Long rest Interruption
- View Results
Poll: What is required to interrupt a long rest?
Log in to vote in this poll.
-
#1 Sep 25, 2022
- (Perfect)
- Join Date: 8/15/2017
- Posts: 2,998
- Member Details
The text for interrupting a long rest says the following:
"If the rest is interrupted by a period of strenuous activity — at least 1 hour of walking, fighting, casting spells, or similar adventuring activity — the characters must begin the rest again to gain any benefit from it."
I'd like to know how most DMs play or interpret this
1) (at least 1 hour) of (walking, fighting, casting spells, or similar adventuring activity)
2) at least (1 hour of walking), (fighting), (casting spells), or (similar adventuring activity)
Does it require an hour of any activity to interrupt a long rest or is it just an hour of walking and any length of time for the other activities? The sentence can be parsed either way.
Does it take an hour of a "similar adventuring activity" to interrupt a long rest? Or does getting up to spend 15 minutes scouting around the camp in the middle of the night looking for threats using stealth and other skills interrupt the long rest because it is a "similar adventuring activity"?
Last edited by David42: Sep 25, 2022
-
#2 Sep 25, 2022
- (Perfect)
- Join Date: 11/30/2017
- Posts: 6,344
- Member Details
I tend to go with the first reading, because it’s more forgiving. If I’m throwing an encounter at them in camp, I don’t necessarily need it to screw up their whole next day. And if I do, for some reason, want to screw up their next day, I’ll can always force them to keep waking up.
-
#3 Sep 25, 2022
- Scout
- Location: insert snarky text
- Join Date: 8/19/2021
- Posts: 242
- Member Details
Here's my way of looking at it:
Let's say I'm an adventurer. I've just turned in for the night in my tent, and after spending a little time maintaining my gear and tending to my wounds, I go to sleep. Three hours later, I awake to rustling outside my tent. Quickly grabbing my weapon, shield, and/or spellcasting focus, I jump out of the tent to see what's going on. It's what I could have expected... a random encounter.
About 20 seconds later, there are 2d4 randomly encountered goblins lying on the ground. I take a moment to clear away the bodies and clean my weapons, then return to sleep. I'm an adventurer, so I've slept after much worse trauma than this.
I don't think that this short little encounter is gonna cause three hours of sleep to magically go away. If you think about them for a second, these rules confusions go away pretty quickly.
Panda-wat (I hate my username) is somehow convinced that he is objectively right about everything D&D related even though he obviouslyis not. Considering that, he'd probably make a great D&D youtuber.
"If I die, I can live with that." ~Luke Hart,the DM lair
-
#4 Sep 25, 2022
- Rutterkin
- Join Date: 6/8/2020
- Posts: 221
- Member Details
It's definitely the second. Any encounter disrupts a long rest.
-
#5 Sep 25, 2022
- (Perfect)
- Location: Phoenix, AZ
- Join Date: 3/14/2018
- Posts: 1,159
- Member Details
Quote from Garr_Feyld >>
It's definitely the second. Any encounter disrupts a long rest.
I do not believe that is supported by the line of text as written and it certainly was not RAI according toWotC staff. For it to be the latter option, I believe the text would need to read"If the rest is interrupted by a period of strenuous activity — at least 1 hour of walking or any time spentfighting, casting spells, orsimilar adventuring activity — the characters must begin the rest again to gain any benefit from it."
DM mostly, Playeroccasionally | Session 0 form| Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock |He/Him/They/Them
You can try DDB for free using the Basic Rules, free adventures, MCV1:SC, andhomebrew. Answers about physical books, purchases, and subbing.
-
#6 Sep 26, 2022
See AlsoRoll20 - Compendium and Rule Set DirectoryDoes casting a spell negate a long rest? - Rules & Game Mechanics - Dungeons & Dragons Discussion - D&D Beyond ForumsForums: Rules Discussion: How severely can a rest be interrupted?Spending hit dice - Rules & Game Mechanics - Dungeons & Dragons Discussion - D&D Beyond Forums- Warder
- Join Date: 9/14/2019
- Posts: 569
- Member Details
I usually lean lenient, but I think the One-D&D Playtest description is a more precise wording for what the rule was intended to be for 5e.
Any period of combat would interrupt the rest every bit as much as an hour of walking, because the adrenaline would be pumping, and the party would be on edge in case another attack occurs. Also, no combat in D&D goes for an hour, so that part of the rule is pointless under the other interpretation. That's 60 rounds of combat. Unless they're "fighting" a sleeping Tarasque that refuses to attack them, it's just not going to happen.
Also, the stricter ruling on Long Rests encourages the party to take better precautions for finding safe resting places. If they think it out well, they should be rewarded with an easy long rest. If they decide to plop-down half-way through a dungeon, or with a big fired out on a hill in bandit territory, then they should have to deal with the Exhaustion from the lost night of rest due to the bandit attacks.
Of course, this is largely nullified once they get Leomund's Tiny Hut, unless the DM decides to throw a spellcaster who knows Dispel Magic at the party.
-
#7 Sep 26, 2022
- Rutterkin
- Join Date: 6/8/2020
- Posts: 221
- Member Details
You are incorrect. RAI and RAW are clear. Any strenuous activity disrupts a long rest. The examples given are;
- An hour of walking
- Fighting
- Casting spells
- Or any similar adventuring activity
There is no ambiguity here. Anyone taking this to mean that you need to fight for an hour for a long rest to be interrupted are either mistaken (this is ok), or talking a poorly worded rule and deliberately misinterpreting it (this is not ok).
If you need any further convincing, see the new, updated, wording of the rule in the 1D&D playtest doc;
"A Long Rest is a period of extended downtime—at least 8 hours long—during which a creature sleeps for at least 6 hours and performs no more than 2 hours of light activity, such as reading, talking, eating, or standing watch
INTERRUPTING THE REST
If a Long Rest is interrupted by combat or by 1 hour of walking, casting Spells, or similar activity, the rest confers no benefit and must be restarted; however, if the rest was at least 1 hour long before the interruption, the creature gains the benefits of a Short Rest."Last edited by Garr_Feyld: Sep 26, 2022
-
#8 Sep 26, 2022
- (Perfect)
- Join Date: 10/5/2019
- Posts: 9,018
- Member Details
I assume that the One D&D text (If a Long Rest is interrupted by combat or by 1 hour of walking, casting Spells, or similar activity, the rest confers no benefit and must be restarted) is the intended behavior for 5e, but as written the other interpretation is consistent as well. I assume that any amount of combat interrupts because otherwise it's pretty much a null statement.
-
#9 Sep 26, 2022
- (Perfect)
- Join Date: 8/15/2017
- Posts: 2,998
- Member Details
Quote from Garr_Feyld >>
You are incorrect. RAI and RAW are clear. Any strenuous activity disrupts a long rest. The examples given are;
- An hour of walking
- Fighting
- Casting spells
- Or any similar adventuring activity
There is no ambiguity here. Anyone taking this to mean that you need to fight for an hour for a long rest to be interrupted are either mistaken (this is ok), or talking a poorly worded rule and deliberately misinterpreting it (this is not ok).
If you need any further convincing, see the new, updated, wording of the rule in the 1D&D playtest doc;
"A Long Rest is a period of extended downtime—at least 8 hours long—during which a creature sleeps for at least 6 hours and performs no more than 2 hours of light activity, such as reading, talking, eating, or standing watch
INTERRUPTING THE REST
If a Long Rest is interrupted by combat or by 1 hour of walking, casting Spells, or similar activity, the rest confers no benefit and must be restarted; however, if the rest was at least 1 hour long before the interruption, the creature gains the benefits of a Short Rest."However, the One D&D example has the same ambiguity and in fact seems to clarify that it is only the combat that will interrupt the long rest but an hour of any other activity is still required.
"interrupted by combat or by 1 hour of walking, casting Spells, or similar activity"
If they REALLY wanted anything to interrupt it, it would have been very simple to re-write as:
"If a Long Rest is interrupted by combat, casting spells, similar activities or by 1 hour of walking, the rest confers no benefit ..."
THAT statement is unambiguous in terms of the length of time required for all activities.
Also, I don't see why a wizard would void their long rest by casting prestidigitation or Create Bonfire to keep the campfire going - so it is very possible that taking an hour or more to cast spells IS intended to disrupt the long rest (eg concentrating on casting something or long duration spells) but that occasional casting is NOT. (e.g. You can't cast find familiar during a long rest since it has a casting time of an hour).
The other clear way to write it would be:
"If a Long Rest is interrupted by combat or by 1 hour spent on any of the following - walking, casting spells, or similar activities - the rest confers no benefit ..."
The current 5e version is unfortunately ambiguous in the same way that the second half of the One D&D version is still ambiguous. However, since they explicitly moved the combat to a separate clause but did not move the rest then it seems that the developers also consider the one hour to apply to all the other activities - otherwise they would have chosen a different wording to match the change made for combat.
Finally, :), as someone else mentioned, these are seasoned adventurers. Modern day soldiers will get sleep whenever possible. They are trained to deal with threats, have sleep interrupted, stay up if necessary but as soon as that threat isn't imminent ... nap time. It isn't clear to me why a few minutes of fighting would prevent a group from resting or void any rest they have already had so I can easily see either interpretation of the current text being reasonable.
Last edited by David42: Sep 26, 2022
-
#10 Sep 26, 2022
- (Perfect)
- Location: Phoenix, AZ
- Join Date: 3/14/2018
- Posts: 1,159
- Member Details
Quote from Garr_Feyld >>
You are incorrect. RAI and RAW are clear. Any strenuous activity disrupts a long rest. The examples given are;
- An hour of walking
- Fighting
- Casting spells
- Or any similar adventuring activity
There is no ambiguity here. Anyone taking this to mean that you need to fight for an hour for a long rest to be interrupted are either mistaken (this is ok), or talking a poorly worded rule and deliberately misinterpreting it (this is not ok).
If you need any further convincing, see the new, updated, wording of the rule in the 1D&D playtest doc;
"A Long Rest is a period of extended downtime—at least 8 hours long—during which a creature sleeps for at least 6 hours and performs no more than 2 hours of light activity, such as reading, talking, eating, or standing watch
INTERRUPTING THE REST
If a Long Rest is interrupted by combat or by 1 hour of walking, casting Spells, or similar activity, the rest confers no benefit and must be restarted; however, if the rest was at least 1 hour long before the interruption, the creature gains the benefits of a Short Rest."RAW and RAI are clear, that much is true. I gave you RAI, which prove that you have clearly failed to understand the intent. One D&D playtest rules are not clarification, they are playtesting a possible change to the way this interruption operates and everything in that document is just that: a test. It is frankly, silly to think that the One D&D is proof of anything. Does the One D&D playtest material clarify the rules on rolling a D20 on checks for current rules?
The playtest material making very clear changes to the rules that puts combat before the time stipulation. They are separated categorically so that there is a clear distinction where 1 hour of walking resets the long rest or any combat encounter. You know, exactly like in the example I offered in my initial post… That is not the case in the current rules, which list the time requirement first, followed by all the activities that fall under that time period of interruption. Further, Mike Mearls explained that this grouping was intentional, so that interruptions to long rests would be rare. Again, they were intentional about their word choice in placing the time requirement first so that all the examples that follow must meet the time requirement. This is not a case of sloppy writing that leads to confusion. You are correct that there is no ambiguity. You are incorrect about your overall conclusion.
DM mostly, Playeroccasionally | Session 0 form| Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock |He/Him/They/Them
You can try DDB for free using the Basic Rules, free adventures, MCV1:SC, andhomebrew. Answers about physical books, purchases, and subbing.
-
#11 Sep 26, 2022
- (Perfect)
- Join Date: 10/5/2019
- Posts: 9,018
- Member Details
Quote from Erik_Soong >>
RAW and RAI are clear, that much is true. I gave you RAI, which prove that you have clearly failed to understand the intent. One D&D playtest rules are not clarification, they are playtesting a possible change to the way this interruption operates and everything in that document is just that: a test. It is frankly, silly to think that the One D&D is proof of anything. Does the One D&D playtest material clarify the rules on rolling a D20 on checks for current rules?
When you have vague wording and the playtest is consistent with one particular reading of the original rules, it's reasonable to assume that the intent is clarification, not a rules change.
-
#12 Sep 26, 2022
- (Perfect)
- Location: Phoenix, AZ
- Join Date: 3/14/2018
- Posts: 1,159
- Member Details
Quote from Pantagruel666 >>
Quote from Erik_Soong >>
RAW and RAI are clear, that much is true. I gave you RAI, which prove that you have clearly failed to understand the intent. One D&D playtest rules are not clarification, they are playtesting a possible change to the way this interruption operates and everything in that document is just that: a test. It is frankly, silly to think that the One D&D is proof of anything. Does the One D&D playtest material clarify the rules on rolling a D20 on checks for current rules?
When you have vague wording and the playtest is consistent with one particular reading of the original rules, it's reasonable to assume that the intent is clarification, not a rules change.
I would agree with this if not for clarification that was already given for the opposite conclusion. The wording is not vague in my opinion and brought me immediately to the same understanding that the game designers intended to give at the time. The grammatical choices they made bring us to the first option and these were further supported as RAI by the then co-lead game designer for 5e.
In what way is the language unclear for you? I know you love to argue for its own sake but if this is genuine confusion, I will do my best to clarify using rules of the English language.
DM mostly, Playeroccasionally | Session 0 form| Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock |He/Him/They/Them
You can try DDB for free using the Basic Rules, free adventures, MCV1:SC, andhomebrew. Answers about physical books, purchases, and subbing.
-
#13 Sep 26, 2022
- (Perfect)
- Join Date: 10/5/2019
- Posts: 9,018
- Member Details
Quote from Erik_Soong >>
In what way is the language unclear for you? I know you love to argue for its own sake but if this is genuine confusion, I will do my best to clarify using rules of the English language.
The English language does not have operator precedence rules. Whether 'one hour' applies to 'walking' or applies to 'walking, fighting, casting spells, or similar adventuring activity' cannot be determined based on the rules of grammar.
-
#14 Sep 26, 2022
- (Perfect)
- Location: Phoenix, AZ
- Join Date: 3/14/2018
- Posts: 1,159
- Member Details
Quote from Pantagruel666 >>
Quote from Erik_Soong >>
In what way is the language unclear for you? I know you love to argue for its own sake but if this is genuine confusion, I will do my best to clarify using rules of the English language.
The English language does not have operator precedence rules. Whether 'one hour' applies to 'walking' or applies to 'walking, fighting, casting spells, or similar adventuring activity' cannot be determined based on the rules of grammar.
- At - preposition - expressing the time when an event takes place.
- Least - determiner - the smallest in amount, extent, or significance.
- Commas - used in this context between all items in a series.
You are trying to argue that the commas could be used for independent clauses, this makes no actual sense because such an arrangement would demand a decoupling from the determiner to support your position and each one would need its own established time for clarity.
"At least 1 hour of walking, any time spent fighting..."
This is not the case. The items in the series are linked to the phrase 'at least' which establishes the minimum criterion that must be met for each item in the series to reset the long rest. Further (and a point that you continually ignore), the game designers themselves explained that they intended for this exact interpretation of the rules and were deliberate in their word choice which directly undermines your willful misinterpretation. Therefore, the playtest material cannot be clarification of existing rules but rather, is intended as a shift in game design for whatever reason. Other rules have been changed to match common playstyles. I suspect that this is a change for similar reasons, though the why is immaterial to this discussion.These are basic English rules that you are arguing against and I suspect that not even you have had such a spectacular reading comprehension failure. Instead, I believe this is an attempt to get into another six page argument splitting hairs. We have already established several times that you have far more stamina than I do for pointless discussion; if you once again crave the last word victory, you will undoubtedly get it. I will monitor to see if you are capable of a genuine attempt to seek out truth and understanding. Failing that, I am comfortable letting you have another victory. It is your choice.
Last edited by Erik_Soong: Sep 26, 2022
DM mostly, Playeroccasionally | Session 0 form| Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock |He/Him/They/Them
You can try DDB for free using the Basic Rules, free adventures, MCV1:SC, andhomebrew. Answers about physical books, purchases, and subbing.
-
#15 Sep 26, 2022
- (Perfect)
- Join Date: 10/5/2019
- Posts: 9,018
- Member Details
Quote from Erik_Soong >>
These are basic English rules that you are arguing against .
You grossly overestimate the degree to which English has rules.
-
#16 Sep 26, 2022
- (Perfect)
- Location: Phoenix, AZ
- Join Date: 3/14/2018
- Posts: 1,159
- Member Details
Quote from Pantagruel666 >>
Quote from Erik_Soong >>
These are basic English rules that you are arguing against .
You grossly overestimate the degree to which English has rules.
LOL Well, you got me at barrel’s end on that one. King’s to you.
DM mostly, Playeroccasionally | Session 0 form| Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock |He/Him/They/Them
You can try DDB for free using the Basic Rules, free adventures, MCV1:SC, andhomebrew. Answers about physical books, purchases, and subbing.
-
#17 Sep 26, 2022
- (Perfect)
- Join Date: 8/15/2017
- Posts: 2,998
- Member Details
Quote from Pantagruel666 >>
Quote from Erik_Soong >>
RAW and RAI are clear, that much is true. I gave you RAI, which prove that you have clearly failed to understand the intent. One D&D playtest rules are not clarification, they are playtesting a possible change to the way this interruption operates and everything in that document is just that: a test. It is frankly, silly to think that the One D&D is proof of anything. Does the One D&D playtest material clarify the rules on rolling a D20 on checks for current rules?
When you have vague wording and the playtest is consistent with one particular reading of the original rules, it's reasonable to assume that the intent is clarification, not a rules change.
The problem is that the rewritten rule is NOT consistent with one particular reading of the original rules.
The playtest rule treats combat separately from the clause of at least 1 hour walking, casting spells or similar activities. The fact that they split only the combat element is indicative that the others all require at least an hour and imply that the change to the rule is that any combat interrupt a long rest but an hour of the other activities is still required - which similarly implies that the current intent was that an hour of combat was required to interrupt a long rest.
You can't read intent behind the 5e rules from a playtest rule that only changes a portion of the existing phrasing.
P.S. Take the following for what it is worth but in terms of actual intent from designers ...
Edit: Added tweet reference from Jeremy Crawford
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/764150520646742016
"Any amount of fighting breaks a short rest. A long rest can withstand an interruption of up to 1 hour. #DnD"
Mike Mearls clarified this on twitter:
The Seven-Sided Die @sevensideddie 9:30 AM - 9 July 2014
.@mikemearls How are Long Rest interruptions meant to work? The land is in confusion & dismay! http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php… https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/42123…Mike Mearls @mikemearls 10:01 AM - 10 July 2014
@sevensideddie interruption needs to be a full hour. Testers: "We rest 7 hours, a kobold knocks on the door, and now we have to start over?The Seven-Sided Die @sevensideddie 10:04 AM - 10 July 2014
.@mikemearls Oh. But that means combat will never interrupt rest, since a 600-round combat is unheard of. Why list it at all then?Mike Mearls @mikemearls 10:05 AM - 10 July 2014
@sevensideddie there could be cases where it's valid - fight starts, now you need to leave the dungeonThe Seven-Sided Die @sevensideddie 10:07 AM - 10 July 2014
@mikemearls Ah, so it’s meant to be fairly rare, more “we’ve given up resting for now,” not just attacks on the camp.Mike Mearls @mikemearls 10:08 AM - 10 July 2014
@sevensideddie exactlyEdit: P.P.S. The reason for the poll is that there seemed to be a difference of opinion on how to interpret those particular lines and I was curious how widespread the different interpretations might be.
Last edited by David42: Sep 26, 2022
-
#18 Sep 26, 2022
- Burglar
- Location: Epsom, Surrey
- Join Date: 7/14/2018
- Posts: 2,683
- Member Details
The reworded version in One D&D makes it very clear how the rules will work from 2024 onwards.
However the current wording does imply your option 1.
-
#19 Sep 27, 2022
- (Perfect)
- Join Date: 6/20/2019
- Posts: 738
- Member Details
unless it in the middle of the watch, does it really matter if the adventurers have breakfast at 0630 and start moving out at 0700, or if they move out at 0900?
No Gaming is Better than Bad Gaming.
-
#20 Sep 28, 2022
- Thaumaturgist
- Join Date: 8/19/2017
- Posts: 1,311
- Member Details
I'd ask the question, when has any party spent a whole hour fighting?
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Posts Quoted:
Reply
Clear All Quotes
