TheRPGSite

I think there is a lot of potential to set tone in the short long rest mechanic of 5.0.

I mostly hear people complaining about it but if we just remember that the DM makes the rules, not the book, it can be a really useful tool.  

For instance I want to limit healing.  Or make it non-magical.  No scratch that I don't have a problem with magical healing.  I don't want video game hp in my role playing game.  It removes risk, and makes every fight a slog to see who can wrack up the biggest numbers fastest.  (I might start another thread about arithmetic, geometric, an logarithmic risk and reward)  

Any way I like players being able to heal them self by resting.  The mechanism fits with the game we just need to add the narration.  Lost a bunch of hit points, maybe you need to put a salve or cool water on a burn, put a preasure bandage on a gash, maybe you had the wind knocked out of you and you just need to sit down and catch your breath.  

Now if you are fresh and health and have a clean dry safe place to do that it might only take 20 min.  One hour is fine, I think thats what the book says, it could take some people longer than others and we don't want varible rest times.   If you are trudging throught the wilds it takes longer.  You have to unpack your gear.  Start a fire to brew a tea or make a salve, hot food is more rejuvenating than cold food.  Its easy enough to read you spell book in your own study, it another thing to try to memorize your spells by flickering candle light in a wet camp with the mosquito biting you and the dire wolves holwing not very far away.

Anyway.   I have more to say about it, but I need to look over the rules as written again.

Quote from: Headless;964321I think there is a lot of potential to set tone in the short long rest mechanic of 5.0.

I mostly hear people complaining about it but if we just remember that the DM makes the rules, not the book, it can be a really useful tool.  

For instance I want to limit healing.  Or make it non-magical.  No scratch that I don't have a problem with magical healing.  I don't want video game hp in my role playing game.  It removes risk, and makes every fight a slog to see who can wrack up the biggest numbers fastest.  (I might start another thread about arithmetic, geometric, an logarithmic risk and reward)  

Any way I like players being able to heal them self by resting.  The mechanism fits with the game we just need to add the narration.  Lost a bunch of hit points, maybe you need to put a salve or cool water on a burn, put a preasure bandage on a gash, maybe you had the wind knocked out of you and you just need to sit down and catch your breath.  

Now if you are fresh and health and have a clean dry safe place to do that it might only take 20 min.  One hour is fine, I think thats what the book says, it could take some people longer than others and we don't want varible rest times.   If you are trudging throught the wilds it takes longer.  You have to unpack your gear.  Start a fire to brew a tea or make a salve, hot food is more rejuvenating than cold food.  Its easy enough to read you spell book in your own study, it another thing to try to memorize your spells by flickering candle light in a wet camp with the mosquito biting you and the dire wolves holwing not very far away.

Anyway.   I have more to say about it, but I need to look over the rules as written again.

Yeah, I don't get the bitching a lot of people have about this. a) The designers of 5e have been very up front about "you're not gonna break this, do what works at your table" and b) the DMG explicitly lays out variations to the time of the rests to get different effects.

Quote from: Tommy Brownell;964324Yeah, I don't get the bitching a lot of people have about this. a) The designers of 5e have been very up front about "you're not gonna break this, do what works at your table" and b) the DMG explicitly lays out variations to the time of the rests to get different effects.

I am honestly quite okay with stuff like this in the 5E book. They had to bring a lot of people together for 5E (old school players, 3e players and 4 players). And the underlying philosophy seems to be very much what you say, do what works for your table.

The variations are pretty useful. When I first heard about that when they were still playtesting I pulled it into my 3E game and based it on the style of campaign. So when I ran wuxia, I had a much faster rate than when I ran dark fantasy.

I don't have 5E, but if I understand the short rest mechanic, it makes sense by the Gygaxian definition of hit points. He liked the Robin Hood example of characters going back and forth wearing the opponent down. Hit points were a mix of luck, skills, endurance, along with actual ability to take damage.

Given his interpretation, it makes sense you can get some HP back by sitting down, catching your breath and heating a kettle of tea on the campfire. Anyway, it's easy enough to house rule away if it doesn't fit the playstyle you are going for.

It's the kind of thing you need to settle with the other people in your gaming group. It makes no difference what other people out on the Internet are doing.

The problem with short rest and long rest is they eliminated wandering monsters.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;964344The problem with short rest and long rest is they eliminated wandering monsters.

I don't know what you are talking about.  Please explain.

I guess he thinks they've elminated wandering monsters even though there's a table in pretty much every official 5e adventure book I've seen.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;964344The problem with short rest and long rest is they eliminated wandering monsters.

The problem with the short rest and long rest 5E defaults is that they eliminate wandering monsters.  Since a lot of people don't like wandering monsters, this is a (feature or bug?) type of thing.  

I do like wandering monsters quite a bit.  So I use some of the options for short rest and long rests that put wandering monsters back on the table.

It's trivially easy.  In fact, it's so easy I was shocked when people went into hysterics about the issue in 4E (which had the defaults, but not the options).  The whole point in having a termed "short rest" and "long rest" concept is to hang clear rules from it.  If you can hang clear rules on a term, then you can hang options to those same rules on the term, with minimal work.  (Rather than needing to dig through all the rules, spells, feats, etc. to find nasty side effects to house rules.)

All "short rests" and "long rests" do is provide a "level of indirection" between the actions that characters take to rest and what they get from those action.  The rest of the system mostly puts things in terms of "short rests" and "long rests" so that when you change what they get from them, the rest of the system still works.  (Mostly still works, anyway, depending upon whether you are using warlocks or not.)

Since when did 5e get rid of wandering monsters? The official adventures tell you to roll for them every so many hours.

It seems to me to be a separate issue anyways. Wondering monsters are good or bad regardless of the act of adding a Short Rest mechanic to the rules (Long rest has always been there).  I do get that the Healing your HP with a long rest rule does eliminate the whole situation of camping out in the wilderness with an unconscious cleric, getting back a measly couple of hp/day and clenching your pucker with each roll of the wandering monster check. But other than that, I don't see what it has to do with the rest mechanics.

Quote from: Headless;964347I don't know what you are talking about.  Please explain.

Really?  Okay.

In Original D&D, you rolled once per 10 minute turn for a wandering monster.  There was a 1/6 chance.

Wandering monsters had no treasure, and monster XP was junk on purpose; wandering monsters were resource drains and nothing else.

There were six "wandering monster level" charts.  On the first dungeon level, you could possibly get a 4th level wandering monster, which included Wights -- hit by silver or magic weapons only, drain levels; Wraiths -- magic weapons only, fly, drain levels; Gargoyles -- magic weapons only; as well as sixth level magic users or fighters.

So, you HAD to keep moving.  Wandering monsters entirely change the nature of the game.

I think Headless is confused because you say they eliminated wandering monsters but they still have them in 5e.

With the default settings, you may still be rolling for wandering monsters, but they are mostly neutered compared to their original purpose.  You can't get easily* worn down over time by wandering monsters if you can use short rests for healing and then long rests to get all of your hit points back (and half your hit dice).   Thus, the default settings have largely eliminated the function of wandering monsters from the game, even if you still roll on a table and still use them.

* It can barely be managed by a competent GM that deliberately monkeys with the odds, but that is a lot more trouble than changing the frequency and/or benefits of rests to work more like the original.  I've done it both ways.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;964382Really?  Okay.

In Original D&D, you rolled once per 10 minute turn for a wandering monster.  There was a 1/6 chance.

Wandering monsters had no treasure, and monster XP was junk on purpose; wandering monsters were resource drains and nothing else.

There were six "wandering monster level" charts.  On the first dungeon level, you could possibly get a 4th level wandering monster, which included Wights -- hit by silver or magic weapons only, drain levels; Wraiths -- magic weapons only, fly, drain levels; Gargoyles -- magic weapons only; as well as sixth level magic users or fighters.

So, you HAD to keep moving.  Wandering monsters entirely change the nature of the game.

Ahh ok.  First thats on the DM.  It's one of the many published offical rules that is actually a house rule.  

Second read as written thats stupid.  If I stop I have a greater chance of an encounter thannif I keep moving?  Thats dumb.

Third if thats your problem with short rests, I will remind you that a wise guy once said "the rules can't cure stupid." apply some mental flexiblity and creativity to the problem.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;964344The problem with short rest and long rest is they eliminated wandering monsters.

Wandering monsters had no treasure, and monster XP was junk on purpose; wandering monsters were resource drains and nothing else.

1: Theres still wandering monsters? They just cant easily interrupt a long rest now. Its just noe mostly on the DM to make up the tables. They gove some examples of how in the DMG.

2: They still dont.

Quote from: Headless;964395Second read as written thats stupid.  If I stop I have a greater chance of an encounter thannif I keep moving?  Thats dumb.

How so?

Im moving around, you are moving around. The chances of us both being in the same place is lower than if one of us is not moving around. Ive actually had to deal with this many a time trying to find someone and just wishing theyd stand the hell still! argh!

And you roll for wandering monsters wether you are moving or not. Its a time factor. Balance out is it worth it to take a breather now or forge ahead and get things done.

BX for example you had to take a 1 turn(10min) breather every 5 turns(50min) of dungeoncrawling. If you didnt it was a -1 penalty to to hit and damage rolls till they do take a rest. You check for wandering monsters every 2 turns with a 1 in 6 chance of an encounter.

I personally didn't care for the way they handled rests.  Fortunately, there were ways to toughen things up.

Quote from: RPGPundit;964600I personally didn't care for the way they handled rests.  Fortunately, there were ways to toughen things up.

What did you want?

One somewhat unseen problem with 5e and tying into rests is that a few classes do, and others can, acquire a-lot of phantom HP via various means.

The biggest is the Rogue followed by the Barbarian as both get resistance to the three basic combat damages. Totem path barbarians can get resistance to everything but psychic damage while raging. Next up Nature clerics can grant resistance to elemental damages, Rangers taking one of the later options can also get resistance to the three combat damages. The Fiend Warlock and Transmutor Wizard can grant resistance to 1 elemental type at a time.
On top of that the Blade Ward cantrip grants resistance to the three combat types. The Bard Sorcerer, Warlock and Wizard can get that, as can anyone taking the Magic Adept feat.
These all add essentially 50% more HP in the right circumstances.

Then theres some classes that can dodge spells to half or nullify damage.

And lastly there are some classes that can get phantom HP via one means or another. The Fighter gets second wind and a Battle Master using the Feint maneuver can reduce damage taken by using maneuver dice. Not alot, but its there. The Champion actually gains regeneration! Fiend Warlock also gets some HP. The Necro Wizard can gain HP from kills, And the Abjurer too gets a HP trick.

Lastly there is the Druid who can soak potentially a fair amount of HP in beast form. And the Warlock can pick up False Life as a at-will meaning they can keep giving themselves every round if need be an extra 5-9 phantom HP. I know. I used it once to stall an enemy!

Have you actually found that to be an issue at the table or is it theory?

Quote from: Headless;964395Third if thats your problem with short rests, I will remind you that a wise guy once said "the rules can't cure stupid." apply some mental flexiblity and creativity to the problem.

I could use that same argument against short rests as well. After all, short rests were added to the game to "cure stupid". More specifically, to fix bad adventure design.

The 5E default level of damage recovery is high heroic. The way the rests and healing rates are structured make it easy to dial this even further up or take it way down. The base rules are very much a middle ground compromise and very easy to adjust.

Without major changes to the way XP is handled, even frequent wandering monster encounters isn't going to do anything except level up the party faster. More XP on the hoof and there isn't really anything that the monsters can do that cannot be cured by a good night's sleep.

The treatment of monsters in the last few editions is really where the root of the issues are. Monsters have been engineered not to be scary, just fun to pound on. Combine that with the removal of morale and reaction rolls all you have is a collection of varying bags of hitpoints that attack, fight to the death, and have little to no lasting impact upon the PCs.

I am running one campaign now using AD&D 1E and the group recently finished Bone Hill. The wraith there was actually scary. The players were nervous as hell and shitting their britches because level drain has lasting consequences for the character. They knew that if that wraith scored a hit that it was one more pimp slap closer to farmer town. That kind of tension and excitement just isn't there when all the stakes are removed from the game.

Quote from: Omega;964773One somewhat unseen problem with 5e and tying into rests is that a few classes do, and others can, acquire a-lot of phantom HP via various means.

The biggest is the Rogue followed by the Barbarian as both get resistance to the three basic combat damages. Totem path barbarians can get resistance to everything but psychic damage while raging. Next up Nature clerics can grant resistance to elemental damages, Rangers taking one of the later options can also get resistance to the three combat damages. The Fiend Warlock and Transmutor Wizard can grant resistance to 1 elemental type at a time.
On top of that the Blade Ward cantrip grants resistance to the three combat types. The Bard Sorcerer, Warlock and Wizard can get that, as can anyone taking the Magic Adept feat.
These all add essentially 50% more HP in the right circumstances.

Then theres some classes that can dodge spells to half or nullify damage.

And lastly there are some classes that can get phantom HP via one means or another. The Fighter gets second wind and a Battle Master using the Feint maneuver can reduce damage taken by using maneuver dice. Not alot, but its there. The Champion actually gains regeneration! Fiend Warlock also gets some HP. The Necro Wizard can gain HP from kills, And the Abjurer too gets a HP trick.

Lastly there is the Druid who can soak potentially a fair amount of HP in beast form. And the Warlock can pick up False Life as a at-will meaning they can keep giving themselves every round if need be an extra 5-9 phantom HP. I know. I used it once to stall an enemy!

Yeah but everybody hits far more often right?  I seems far more difficult to stack up untouchable ACs.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;964844The 5E default level of damage recovery is high heroic. The way the rests and healing rates are structured make it easy to dial this even further up or take it way down. The base rules are very much a middle ground compromise and very easy to adjust.

Exactly. I know 90 percent of posts on RPG forums are composed of Talmudic readings of the latest edition's rules but it must be frustrating for the rule wonks that the new edition gives various options and explicitly says numerous times that if you don't like something change it.

That takes away any point to their endless whining or criticizing the new system and comparing it unfavourably to older systems, not that it stops them. To compensate they claim that they are criticizing the RAW even though there essentially is no such thing in 5e sinc RAW say it can be changed in anyway.

I think this was Mearls intention. On one podcast he said that it often seemed people were spending more time debating rules and design online rather than playing at the table. He wanted to get back to what does and does't work at the table, to use that as the basis for design.

I think that is a good baseline: has someone actually played with the rule and found it to be an issue? If so, what's the best fix? Move on from there.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;964382In Original D&D, you rolled once per 10 minute turn for a wandering monster.  There was a 1/6 chance.

Wandering monsters had no treasure, and monster XP was junk on purpose; wandering monsters were resource drains and nothing else.

Yes, I recall. Wandering monster rolls were pretty much the measure of time advancing (if no spells or potion effects were expiring, unless you wanted to track torches used). While it is true that XP for wandering monsters and non-wandering monsters are the same in 5e, players are still motivated to avoid wandering monsters in favor of those that are more likely to have treasure (mostly the wandering monsters don't in the hardcover adventures), and wandering monsters of course do exist in 5e.

The time pressure nowadays comes (or should come) from the overall events taking place in the world, not from an attrition mechanic.

QuoteThere were six "wandering monster level" charts.  On the first dungeon level, you could possibly get a 4th level wandering monster, which included Wights -- hit by silver or magic weapons only, drain levels; Wraiths -- magic weapons only, fly, drain levels; Gargoyles -- magic weapons only; as well as sixth level magic users or fighters.

So, you HAD to keep moving.  Wandering monsters entirely change the nature of the game.

Reading the Underworld Adventures table, there was as much as a 2% chance per roll to get a wandering monster that should always kill a 1st level party. (Any MU of 3rd level or higher should likely be invisible and have a sleep spell available; otherwise just counting the most dangerous monsters.) No matter how fast you move, you're still going to get those potentially deadly wandering monster rolls. And that is not an improvement on 5e.

As I recall reading somewhere the suggestion from Gygax was if the party was spending too much time discussing what to do he'd roll to just encourage them to make up their minds and move on.

Quote from: Voros;964818Have you actually found that to be an issue at the table or is it theory?

Depends on the group and if theres a healer present or not. So far its not been a problem as theres usually some limiter in effect.

The Rogues ability doesnt help if they are being blasted by magic missiles or something else thats not one of the three combat types or something that allows a save vs damage. One of our players found that out the hard way.

And the Warlock example is from personal play use. Yes. I can keep giving myself some HP every round if I wanted to. But the tradeoff is that cant attack too on that round. The one time I actually abused the spell was deliberate in character to impress an opponent. Was pretty funny. The other time was the previously mentioned defensive tactic. It worked. but just barely.

Kefra runs a Barbarian in a different campaign and I can tell you that in melee combat she can soak quite a bit of punishment while raging. She effectively has 50% more HP during that time due to halving damage. Her Druid character on the other hand doesnt care about the advantage of the extra HP. Shes aware of the tradeoffs and eventual drawbacks. It didnt occur ro her just how limited the Moon Druid really was. But she doesnt mind as shes having fun with what she has as she built the character as a spy, not a combat monster.

Quote from: Headless;964883Yeah but everybody hits far more often right?  I seems far more difficult to stack up untouchable ACs.

It feels like everyones hitting less. But some are hitting more often, or harder. So YMMV there. But the extra HP from resistance or other tricks means that its even harder to knock down a PC sometimes. Or just takes a bit longer. Several monsters have resistances too.

Stacking ACs is hard for PCs. But depends on if they rolled stats or not. Any PC with access to good armour can hit AC 20 fairly quick if they get lucky with gold and invest it in armour. After that the max AC you can attain is probably 26. Possibly more if the DM is foolish enough to allow stacking rings and cloaks. So say AC 30 max. Though such items tend to only appear later in the campaign so not so much a problem and depending on the DM, even impossible to achieve since random treasure rolls can pass over your "build" consistently.

I was disappointed that they had first, kept the short/long rest mechanic in the first place, as I knew it would be used to hang "cooldowns" on and so replicate in part AEDU (ie. MMO powers) from 4th, and second that they had dialed them so high into super-heroic fantasy as that really sets the tone for the Default Assumptions which would taint all the published products.

Having said that, after reading through the rules, particularly the exhaustion mechanics, I wasn't too concerned that I couldn't manipulate the system to get something closer to the D&D I want.
It's just a case of effort vs. payoff.

I like the basic idea of short rests, in that they encourage the party to push on with the adventure at hand, rather than look for a place to camp.

What I dont like about them however is they automatically restore abilities. I would prefer some kind of check or a flat 50% of restoring an ability on a short rest. Then there will always be a meaningful choice to be made about using class abilities, instead of "we can spam it now because we know we've got an hour up our sleeve after this to get our abilities back" (pending wandering monsters, but odds generally in the PCs favour).

In LFG I went with 5 min short rests (needing a check, max 3/day and requiring a "signficant" encounter in between - GM determines what is signficant), but 1d6 day long rests (or 1d4 days in an inn or similar). This generally allows a party to keep pushing on with an adventure, but never sure just how many resources they'll have available after the current fight/scenario is resolved.  

There is another issue with 5e rests besides the time frames used. Some classes refresh their powers on a short rest, others long, other a mix, others (eg thief rogue) have abilities that are "always on" and dont care about rests except for hit dice healing. You change class balance if you change the refresh rates. Eg increase short rest to 8 hrs and long rest 1 week variant makes all classes weaker, but especially the long rest classes.

You could reword all the long rest abilities to "Once per day"

Quote from: Omega;964924It feels like everyones hitting less. But some are hitting more often, or harder. So YMMV there. But the extra HP from resistance or other tricks means that its even harder to knock down a PC sometimes. Or just takes a bit longer. Several monsters have resistances too.

Stacking ACs is hard for PCs. But depends on if they rolled stats or not. Any PC with access to good armour can hit AC 20 fairly quick if they get lucky with gold and invest it in armour. After that the max AC you can attain is probably 26. Possibly more if the DM is foolish enough to allow stacking rings and cloaks. So say AC 30 max. Though such items tend to only appear later in the campaign so not so much a problem and depending on the DM, even impossible to achieve since random treasure rolls can pass over your "build" consistently.

I don't see an issue with letting ring & cloak stack, that's 2 of 3 attunement slots used for +2 to AC. I think the Shield spell +5 to AC is more of an issue, the Bladesinger IMC is 13th level and can already hit AC 28 with Shield. She basically only gets hit on crits.

Quote from: S'mon;965002I don't see an issue with letting ring & cloak stack, that's 2 of 3 attunement slots used for +2 to AC. I think the Shield spell +5 to AC is more of an issue, the Bladesinger IMC is 13th level and can already hit AC 28 with Shield. She basically only gets hit on crits.

The shield spell only lasts a single round. Characters don't have a great number of spell slots anymore. Is the player spamming shield every round then demanding a long rest when the slots run out or something?

Quote from: S'mon;965002I don't see an issue with letting ring & cloak stack, that's 2 of 3 attunement slots used for +2 to AC. I think the Shield spell +5 to AC is more of an issue, the Bladesinger IMC is 13th level and can already hit AC 28 with Shield. She basically only gets hit on crits.

True. At best you could get a cloak and two rings for +3.

And er? How? Shield last only a round? A bladesingers powers are limited to light armour and no shield? So at best they have AC 12+DEX mod+INT mod. Assuming maxed stats that would be an AC of 22 while bladesinging without Shield. A 13th level Wizard has access to just 4 castings. Though at level 18 she can pick it up as an at will.

And yeah youd need a high level character to have a chance to hit. A Fighter for example with maxed stats and level 17 could hit on a 16 or better. An adult red dragon on a 13 or better.

Quote from: Omega;965045And er? How? Shield last only a round? A bladesingers powers are limited to light armour and no shield? So at best they have AC 12+DEX mod+INT mod+1. Assuming maxed stats that would be an AC of 23 while bladesinging without Shield. A 13th level Wizard has access to just 4 castings. Though at level 18 she can pick it up as an at will.

Certainly Shield is the most obvious at will 1st level spell to take at 18th level.

Importantly, the Wizard only casts Shield if they would be hit, so only an attack that hit AC23 would trigger it. But the 13th level Wizard could cast Shield more than 4 times with higher level spell slots; 3 second level spell slots, leaving 10 higher level spell slots for other purposes. My experience is that it's rare for a fight to last 7 rounds. Yes, the Wizard may be blowing everything in one fight and will really need a long rest, but if it's the climactic fight or an isolated wilderness location, that's not an unreasonable expectation. And they could also get back four Shield castings (or even five if one was 2nd level) via Arcane Recovery with a short rest.

True. You can blow higher level slots on Shield. At 13th level that would be 17 or so uses. If you havent cast anything else or used any to absorb  damage. But a 22 AC is allmost hittable by the sorts of monsters and NPCs might run into at 13th level. By that point several are probably sporting a +7 or more which means the Bladesinger is going to be hit about one in 5 or 4 attacks.

But of course the tradeoff is no spells left. But that would be a great hold the line defensive maneuver in the right circumstances.

Fixed my bad math twice. :o

Quote from: Omega;965099True. You can blow higher level slots on Shield. At 13th level that would be 17 or so uses. If you havent cast anything else or used any to absorb  damage.

Or, as I said, the lower half of spell slots on Shield and the higher more than half on other spells. (How useful are 1st and 2nd level Wizard spells at 13th level? Shield yes; Misty Step, I suppose; some useful support spells but more often out of combat, while most of the offensive uses are little better than a cantrip. Honest question, since I haven't played a Wizard above 6th level.) Fights are not going to last 17 rounds. Clearly the Shield defense is going to give way to "only" being AC23 if a fight goes long or a second fight starts without any rest.

QuoteBut a 22 AC is allmost hittable by the sorts of monsters and NPCs might run into at 13th level. By that point several are probably sporting a +7 or more which means the Bladesinger is going to be hit about one in 5 or 4 attacks.

So the Bladesinger at AC23 gets completely missed by, say, 3 such attacks (missing 3/4 of the time) in a round 27/64 of the time (3/4 cubed), and the Shield spell would (indeed, can) only be used if the caster is actually hit (or targeted by magic missile). So even a mere four slots could last an average of 7 rounds, and the Bladesinger doesn't get hit except by a critical (average of just over one in 7 rounds at 3 attacks per round). It's rare for fights to last more than 7 rounds in our 5e games; are your fights much longer?

QuoteBut of course the tradeoff is no spells left. But that would be a great hold the line defensive maneuver in the right circumstances.

Like I said, if it's a climactic fight or otherwise fairly certain to be followed by a long rest, it would definitely be well worth it. Certainly the character is not committed to do it in every fight, and could settle for the lesser AC of 23 if the fight is long or they started with depleted spell slots.

Shield is not so mighty for a more ordinary AC Wizard, who will probably get hit every round and may even still get hit after the +5 from Shield, thus burning through spell slots faster for less gain. The spell slot tradeoff is there in all cases, but the gains are much higher for a character with such a high armor class; worse than +2 AC from two (attunement) magic items, as S'mon said.

Another tradeoff in certain fights is that a Wizard might prefer saving their reaction for Counterspell.

Gotta love WotC D&D.

One of my players pointed out the following. Take a level in Monk and then go with Bladesinger and you have eventually a +15 AC if you can get all three stats maxed since the Bladesinger AC bonus is additive. You could do it too with a Barbarian. Tradeoff is no potential magic item bonuses.

Stuff that never occurred to me before.

Quote from: CRKrueger;965219Gotta love WotC D&D.

I get the feeling the Bladesinger didnt go through as much playtesting as the Undying or Swashbuckler did.

I personally found the rest mechanics were tied into several class features too strongly to just change the times associated. But with some house ruling, that could be changed. What I don't like about them is they set a certain tone. PCs can just charge into very dangerous combats, and unless they are utterly defeated, they will "walk it off". No healer required. At least a healer would run out of charges a day. Now the entire group is a poor healer themselves via rests, and add an actual healer to them, and they will walk from one danger to another. This gives the group a kind of brazen courage that I personally dislike, and I've found (in actual play) empowered certain play styles to attempt things that were bad for game.

I think if rests were increased, or their benefit diminished, the game would be better for it. The next time I run 5E, this is precisely what I plan on doing. It's kind of a shame that there's no serious or mortal wound mechanics in the game at all now. You are either dying, or on the road to complete recovery in a day.

Quote from: Coffee Zombie;965245I think if rests were increased, or their benefit diminished, the game would be better for it. The next time I run 5E, this is precisely what I plan on doing. It's kind of a shame that there's no serious or mortal wound mechanics in the game at all now. You are either dying, or on the road to complete recovery in a day.

No natural healing each long rest.  Instead, must use hit dice.  Give a level of exhaustion every death save rolled, whether successful on the save or not.  Put in a little old school time pressure (via wandering monsters and an adventure structure where the party can easily get in it deep before they start making a run for it).  The problem you describe completely goes away.  If the players stay in "charge in" mode when fully healthy, they'll regret it later.

I was able to move to that without much trouble, because the group I'm in was already cautious, even when not warranted by the system.  (I can be pretty mean even with a so called "forgiving" system.)  But whether weaned slowly off, or learning the hard way, a combination of slower rests, exhaustion rules enforced and house rules slightly, and adventures that reflect it--will work.

Quote from: Omega;965242One of my players pointed out the following. Take a level in Monk and then go with Bladesinger and you have eventually a +15 AC if you can get all three stats maxed since the Bladesinger AC bonus is additive. You could do it too with a Barbarian. Tradeoff is no potential magic item bonuses.

If you make that investment, then it has an opportunity cost and is probably fine.

QuoteI get the feeling the Bladesinger didnt go through as much playtesting as the Undying or Swashbuckler did.

Or the decided that a character totally invested in AC is going to be hard-to-hit, but not necessarily worse than a well designed diviner or abjurer (who have survivability through other mechanics). I'm not sure, I'd need to see the bladesinger in actual play a lot more to come to a hard opinion

Quote from: rawma;965173Or, as I said, the lower half of spell slots on Shield and the higher more than half on other spells. (How useful are 1st and 2nd level Wizard spells at 13th level? Shield yes; Misty Step, I suppose; some useful support spells but more often out of combat, while most of the offensive uses are little better than a cantrip. Honest question, since I haven't played a Wizard above 6th level.) Fights are not going to last 17 rounds. Clearly the Shield defense is going to give way to "only" being AC23 if a fight goes long or a second fight starts without any rest.

You're right. Fights will not last 17 rounds. But a day's worth of fights can. Shield is quite good (I say quite good and not overpowered because there are still plenty of things that do not key off AC) if you can get the 15 minute workday going. If not, and you have to conserve your spells.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;965040The shield spell only lasts a single round. Characters don't have a great number of spell slots anymore. Is the player spamming shield every round then demanding a long rest when the slots run out or something?

She has base AC 23 and being a Wizard is not in the front line, doesn't tank (they have a Barbarian for that, and a Moon Druid), so doesn't get hit every round. Maybe around once or twice a fight, and some of those are crits. She is certainly happy to burn her 1st level spell slots on Shield, occasionally dips into 2nd level slots. I don't think she is running out of slots - actually I don't think any of the PCs (mostly 13th level) run out of resources at a much faster rate than any other. Usually the group is out of hit dice & running low on hit points & healing as the main impetus to seek a long rest, I think.

They probably average 2-5 Hard to Deadly encounters per Long Rest, say 16 combat rounds in an adventuring day might be typical.

Quote from: Omega;965045True. At best you could get a cloak and two rings for +3.

And er? How? Shield last only a round? A bladesingers powers are limited to light armour and no shield? So at best they have AC 12+DEX mod+INT mod. Assuming maxed stats that would be an AC of 22 while bladesinging without Shield. A 13th level Wizard has access to just 4 castings. Though at level 18 she can pick it up as an at will.

She has a ring of protection, I think she has AC 14 armour too - +1 elf chain shirt with me counting elf chain as light armour, but it could just as well be +2 studded. Game is set on Golarion the Pathfinder world, mashing up Rise of the Runelords & Shattered Star, so magic is on the high end by 5e standards and this player maxes for AC, quite sensibly since a couple hits from a big monster could put her out.

They do face some monsters with up to +14 to hit (I think Pappy Kreeg was +13 or +14), so it's not plain sailing even with very high AC. Average foe is probably CR 8 with +8 to hit, with 2 or 3 attacks each. Might face 3 such in a typical encounter I think.

Quote from: Coffee Zombie;965245I think if rests were increased, or their benefit diminished, the game would be better for it. The next time I run 5E, this is precisely what I plan on doing. It's kind of a shame that there's no serious or mortal wound mechanics in the game at all now. You are either dying, or on the road to complete recovery in a day.

There are a number of options to slow healing in the DMG. What edition of D&D had a serious or mortal wound mechanic? I didn't play 3e or 4e so I assume one of them did?

Quote from: Omega;965243I get the feeling the Bladesinger didnt go through as much playtesting as the Undying or Swashbuckler did.

Bladesinger is obviously a bad idea, I would only allow them in the game if I wasn't going to worry about game balance. The min/maxers all had a collective orgasm once it was published.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;965264If you make that investment, then it has an opportunity cost and is probably fine.

Or the decided that a character totally invested in AC is going to be hard-to-hit, but not necessarily worse than a well designed diviner or abjurer (who have survivability through other mechanics). I'm not sure, I'd need to see the bladesinger in actual play a lot more to come to a hard opinion

You're right. Fights will not last 17 rounds. But a day's worth of fights can. Shield is quite good (I say quite good and not overpowered because there are still plenty of things that do not key off AC) if you can get the 15 minute workday going. If not, and you have to conserve your spells.

1: Thats how it feels so far. Its like my melee oriented Warlock character. Theres a tradeoff of X and Y.

2: Id like to see it in play myself to see what happens. But from experience playtesting for WOTC I've seen that no, they dont really consider the whole as much as they should. But how generous, or not, the DM is with short rests will potentially curb some problems, or magnify them.

3: This is the big thing as noted in 2. If the players are trying to nova and rest every damn battle and the DM is allowing it with no repercussions then things are going to skew probably badly. Same with long rest.

Frankly the more I listen to the bladesinger the more I think its overblown its a wizard are type its got what a d4 hd high ac only goes so far for that matter where then hell is that magic of any other non ac target ability its an easy pc to kill.

Quote from: S'mon;965362She has a ring of protection, I think she has AC 14 armour too - +1 elf chain shirt with me counting elf chain as light armour, but it could just as well be +2 studded. Game is set on Golarion the Pathfinder world, mashing up Rise of the Runelords & Shattered Star, so magic is on the high end by 5e standards and this player maxes for AC, quite sensibly since a couple hits from a big monster could put her out.

Average foe is probably CR 8 with +8 to hit, with 2 or 3 attacks each. Might face 3 such in a typical encounter I think.

1: Normal Chain mail is a Heavy armour, Elven Chain reduces it to Medium. So it still wouldn't count for bladesinging. And wouldn't allow the full DEX bonus. You could make up something like Elven Scale or Elven Half Plate using the same principle and that would work.

2: How many PCs in the party? According to 5e then 3 CR8 monsters should be a deadly encounter for 4 level 13 characters. But this is kinda a good example of why CRs and 5es calculations are guidelines at best.

But at the end of the day. Are you and the players having fun? Yes? Rock on then.

Quote from: Omega;9653871: Normal Chain mail is a Heavy armour, Elven Chain reduces it to Medium. So it still wouldn't count for bladesinging. And wouldn't allow the full DEX bonus. You could make up something like Elven Scale or Elven Half Plate using the same principle and that would work.

2: How many PCs in the party? According to 5e then 3 CR8 monsters should be a deadly encounter for 4 level 13 characters. But this is kinda a good example of why CRs and 5es calculations are guidelines at best.

But at the end of the day. Are you and the players having fun? Yes? Rock on then.

5 PC group, levels 11-14, just added a 6th at level 11. Probably most encounters are officially Deadly.
Chain Shirt is medium armour AC 13. I allow Elf Chain Shirt to be Light armour AC 13 ie identical to +1 Studded. Chainmail is AC 16 Heavy AFAICR.

Quote from: S'mon;965361She has base AC 23 and being a Wizard is not in the front line, doesn't tank (they have a Barbarian for that, and a Moon Druid), so doesn't get hit every round. Maybe around once or twice a fight, and some of those are crits. She is certainly happy to burn her 1st level spell slots on Shield, occasionally dips into 2nd level slots. I don't think she is running out of slots - actually I don't think any of the PCs (mostly 13th level) run out of resources at a much faster rate than any other. Usually the group is out of hit dice & running low on hit points & healing as the main impetus to seek a long rest, I think.

You have a wizard who is not on the front line, and doesn't tank, and we're worried that she has an AC through the roof? This is sounding more and more like a paper tiger.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;965489You have a wizard who is not on the front line, and doesn't tank, and we're worried that she has an AC through the roof? This is sounding more and more like a paper tiger.

No. We only just were told shes not a frontlineer.

Try again please.

Yes. With this new information, the scenario is looking like a paper tiger.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;965492Yes. With this new information, the scenario is looking like a paper tiger.

Game certainly plays fine even with my AC 28 Bladesinger. She occasionally takes on an emergency tanking roll if the Barbarian is down/dead/nearly out of hp, and she is the most powerful PC although the Moon Druid is a level higher (and the Bladesinger is actually Rog-1/Wiz-12). But it's not a Pathfinder-style issue of PCs breaking the game, trivialising boss fights etc.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;964618What did you want?

Well, I took an extreme position. I tried to convince Mike Mearls that actual healing from rest should be fairly limited, and to substitute that there should be an emphasis on things like curative herbs and characters with healing skills.  In essence, to make healing a resource as much as a time-management issue.

Quote from: RPGPundit;965984Well, I took an extreme position. I tried to convince Mike Mearls that actual healing from rest should be fairly limited, and to substitute that there should be an emphasis on things like curative herbs and characters with healing skills.  In essence, to make healing a resource as much as a time-management issue.

I like that.  I use something similar in conception but opposite in execution.  

I like healing from rest, I don't like healing from magic.  So magic healing is limited and temporary with wounds opening up again after the magic wears off.  But resting heals provided a pleasent camp and fire (I think I started this thread describing the difference between a dry camp and a cold one.)  I will just hand wave in tea's and salves and stitches.

Quote from: Headless;966025I like that.  I use something similar in conception but opposite in execution.  

I like healing from rest, I don't like healing from magic.  So magic healing is limited and temporary with wounds opening up again after the magic wears off.  But resting heals provided a pleasent camp and fire (I think I started this thread describing the difference between a dry camp and a cold one.)  I will just hand wave in tea's and salves and stitches.

Me too. I allow healing from magic to be stabilizing but not like video game healing that players just shoot up with health.

Quote from: RPGPundit;965984Well, I took an extreme position. I tried to convince Mike Mearls that actual healing from rest should be fairly limited, and to substitute that there should be an emphasis on things like curative herbs and characters with healing skills.  In essence, to make healing a resource as much as a time-management issue.

What effect do you think would that have had on the game?

Would they regain those resources on resting? Seems like in that case it would just be the same thing but a step removed.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;966176What effect do you think would that have had on the game?

Would they regain those resources on resting? Seems like in that case it would just be the same thing but a step removed.

The difference being one remotely resembles how things might work according to Physics, Biology Chemistry and the entire knowledge base of humanity.  The other...not so much.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;965264You're right. Fights will not last 17 rounds. But a day's worth of fights can. Shield is quite good (I say quite good and not overpowered because there are still plenty of things that do not key off AC) if you can get the 15 minute workday going. If not, and you have to conserve your spells.

There is a tradeoff; but is the cost enough for AC23 and full caster spell slots? It is true that players can get cautious if they don't know how much longer the work day will be, and that's also a good feature of the game. To paraphrase Nimzovich, the threat is greater than the (re)action. But I'm still puzzled as to what else the 13th level caster is saving those 1st level slots (in particular) for?

Honestly, I don't think the character is overpowered, but I'd have to see how it works in practice to be sure. I am certain that Shield is much more effective for a high AC caster than for a low AC caster (versus the +8 to hit opponent, the AC23 caster gets hit 1/6 as much when it's used, and doesn't have to use the spell at all most of the time; an AC15 caster, not that low an AC, gets hit 60% as often by using Shield and has to choose to use it more often).

Quote from: S'mon;965361She has base AC 23 and being a Wizard is not in the front line, doesn't tank (they have a Barbarian for that, and a Moon Druid), so doesn't get hit every round. Maybe around once or twice a fight, and some of those are crits. She is certainly happy to burn her 1st level spell slots on Shield, occasionally dips into 2nd level slots. I don't think she is running out of slots - actually I don't think any of the PCs (mostly 13th level) run out of resources at a much faster rate than any other. Usually the group is out of hit dice & running low on hit points & healing as the main impetus to seek a long rest, I think.

They probably average 2-5 Hard to Deadly encounters per Long Rest, say 16 combat rounds in an adventuring day might be typical.

Quote from: S'mon;965362She has a ring of protection, I think she has AC 14 armour too - +1 elf chain shirt with me counting elf chain as light armour, but it could just as well be +2 studded. Game is set on Golarion the Pathfinder world, mashing up Rise of the Runelords & Shattered Star, so magic is on the high end by 5e standards and this player maxes for AC, quite sensibly since a couple hits from a big monster could put her out.

They do face some monsters with up to +14 to hit (I think Pappy Kreeg was +13 or +14), so it's not plain sailing even with very high AC. Average foe is probably CR 8 with +8 to hit, with 2 or 3 attacks each. Might face 3 such in a typical encounter I think.

I'm guessing that they (often) get a short rest somewhere between the first and last of those encounters (if not, you're possibly mistreating the short rest oriented characters - the Moon Druid is much less of a tank without it, and any warlock will have to spend 14 of those 16 rounds casting Eldritch Blast). So, thanks to Arcane Recovery, the 13th level wizard could get back 4 1st level slots and a 2nd level slot, so can be able to use Shield in more than half the rounds.

How does a long rest come about? Is it a natural occurrence in the course of events ("you conclude your travels at a friendly inn and spend an uneventful night"), does the party change some of its plans to get it ("we'll retreat from the dungeon and return after resting") or do they force the issue ("Wizard! Cast Leomund's Tiny Hut as a ritual and we'll spend 8 hours resting here in the middle of the Tomb of Horrors!")?

Quote from: Omega;965382If the players are trying to nova and rest every damn battle and the DM is allowing it with no repercussions then things are going to skew probably badly. Same with long rest.

That's at the heart of the matter; the game and the published adventures don't give sufficient (in my opinion) advice on pacing the rests. This has some potential for good; the DM has an easy way to make things less deadly for players who are less effective, or to put more pressure on better players. But it's more likely to be harmful.

However, I will surprise some people in saying that WotC is in the right ballpark.  If Hit Points are indeed meant to be Luck, Skill, Stamina mostly and only actual meat trauma with the last few, then there should be a difference between the Non-Meat and Meat HPs and the non-meat should recover much faster.  WotC's problem is, they don't look at the problem from a point of reality/simulation/verisimilitude and try to come with a system that has an in-setting rationalization.  In 4e and 5e, they still look at it from a purely mechanics perspective tuned to high cinematic action.  As a result, what you see doesn't resemble anything other than an MMO or maybe anime show.

That's what I was going to say, the game doesn't really try to represent reality.

If it did it might as well be GURPS.

Yeah, because there's nothing in between Phoenix Command and Toon. No room at all.  I mean, it's "fantasy" right, so why shouldn't characters be chopped down and dying just to jump right back into the fight 12 times?

Quote from: rawma;966181I'm guessing that they (often) get a short rest somewhere between the first and last of those encounters (if not, you're possibly mistreating the short rest oriented characters - the Moon Druid is much less of a tank without it, and any warlock will have to spend 14 of those 16 rounds casting Eldritch Blast). So, thanks to Arcane Recovery, the 13th level wizard could get back 4 1st level slots and a 2nd level slot, so can be able to use Shield in more than half the rounds.

How does a long rest come about? Is it a natural occurrence in the course of events ("you conclude your travels at a friendly inn and spend an uneventful night"), does the party change some of its plans to get it ("we'll retreat from the dungeon and return after resting") or do they force the issue ("Wizard! Cast Leomund's Tiny Hut as a ritual and we'll spend 8 hours resting here in the middle of the Tomb of Horrors!")?

I went to 15 minute short rests with a maximum of 3 short rests per day. They normally short rest after any tough encounter.

They long rest either at the conclusion of an adventure or when they're feeling beaten up they will seek a long rest. Playing Hook Mountain Massacre there was a lot of retreating (at least several miles) into the wilderness & casting of Leomund's Tiny Hut at a secluded spot (I told the wizard a powerful monster might break into the Hut). The PCs were heavily outmatched by the Kreeg ogres so resorted to hit & run guerilla tactics to wear them down over weeks and months.

All said though. something to keep in mind is that some of the older editions of D&D did require the group to frequently pause and take a breather or else suffer some penalty.

As noted earlier. In BX that was every 6th turn. 10 minutes out of every hour. Not sure if its in AD&D as I didnt see mention on a glance through.

As for more resource optioned healing. Theres hints of it in the PHB. PCs can buy a basic healing potion from shops and assuming its non-magical a PC could craft one with a healing kit in 10 days.

Quote from: S'mon;966205I went to 15 minute short rests with a maximum of 3 short rests per day. They normally short rest after any tough encounter.

They long rest either at the conclusion of an adventure or when they're feeling beaten up they will seek a long rest. Playing Hook Mountain Massacre there was a lot of retreating (at least several miles) into the wilderness & casting of Leomund's Tiny Hut at a secluded spot (I told the wizard a powerful monster might break into the Hut). The PCs were heavily outmatched by the Kreeg ogres so resorted to hit & run guerilla tactics to wear them down over weeks and months.

Thanks for the info. I don't have any hard limit on short rests, beyond what feels natural for the setting or adventure. It is the case for our group that players don't seek rests unless they're severely and uniformly depleted; if only one character runs out of spell slots then they just have to make do with cantrips or whatever, so we're unlikely to get 15 minute adventuring days. I have mostly prevented misuse of Leomund's Tiny Hut in active adventuring areas by observing that the most powerful NPC in the area will probably organize a sizable impromptu army just out of sight, waiting for the spell to end.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;966176What effect do you think would that have had on the game?

Would they regain those resources on resting? Seems like in that case it would just be the same thing but a step removed.

No, they wouldn't, except for the low baseline of hit points from sleeping without any assistance.

I suspect that was the problem. WoTC at least seems to think that a resource-management element is not something that their customer base would really like. Probably because some stupid fuck came up with that fantasy about the "20 minute adventuring day".

Quote from: CRKrueger;966182However, I will surprise some people in saying that WotC is in the right ballpark.  If Hit Points are indeed meant to be Luck, Skill, Stamina mostly and only actual meat trauma with the last few, then there should be a difference between the Non-Meat and Meat HPs and the non-meat should recover much faster.  WotC's problem is, they don't look at the problem from a point of reality/simulation/verisimilitude and try to come with a system that has an in-setting rationalization.  In 4e and 5e, they still look at it from a purely mechanics perspective tuned to high cinematic action.  As a result, what you see doesn't resemble anything other than an MMO or maybe anime show.

Not sure what you're saying here. As I recall from the 5e PHB hit points are defined exactly as you say here: luck, skill and stamina with only the last half involving any meat points. Are you critical or approving of that? It sounds like you approve of that but say 5e is like an MMO for having the exact rule that you approve of? Or am I misunderstanding?

I'm wondering now if 5e would work best keeping short rests as-is, but a week to long rest. Then you could actually have 6-8 fights per long rest without it getting ridiculous or tedious. I'm thinking overnight rest restores 1 hp/level & removes 1 level of exhaustion, which solves the issue of Exhaustion being excessively punitive to eg the Berserker.

Quote from: S'mon;966417I'm wondering now if 5e would work best keeping short rests as-is, but a week to long rest. Then you could actually have 6-8 fights per long rest without it getting ridiculous or tedious. I'm thinking overnight rest restores 1 hp/level & removes 1 level of exhaustion, which solves the issue of Exhaustion being excessively punitive to eg the Berserker.

Low Fantasy Gaming rpg has something like this. 1d6 day long rest, with 5 min short rest (up to 3/day, but you must make Will checks to get anything back; a refresh is not automatic).

I dont think you can make this shift in 5e however without greatly upsetting short rest vs long rest class balance. Having classes refresh at different rest rates is one of the fundamental flaws of 5e imo.