D&D (2024) What would your ideal rest mechanic look like?

[Yaarel]

Are Milestones worth bringing back from 4e? Every 2 encounters you can get a power back. Maybe separate powers from healing. If a fighter knows he gets 2nd wind back every 2 fights, then he uses it and does not need the rest mechanic to get powers back. Maybe a milestone is a 5 minute break where you get a power back and/or can spend 1 HD.

I dont count narrative "milestones", but I do count the number of standard encounters to reach the next level. (For most levels about 16 encounters to level, give or take, depending on the narrative and the mood of the players. The leveling only happens between sessions.

In my campaign, all rests are short rests, except that twice per level, a player can instead choose to gain the benefit of a long rest from it. So far it is working well.

Only the narrative matters for when a combat happens. A standard encounter is often enough a noncombat encounter, such as a social challenge or puzzle, or a nonlethal encounter where foes flee or surrender. Rests happen narratively whenever a rest makes sense.

It is possible to modify this further, such as allowing any rest to be as brief as, say, 15 minutes. Or that the deep rest is only possible if in a nonstressful environment.

 

[Composer99]

I'm coming around to everyone gets everything back on a short or long rest, and then you have a number of Recoveries or whatever you want to call them, that limit the number of short rests you can take. I'm assuming 10 minute short rests and 8 hour long rests. (I do like the Cypher system schedule as an alternative.)

IMO this handily gets rid of rest schedule discrepancies - no 5 minute adventuring day or coffeelock - and is easy for DMs to play around with to suit the campaign with three simple dials to adjust - the number of Recoveries, the length of short rests, and the length of long rests.

Want a grittier game? Fewer Recoveries, and/or rests take longer. Want an epic game? More Recoveries.

 

[Umbran]

This standard schedule seems to happen less frequently than intended because the same hostile environment that fills a single day with about seven combat encounters is the same hostile environment that makes full 1-hour short rests less obtainable.

I think there are other reasons that aren't based in the order of play of the game, but in the practical arrangement of play - meaning the "game session". There is a great deal to be said for having the basic unit of rest be one session - the characters start fresh at the beginning, and they go into a long rest at the end, such that they'll be fresh at the start of the next session.

For one (entirely practical, metagame) thing, this largely eliminates the need for mechanical bookkeeping between sessions. No more need to remember how many slots of which levels of spells did you use, and so forth.

Moreover, many people can go a couple of weeks between sessions, and lives are busy - not having to remember in quite so much detail exactly what the heck was going on last session is a bonus.

And then, there's the length of our sessions. Eight encounters is... a lot. I'm not getting through those in a three-hour weeknight session. So either I am going to have to preserve the detailed game-state across multiple weeks between sessions, or I am just going to muck with the number of "encounters" I handle in one session.

It seems to me that the rest mechanic was really built around a group that's spending a long weekend afternoon playing the game, rather than a short weekday evening.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

My ideal rest power recovery mechanic is one where different DMs are free to run extremely different types of games and the various classes are still in balance.

So a three week trek across a wilderness with four encounters, or a brisk morning with the same have the same total power recovery. As well as being able to have exploration with heavy utility usage and a masquerade ball with associated intrigue, stealthing, uncovering secrets, and stopping a poisoning can balance.

Which means there is no way for it to be a rest mechanic, as rests will be available at different rates as they are related to character choices as well as the passing of in-game time.

While rather gamist to some, 13th Age (a d20 that 5e is similar to in streamlining) has a solution. "Full heal ups" happen after four encounters. Sleeping has nothing to getting your powers back. It could be four days of exploring the Overworld, it could be twice during a busy day in a Living Dungeon. The DM can reduce the number if they are particularly big combats (but by default a standard combat is hard to deadly in 5e encounter design terms, may be hard but isn't actually deadly), and players can take one early by taking a campaign loss - the cultists complete another part of their ritual, the werewolves claim another farm, whatever makes sense.

I'd hate this. It is just gamey and utterly disconnected. "Quick, find some goblins we can fight so that we heal and get our spells back!"

I want the rules to be at least somewhat connected to the fictional reality the characters inhabit, so that the players can make informed choices in character.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

My ideal rest mechanics are entirely about making the board game work and be fun. That's all I care about. If the rules allow the players of the board game to play it and enjoy it, then I'm good. But I do not in any way, shape, or form care a whit about making those rules of the board game align to any sense of true injury narratively. Because Dungeons & Dragons combat does not in any way, shape, or form reflect any sort of reality in terms of actual swordfighting, archery, and being blasted in the face by what these "spells" are supposed to do... so I just handwave that aspect of it completely. Going from 0 HP to full HP with a good night's rest? Doesn't matter. That's purely a convenience of the board game and to make the rules easy and fun to use, so worrying about how it looks within the story is a waste of my time.

And this is simply because I refuse to believe there is any sort of realistic response to a person getting blasted in the face by essentially a flamethrower, falling unconscious, having a healer a couple seconds later heal those burns (but not in any way removing the trauma of being burned alive and the memory of that pain and agony)... and then that same person just jumps up and says "Okay! That was fun! On to the next room!" And then five minutes later in the next room that same character suffers a myriad of bites, claws, stab wounds, poisoning, and being bludgeoned about the head and neck, falls unconscious AGAIN... then has a vial of liquid emptied into their mouth to seal up those bleeding wounds (but again not in any way removing the trauma and mental anguish of pain they just suffered) and the character just once more jumps up and says "Okay! That was fun! On to the next room!" and this continues ad nauseum.

All of it is stupid. It has no basis for any attempt at realism. It is complete and utter fantasy (which makes sense, because it is a game of fantasy.) And thus I just accept it for the unrealism it is and do my best to never question it (or care in the slightest if the board game and fantasy story does or does not align.)

If I believed this about any RPG I would refuse to play it.

 

[Yaarel]

I think there are other reasons that aren't based in the play of the game, but in the practical arrangement of play - meaning the "game session". There is a great deal to be said for having the basic unit of rest be one session - the characters start fresh at the beginning, and they go into a long rest at the end, such that they'll be fresh at the start of the next session.

For one (entirely practical, metagame) thing, this largely eliminates the need for mechanical bookkeeping between sessions. No more need to remember how many slots of which levels of spells did you use, and so forth.

Moreover, many people can go a couple of weeks between sessions, and lives are busy - not having to remember in quite so much detail exactly what the heck was going on last session is a bonus.

And then, there's the length of our sessions. Eight encounters is... a lot. I'm not getting through those in a three-hour weeknight session. So either I am going to have to preserve the detailed game-state across multiple weeks between sessions, or I am just going to muck with the number of "encounters" I handle in one session.

It seems to me that the rest mechanic was really built around a group that's spending a long weekend afternoon playing the game, rather than a short weekday evening.

For me, leveling is always between sessions, it would be easy to handle rests similarly.

So, maybe all rests are short rests (to spend hit dice if any).

Then the start of every gaming session benefits from a long rest, with max hit points.

I can live with that.

 

[Laurefindel]

The above is many of the considerations. What is your ideal rest mechanic?

I find myself in a situation where, as a DM, I don't really know anymore. What I do know however, is that I no longer want to care about short rests and who benefits most from them, who is advantaged if there aren't any, and how to pace my encounters to follow the rest mechanics (as opposed to pacing my encounters to follow the narrative), etc.

At this minute today, this would be my favourite:

• Per/encounter abilities (or using the 5e lingo, " when you roll initiative and don't have X..." for everything expected to refresh after short rests/combats.
• A "wilderness" overnight rest when the party is sleeping in conditions that do not allow them to fully relax, for most of what 5e long rest is for.
• A "safe haven" stay where the PC can let their guard down and fully recover, for abilities that make game balance harder to keep, especially at higher levels. I'm thinking spells of level 6-9 and other magick-y stuff that is cool but becomes annoying when performed every single day, day after day, for the rest of the adventurer's career*.

But I'm not sold on this either. As I said, I no longer know the right balance between having manageable PC and happy players.

*An obvious hyperbole, but you get my drift...

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I think there are other reasons that aren't based in the play of the game, but in the practical arrangement of play - meaning the "game session". There is a great deal to be said for having the basic unit of rest be one session - the characters start fresh at the beginning, and they go into a long rest at the end, such that they'll be fresh at the start of the next session.

For one (entirely practical, metagame) thing, this largely eliminates the need for mechanical bookkeeping between sessions. No more need to remember how many slots of which levels of spells did you use, and so forth.

Moreover, many people can go a couple of weeks between sessions, and lives are busy - not having to remember in quite so much detail exactly what the heck was going on last session is a bonus.

And then, there's the length of our sessions. Eight encounters is... a lot. I'm not getting through those in a three-hour weeknight session. So either I am going to have to preserve the detailed game-state across multiple weeks between sessions, or I am just going to muck with the number of "encounters" I handle in one session.

It seems to me that the rest mechanic was really built around a group that's spending a long weekend afternoon playing the game, rather than a short weekday evening.

I use (slightly altered) gritty rests and try to arrange the sessions so that they can end to a long rest. It doesn't always work that way, but seems to be relatively easy to arrange.

I think my ideal rest mechanic would probably be close to the gritty rests. Camping for nigh is an adventuring trope, so having that to be significant (I.E. a short rest) seems corrects, and long rest can be a small amount of downtime in a safe location, which again is something that seems narratively meaningful (E.G Hobbits arriving to Rivendel and spending some time there.)

 

[Blue]

I'd hate this. It is just gamey and utterly disconnected. "Quick, find some goblins we can fight so that we heal and get our spells back!"

I want the rules to be at least somewhat connected to the fictional reality the characters inhabit, so that the players can make informed choices in character.

I pointed out it was gamey, but opens up a world of difference in class design and play. My requirement is "not easily under player control" which includes generically time based because without requiring the DM to do anything special (like put time pressure in every adventure) that is effectively under rough player control.

So, just as you dismiss this as gamey, I will equally dismiss resting.

Let's explore together everything else that it might be.

For example, Adventures in Middle Earth (the 5e adaption of The One Ring) doesn't allow resting during the Journey phase generally unless you stop by a sanctuary like Elrond's.

So, where can we find a medium that meets

 

[jmartkdr2]

I pointed out it was gamey, but opens up a world of difference in class design and play. My requirement is "not easily under player control" which includes generically time based because without requiring the DM to do anything special (like put time pressure in every adventure) that is effectively under rough player control.

So, just as you dismiss this as gamey, I will equally dismiss resting.

Let's explore together everything else that it might be.

For example, Adventures in Middle Earth (the 5e adaption of The One Ring) doesn't allow resting during the Journey phase generally unless you stop by a sanctuary like Elrond's.

So, where can we find a medium that meets

The best mediums I've seen is to design the game so that the rests have roughly the same impact on all characters. If some classes need a lot of naps, others only get stuff back after a trip to the spa and one shines the best when they have a dozen battles in a row - you've created conflict between players over what rest schedule to follow, because they have divergent interests.

Now you just need to come up with a fictionally-logical way to limit spells the same way you limit trip attempts and sneak attacks. I don't think you'll find a universally acceptable answer, but I'm sure there's several good answers.