clearstream]

That's where the arbitrary line in the sand has been drawn, yes. Would it become any less arbitrary if we were talking about 59 minutes of walking?

Indeed, but you spoke of hours of battlefield engagements, did you not?

 

[clearstream]

I just don’t think that’s what the words in the book actually say.

As a statement of what you think, one can hardly argue with it!

 

[Maxperson]

Nevermind

 

[Rune]

And, were it but 59 minutes of battlefield engagements, it would not interrupt a rest?

If I may answer this question with a different question: Would 59 minutes of walking interrupt a long rest? If we’re going to get hung up on the minutiae of timing, we may as well use the part of the rule that isn’t debatable.

But, really, that kind of misses the point. The intent of the rule is either that most long rests in the field won’t get interrupted or that most will.

You’re mileage may vary, but if you’re looking for ways to pressure the PCs’ resource-management, there are probably better ways to do it than only screwing over the non-warlock casters and berserker barbarians.

Not that it matters much once Leomund’s Tiny Hut is in play…

 

[Maxperson]

If I may answer this question with a different question: Would 59 minutes of walking interrupt a long rest? If we’re going to get hung up on the minutiae of timing, we may as well use the part of the rule that isn’t debatable.

But, really, that kind of misses the point. The intent of the rule is either that most long rests in the field won’t get interrupted or that most will.

The intent very open to interpretation, yes. One is ridiculous, though and the other is not.

You’re mileage may vary, but if you’re looking for ways to pressure the PCs’ resource-management, there are probably better ways to do it than only screwing over the non-warlock casters and berserker barbarians.

Two two classes that are unlikely to be in the group. And you aren't "screwing over" anyone. The occasional spoiled rest is just another danger like traps.

Not that it matters much once Leomund’s Tiny Hut is in play…

And now one class that may not be present in the group at all, requires 5th level if the class is present, AND the taking of the spell as a limited choice in order to foil a very small number of spoiled rests.

 

[clearstream]

If I may answer this question with a different question: Would 59 minutes of walking interrupt a long rest? If we’re going to get hung up on the minutiae of timing, we may as well use the part of the rule that isn’t debatable.

But, really, that kind of misses the point. The intent of the rule is either that most long rests in the field won’t get interrupted or that most will.

Yes, it misses the point. That was rather my point. That is why I said the problem for JC was that he was forced to choose between very easy, or very hard, to interrupt rests. In threads about it, many have found a middleground more appealing. In that regard, a crucial fault is that the wording is not only ambiguous, but also divisive.

My post was responding to a specific claim, about what the rules as written in the book say. As a matter of language, they are strictly ambiguous. However, I think it can be shown that a "mixture of activities" reading forces its holder to either accept that 600 rounds of fighting is included, or accept that they are not applying the rules as written. They are adding to it, to produce their preferred RAI.

You'll notice the gambit of asking disingenuously whether anyone thinks 600 rounds of combat should not interrupt a rest. That sidesteps the actual concern, which is with the absurdity of supposing 600 rounds of combat could be a reasonable test for interrupting a rest in the first place.

 

[clearstream]

And now one class that may not be present in the group at all, requires 5th level if the class is present, AND the taking of the spell as a limited choice in order to foil a very small number of spoiled rests.

In all our threads on this matter, it has only ever been a matter of time before LTH is mentioned. Mark that this is page 5. Next thread I see on this I am reverting to LTH on page 1.

 

[prabe]

Something I've noticed in debates about ambiguous rules in this and other game systems is that they are typified by one group finding one reading simply the most intuitive, and the other group finding the other reading simply the most intuitive.

I moot that you find yourself on the side of the debate that comports with your intuitions, whichever side those fall on.

This is very much my thinking on this specific rule, phrased somewhat more broadly, though I think there may be some who see the rule as written to mean that it takes one hour of fighting to break a long rest, and think that rule is daft, so they look for alternative readings. It's possible they do this without knowing they're doing it.

The rule to me seems very clearly to say what JC says it says, and while I wouldn't argue with someone saying that's a daft rule, I haven't changed it in my games.

 

[Rune]

The intent very open to interpretation, yes. One is ridiculous, though and the other is not.

Since I’m not sure which intent you consider ridiculous, I’m not sure this statement can be accurate.

For my edification, which of the following intended rules-consequences do you consider ridiculous?

A: Most long rests will not be interrupted.
OR
B: Long rests will often be interrupted.

RAW does not leave much room for anything in between.

Two two classes that are unlikely to be in the group. And you aren't "screwing over" anyone. The occasional spoiled rest is just another danger like traps.

Two classes? Every spell-caster except the warlock cannot regain any spell slots, if even one random encounter wanders by (not to mention attacks deliberately intended to keep the party from recovering). That’s significant.

But the fighters and the rogues? They’ll probably be fine. until they run out of hit dice, at least.

And now one class that may not be present in the group at all, requires 5th level if the class is present, AND the taking of the spell as a limited choice in order to foil a very small number of spoiled rests.

Bard, Twilight Cleric, and Wizard have access to Leomund’s Tiny Hut. And it’s utility as a ritual is unmatched, especially for the wizard (who, of course, doesn’t need to prepare it); I can’t envision a case where the wizard doesn’t learn this spell, unless they truly do not care about getting attacked in the middle of the night.

I will concede that many groups will not have access, though. Hopefully they have the resources to make up for that lack.

 

[Rune]

You'll notice the gambit of asking disingenuously whether anyone thinks 600 rounds of combat should not interrupt a rest. That sidesteps the actual concern, which is with the absurdity of supposing 600 rounds of combat could be a reasonable test for interrupting a rest in the first place.

Why would that be unreasonable? Are you implying that a 600 round combat is unreasonable? If so, I’ll just quote myself from earlier in this fast-moving thread, by way of rebuttal:

Anyone who thinks an hour-long combat is impossible in 5e clearly hasn’t harassed their party with hit-and-run tactics from foes unseen.

The worst part is never knowing when or from where they’ll be attacked next – but they still have to keep those actions readied, or they’ll never be able to put an end to it.

This is especially fun with wraiths in a dungeon; they could come through any wall, the ceiling, or the floor.

That’s entirely achievable. And, while I wouldn’t suggest doing it often, I do recommend something like it at least once or twice per campaign.

Obviously, I wouldn’t play out every round, but I wouldn’t drop out of initiative either, since (a) the aggressors will be using combat actions and movement speed, even if they are undetected and not actually attacking every round and (b) readied actions are combat actions.