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

[Kinematics]

Per/encounter abilities

Hmm. This makes me think of legendary abilities, where the creature gets an ability back on some value of a d6 roll (eg: 4-6). Using that idea, if you used a short rest ability, then at the end of the encounter you can roll a d6 to see if you get it back and are able to use it in the next encounter. A 4-6 means you tend to be able to use an ability every other encounter, which is vaguely close to a short rest. Maybe a 5-6 if you want to be a bit more restrictive.

So there wouldn't ever be short rests to recover abilities. It would only be a short break to get your breath back, and use hit dice to recover HP.

My preferred duration for a short rest is 15 minutes. It's long enough for 10 minute duration effects to wear off if there's an encounter on either side. 1 hour is the next tier up, and I feel it's a bit punitive to enforce that a 1 hour effect wears off after a short rest.

Edit:

You might even be able to extend this to recovering spell slots, but considering the logistics of how to work through points and spell slots and such (based on the default values given in the DM guide), maybe not so much.

On the other hand, it might works reasonably well for a sorcerer if you used spell points instead of spell slots, but with a much more limited pool than one that tried to represent all your possible spell slots. Like, start with a relatively low value, and at the end of each encounter you can recover 1d4 spell points (maybe with a max number of dice used per day equal to your hit dice count or something).

This would need a lot of polishing to see how it balances out, but it's an interesting idea.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

If the proficiency times per long rest replaces short rests, that would effectively be "one type of rest". Thoughts?

True, but we end up with one big rests that resets all, which I feel is actually the thing that causes the issues in the first place. If there is just one type of rest, I'd definitely want it to be a small rest that resets a fraction of things, and you effectively need to just queue several of them to achieve a full reset.

 

[Yaarel]

If there is just one type of rest, I'd definitely want it to be a small rest that resets a fraction of things, and you effectively need to just queue several of them to achieve a full reset.

The long rest is worth about 1½ x the maximum hit dice. Two halves to refresh the maximum hit points, plus one half for the extra hit dice left over.

So a "small rest" might be only the ½ max hit dice, by itself, being equivalent to one third of the current long rest.

By extension, the recovery of class features would also be approximately by a third, such as the "small rest" recovering the equivalent of about one third of the total number of spells.



For reference:

Standard Long Rest
• req: 8-hour rest per 24 hours
• maximum hit points
• half maximum hit dice

Standard Short Rest
• req: 1-hour rest
• spend any number of hit dice
• + Con per hit die.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

The long rest is worth about 1½ x the maximum hit dice. Two halves to refresh the maximum hit points, plus one half for the extra hit dice left over.

So a "small rest" might be only the ½ max hit dice, by itself, being equivalent to one third of the current long rest.

By extension, the recovery of class features would also be approximately by a third, such as the "small rest" recovering the equivalent of about one third of the total number of spells.

Yes, but one third of features and spells is hard to elegantly formulate. The good thing about long rests resetting basically everything is that it is clear and easy.

 

[Yaarel]

Yes, but one third of features and spells is hard to elegantly formulate.

Yeah. The third is mainly to explore a ballpark figure.

The good thing about long rests resetting basically everything is that it is clear and easy.

Consider if the rest grants only max hit dice, that might be spent immediately or save for later.

Meanwhile, the casters might only refresh half their total.

This privileging hit points over spells might benefit the noncasters more, but that might be tolerable.

 

[Yaarel]

It occurs to me, the proficiency times mechanics seems to require the "big" long rest to balance around.

 

[jmartkdr2]

True, but we end up with one big rests that resets all, which I feel is actually the thing that causes the issues in the first place. If there is just one type of rest, I'd definitely want it to be a small rest that resets a fraction of things, and you effectively need to just queue several of them to achieve a full reset.

And/or add a mechanic that limits how much you can get from short resting during an entire adventure (ie you need downtime to fully recharge).

 

[EpicureanDM]

What is your ideal rest mechanic?

It's hard to understand the most important function of the rest system: control of the game's pacing. It's an artificial restraint on the recovery of the characters' limited resources. It makes the game challenging and rewarding. The biggest hurdle to accepting this idea comes from players and DMs internalizing the idea that "rest" should be measured through in-game time. This thread is full of people trying to find the golden ratio of minutes and hours to apply to short and long rests. Rest in 5e is not about in-game time; it's about controlling pace and difficulty. Control of the game's pacing is the DM's job, not the player's job. But D&D's approach to rest puts primary control of rest (i.e. pacing) in the players' hands. Whomever controls the pacing controls the difficulty and challenge of the game.

13th Age offers a solution for this problem with its rule that the PCs gain the benefits of a long rest after every fourth encounter. The rule hedges its language a bit to say that the GM can decide to award a long rest after a series of three tough encounters or after the fifth encounter if the party has had an easy time of it. But, for the most part, it's four encounters.

I adapted this rule for 5e by suggesting the following: After every two encounters, the party gets the benefit of a short rest. After their sixth encounter, they get the benefits of a long rest. So over the course of six encounters, the players will get two short rests and one long one. If they faced a really hard fight, you decide that long rest happens after the fifth encounter. If the players feel that they're too beat up then, at any point, they can just declare that they're taking a long rest. That's fine, but then you, as the DM, get to describe a significant setback they suffer. The monsters get tougher or find dangerous reinforcements. Maybe an enemy of theirs take a major step forward in their plans, putting the party further behind in their plan to stop the villain. But for the most part, this schedule is strict. Unless the players accept the big setback or the DM decides that the players have had bad dice luck (this should be a rare determination), the schedule doesn't change.

To clarify the rest pattern, it looks like this:

Two encounters -> short rest -> Two more encounters -> short rest -> Another two encounters -> long rest, restart the counter at zero.

So the game falls into the "natural" 6-8 encounter rhythm that the Dungeon Master's Guide famously suggests as ideal for play. For players who aren't used to this system, you can shorten it to 2, 2, 1. So they'd get the long rest after the fifth encounter, not the sixth. If there's a non-combat encounter where the players expend some resources (spells, usually), you might consider that an encounter, too. Look for opportunities to do this, but don't go too far out of your way.

Every 5e group I've introduced to this rest system has enjoyed it.

 

[Oofta]

It's hard to understand the most important function of the rest system: control of the game's pacing. It's an artificial restraint on the recovery of the characters' limited resources. It makes the game challenging and rewarding. The biggest hurdle to accepting this idea comes from players and DMs internalizing the idea that "rest" should be measured through in-game time. This thread is full of people trying to find the golden ratio of minutes and hours to apply to short and long rests. Rest in 5e is not about in-game time; it's about controlling pace and difficulty. Control of the game's pacing is the DM's job, not the player's job. But D&D's approach to rest puts primary control of rest (i.e. pacing) in the players' hands. Whomever controls the pacing controls the difficulty and challenge of the game.

13th Age offers a solution for this problem with its rule that the PCs gain the benefits of a long rest after every fourth encounter. The rule hedges its language a bit to say that the GM can decide to award a long rest after a series of three tough encounters or after the fifth encounter if the party has had an easy time of it. But, for the most part, it's four encounters.

I adapted this rule for 5e by suggesting the following: After every two encounters, the party gets the benefit of a short rest. After their sixth encounter, they get the benefits of a long rest. So over the course of six encounters, the players will get two short rests and one long one. If they faced a really hard fight, you decide that long rest happens after the fifth encounter. If the players feel that they're too beat up then, at any point, they can just declare that they're taking a long rest. That's fine, but then you, as the DM, get to describe a significant setback they suffer. The monsters get tougher or find dangerous reinforcements. Maybe an enemy of theirs take a major step forward in their plans, putting the party further behind in their plan to stop the villain. But for the most part, this schedule is strict. Unless the players accept the big setback or the DM decides that the players have had bad dice luck (this should be a rare determination), the schedule doesn't change.

To clarify the rest pattern, it looks like this:

Two encounters -> short rest -> Two more encounters -> short rest -> Another two encounters -> long rest, restart the counter at zero.

So the game falls into the "natural" 6-8 encounter rhythm that the Dungeon Master's Guide famously suggests as ideal for play. For players who aren't used to this system, you can shorten it to 2, 2, 1. So they'd get the long rest after the fifth encounter, not the sixth. If there's a non-combat encounter where the players expend some resources (spells, usually), you might consider that an encounter, too. Look for opportunities to do this, but don't go too far out of your way.

Every 5e group I've introduced to this rest system has enjoyed it.

I know other people have suggested this as well and I'm glad it works for you and your group. I would hate it, it would feel too artificial to me. Which, yeah, I know D&D isn't exactly a real world simulator but it does a decent job of being a fantasy novel simulator. Resting after X encounters makes sense from a game rule perspective but has no in-world logic attached to it so it wouldn't work for me.

 

[EpicureanDM]

I know other people have suggested this as well and I'm glad it works for you and your group. I would hate it, it would feel too artificial to me. Which, yeah, I know D&D isn't exactly a real world simulator but it does a decent job of being a fantasy novel simulator. Resting after X encounters makes sense from a game rule perspective but has no in-world logic attached to it so it wouldn't work for me.

It's worked for multiple, different groups of players. I often encourage DMs to try it because it usually reveals just how little the players care about in-game time between rests. It seems like it would feel artificial, but it produces enough fun play that people tend to forget worries about artificiality.