Can someone please explain the ‘coffeelock’ to me?

[UnwiseAlistair]

I don’t think I’m understanding the coffeelock build, please help me figure it out?

[Scyrner]

Step 1: Get Warlock and Sorc Levels.
Step 2: Convert Warlock spell slots (that recharge on a short rest) to sorcery points with Sorc metamagic.
Step 3: Convert Spell points to spell slots with Sorc metamagic.
Step 4: Take short rest, refresh warlock spell slots, repeat at step 2.


That's basically it. Your extra spell slots never go away as long as you never take a long rest. If you take a Divine Soul Sorc origin, then you can cast cure wounds on yourself so you never need Hit Dice.

Edit because I'm bad at typing what I'm thinking. Thanks for pointing it out.

[JackPhoenix]

Warlock restores pact magic slots on short rest, sorcerer converts pact magic slots to sorcery points and sorcery points to normal spell slots. There's limit on how many sorcery points you can have, but no limit on number of extra spell slots created. Created slots last until the next long rest, but you don't have to ever take a long rest. You take only short rests at every possible opportunity, and generate arbitrary number of spell slots.

[8wGremlin]

That's basically it. Your extra spell slots never go away as long as you never take a short rest. If you take a Divine Soul Sorc origin, then you can cast cure wounds on yourself so you never need Hit Dice.

Your extra spell slots never go away as long as you never take a LONG rest.

The trick has been around since the release of the PHB, but you had to be an elf and use their trance ability to sleep for 4 hours and then have 4 (3 usable) short rests for everyone else long rest.

but has gotten extra coverage due to the following


new invocation that means you don't have to sleep, turning everyone else's long rest into 8 short rests (7 usable ones)
divine soul sorcerer allowing for cure light wounds, as you don't get your HD back.

[nickl_2000]

And then your DM smacks you and turns your character into a weasel with a true polymorph spell for trying to cheat the system.

[samcifer]

Warlock restores pact magic slots on short rest, sorcerer converts pact magic slots to sorcery points and sorcery points to normal spell slots. There's limit on how many sorcery points you can have, but no limit on number of extra spell slots created. Created slots last until the next long rest, but you don't have to ever take a long rest. You take only short rests at every possible opportunity, and generate arbitrary number of spell slots.

Also, you skip long rests. The main ways to do this are to get Warlock to 3 and take Pact of the Tome, then Aspect of the Moon as one of your Eldritch Evocations or use a racial ability such as the Elven Trance or The Warforged who never need to sleep, you can avoid the exhaustion penalty for skipping sleep and instead of taking a long (8 hr.) rest, you take several short (1 hr.) rests and use that to continually reset your warlock spell slots so you can keep cashing them in for Sorcerery Points. Basically you want Warlock 3 / Sorcerer 3+ to pull this off.

Another way to counter exhaustion penalties is to choose the Divine Soul Sorcerer and once you reach lv. 5 spells, take Greater Restoration as one of your Sorcerer spells as one of it's effects is to negate one level of exhaustion.

[Samayu]

So how many spell slots do you usually have, walking into an encounter?

[samcifer]

So how many spell slots do you usually have, walking into an encounter?

If you have level 2 Sorcerer spell slots and Lv. 2 Warlock spell slots, you could get extra lv. 2 spell slots and based on cashing in 2 lv. 2 spell slots per short rest, then spending 3 sorcery points per lv. 2 spell slot, you'd have an extra 11 lv. 2 slots counting your initial 3 sp from being a lv. 3 sorc and still have two left over for an extra lv. 1 spell slot at character level 6.

[mephnick]

Just be warned, like all of these niche builds it's very likely a DM will say "....no".

[Skyblaze]

Isnt this impossible to abuse since you can only have max alloted sorcery points and not any more? So if you only dip 3 lvls into sorc you can only have 3 sorc points at any given time

[Easy_Lee]

Putting it all together:

Take three levels of Warlock, Tome Pact, and pick up Aspect of the Moon: you no longer need to sleep.
Take 2+ levels of Divine Soul Sorcerer: gain Flexible Casting and healing spells.
Whenever your party takes a Long Rest, you take eight Short Rests. The DM cannot force you to take a Long Rest.
At the end of each short rest, use Flexible Casting to convert your recovered Warlock spell slots into Four Sorcery Points, then covert those Sorcery Points into spell slots up to fifth level.

Flexible Casting: You can transform unexpended sorcery points into one spell slot as a Bonus Action on Your Turn. The created Spell Slots Vanish at the end of a Long Rest - you never need to take a long rest.


The build comes online at level 5 by which point it has an arbitrary number of level 1 spell slots. At level 6, you gain second level slots. At level 8, you gain third level slots. And so on.

Over the course of a single downtime day, you can generate 24 * 4 = 96 Sorcery Points, which you turn into spell slots as you go along.

One downtime day equals:

48 1st level slots
32 2nd level slots
19 3rd level slots
16 4th level slots
13 5th level slots

In other words, if you have a week of downtime you can generate more spell slots that you're going to need. Other players track their spell slots with paper; you can use a giant bag of jelly beans.

Metamagic: you can convert spell slots to spell points as a bonus action on your turn. Use this to apply metamagic to every spell you cast. Starting at 6th level, you can Twin every buff / debuff or Empower every blast without fear of running out of Spell points.

Short Version: for the cost of being 3 levels behind in spell slot progression and being unable to recover spell slots over 5th level, you have infinite castings of all of your spells. It's like the Wizard capstone Signature Spell plus metamagic applied to your entire spell list.

In spite of all this, this character doesn't do more with his turn than anyone else does, and he is behind on spells known and spell level. But in return, he can use his abilities whenever he likes with no regard for resource expenditure. This character transcends exactly one aspect of the system: resource management. He's free.

[LordEntrails]

And then your DM smacks you and turns your character into a weasel with a true polymorph spell for trying to cheat the system.


Just be warned, like all of these niche builds it's very likely a DM will say "....no".
Absolutely.

[Provo]

Isnt this impossible to abuse since you can only have max alloted sorcery points and not any more? So if you only dip 3 lvls into sorc you can only have 3 sorc points at any given time

No. You have a maximum amount of sorcery points but you do not have a maximum amount of spell slots.

Every short rest you convert Warlock spell slots -> Sorc points -> Sorc spell slots

Edit: You will lose some sorc points in the transition if your Warlock level is high, but your spell slots will still grow indefinitely.

[Samayu]

If you have level 2 Sorcerer spell slots and Lv. 2 Warlock spell slots, you could get extra lv. 2 spell slots and based on cashing in 2 lv. 2 spell slots per short rest, then spending 3 sorcery points per lv. 2 spell slot, you'd have an extra 11 lv. 2 slots counting your initial 3 sp from being a lv. 3 sorc and still have two left over for an extra lv. 1 spell slot at character level 6.

Huh?

Okay, let me rephrase it. On the average adventure, when you're walking around and attacking things several times a day, how many spell slots do you have? Like, in your experience, at a given level/level, how many spells do you usually cast per encounter?

[8wGremlin]

Huh?

Okay, let me rephrase it. On the average adventure, when you're walking around and attacking things several times a day, how many spell slots do you have? Like, in your experience, at a given level/level, how many spells do you usually cast per encounter?

Lets say that your 3rd Warlock, 3rd Sorcerer and a Combat lasts no more than 6 turns

on each turn you can cast a spell, and a bonus action spell (quicken for instance)
on every encounter, every turn. As you have the spells and the sorcery points to do so.

[Slipperychicken]

I really hope no-one allows this in real games..

[8wGremlin]

I really hope no-one allows this in real games..

Played it in two AL games
Dm’d It in two as well.

It is potent. But I’ve seen sorcadins Be more disruptive.

[samcifer]

Huh?

Okay, let me rephrase it. On the average adventure, when you're walking around and attacking things several times a day, how many spell slots do you have? Like, in your experience, at a given level/level, how many spells do you usually cast per encounter?

Well, that covered it pretty well, but I'll go over it in more detail...

You can add additional spell slots to supplement what you normally have between each long rest. Say you're a lv 6 character with Warlock 3 and sorcerer 3. You'd have 4 lv. 1 spell slots and 2 lv. 2 spell slots as well as 2 lv. 2 warlock spell slots. If you sacrifice the 2 lv. 2 warlock spell slots to convert them to sorcery points (SP), you can spend them to either make 2 more lv. 1 sorcerer spell slots, or one lv. 2 sorcerer spell slot.

A spell slot gives sp equal to its level, so a lv. 2 warlock spell slot gives 2 sp.

Purchasing new spell slots is more expensive, as listed on page 101 of the PHB. A level 1 spell slot costs 2sp and a lv. 2 spell slot costs 3sp to create. The slots remain until used or you take a long rest, I believe, since all your spell slots reset to fresh usable ones at the end of a successful long rest.

So you sacrifice your warlock slots to gain 4 sp (you need to be a sorcerer 4 to avoid losing the 4th sp), then spend the new sp to create spell slots. Then you take a short (1 hr.) rest to replenish your warlock spell slots, and convert them to more sp, spend those to create new slots, take another short rest, etc,. etc.

The number of slots you can make are determined only bu how many sp you can hold at a time and how many short rests you can take before the dm forces a long rest or tells you to knock oit off or an event begins where you are not given the opportunity to rest.

That's the best I can explain it. Read pages 100 and 1164 as well as talk this over with your DM to see if he'll allow it. Odds are that he'll ban it or put restrictions on how many short rests you are permitted to take per in-game day.

[samcifer]

Played it in two AL games
Dm’d It in two as well.

It is potent. But I’ve seen sorcadins Be more disruptive.

can you point me to any sorcadin builds? Curious to study that type of build.

[Easy_Lee]

Played it in two AL games
Dm’d It in two as well.

It is potent. But I’ve seen sorcadins Be more disruptive.

Right, and this is my point about the build. Does it do more in a single round than other builds? No. In some cases, it does less as it's behind in spell levels. Does this build outdamage other builds? Over time, quite possibly with Empowered lightning bolts. But in a burst round against a single target, it does less damage than a pure Sorcerer or, yes, a Sorcadin.

What does this build do that no one else does? Cast its best spells all day and never run out of power. But other builds can do more damage, more healing (even out of combat now thanks to healing spirit), cast stronger buffs (higher spell level), cast more powerful control spells, etc.

It's not nearly as broken as it at first appears. The only thing it breaks is resource management.

[mephnick]

The only thing it breaks is resource management.

Which is the entire game, unless you play some weird facsimile of D&D where resource attrition doesn't matter...which I've found out is very popular. So, Coffeelocks and Healing Spirit for everyone!

[Easy_Lee]

Which is the entire game, unless you play some weird facsimile of D&D where resource attrition doesn't matter...which I've found out is very popular. So, Coffeelocks and Healing Spirit for everyone!

Resource management isn't even one pillar of the game. It's part of one pillar: combat. And it's already a non-issue for rogues who don't have resources to track besides hit points, anyway.

You should use blue text when cracking jokes so people don't mistake you as serious.

[miburo]

can you point me to any sorcadin builds? Curious to study that type of build.

This is by far the most comprehensive guide on sorcadins out there:

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?502673-Unlimited-Blade-Works-The-Guide-to-the-Ultimate-Paladin-Sorcerer-Multiclass

FWIW I could see most DMs allowing you to gain spell slots up to your normal maximum, but not beyond that. With Aspect of the Moon opening this up to more races, I bet an errata will show up at some point...

[CantigThimble]

Resource management isn't even one pillar of the game. It's part of one pillar: combat. And it's already a non-issue for rogues who don't have resources to track besides hit points, anyway.

You should use blue text when cracking jokes so people don't mistake you as serious.

Resource management is a part of all three pillars. Unless you're doing some silly, forum combat-only build.

[FabulousFizban]

Just be warned, like all of these niche builds it's very likely a DM will say "....no".

i wouldn't say no, but i woul attack the party during every short rest >:]

[Easy_Lee]

Resource management is a part of all three pillars. Unless you're doing some silly, forum combat-only build.

Oh? Can't wait to hear about the time you ran out of spell slots during a social encounter, or on one of those random encounters while traveling that so many DMs are fond of.

[Malifice]

The DM cannot force you to take a Long Rest.

Lol.

The DM can have elephants rain from the sky if he wants.

I don't see anything in the rules that forces the DM to allow Pcs to take consecutive short rests.

IMG if you take 8 x 1 hour brakes in a row = a long rest.

I mean yeah in theory, if your DM is hands off with policing the adventuring day and resource usage, and is fine with this kind of exploitng the rest mechanic, go nuts.

[Easy_Lee]

Lol.

The DM can have elephants rain from the sky if he wants.

I don't see anything in the rules that forces the DM to allow Pcs to take consecutive short rests.

IMG if you take 8 x 1 hour brakes in a row = a long rest.

I mean yeah in theory, if your DM is hands off with policing the adventuring day and resource usage, and is fine with this kind of exploitng the rest mechanic, go nuts.

Let me rephrase that, then. The DM cannot force the player to take any action, whatsoever, at any time, ever. Any DM who tries to break that will quickly find himself without players. You don't do that. It's part of the social contract of D&D.

And before you say "yeah, but players aren't supposed to break the game," this build doesn't actually break the game. Nor should you presume that someone who chooses to do this has malicious intent or is somehow having the wrong kind of fun. Nor should you presume that your ideas about the game or manner of play are superior to someone else's.

[Danielqueue1]

I know it is never explicitly stated in the rules, but I have never seen a DM allow a player to take more than 3 short rests in a day. and when I discussed it with the other players in my groups we all agreed that our understanding of RAI is that forced march resets on a long rest. It may not be purely RAW, but coffee-lock would be a non-starter at any of the tables I've played at. Unless you can afford the 100 gp worth of diamond dust and level 5 spell slot each hour you traveled to stave off exhaustion.

[DarkKnightJin]

Well, crud.
You all just put the idea in my head of making my Xerath Warforged Sorcerer a coffeelock, to emulate his supposed mastery of magic.

I doubt it would break the game by itself, anyway. And I'd be discussing the idea with the DM before putting it into action, anyway. I feel the game just works best if the players aren't trying to pull a fast one on the DM. Or vice versa.

[Slipperychicken]

Let me rephrase that, then. The DM cannot force the player to take any action, whatsoever, at any time, ever. Any DM who tries to break that will quickly find himself without players. You don't do that. It's part of the social contract of D&D.

It's not about forcing players to do stuff, but about interpreting what's going on in the game world, and also making a decision which is good for game-balance and verisimilitude.


My GM would probably rule 8 hours of roughly-consecutive rest as a long rest, or just tell us to quit being cheeselords. More likely though, my shame would kick in and I wouldn't try to sneak dubious exploits into his game. I grew out of that a long time ago.


I could see most DMs allowing you to gain spell slots up to your normal maximum, but not beyond that.

This is also a decent ruling for GMs to use with coffeelocks. It lets them have something nice and strong, but it doesn't let them stockpile infinite spell slots in their free time.

[Potato_Priest]

Here’s my question:
Where does it say that your spell slots are “reset” by a long rest? All I see in the book is that you regain expended ones when completing a long rest. It doesn’t mention the elimination of extras at all.

[lperkins2]

I really hope no-one allows this in real games..

I'm currently running one, as a front line tank. Mostly just lets me spam out shield, which I need due to a not spectacular base AC. Compared to the xbow expert sharpshooter ranger, my damage output is pretty pathetic.


Lol.
IMG if you take 8 x 1 hour brakes in a row = a long rest.

That's simple, cast a spell or take 2 hours on watch. Invalidates the long rest attempt.


I know it is never explicitly stated in the rules, but I have never seen a DM allow a player to take more than 3 short rests in a day. and when I discussed it with the other players in my groups we all agreed that our understanding of RAI is that forced march resets on a long rest. It may not be purely RAW, but coffee-lock would be a non-starter at any of the tables I've played at. Unless you can afford the 100 gp worth of diamond dust and level 5 spell slot each hour you traveled to stave off exhaustion.
RAW, forced march assumes more than 8 hours of travel per day, unless you are leaving your party behind, you aren't traveling more than they do. Of course, if you do get a exhausted, you'll either need a spell or lose all your extra slots.


Here’s my question:
Where does it say that your spell slots are “reset” by a long rest? All I see in the book is that you regain expended ones when completing a long rest. It doesn’t mention the elimination of extras at all.

It's in the sorcery points flexible casting section. The created slots vanish when you finish a long rest.


On a related note, RAW is silent on the subject of the amount of sleep needed. It's often assumed to be 8 hours for humans, but it can't be. You are specifically allowed one hour on watch during your 8 hour long rest, which means you must be awake. Also, the description of long rests says sleep or light activity. The only place consequences for lack of sleep are mentioned is in the section on con saves. Specifically, trying to remain awake under adverse conditions or when you've not slept in too long requires a con save. Of course, failing that con save when running away or during a fight would be bad, so it's not like RAW you can just go without sleep forever, but it doesn't use the exhaustion mechanic.

[Citan]

Just be warned, like all of these niche builds it's very likely a DM will say "....no".


Absolutely.


I really hope no-one allows this in real games..
Why not? ;)


Played it in two AL games
Dm’d It in two as well.

It is potent. But I’ve seen sorcadins Be more disruptive.
Exactly.
I personally would not allow it in any and every game, because it does create an unbalance with other players if left unchecked.
But in a high-power game, I'd totally allow it. After all, it's "only" unlimited cast, and only as long as you can take rests without problem, and as long as you stay conscious (please correct me if I'm wrong, but if I put you unconscious for more than 8 hours that would be considered a long rest right?). You are still limited by action economy. And unless you start making complex multiclass, you don't have that many spells to play with too.
Plus you are still a caster at core, you will be sensible to either Constitution or Wisdom saving throws for a long time (especially since you get less ASI, later, and you still want to bump CHA to at least at 18 sometime), as well as INT/STR ones.

The things I would adapt if I wanted to allow it and other players would mind the unbalance...
- other casters use spell point system (but NOT the gish) and would quickly get a ring of spell storing.
- martials would get powerful magical equipment much more quickly than usual (in my games usual = very late or none :smalltongue:).
- warn players that this will be a high-level game (BBEG has lots of people to its service to spy/harm/bother its enemies so enemy tactics will adapt much faster in worldgame-time than usual).

This should imo be enough to level the game, except in those rare occurences in which the players chain several difficult fights, making the resource drain much more apparent. But not every adventure day is required to get the full brunt of 6-8 encounters... :)

[Puh Laden]

On a related note, RAW is silent on the subject of the amount of sleep needed. It's often assumed to be 8 hours for humans, but it can't be. You are specifically allowed one hour on watch during your 8 hour long rest, which means you must be awake. Also, the description of long rests says sleep or light activity. The only place consequences for lack of sleep are mentioned is in the section on con saves. Specifically, trying to remain awake under adverse conditions or when you've not slept in too long requires a con save. Of course, failing that con save when running away or during a fight would be bad, so it's not like RAW you can just go without sleep forever, but it doesn't use the exhaustion mechanic.

For a long rest, errata says you need six hours of sleep and two hours can be light activity or more sleep.

[Easy_Lee]

People talk about the high power of this build, but the more I think about it, the less I'm convinced of that. Most campaigns are run with the typical rest cycles in mind. Other casters shouldn't be out of spell slots very often, and martials are never out of attacks.

When people do run out of slots, this build will shine. Until then, this build is casting first and second level spells when everyone else is casting third and fourth level spells. And once it finally does have fifth level spells, everyone else is casting 6th and moving on to 7th. Notably by that point the odds of running out of slots are much lower due to how many spell slots full casters have.

The coffeelock casts his spells as much as he wants, but can only cast two leveled spells in the same round, and even that assumes he gets his reaction. Bear barbarians, sorcadins, and even certain rogues can be more disruptive (of the DM's plans) than this build. Other builds beat this one in every way except resource management.

[KorvinStarmast]

@Easy_Lee, what I'd suggest, in terms of not getting on a DM's nerves, is to take that 8 hour period and alternate between 1 hour of activity / standing watch, then a short rest, then an hour of activity, etc, and so on using Aspect of the moon. That offers up 4 recharge via short rest bundles, and doesn't enter into the territory of "you just took a long rest" and while not as piled high with spell resources, still offers a nice bundle of spells/slots for our much bedraggled coffeelock.

[Mikal]

So for everyone getting whiny about the coffelock and calling it cheese, how many of you allow the party to immediately perform long rests after a big fight where their resources depleted heavily as a DM? Also, how many DMs are not using the 6-8 encounters per adventuring day rule?

How many of you have tried to do so as a player, either get a long rest or avoid the 6-8 encounters?

Because you're basically being about if not more cheesy doing that and breaking the "resource game" than by making a specific build to expand your low level spells at the expense of higher level casting.

Unless you think being able to cast 20 fireballs in a dungeon is somehow less cheesy than the ability to cast say... three wishes during it.

[Ganymede]

I think there have been some analytical mistakes in this thread.

For one, I've seen a couple people say that, if you don't need to sleep, you don't need to take long rests. I am not sure this is accurate. Xanathar's Going Without a Long Rest section is pretty clear that you suffer penalties "whenever you end a 24-hour period without finishing a long rest."

Secondly, short rests and long rests are not mechanical actions that characters perform; they are instead suites of benefits that characters receive for enjoying extended downtime. PCs don't say "I'm going to take a short rest," they say, "I'll sit by the fire for a while and pass around that cheese wheel I found earlier." This means that, if you enjoy downtime for eight consecutive hours, you haven't actually taken eight short rests; you've taken a long rest and receive the benefits for a long rest.

[Mikal]

For one, I've seen a couple people say that, if you don't need to sleep, you don't need to take long rests. I am not sure this is accurate. Xanathar's Going Without a Long Rest section is pretty clear that you suffer penalties "whenever you end a 24-hour period without finishing a long rest."

The xanathar rule is talking about sleep deprivation effects. If you need to sleep you get the penalties. Aspect of the Moon negates the need for sleep so you do not get the penalty. Reading the entire rule instead of dishonestly cherry picking one part of the rule makes this obvious.

And short and long rests are mechanical concepts that provide mechanics benefits and changes, and furthermore the same rule about sleep deprivation begins by saying a player is never forced to take a long rest. This means the player chooses when they rest and for how long, modified by environmental effects such as attacks and so on which can disrupt it. Period. The player does say they take a long or short rest, and can fluff it as they wish.

If a DM wants to house rule it differently then it's a house rule. It's not RAW.

Personally I think it'd be more logical to just say that the sorcerery slots you can gain by SP be limited in some way insead, probably something like max of charisma mod
More slots than you normally can cast or x slots per 24 hour period after which they fade.

But again that's a house rule, not RAW.
RAW a sorlock with aspect of the moon does not need to sleep, any pc never needs to take a long rest unless they choose, and the coffelock is a viable and legal build.


PCs don't say "I'm going to take a short rest," they say, "I'll sit by the fire for a while and pass around that cheese wheel I found earlier." This means that, if you enjoy downtime for eight consecutive hours, you haven't actually taken eight short rests; you've taken a long rest and receive the benefits for a long rest.

Which is why the coffelock doesn't say that. They say "I convert my warlock spells into sorcery points and sorcery into sorcerer spell slots. I mediate for an hour while everyone sleeps and do so again, seven more times through the night."

[Ganymede]

The xanathar rule is talking about sleep deprivation effects. If you need to sleep you get the penalties. Aspect of the Moon negates the need for sleep so you do not get the penalty. Reading the entire rule instead of dishonestly cherry picking makes this obvious.

I really don't think listing the title of the section, Going Without a Long Rest, is "dishonestly cherry picking."


And short and long rests are mechanical concepts that provide mechanics benefits and changes, and furthermore the same rule about sleep deprivation begins by saying a player is never forced to take a long rest. This means the player chooses when they rest and for how long, modified by environmental effects such as attacks and so on which can disrupt it. Period. The player does say they take a long or short rest, and can fluff it as they wish.

You're correct that a PC could certainly choose not to rest or otherwise enjoy some relaxing down time, as both Xanathar's and common sense indicate. What a PC cannot do is have his character sleep for eight hours (or trance for 4 hours, or spend 8 restful hours reflecting on an aspect of the moon) and then say "I refuse the benefits of the rest I just took."

That would be just as farcical as a PC saying "I'll go ahead and eat my rations for the day, but I also want to make the Con checks for going without food."



Which is why the coffelock doesn't say that. They say "I convert my warlock spells into sorcery points and sorcery into sorcerer spell slots. I mediate for an hour while everyone sleeps and do so again, seven more times through the night."

Newp. That PC just spent eight hours resting and recuperating; as such, he gets the benefits of a long rest. It doesn't matter how he fluffs those restful eight hours; he can't avoid the consequences of his actions.

You might as well say "Ok, I drink the vial of the poison, but I'll say I drank eight sips instead, so I don't need to take any damage."

[Mikal]

I really don't think listing the title of the section, Going Without a Long Rest, is "dishonestly cherry picking."

Seeing as how the ruling
a)Is in a section called "Sleep" that talks about rules for sleeping
and
b) Talks about the specific rule being used for sleep deprivation in 2/3rds of the ruling

I would call it dishonest cherry picking to somehow say that this rule is for any long rest, and not for long rest as it relates to sleeping. Any emphasis below is mine with relation to the definitions of the terms, as well as the wording on the actual rules in question.


selectively choose (the most beneficial items) from what is available.


lack of honesty or integrity : disposition to defraud or deceive


SLEEP
Just as in the real world, D&D characters spend many
hours sleeping, most often as part of a long rest. Most
monsters also need to sleep. While a creature sleeps, it is subjected to the unconscious condition. Here are a few rules that expand on that basic fact.


GOING WITHOUT A LONG REST
A long rest is never mandatory, but going without sleep does have its consequences. If you want to account for the effects of sleep deprivation on characters and creatures, use these rules.
Whenever you end a 24-hour period without finishing
a long rest, you must succeed on a DC 10 Constitution
saving throw or suffer one level of exhaustion.
It becomes harder to fight off exhaustion if you stay awake for multiple days. After the first 24 hours, the DC increases by 5 for each consecutive 24-hour period without a long rest. The DC resets to 10 when you finish a long rest.

So yes, looking at the definitions of the terms dishonest, cherry picking, and the actual rules in question, as well as your original claim, I feel calling it dishonest cherry picking is extremely valid.


You're correct that a PC could certainly choose not to rest or otherwise enjoy some relaxing down time, as both Xanathar's and common sense indicate. What a PC cannot do is have his character sleep for eight hours (or trance for 4 hours, or spend 8 restful hours reflecting on an aspect of the moon) and then say "I refuse the benefits of the rest I just took."

Except that we're talking about a Coffeelock who uses Aspect of the Moon, so they don't trance for 4 hours, they don't stare at the Moon for 4-8 hours, or any of that. They convert their warlock spells into sorcery points, convert those into sorcerer spell slots, do whatever for an hour, then repeat the process. While your quote above isn't cherry picking, it is a strawman and is equally dishonest.

[UrielAwakened]

I talked my group into a houserule that you can never have more spell slots than your max after a long rest, unless something gives you additional spells per day.

I'm really surprised that isn't a real rule.

[Ganymede]

(A wall of dictionary definitions.)

Why quote Webster's when you could simply quote the relevant rule? Here, I'll do it for you.

"Whenever you end a 24-hour period without finishing a long rest, you must succeed on a DC 10 Constitution saving throw or suffer one level of exhaustion."

See how easy that was? There was no editing, no dastardly ellipses, no bracketing. It was the full sentence, from capital letter to period, explaining how the rule works.


Except that we're talking about a Coffeelock who uses Aspect of the Moon, so they don't trance for 4 hours, they don't stare at the Moon for 4-8 hours, or any of that. They convert their warlock spells into sorcery points, convert those into sorcerer spell slots, do whatever for an hour, then repeat the process. While your quote above isn't cherry picking, it is a strawman and is equally dishonest.


You're correct that a PC could certainly choose not to rest or otherwise enjoy some relaxing down time, as both Xanathar's and common sense indicate. What a PC cannot do is have his character sleep for eight hours (or trance for 4 hours, or spend 8 restful hours reflecting on an aspect of the moon) and then say "I refuse the benefits of the rest I just took."

That portion of my post was only two sentences. You did not read them.

Personally, I do not think it is too much to ask that you actually read the two sentences before posting your response, but I might be mistaken.

[Mikal]

I talked my group into a houserule that you can never have more spell slots than your max after a long rest, unless something gives you additional spells per day.

I'm really surprised that isn't a real rule.

I'm surprised it wasn't errata'ed in after the original version of the Coffelock came into being. Maybe it will be now. Either way though, it's a very reasonable house rule and prevents the unlimited Coffeelock power while still making Coffeelock useful if you can't sleep for whatever reason.


Why quote Webster's when you could simply quote the relevant rule? Here, I'll do it for you.

"Whenever you end a 24-hour period without finishing a long rest, you must succeed on a DC 10 Constitution saving throw or suffer one level of exhaustion."

See how easy that was? There was no editing, no dastardly ellipses, no bracketing. It was the full sentence, from capital letter to period, explaining how the rule works.

So in other words, you ignore what cherry picking is... then proceed to do it again after ignoring the entire ruling as it was presented in my previous post. Sorry, didn't realize you were just trolling. Thanks for clearing it up.
FYI: I quoted the relevant rule. I also quoted the relevant section it was in. Unlike you, I quoted the entire rule. Unlike you, I cited the entire definition of what I was explaining to make sure it was clearly understood. Unlike you, I actually read the entire thing instead of cherry picked it.


That portion of my post was only two sentences. You did not read them.

I did. Because your post about an Aspect of the Moon warlock sleeping for any reason for 8 hours was absurd for the reasons in my last post. But again, didn't realize you were just trolling.


Personally, I do not think it is too much to ask that you actually read the two sentences before posting your response, but I might be mistaken.
Got it already, you're not taking bothering to actually read the entire post, let alone actually using the entire rule because you're cherry picking. Have fun with that. I'll make sure to treat further posts from you accordingly.

[Ganymede]

So in other words, you ignore what cherry picking is... then proceed to do it again after ignoring the entire ruling as it was presented in my previous post. Sorry, didn't realize you were just trolling. Thanks for clearing it up.

I'm sorry. I was actually discussing what happens when a PC goes without a long rest. That's the topic at hand, after all.

I didn't think your sweet, sweet internet burns using the dictionary were particularly valuable, so I didn't address them.



I did. Because your post about an Aspect of the Moon warlock sleeping for any reason for 8 hours was absurd for the reasons in my last post. But again, didn't realize you were just trolling.

I never made a post about a sleeping Aspect of the Moon warlock. Before I thought you were replying without reading my posts, but now I think you might accidentally be confusing me with another commenter.

[Mikal]

I'm sorry. I was actually discussing what happens when a PC goes without a long rest. That's the topic at hand, after all.

I didn't think your sweet, sweet internet burns using the dictionary were particularly valuable, so I didn't address them.

So in other words, much like the rules you're discussing, you didn't bother reading the entire post, or are choosing to ignore the parts that disagree with your opinion. Got it.


I never made a post about a sleeping Aspect of the Moon warlock. Before I thought you were replying without reading my posts, but now I think you might accidentally be confusing me with another commenter.


I think there have been some analytical mistakes in this thread.

For one, I've seen a couple people say that, if you don't need to sleep, you don't need to take long rests. I am not sure this is accurate. Xanathar's Going Without a Long Rest section is pretty clear that you suffer penalties "whenever you end a 24-hour period without finishing a long rest."

That's what kicked off my reply, and has been the basis for what I'm laughing calling a 'discussion' (as discussions usually involve people paying attention, not one person paying attention and the other trolling). I'm using Aspect of the Moon because that allows any Tomelock to go without sleep, and has been the item discussed when it comes to warlocks not needing sleep and how it can be used in relation to the Coffeelock. So wow. You don't even read your own posts then, since you're the one who talked about people not needing to sleep still needing long rests in the first place?

[XmonkTad]

@Easy_Lee, what I'd suggest, in terms of not getting on a DM's nerves, is to take that 8 hour period and alternate between 1 hour of activity / standing watch, then a short rest, then an hour of activity, etc, and so on using Aspect of the moon. That offers up 4 recharge via short rest bundles, and doesn't enter into the territory of "you just took a long rest" and while not as piled high with spell resources, still offers a nice bundle of spells/slots for our much bedraggled coffeelock.

This seems fairly inefficient though. In this case you're better off as an elf rather than aspect of the moon because then you could get 5 short-term recharges (1 from 4-hour trance, 4 from 1-hour coffee cycles).

That being said, I think the general consensus is that the process of turning sorcery points into spells and back is incompatible with resting, therefore breaking up the rests. I'm FAB right now, but I remember there being something about "light activity" that qualifies for a short rest, but not a long one. Making coffee probably counts.

[Ganymede]

So in other words, much like the rules you're discussing, you didn't bother reading the entire post, or are choosing to ignore the parts that disagree with your opinion. Got it.

I did read that, but I did not think it was particularly valuable to the rules discussion.

The rule about going without a long rest is a general rule. The reason why you see sleep mentioned in the introductory language is because, generally speaking, a PC needs to sleep in order to benefit from a long rest. Granted, there are exceptions to this rule (Elves, Aspect of the Moon warlocks), but why would we expect to see those specific exceptions mentioned in the general rule on going without long rests?

For one, the mechanical wording of trance and aspect of the moon merely changes how some PCs can qualify for long rests; instead of requiring sleep, they instead require a four-hour trance or eight hours of relaxation. This is why the Going Without a Long Rest rule refers to long rests instead of sleep.

Elves and Moon warlocks don't need to sleep to benefit from a long rest, but they still need long rests.

Your alternative interpretation, that PCs whom don't require sleep suffer no penalties for skipping a long rest, is simply flawed. Not only does it involve literally rewriting a rule, "When they say long rest, they really mean sleep. Sike!," it also involves ignoring the general-specific convention in these rules.






That's what kicked off my reply, and has been the basis for what I'm laughing calling a 'discussion' (as discussions usually involve people paying attention, not one person paying attention and the other trolling). I'm using Aspect of the Moon because that allows any Tomelock to go without sleep. So wow. You don't even read your own posts then?

I didn't mentioned a sleeping Aspect of the Moon warlock there, either.

Your replies are really starting to get all jumbled. Maybe you should take an hour break away from the forum to clear your head.

[lperkins2]

For a long rest, errata says you need six hours of sleep and two hours can be light activity or more sleep.

That's not in the PHB or DMG errata, do you mean its in Xanthar's? Or is it in Sage Advice? It's certainly reasonable, but I can't find where the change is.

[Ganymede]

This seems fairly inefficient though. In this case you're better off as an elf rather than aspect of the moon because then you could get 5 short-term recharges (1 from 4-hour trance, 4 from 1-hour coffee cycles).

The problem with this is that, thanks to the most recent errata, an elf's 4-hour Trance is a long rest.

[XmonkTad]

The problem with this is that, thanks to the most recent errata, an elf's 4-hour Trance is a long rest.

Oh! Thanks for pointing this out. You wouldn't happen to have a link for the new errata would you? I'm probably going to have to study it and prepare for an endless amount of rules-lawyering (and then update the original coffeelock post).

[Ganymede]

Oh! Thanks for pointing this out. You wouldn't happen to have a link for the new errata would you? I'm probably going to have to study it and prepare for an endless amount of rules-lawyering (and then update the original coffeelock post).

"Does the Trance trait allow an elf to finish a long rest in
4 hours?

If an elf meditates during a long rest (as described
in the Trance trait), the elf finishes the rest after only 4
hours. A meditating elf otherwise follows all the rules for
a long rest; only the duration is changed. [This answer
has been altered as a result of a tweak to the rules for a
long rest, which appears in newer printings of the
Player’s Handbook.]"

http://media.wizards.com/2017/dnd/downloads/SA-Compendium.pdf

[Veldrenor]

Which is why the coffelock doesn't say that. They say "I convert my warlock spells into sorcery points and sorcery into sorcerer spell slots. I mediate for an hour while everyone sleeps and do so again, seven more times through the night."


Newp. That PC just spent eight hours resting and recuperating; as such, he gets the benefits of a long rest. It doesn't matter how he fluffs those restful eight hours; he can't avoid the consequences of his actions.

PHB 186: "A long rest is a period of extended downtime, at least 8 hours long, during which a character sleeps or performs light activity: reading, talking, eating, or standing watch for no more than 2 hours. 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."

RAW, it looks like Ganymede is right. 8 short-rests in a row just becomes a long rest, because it's at least 8 hours of extended downtime. The time it takes to convert spell slots to sorcery points to spell slots isn't a lengthy enough period of strenuous activity. If, however, you spent an hour Eldritch Blasting trees for target practice that would be sufficient to interrupt the long rest. So a coffeelock can take 7 short rests in the time that the party is taking a long rest, the remaining hour must be spent slinging spells, climbing trees, or otherwise being adventuring-level active.

[Mikal]

PHB 186: "A long rest is a period of extended downtime, at least 8 hours long, during which a character sleeps or performs light activity: reading, talking, eating, or standing watch for no more than 2 hours. 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."

RAW, it looks like Ganymede is right. 8 short-rests in a row just becomes a long rest, because it's at least 8 hours of extended downtime. The time it takes to convert spell slots to sorcery points to spell slots isn't a lengthy enough period of strenuous activity. If, however, you spent an hour Eldritch Blasting trees for target practice that would be sufficient to interrupt the long rest. So a coffeelock can take 7 short rests in the time that the party is taking a long rest, the remaining hour must be spent slinging spells, climbing trees, or otherwise being adventuring-level active.

I'd agree with you except that the long rest rule starts with the words that it's never mandatory to take a long rest. As such, to me that's saying that the PC makes the choice. The DM can't force it. However, I can see it being ruled the other way. 7 short rests is not much different from 8 in any event.
The Coffeelock could just do calisthenics or the like for the odd hour out.

[Ganymede]

I'd agree with you except that the long rest rule starts with the words that it's never mandatory to take a long rest.

You're referring to "a long rest is never mandatory."

You seem to think this means a PC can take a long rest and ignore its benefits. No, it simply means that PCs can choose to go without rest.

[Potato_Priest]

I talked my group into a houserule that you can never have more spell slots than your max after a long rest, unless something gives you additional spells per day.

I'm really surprised that isn't a real rule.

Man, if I had to deal with that houserule I don’t know that I’d play sorcerers very often.

I never use coffeelocks, but I enjoy converting first and second level slots into extra 4th or 5th level ones.

[XmonkTad]

http://media.wizards.com/2017/dnd/downloads/SA-Compendium.pdf
Thank you. This makes the aspect of the moon much more attractive than before I guess.

PHB 186: "A long rest is a period of extended downtime, at least 8 hours long, during which a character sleeps or performs light activity: reading, talking, eating, or standing watch for no more than 2 hours. 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."

RAW, it looks like Ganymede is right. 8 short-rests in a row just becomes a long rest, because it's at least 8 hours of extended downtime. The time it takes to convert spell slots to sorcery points to spell slots isn't a lengthy enough period of strenuous activity. If, however, you spent an hour Eldritch Blasting trees for target practice that would be sufficient to interrupt the long rest. So a coffeelock can take 7 short rests in the time that the party is taking a long rest, the remaining hour must be spent slinging spells, climbing trees, or otherwise being adventuring-level active.

There's the part of the rule which talks about interrupting a long rest, but there's also the part that enumerates what counts as a long-rest only if you spend less than 2 hours doing it. If you spend all 8 hours of the night reading or brewing coffee, it doesn't qualify for a long rest.

[Easy_Lee]

Question for you guys: does this build negatively affect other players? If so, how?

[Ganymede]

Question for you guys: does this build negatively affect other players? If so, how?

There's the cleric annoyed that he/she always has to keep a restoration spell on deck to refresh that sleepless companion.

There's the sleeping party constantly being awakened by their weirdo friend shooting Eldritch Blasts at the trees.

And there's the party's constant groaning about having to stop their adventures all the time to accommodate this restless dude that somehow also needs to take a break every hour.

All in all, it is a big bucket of eccentricities that I imagine would inspire many PCs to say, "By Moradin's beard, can you please stop being such a freak?"


It doesn't impact my players, tho; I use a house rule that limits the party to benefiting from two short rests and one long rest per day.

[Veldrenor]

There's the part of the rule which talks about interrupting a long rest, but there's also the part that enumerates what counts as a long-rest only if you spend less than 2 hours doing it. If you spend all 8 hours of the night reading or brewing coffee, it doesn't qualify for a long rest.

If you spend all 8 hours reading or brewing coffee it absolutely can qualify for a long rest, it depends on how you interpret the part enumerating what counts as a long rest. The relevant part of the rules says "during which a character sleeps or performs light activity: reading, talking, eating, or standing watch for no more than 2 hours." That part of the rule can be read two different ways:
1) during which a character sleeps or performs light activity (reading, talking, eating, or standing watch) for no more than 2 hours.
2) during which a character sleeps or performs light activity:
-reading
-talking
-eating
-standing watch for no more than 2 hours.
Both are valid readings of the rules. Personally I go with #2 because there's no comma or other punctuation separating "standing watch" from "for no more than 2 hours."


Question for you guys: does this build negatively affect other players? If so, how?
Mechanically I'd say no. You're several spell levels behind your fellows so you trade raw nova power for major sustain, it's like being a champion fighter vs. being a wizard. From a standpoint of morale, however, depends on the group. Some people might look at what you're doing and think you're getting away with cheating because you managed to fast talk the DM. Even if they agree that what you're doing is in the rules, they may look at you and your arbitrarily large number of fireballs and feel bad (sour grapes and all that). Others may just think that you're doing something really cool and useful and be ok with it.

[Mikal]

There's the cleric annoyed that he/she always has to keep a restoration spell on deck to refresh that sleepless companion.

Except the clerics player is stupid because an Aspect of the Moon coffeelock never needs that restoration spell for being sleepless.


There's the sleeping party constantly being awakened by their weirdo friend shooting Eldritch Blasts at the trees.
Except that the Warlock doesn't need to constantly shoot Eldritch Blasts or be active in a way that disturbs their sleeping friend.



And there's the party's constant groaning about having to stop their adventures all the time to accommodate this restless dude that somehow also needs to take a break every hour.

Except the slots are refreshed while they sleep, so the group only needs to rest during the day as often as they would normally take short rests.


All in all, it is a big bucket of eccentricities that I imagine would inspire many PCs to say, "By Moradin's beard, can you please stop being such a freak?"

Except that this mythic 'weirdo' character you speak of wouldn't exist in an actual group, because none of the things you mentioned would need to or actually be done.


If you spend all 8 hours reading or brewing coffee it absolutely can qualify for a long rest, it depends on how you interpret the part enumerating what counts as a long rest. The relevant part of the rules says "during which a character sleeps or performs light activity: reading, talking, eating, or standing watch for no more than 2 hours." That part of the rule can be read two different ways:
1) during which a character sleeps or performs light activity (reading, talking, eating, or standing watch) for no more than 2 hours.
2) during which a character sleeps or performs light activity:
-reading
-talking
-eating
-standing watch for no more than 2 hours.
Both are valid readings of the rules. Personally I go with #2 because there's no comma or other punctuation separating "standing watch" from "for no more than 2 hours."

It can. But can doesn't mean must. It can also mean 8 short rests. Or 7 short rests with one hour of activity by the Warlock.



Mechanically I'd say no. You're several spell levels behind your fellows so you trade raw nova power for major sustain, it's like being a champion fighter vs. being a wizard. From a standpoint of morale, however, depends on the group. Some people might look at what you're doing and think you're getting away with cheating because you managed to fast talk the DM. Even if they agree that what you're doing is in the rules, they may look at you and your arbitrarily large number of fireballs and feel bad (sour grapes and all that). Others may just think that you're doing something really cool and useful and be ok with it.

So in other words... you just need to beat back the ignorance of the group.

[Ganymede]

Except the clerics player is stupid because an Aspect of the Moon coffeelock never needs that restoration spell for being sleepless.


Except that the Warlock doesn't need to constantly shoot Eldritch Blasts or be active in a way that disturbs their sleeping friend.



Except the slots are refreshed while they sleep, so the group only needs to rest during the day as often as they would normally take short rests.



Except that this mythic 'weirdo' character you speak of wouldn't exist in an actual group, because none of the things you mentioned would need to or actually be done.



It can. But can doesn't mean must. It can also mean 8 short rests. Or 7 short rests with one hour of activity by the Warlock.




So in other words... you just need to beat back the ignorance of the group.


I was not talking to you.

[Mikal]

I was not talking to you.

Yes? And? So?

[8wGremlin]

I've played 2 and GM'd 2 games with coffeelocks, None of the games I played or ran, had any player complain about the coffeelock.

granted we were in tier2, but we did have a couple of complaints about the Sorcadin.

[Mikal]

I've played 2 and GM'd 2 games with coffeelocks, None of the games I played or ran, had any player complain about the coffeelock.

granted we were in tier2, but we did have a couple of complaints about the Sorcadin.

Well you'd have to be tier 2 to have the build anyway, since you need to be level 6 for it to come online and nearly level 10 for it to have third level spell access.

[Easy_Lee]

There's the cleric annoyed that he/she always has to keep a restoration spell on deck to refresh that sleepless companion.

There's the sleeping party constantly being awakened by their weirdo friend shooting Eldritch Blasts at the trees.

And there's the party's constant groaning about having to stop their adventures all the time to accommodate this restless dude that somehow also needs to take a break every hour.

All in all, it is a big bucket of eccentricities that I imagine would inspire many PCs to say, "By Moradin's beard, can you please stop being such a freak?"


It doesn't impact my players, tho; I use a house rule that limits the party to benefiting from two short rests and one long rest per day.

Everything you just said is a consequence of a weird, non-RAW penalty that YOU imposed on the build. The player wasn't the problem, YOUR antagonistic rulings were. Thank you for perfectly proving my point.

[Knaight]

Question for you guys: does this build negatively affect other players? If so, how?

It's a thematically ridiculous mess obviously built around rules weirdness, and it damages the game the same way any other highly prominent piece of thematic stupidity does.

[Mikal]

It's a thematically ridiculous mess obviously built around rules weirdness, and it damages the game the same way any other highly prominent piece of thematic stupidity does.

How is playing a character gifted by a higher power to never sleep who uses that gift to magically convert energy from one type to another in an unexpected to gain unnatural power thematically stupid beyond the fact that you personally dislike it?

[Knaight]

How is playing a character gifted by a higher power to never sleep who uses that gift to magically convert energy from one type to another in an unexpected to gain unnatural power thematically stupid beyond the fact that you personally dislike it?

It doesn't particularly fit the particular genre of fantasy that D&D emulates - and I'm far from the only person in this thread to consider it thematically stupid. Obviously the question of negatively affecting other players is group specific, but in general if the group is composed of people who care about thematic coherence* a player bringing a character thematically out of whack causes problems, as does a GM making an incoherent setting. Said character could be out of whack because they're an exact representation of an existing character, or because they're built around really annoying personality traits (e.g. the pacifist in a really violent game or the brutal killer in a game that normally wouldn't have any violence more intense than a bar fight), or because they're out of genre, or a dozen other reasons. Being less a character and more a walking rules exploit is one of them.

[Mikal]

It doesn't particularly fit the particular genre of fantasy that D&D emulates - and I'm far from the only person in this thread to consider it thematically stupid. Obviously the question of negatively affecting other players is group specific, but in general if the group is composed of people who care about thematic coherence* a player bringing a character thematically out of whack causes problems, as does a GM making an incoherent setting. Said character could be out of whack because they're an exact representation of an existing character, or because they're built around really annoying personality traits (e.g. the pacifist in a really violent game or the brutal killer in a game that normally wouldn't have any violence more intense than a bar fight), or because they're out of genre, or a dozen other reasons. Being less a character and more a walking rules exploit is one of them.

How doesn't it fit exactly, outside of again, personal preference?
And it's more than a walking rules exploit, there are several ways it can be thematically interesting to play such a character, and it's not mechanically broken from a power perspective.

[Potato_Priest]

How doesn't it fit exactly, outside of again, personal preference?

I don’t think it would be possible for something to be objectively incongruous for a setting. Anything perceived as incongruous will be perceived as such because of personal preference and expectations, and that subjectivity doesn’t make the perception that it doesn’t fit invalid.

[Mikal]

I don’t think it would be possible for something to be objectively incongruous for a setting. Anything perceived as incongruous will be perceived as such because of personal preference and expectations, and that subjectivity doesn’t make the perception that it doesn’t fit invalid.

As long as everyone is clear that it's a personal preference, and that one persons verisimilitude breaking is another persons inspiration, I can get behind that. Obviously we have groups of people with differing opinions on that subject here, and that said opinions have nothing to do with the legality or RAWness of the actual build.

[MrBig]

Here's another aspect of the coffelock/sorlock build (as compared to a pure warlock).

The coffeelock/sorlock has 2-3x more at-will abilities than a pure warlock of the same level.

One of the defining characteristics of the warlock is that they get at-will abilities.
This comes through invocations.

However, they don't get very many invocations.

A coffeelock (or sorlock), basically turns any level 1-5 sorcerer spell into an at-will ability.
If you look at the warlock invocations, nearly half of them are in that category.

14 of the 32 invocations in the PHB, and 3 of 14 in XGE are coffeelock-accessible sorcerer spells.

PHB:
Armor of Shadows
Ascendant Step
Chains of Carceri
Dreadful Word
Eldritch Sight
Eyes of the Rune Keeper
Fiendish Vigor
Mask of Many Faces
Master of Myriad Forms
Mire the Mind
Misty Visions
One with Shadows
Otherworldly Leap
Sculptor of Flesh

XGE:
Gift of the Depths
Relentless Hex
Shroud of Shadow

In many cases, the coffeelock version is better than the Warlock invocation.
For example, Master of Myriad Forms is a 15th level Warlock invocation, which allows you to case Alter Self at will. But Alter Self is only a 2nd level sorcerer spell. So, a 5th level sorlock (Sorc 3/Warlock 2) would be able to do it nearly at-will.

This means that any spell that the coffeelock/sorlock can cast - either Warlock or Sorcerer, of level 1-5, becomes a nearly at-will ability.

The Warlock, by comparison, only has cantrips + invocations.

So, a 6th level warlock has 3 cantrips + 3 invocations, for a max of 6 at-will abilities.

By comparison, a Sorc 3 / Warlock 3 has :
4 sorc cantrips + 2 warlock cantrips + 2 warlock invocations + 4 sorcerer spells known + 4 warlock spells known = 16

This is true across the whole level range, too. At any given level, a sorlock/coffeelock will have 2-3x more nearly at-will abilities than a warlock of the same level.

So, the only reason to go pure warlock would be if your desired build is specifically reliant on having more than 2 of the 'unique' warlock invocations.

[Mikal]

So, the only reason to go pure warlock would be if your desired build is specifically reliant on having more than 2 of the 'unique' warlock invocations.

Warlock's have always had this kind of problem to a degree though- how often is Warlock considered a dip and not a class in and of itself when it comes to builds?

[Easy_Lee]

A pure warlock has unbroken spell progression and, unlike the coffeelock, will be able to use 6+ level spells. At level 5, a fiend warlock can throw 2 fireballs per short rest while the coffeelock won't even get access to fireball for 3 more levels.

[MrBig]

Warlock's have always had this kind of problem to a degree though- how often is Warlock considered a dip and not a class in and of itself when it comes to builds?

Absolutely. I just didn't fully realize (until today), the extent to which the at-will abilities of the warlock are overshadowed by the sorlock/coffeelock's at-will abilities.

I've always thought of the warlock class a *the* 'at-will' class. Sure, I'd seen threads talking about sorlocks, but it was usually in regards to sustained DPR via quickened-EB. Most of the discussion threads that I saw seemed to indicate that you were doing *less* normal spell casting, and instead using all of your slots for quickened EBs.

It wasn't until I started understanding the mechanics of the coffeelock build that I fully grasped that the pact magic -> SP -> sorc slots trick wasn't limited to restoring up to your normal max of sorcerer slots. You can use it bank a bunch of slots *beyond* your normal slot max.

For me, that was a huge 'ah-ha' moment. It's also where the pure Warlock suddenly lost it's 'master of the at-will abilities' crown.... :(

[Slipperychicken]

The main problem with these exploits is that they function through shameless abuse of the rules in a way which circumvents crucial balancing elements of the game, raises the bar for 'viable' player-characters, makes it harder for new players to make viable PCs on their own, and which will obsolete a growing list of 'weaker' choices in favor of exploitative alternatives. Their use also fosters a culture under which the exact rules-wording in the book always triumphs over important considerations such as game-balance, common sense, designer intent, campaign/story vision, limitations on PCs' power, deference to GM authority, and others.


This is similar in nature to the type of exploits we saw in 3.5, where GMs were routinely browbeaten into accepting all kinds of outrageous, overpowered, and counter-intuitive player abilities regardless of how they might impact the intended game experience. I worry that the culture here may shift in that direction too. We should make it abundantly clear that the default should be to disallow coffeelocks and other such exploits, so that GMs aren't pressured into allowing them.

[Mikal]

The main problem with these exploits is that they function through shameless abuse of the rules in a way which circumvents crucial balancing elements of the game, raises the bar for 'viable' player-characters, makes it harder for new players to make viable PCs on their own, and which will obsolete a growing list of 'weaker' choices in favor of exploitative alternatives. Their use also fosters a culture under which the exact rules-wording in the book always triumphs over important considerations such as game-balance, common sense, designer intent, campaign/story vision, limitations on PCs' power, deference to GM authority, and others.


This is similar in nature to the type of exploits we saw in 3.5, where GMs were routinely browbeaten into accepting all kinds of outrageous, overpowered, and counter-intuitive player abilities regardless of how they might impact the intended game experience. I worry that the culture here may shift in that direction too. We should make it abundantly clear that the default should be to disallow coffeelocks and other such exploits, so that GMs aren't pressured into allowing them.

So in other words the onus on the game being balanced should be on the consumers shoulders, not the designers.

Perhaps if the designers actually made sure to proofread these items beforehand especially as the coffeelock has been around before xanathars it wouldn't be an issue.

And the culture should perhaps demand that of the designers by allowing RAW builds to occur until the rules are written competently.

As such the culture should continue to embrace builds such as the coffeelock which are not actually broken, and if change is to be made it needs to be at the design level, not the game table.

[Easy_Lee]

The main problem with these exploits is that they function through shameless abuse of the rules in a way which circumvents crucial balancing elements of the game, raises the bar for 'viable' player-characters, makes it harder for new players to make viable PCs on their own, and which will obsolete a growing list of 'weaker' choices in favor of exploitative alternatives. Their use also fosters a culture under which the exact rules-wording in the book always triumphs over important considerations such as game-balance, common sense, designer intent, campaign/story vision, limitations on PCs' power, deference to GM authority, and others.


This is similar in nature to the type of exploits we saw in 3.5, where GMs were routinely browbeaten into accepting all kinds of outrageous, overpowered, and counter-intuitive player abilities regardless of how they might impact the intended game experience. I worry that the culture here may shift in that direction too. We should make it abundantly clear that the default should be to disallow coffeelocks and other such exploits, so that GMs aren't pressured into allowing them.

I've noticed just the opposite problem with 5e, Slippery. Players have no control over their own builds because everything is up to DM interpretation. Players are happy just to find a DM who follows the rules rather than changing everything on the fly.

Now, let's examine this build. Does it circumvent the intended way to play the game? Yes. Can we automatically assume that that's bad for the other players, hard on the DM, and fosters a negative culture? Absolutely not. Don't assume that everyone who plays differently from you is a bad person and is corrupting the game.

This build is less disruptive than a bear barbarian, a rogue / shadow monk, a sorcadin, a conjure animals moon druid, a necromancer, a sharpshooter + crossbow expert fighter, or even a typical wizard when played well. All of those builds take something to the extreme: tankiness, stealth, burst damage, extreme action economy, ranged damage, versatility...All of those builds do extreme things in combat when compared to a typical character. When other players are casting eldritch blast, making two weapon attacks, or trying to hide, those characters are doing something extreme.

The bear barbarian can't be killed by any normal means
The sorcadin can kill almost anything in one turn
The sharpshooter crossbow expert can kill everything around him from a safe distance
The wizard wins the encounter with a single well-chosen spell
The conjure animals moon druid and necromancer take more turns than the rest of the party combined
The shadow monk / rogue didn't even engage in combat because his minimum stealth roll is higher than any creature's passive perception

These are builds that a DM has to consider when designing his encounters. But what does the DM have to do differently when there's a coffeelock in the group? Nothing. The coffeelock is remarkable in exactly one way: unlimited resources. If you're designing an encounter, you don't need to worry about him doing something extreme because he doesn't take anything to the extreme in combat. His utility is only fully realized when out of combat.

And this is the build you're complaining about? Really? Give me a break.

[Slipperychicken]

So in other words the onus on the game being balanced should be on the consumers shoulders, not the designers.

Perhaps if the designers actually made sure to proofread these items beforehand especially as the coffeelock has been around before xanathars it wouldn't be an issue.

You are absolutely right about this. The designers do have a very important role to play: they need to maintain game balance through their ability to release after-the-fact rulings and fixes via platforms like sage advice and social media. We should expect more of them.

I disagree about permitting such builds, however, since that is a tacit acceptance of the status quo. I think they'll have an easier time announcing rules against these exploits if they know that the community is actively excluding them from games.

[Eradis]

Won't that Cofeelock become exhausted missing on Long Rest for so long? The drawback of exhaustion will then negates most of the benefits of the spell slots (Like in a real game you would need all those).

[Mikal]

Won't that Cofeelock become exhausted missing on Long Rest for so long? The drawback of exhaustion will then negates most of the benefits of the spell slots (Like in a real game you would need all those).

Not if they take Aspect of the Moon. Long Rest exhaustion is only in regards to sleep deprivation, which AotM prevents

[Citan]

I've noticed just the opposite problem with 5e, Slippery. Players have no control over their own builds because everything is up to DM interpretation. Players are happy just to find a DM who follows the rules rather than changing everything on the fly.

Now, let's examine this build. Does it circumvent the intended way to play the game? Yes. Can we automatically assume that that's bad for the other players, hard on the DM, and fosters a negative culture? Absolutely not. Don't assume that everyone who plays differently from you is a bad person and is corrupting the game.

This build is less disruptive than a bear barbarian, a rogue / shadow monk, a sorcadin, a conjure animals moon druid, a necromancer, a sharpshooter + crossbow expert fighter, or even a typical wizard when played well. All of those builds take something to the extreme: tankiness, stealth, burst damage, extreme action economy, ranged damage, versatility...All of those builds do extreme things in combat when compared to a typical character. When other players are casting eldritch blast, making two weapon attacks, or trying to hide, those characters are doing something extreme.

The bear barbarian can't be killed by any normal means
The sorcadin can kill almost anything in one turn
The sharpshooter crossbow expert can kill everything around him from a safe distance
The wizard wins the encounter with a single well-chosen spell
The conjure animals moon druid and necromancer take more turns than the rest of the party combined
The shadow monk / rogue didn't even engage in combat because his minimum stealth roll is higher than any creature's passive perception

These are builds that a DM has to consider when designing his encounters. But what does the DM have to do differently when there's a coffeelock in the group? Nothing. The coffeelock is remarkable in exactly one way: unlimited resources. If you're designing an encounter, you don't need to worry about him doing something extreme because he doesn't take anything to the extreme in combat. His utility is only fully realized when out of combat.

And this is the build you're complaining about? Really? Give me a break.
Hold your horses mate ;)

I agree with you that the coffeelock is not as overpowered as some people tend to believe, but you are overboard in the opposite extreme with your comparisons here...

- Bear Barbarian can easily be disabled or turned against fellow players through INT/CHA/WIS spells, which are pretty common. He is also extremely melee-dependant, so any obstacle/chasm will disable most of its threat too.
- Sorcadin can certainly not kill anything in a single turn: if you are talking about smites + weapon cantrips, its efficiency is extremely dependant on hitting things and having much fuel, both of them being extremely variable conditions (you can break his line of sight, immobilize him through STR/DEX unless he's already pretty high level with Aura), and he really begins to shine in the upper half of leveling.
- Sharpshooter can be easily disabled: creating total cover (Walls, including Wind Wall), restraining/paralyzing/slowing/distracting him (WIS/CHA/INT), use big creatures as meat shield to protect the frailer ones... Granted, the effective range of Sharpshooter makes it dangerous, but there are still many ways to block him.
- Wizard: this one is hilarious: not only do you need to HAVE the spell (and Wizard don't have many more spells than others if DM does not understand that extra spell are for Wizard the same as magical weapons for martials, an obvious loot), you also need it PREPARED (and Wizard has roughly the same number of prepared spells as any other caster). Plus Wizard has no CON save, no DEX save, no CHA save, and low HP/AC so there are many ways to disable him in addition to those that worked against Sharp.
- Conjure Animals and Necromancers can indeed be deadly, and in "mundane" encounters amongst the most difficult to shut off, provided the caster is a minimum smart, hiding once creatures are unleashed. Still, focus fire on caster, slowing down creatures or using AOE can make quick work of them.
- Shadow Monk / Rogue has no freebie just because it has a high minimum stealth Not only do some creatures have a pretty decent passive perception, but many creatures also have special senses either giving them advantage on smell/hearing perception (although one could discuss the "hearing" thing considering how Pass Without Trace is formulated -but then you cannot concentrate on Invisibility-) or outright giving you away (tremorsense, blindsense).

The Coffeelock crushes them all, simply because he can try again. Let's not forget the following...
1. Many low level spells are useful even at higher levels.
2. Spells have been made powerful in their effects because they are a limited resource.
3. Spells can still fail because of pure luck.

Considering that, and comparing a Coffeelock at level 10 with all those other builds... I'll push my argument by taking specifically Divine Soul Sorcerer and Hexblade Warlock.
I'll go past first turn for those who need to activate somethng with bonus action (Rage, Hex, Hunter's Mark etc).
Bear Barbarian probably has somewhere around 130 HP (honestly too lazy to count), 17 AC and can deal average damage not far from 3*(10+5,5+4+6)=76,5 with rage and GWM. Let's push the average to >80 because of crit chance thanks to advantage.
Pretty good right?
The Coffelock could either, depending on Metamagic, level split and spell choice...
- cast Extended upcast Aid (+20HP) and Fire Shield (Sorc 7 / Warlock 3)
- use upcast Quicken lvl 3+ Scorching Ray (4+ hits) with Agonizing Blast, with Hexblade or Hex bonus added to it. You are looking at at least (4*(2d6+4)+2*(1d10+5+4) so average 4*11+2*14,5=44+29=73 for a 5/5 split. With Warlock 3 / Sorc 7 you could add another 2d6+4.
- or just use first turn to cast Mirror Image and Quicken EB, then use Empowered (upcast?) Fireball EVERY TURN for multiple 8+d6 damage: because you don't care about using slots, you can perfectly aim in a non-optimal way to ensure no friendlies are in the field.
- or just cast Slow EVERY TURN until you get the one enemy you really wanted slowed down (would work well with Sleep too XD)...
- or just cast Heightened single-target debuff EVERY TURN so you don't care about your enemy succeeding on the save.

You could find similar examples for every class you mentioned: Coffeelock not only has the potential to come close to them from level 5 to level ~16, it also has the potential to outshine them in their respective area of expertise depending on how you build it.
Basically the problem lies with the fact that you are normally supposed to use spells scarcily and wait for a big chance to succeed. Coffeelock? Can spam Hold Person, Fly, Haste, Slow, Phantasmal Force, Polymorph, Wall of Fire, Enhance Ability, Shield etc all day long* without batting an eye.

* Well, provided ideal context obviously (you had a chance to take like a dozen short rests) which, I think, shouldn't happen often in real games (the most you can probably expect from any reasonable DM is 5 short rests per party long rest, which is crazy good already).

The big drawback, as mentioned, is that you renounce high-level spells so the more the party levels up, the less your "unfinite slot" thing makes you head and shoulders above others.
Also, as also already stressed, not every adventure day sports a big chain of difficult encounters, so most of the time this overpowered stamina won't make a difference.

These are the two things that make Coffeelock more or less acceptable in "normal" games, unless there are also either a pure Sorcerer or a pure Warlock involved.

[Xynthoros]

You know, people keep calling for the banhammer for this, or for it to be errata'd away, but I pose this to you: Have any of you considered that the developers of the game consider this a viable and acceptable build?

I say this for two key reasons, the wording that they use in the section titled "Sleep" and the fact that they literally included a warlock invocation that blatantly supports the build, a build that has existed since the games inception? A build that they have likely at least heard about if they haven't played/seen played themselves. Both things, at least to me, provide a basis for the validity of the build.

[mephnick]

: Have any of you considered that the developers of the game consider this a viable and acceptable build?


I hope not, or their understanding of how their game works is worse than I thought. It does seem like they're moving away from the resource attrition that's been central to the game for decades, though they should probably wait and design 6e around removing it instead of ignoring the central balancing mechanic (the adventuring day) of the current edition.

[Citan]

You know, people keep calling for the banhammer for this, or for it to be errata'd away, but I pose this to you: Have any of you considered that the developers of the game consider this a viable and acceptable build?

I say this for two key reasons, the wording that they use in the section titled "Sleep" and the fact that they literally included a warlock invocation that blatantly supports the build, a build that has existed since the games inception? A build that they have likely at least heard about if they haven't played/seen played themselves. Both things, at least to me, provide a basis for the validity of the build.
I'd bet against that any day. My guess would rather be that, worst case, they missed this (although seems very improbable considering the concept existed since the beginning) or, my own guess, they consider that since DM is the one ruler of games and this is still a very niche build there is just no reason to address the problem officially since each DM still has the option of advising against/banning it.

As many people told already, the simplest fix to avoid that cheese would be to say that you can never have more long rest slots than the number attributed by your caster level... But maybe they chose not to do that to keep that build possible in ~official games (DM that won't allow homebrew but allow minmaxing), to keep some "variable-overpowerness" build possible (let's recall that you still need to take at least ~2 short rests for coffeelock to become at least as good as a single-class caster).. I wonder really...

[Easy_Lee]

Regarding your points, Citan, you've illustrated that any character can be thwarted by the right encounter. The coffeelock is no different. Even a level 20 coffeelock, 10/10 sorcerer / warlock to maximize his access to spells, is useless against a lone rakshasa. Any other full-caster would at least be useful. Hope he diversified into Paladin. He's also useless inside an anti-magic field. In that tier of play, an open hand monk is harder to challenge than a coffeelock.

The coffeelock is stronger than average in the latter part of tier 2 and tier 3. At higher tiers, other sorts of casters are casting more impressive spells several times per day, which is usually more than enough. And prior to about level 6, the build doesn't have much merit.

It's not unusual for a build to excel in a particular tier. I'd argue that the coffeelock is less impressive during his moments in the spotlight than a barbarian, polearm fighter, or moon druid in tier one, or an open hand monk or moon druid in tier 4.

[RedMage125]

Won't that Cofeelock become exhausted missing on Long Rest for so long? The drawback of exhaustion will then negates most of the benefits of the spell slots (Like in a real game you would need all those).


Not if they take Aspect of the Moon. Long Rest exhaustion is only in regards to sleep deprivation, which AotM prevents
Wasn't the very first "Coffeelock", the trope-namer an elf? A drow, I think. Didn't need the AotM invocation.

Of course, that was also before the errata that said when an elf trances for 4 hours it counts as a "long rest". So that may be a moot point.

As I recall, the original tranced for 4 hours, thus avoiding level of exhaustion, and spent 4 hours doing back to back Short Rests, building up Sorc slots.



Regarding your points, Citan, you've illustrated that any character can be thwarted by the right encounter. The coffeelock is no different. Even a level 20 coffeelock, 10/10 sorcerer / warlock to maximize his access to spells, is useless against a lone rakshasa. Any other full-caster would at least be useful. Hope he diversified into Paladin. He's also useless inside an anti-magic field. In that tier of play, an open hand monk is harder to challenge than a coffeelock.

The coffeelock is stronger than average in the latter part of tier 2 and tier 3. At higher tiers, other sorts of casters are casting more impressive spells several times per day, which is usually more than enough. And prior to about level 6, the build doesn't have much merit.

It's not unusual for a build to excel in a particular tier. I'd argue that the coffeelock is less impressive during his moments in the spotlight than a barbarian, polearm fighter, or moon druid in tier one, or an open hand monk or moon druid in tier 4.
I have a question. I'm seeing mention of "tiers", which I can draw context clues to see you mean a range of player levels, as opposed to what "tier" meant in 3.5. Where can I find the actual breakdown of this? I'd like to read it.

[Citan]

It's not unusual for a build to excel in a particular tier. I'd argue that the coffeelock is less impressive during his moments in the spotlight than a barbarian, polearm fighter, or moon druid in tier one, or an open hand monk or moon druid in tier 4.
That I totally agree with. :smallwink:

Wasn't the very first "Coffeelock", the trope-namer an elf? A drow, I think. Didn't need the AotM invocation.

Of course, that was also before the errata that said when an elf trances for 4 hours it counts as a "long rest". So that may be a moot point.

As I recall, the original tranced for 4 hours, thus avoiding level of exhaustion, and spent 4 hours doing back to back Short Rests, building up Sorc slots.



I have a question. I'm seeing mention of "tiers", which I can draw context clues to see you mean a range of player levels, as opposed to what "tier" meant in 3.5. Where can I find the actual breakdown of this? I'd like to read it.
Maybe Easy_Lee will provide a different split, for me the tier one is 1-4 (get archetype), tier 2 5-10 (you get the first big power boost at level 5), 11-16 (second big boost), and last 17-20...

But other people may prefer a more basic split every 5 levels. :)

[Easy_Lee]

Maybe Easy_Lee will provide a different split, for me the tier one is 1-4 (get archetype), tier 2 5-10 (you get the first big power boost at level 5), 11-16 (second big boost), and last 17-20...

But other people may prefer a more basic split every 5 levels. :)

Yes, that's what I mean by tiers. There's a lot more focus on the middle tiers, tier 2 in particular, from what I read on the forums. People tend to assume tier 2 or 3 when discussing builds.

[Mikal]

The original coffeelock was elven to take advantage of trance and shorter long rests but the improved version uses aspect of the moon

[Malifice]

Let me rephrase that, then. The DM cannot force the player to take any action, whatsoever, at any time, ever. Any DM who tries to break that will quickly find himself without players. You don't do that. It's part of the social contract of D&D.I

Your player doesn't decide to take a long rest. The player tells me he rests for x hours.

It's the DM who has the final call what the benefits of that rest is.

PC: I rest for [X] number of discrete 1 hour periods in a row...
DM: Cool. You feel well rested and nothing else happens (or) it counts as a long rest.

The PC is gaming the rest mechanic. It's on a level of the 5MWD and other gaming of the rest mechanic.

If you're happy allowing players to game the system you run, go nuts.

[Ganymede]

I

Your player doesn't decide to take a long rest. The player tells me he rests for x hours.

It's the DM who has the final call what the benefits of that rest is.

My trick was to compare a PC resting for eight hours but wanting to ignore the mechanical consequences of that rest to a PC eating a day's rations but still wanting to suffer the penalties for starvation.


It literally swayed no one.

[RedMage125]

That I totally agree with. :smallwink:

Maybe Easy_Lee will provide a different split, for me the tier one is 1-4 (get archetype), tier 2 5-10 (you get the first big power boost at level 5), 11-16 (second big boost), and last 17-20...

But other people may prefer a more basic split every 5 levels. :)

So...there's isn't some kind of "standard" that everyone agrees on? Just want to be clear.

[Easy_Lee]

So...there's isn't some kind of "standard" that everyone agrees on? Just want to be clear.

Page 15 of the player's handbook: tiers of play.

One: 1-4: "apprentice adventurers"
Two: 5-10: "characters come into their own"
Three: 11-16: "special even among adventurers"
Four: 17-20: "the fate of the world might hang in the balance during their adventures"

[RedMage125]

Page 15 of the player's handbook: tiers of play.

One: 1-4: "apprentice adventurers"
Two: 5-10: "characters come into their own"
Three: 11-16: "special even among adventurers"
Four: 17-20: "the fate of the world might hang in the balance during their adventures"


I am ashamed. I totally forgot about that. Haven't seen it even discussed until recently.

[Arial Black]

Your player doesn't decide to take a long rest. The player tells me he rests for x hours.

It's the DM who has the final call what the benefits of that rest is.

PC: I rest for [X] number of discrete 1 hour periods in a row...
DM: Cool. You feel well rested and nothing else happens (or) it counts as a long rest.

That's not what the coffeelock's player says to the DM. This is:-

Player: I rest for one hour. Is there anything preventing me from gaining the benefits of a short rest?
DM: No.
Player: Then I regain my Pact Magic slots, convert them to sorcery points, and convert my sorcery points into Spellcasting slots. Any problem?
DM: No.
Player: Good. Now, I rest for one hour. Is there anything preventing me from gaining the benefits of a short rest? I'm out of Pact Magic slots, and a short rest is how I regain them.

So, is there anything preventing him from gaining the benefits of a short rest? If so, what?

[Jerrykhor]

That's not what the coffeelock's player says to the DM. This is:-

Player: I rest for one hour. Is there anything preventing me from gaining the benefits of a short rest?
DM: No.
Player: Then I regain my Pact Magic slots, convert them to sorcery points, and convert my sorcery points into Spellcasting slots. Any problem?
DM: No.
Player: Good. Now, I rest for one hour. Is there anything preventing me from gaining the benefits of a short rest? I'm out of Pact Magic slots, and a short rest is how I regain them.

So, is there anything preventing him from gaining the benefits of a short rest? If so, what?

There is. If you tell me you take 8 short rests of 1 hour each, I would say no, you are in fact taking an 8 hr long rest.

[D-naras]

There is. If you tell me you take 8 short rests of 1 hour each, I would say no, you are in fact taking an 8 hr long rest.

And then they simply say that they take an action that prevents a long rest (such as casting a cantrip) and then you say it doesn't work and then the verisimilitude goes out of the window.

Alternately, they say they take 5 short rests in a row as described in a previous post and then do any activity that doesn't count as light activity for the rest of the time that the party rests such as taking a 3 hour watch. What do you say then?

[Malifice]

That's not what the coffeelock's player says to the DM. This is:-

Player: I rest for one hour. Is there anything preventing me from gaining the benefits of a short rest?
DM: No.
Player: Then I regain my Pact Magic slots, convert them to sorcery points, and convert my sorcery points into Spellcasting slots. Any problem?
DM: No.
Player: Good. Now, I rest for one hour. Is there anything preventing me from gaining the benefits of a short rest? I'm out of Pact Magic slots, and a short rest is how I regain them.

So, is there anything preventing him from gaining the benefits of a short rest? If so, what?

The DM.

PC: I've just short rested. I want to do it again.

DM: 'You just rested an hour. You feel pretty well rested as is. You can continue to rest if you like but you gain no benefit unless it lasts at least 7 hours, in which case this rest counts as long rest. What do you want to do; keep resting or push on?'

It's the DMs job to manage resources, rests and the adventuring day. Resting is a game abstraction used to refresh resources. Players are going to game this abstract system if you let them.

See also: the 5 minute work day.

[Malifice]

And then they simply say that they take an action that prevents a long rest (such as casting a cantrip) and...

You say 'I don't care, I've told you my ruling, stop being a **** and attempting to game the rest mechanic.'

And the game goes on.

[Eradis]

DM: 'You just rested an hour. You feel pretty well rested as is. You can continue to rest if you like but you gain no benefit unless it lasts at least 7 hours, in which case this rest counts as long rest. What do you want to do; keep resting or push on?'

[...]

See also: the 5 minute work day.

I quite like how you bring that point. Some people, players and GM alike, including myself, sometimes forgets how "realistic" the game should feel. Abusing a game mechanic to tilt the balance in your favor wouldn't be realistic, as indeed in some sort of real life, you would rest for X hours, then you feel rested consequentially to that. Sure, going outside and shoveling snow might break that felling of rest, but if your transmuted spell/sorcery were the benefits of one rest and you still have those, then why the heck would you still gain that?

Also, I am curious what is that 5 minute work day you are referring.

[Aett_Thorn]

I quite like how you bring that point. Some people, players and GM alike, including myself, sometimes forgets how "realistic" the game should feel. Abusing a game mechanic to tilt the balance in your favor wouldn't be realistic, as indeed in some sort of real life, you would rest for X hours, then you feel rested consequentially to that. Sure, going outside and shoveling snow might break that felling of rest, but if your transmuted spell/sorcery were the benefits of one rest and you still have those, then why the heck would you still gain that?

Also, I am curious what is that 5 minute work day you are referring.

http://dungeonsmaster.com/2010/12/5-minute-work-day-part-2/

[Eradis]

http://dungeonsmaster.com/2010/12/5-minute-work-day-part-2/

Okay, now I get it. Thanks. I've played a game session of 3.5 in the past months that both my allies wanted to return to town after an encounter against goblins and their worgs. I admit that we were all pretty beaten (the encounter being too rough for the group we had), but we didn't even get to the mine shaft we were headed. I'm glad that after I insisted to get a healing potion and that both the cleric and bard exhausted their healing spells on each other we pressed on. It lead to quite a moment. I learned that the session before this one, they did the same thing after an encounter against undead. They never found the source and just went back to report it. Realistically in cases like that when you are all out of resources, I too would have back out of danger and call it a day. But in the worg case, we were able to retrieve most of our hit points, even though they lost most of their spell slots, so we weren't all of the life resource.

[Easy_Lee]

I'll repeat, if you don't want to allow the build, then don't allow the build. You aren't doing yourself any favors by being cheeky with your players, pretending like they should somehow know that they're only allowed to rest when and how YOU say they may.

There's a real epidemic of power-tripping DMs, and it isn't just on the forums.

[Mikal]

I'll repeat, if you don't want to allow the build, then don't allow the build. You aren't doing yourself any favors by being cheeky with your players, pretending like they should somehow know that they're only allowed to rest when and how YOU say they may.

There's a real epidemic of power-tripping DMs, and it isn't just on the forums.

Pretty much.

[Aett_Thorn]

I'll repeat, if you don't want to allow the build, then don't allow the build. You aren't doing yourself any favors by being cheeky with your players, pretending like they should somehow know that they're only allowed to rest when and how YOU say they may.

There's a real epidemic of power-tripping DMs, and it isn't just on the forums.

Well, I would say that this is probably one of those things that isn't really a problem at an actual table. Those people who play with a more casual group aren't likely to try to cheese the system this way anyways, and those players at a power-gaming table probably won't skew the overall power level of their characters by doing this since they were going to optimize anyways.

Yes, it's a theoretical problem, but not one that is likely going to have any actual impact at tables. Maybe at AL this will be an issue, but I think that most of those tables would still hopefully go over these kinds of shenanigans up-front.

[mgshamster]

Question:

How would the coffeelock work if the sorcerer used the spell point variant in the DMG?

I guess this also requires us to figure out how sorc points interact with spell points. Are they the same thing? Do the sorc points just add to the spell point total? If not, what's the conversion rate? What's the cap?

[Easy_Lee]

Question:

How would the coffeelock work if the sorcerer used the spell point variant in the DMG?

I guess this also requires us to figure out how sorc points interact with spell points. Are they the same thing? Do the sorc points just add to the spell point total? If not, what's the conversion rate? What's the cap?

As I understand it, sorcery points and spell points would be separate. The coffeelock has a limited sorcery point total, but no limit to his spell point total. In theory, he'd have to manage separate pools for his warlock spell points and his sorcerer spell points. In practice, he probably wouldn't track spell points at all and would always assume he had enough to do whatever, and would just track his current sorcery point pool instead.

The benefit would be not needing to spend time building your new spell slots each time you gained a sorcerer spell level (up to 5th).

[mgshamster]

As I understand it, sorcery points and spell points would be separate. The coffeelock has a limited sorcery point total, but no limit to his spell point total. In theory, he'd have to manage separate pools for his warlock spell points and his sorcerer spell points. In practice, he probably wouldn't track spell points at all and would always assume he had enough to do whatever, and would just track his current sorcery point pool instead.

The benefit would be not needing to spend time building your new spell slots each time you gained a sorcerer spell level (up to 5th).

I apologize; I meant that only the sorcerer uses spell points (that's a common sorc power boost for those who feel the sorc is UP).

I was thinking that if that's the case, and if you wanted to allow the coffeelock in limited doses, you could simply pool the sorc points with the spell splints (sorc only) and then say that's the max allowed.

Then, a coffeelock could come in and easily replenish spell points throughout the day, but wouldn't be super OP with unlimited spell points.

Reading over the spell point section, however, it doesn't say there's a limit. So it would have to be introduced. Without the limit, were right back to the standard coffeelock that's even easier to comprehend. :)

[XmonkTad]

Wasn't the very first "Coffeelock", the trope-namer an elf? A drow, I think. Didn't need the AotM invocation.

Of course, that was also before the errata that said when an elf trances for 4 hours it counts as a "long rest". So that may be a moot point.

As I recall, the original tranced for 4 hours, thus avoiding level of exhaustion, and spent 4 hours doing back to back Short Rests, building up Sorc slots.


This is exactly right. Since the errata, it really needs the AotM invocation. I believe that elf could still be used providing your DM allows for elf trances to be broken up, not count as a long rest, but still count as "resting" for the purposes of exhaustion. Honestly, that seems like a stretch to me, so AotM seems better.


The original coffeelock was elven to take advantage of trance and shorter long rests but the improved version uses aspect of the moon

Not "shorter long rests" because originally the long rests were 8 hours regardless of race. It was the gap in the time between "physiologic" rests (ie. Sleep/trance) and "spell slot resetting rests" (ie. Long rests). But the errata that makes elven long rests 4 hours, eliminating the gap that the original took advantage of. AotM widens the gap to the point of allowing the full 8 hours of short rests.

[Easy_Lee]

As far as a limited doses coffeelock go, the simplest thing to do is to say that the spell slots reset after 24 hours or, even better, that it happens at midnight each day. That still allows the coffeelock to skip sleeping and setup eight hours worth of slots without gaining infinite slots in the process. It also encourages the coffeelock to take approximately equal warlock and sorcerer levels to maximize the number of slots he can create.

But I need to emphasize that this won't be much different in actual play than a typical coffeelock. Unless you have a weird player who wants to keep mirror image and Blink up at all times, he'll play the same way.

[mgshamster]

But I need to emphasize that this won't be much different in actual play than a typical coffeelock. Unless you have a weird player who wants to keep mirror image and Blink up at all times, he'll play the same way.

Pretty much.

To think of it another way, look at the adventure design. You wouldn't create a level 1 adventure challenge for a group of level 10 PCs. They'd breeze through it.

So what do you do to someone when you can't do resource attrition? You design an adventure that's not based on the attrition of resources, of course! You stop worrying about the 6-8 encounters with two short rests, etc.. and you design a story and a plot that require more to solve than pressing the buttons of the character sheet. And once you're at that point of adventure design, then the power level of the PCs stops being an issue. :)

[Jama7301]

PHB 186: "A long rest is a period of extended downtime, at least 8 hours long, during which a character sleeps or performs light activity: reading, talking, eating, or standing watch for no more than 2 hours. 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."

Forgive my ignorance if I'm misreading this and the discussion wrong, but couldn't a Coffeelock cast a cantrip that's harmless, and use the SP generated to create a spell slot? By doing this, the Coffeelock wouldn't qualify for a long rest under the "Casting Spells" qualifier, right?

[Mikal]

Forgive my ignorance if I'm misreading this and the discussion wrong, but couldn't a Coffeelock cast a cantrip that's harmless, and use the SP generated to create a spell slot? By doing this, the Coffeelock wouldn't qualify for a long rest under the "Casting Spells" qualifier, right?

Pretty much. But the thing being ignored here is that it is never mandatory for a PC to take a Long Rest. Some people are trying to twist that to mean that a DM can still force one by saying "oh 8 hours? Long Rest lol" but the intent of the rules is very clearly that the PC decides what type of Rest(s) they take take are, with the DM modifying things based on encounters during that rest period.

Of course, a DM can rule as such regardless, but if they do then that's a clear House Rule, and for fairness' sake should be shared in session 0, and obviously doesn't apply to AL which doesn't use House Rules.

[Ganymede]

You aren't doing yourself any favors by being cheeky


I wanted to highlight this particular phrase.

[RedMage125]

Pretty much. But the thing being ignored here is that it is never mandatory for a PC to take a Long Rest. Some people are trying to twist that to mean that a DM can still force one by saying "oh 8 hours? Long Rest lol" but the intent of the rules is very clearly that the PC decides what type of Rest(s) they take take are, with the DM modifying things based on encounters during that rest period.

Of course, a DM can rule as such regardless, but if they do then that's a clear House Rule, and for fairness' sake should be shared in session 0, and obviously doesn't apply to AL which doesn't use House Rules.

I'm going to play Devil's Advocate here, because it looks to me like there's a serious communication breakdown somewhere.

What your opposition is saying is that since the RAW say that a period of 8 hours with no strenuous activity constitutes a "long rest", that unless the coffeelock specifies that he is-between "short rests"- engaging in activity that is NOT "light" (such as reading, standing watch, etc.), that the RAW say that since the PC has engaged in "8 hours with no strenuous activity" that the PC HAS, in fact, CHOSEN to take a "long rest", whether they recognize it as such or not.

That is what your opposition is trying to say when they say that the RAW does not support "8 short rests back to back". And to be fair, it's a matter of perspective. It's an entirely fair interpretation of what is written that-because of what the rules specify AS a "long rest"- if your PC chooses to do what meets that definition, then you have taken a long rest. There is no RAW to suggest that a PC must also say "I accept the benefits of a long rest" in order for it to count. There's no evidence that you're explicitly WRONG, either, though. So, as I said, it's a matter of perspective.

To the guys opposing you, YOUR argument sounds like you think a PC can do everything that a fellow party member is doing during a long rest, but say "no long rest for me, lol". Which is like if a PC fired a longbow randomly into a crowd, not even looking where the arrow was aimed. Which hit a commoner and killed them outright. But later, when they are charged with deliberate murder, the PC using-as his defense-the claim that, "I didn't deliberately murder anybody! All I did was deliberately fire a longbow at no particular target in a crowd." and thinking that such somehow absolves them from having murdered someone.

HOWEVER, all of this is easily countered. There is a 100% foolproof way to ensure that you are RAW-compliant, no matter how one reads that. Your coffeelock simply needs to engage in strenuous activity between each short rest. Say...10 minutes or so between each one. So you get 7 short rests, each separated by a 10 minute interval of physically strenuous activity (like doing some cardio exercise). Boom. 8 hours, no "long rest" taken, even by the interpretation of the RAW used by your opponents.

Make sense?

[kilpatds]

(fwiw, if someone played this in an AL table I was DMing, and it was disruptive, I'd point out that in AL time doesn't seem to pass between adventures unless Downtime is spent, and ask for the full logbook of where you started tracking your spells in detail, and limit you to the slots you can show you've tracked since the last adventure. And downtime activities seem limited to 8 hours, so ... I'm not sure how many short rests per downtime day, but I'd figure not more than 16. That still lets you have idiotic numbers of spell slots though, so it's not much of a limit.

Or alternately just "rule" that you can't have spell slots in excess of your maximum. I've had DMs "rule" that you have to STAY adjacent to the enemy to use the Help action, because they thought Owls were overpowered).

Apologies if someone already covered this, but how do you deal with exhaustion obtained through normal adventuring? (IE: the adventure says "make a DC15 Con Save or gain a level of exhaustion")

[Easy_Lee]

Apologies if someone already covered this, but how do you deal with exhaustion obtained through normal adventuring? (IE: the adventure says "make a DC15 Con Save or gain a level of exhaustion")

Greater restoration.

Regarding the rest of your post, those rulings you're talking about are the only way to really stop this build from working. The DM has to add to or change the mechanics. Honestly, I don't know why a DM would do those things. All a DM has to say is that he doesn't allow X build, and that's that. You don't need to change the mechanics or, worse, pretend that the player doesn't understand the mechanics, so you can try to make him feel like an idiot while trying to dodge responsibility for invalidating his build.

This is what I mean when I say people shouldn't be cheeky.

[Ganymede]

You don't need to [do things] so you can try to make him feel like an idiot while trying to dodge responsibility for invalidating his build.

Are we really pretending that this is anything more than a handful of people taking Devil's Advocate to a perverse extreme? Absolutely no one is buying this. No one is lovingly crafting up their PC saying to himself, "infinite spell slots is integral to both my backstory and my enjoyment of the game."

So no. I'll roast this imaginary gamer all day long because he/she simply does not exist; it is nothing more than the figment in the imagination of some forum goers that enjoy getting saucy.

[Bahamut7]

Wouldn't a simpler solution to be that it doesn't matter how many spells the coffeelock can do when the rest of the party will tire out? Sure, the coffelock can keep slinging spells...but the other casters in the group will run out and then request to long rest. The martials, will eventually run out of Hp and need to rest.

Basically, as a DM, if one of my players used the coffelock build, I would merely tire out the rest of the group so that he/she is forced to retreat. That and design the encounters to account for constant spells being slung by the coffeelock,

[Unoriginal]

Forgive my ignorance if I'm misreading this and the discussion wrong, but couldn't a Coffeelock cast a cantrip that's harmless, and use the SP generated to create a spell slot? By doing this, the Coffeelock wouldn't qualify for a long rest under the "Casting Spells" qualifier, right?

He has to cast it for an hour, though.


Wouldn't a simpler solution to be that it doesn't matter how many spells the coffeelock can do when the rest of the party will tire out? Sure, the coffelock can keep slinging spells...but the other casters in the group will run out and then request to long rest. The martials, will eventually run out of Hp and need to rest.

Basically, as a DM, if one of my players used the coffelock build, I would merely tire out the rest of the group so that he/she is forced to retreat. That and design the encounters to account for constant spells being slung by the coffeelock,

If that recently-deleted thread about that coffeelock "build" proved anything, it's that the coffeelock isn't better at anything except endurance.

[Easy_Lee]

If that recently-deleted thread about that coffeelock "build" proved anything, it's that the coffeelock isn't better at anything except endurance.

Basically this. The coffeelock takes exactly one thing to the extreme, and it's far from the only build like it. I don't understand why people are overall fine with a rogue / shadow monk (stealth), crossbow expert + sharpshooter BM fighter (ranged damage), raging bear barbarian (tankiness), necromancer wizard or summons druid (action economy), but not this build (endurance at a high cost). But I think I've made that clear.

[kilpatds]

(With respect to "how do you deal with exhaustion from a module")

Greater restoration.
That gets kinda expensive, doesn't it? (450gp in AL, without friendly party member). Also I'd tend to assume you do most of your healing via potions, so that also gets expensive until Tier 3?

[Veldrenor]

(With respect to "how do you deal with exhaustion from a module")

That gets kinda expensive, doesn't it? (450gp in AL, without friendly party member). Also I'd tend to assume you do most of your healing via potions, so that also gets expensive until Tier 3?

Healing potions are one way of doing it, which can get expensive. Another is to be a Divine Soul sorcerer with Good affinity for your Divine Magic feature, so you get Cure Wounds as a bonus spell. You don't really have to worry about your health at the end of the adventuring day when you have an arbitrarily large number of low-level slots to repeatedly heal yourself with.

[krugaan]

Healing potions are one way of doing it, which can get expensive. Another is to be a Divine Soul sorcerer with Good affinity for your Divine Magic feature, so you get Cure Wounds as a bonus spell. You don't really have to worry about your health at the end of the adventuring day when you have an arbitrarily large number of low-level slots to repeatedly heal yourself with.

There's already nature's spirit which sort of does that already, though.

[Malifice]

I'll repeat, if you don't want to allow the build, then don't allow the build. You aren't doing yourself any favors by being cheeky with your players, pretending like they should somehow know that they're only allowed to rest when and how YOU say they may.

There's a real epidemic of power-tripping DMs, and it isn't just on the forums.

I'll allow the build, but I'll also police the adventuring day.

I'll do that for every build and most adventuring days.

5E is a resource management game. Ultimate responsibility for that falls with the DM. The challenge and balance of the game revolves around it.

No 5MWD or spamming short rests at my table thanks.

And the game goes on.

[Malifice]

Pretty much. But the thing being ignored here is that it is never mandatory for a PC to take a Long Rest. Some people are trying to twist that to mean that a DM can still force one by saying "oh 8 hours? Long Rest lol" but the intent of the rules is very clearly that the PC decides what type of Rest(s) they take take are, with the DM modifying things based on encounters during that rest period.

Of course, a DM can rule as such regardless, but if they do then that's a clear House Rule, and for fairness' sake should be shared in session 0, and obviously doesn't apply to AL which doesn't use House Rules.

If your PC spends 8 hours doing nothing but light activity (8 x 1 hour blocks in a row or 1 x 8 hour block) a long rest happens whether you want it to or not.

Presuming the DM agrees of course.

If you don't want a long rest, don't sit around doing very little for 8 or more hours.

Choice is the players.

[Mikal]

If your PC spends 8 hours doing nothing but light activity (8 x 1 hour blocks in a row or 1 x 8 hour block) a long rest happens whether you want it to or not.

Presuming the DM agrees of course.

If you don't want a long rest, don't sit around doing very little for 8 or more hours.

Choice is the players.

So in other words, you're making a house rule, since what you just said flatly contradicts "It is never mandatory to take a long rest", and you're forcing someone to take a long rest.
Thanks for providing an example of a house rule that can be used!

[Daithi]

I noticed that the Hexblade from XGtE gives you the ability to create a specter that doesn't die until you take a long rest. So, a Coffeelock Hexblade could theoretically create a Specter Army.

[Mikal]

I noticed that the Hexblade from XGtE gives you the ability to create a specter that doesn't die until you take a long rest. So, a Coffeelock Hexblade could theoretically create a Specter Army.

Except you can only use the ability once per long rest, so less army more constant companion (until it dies)

[Easy_Lee]

5E is a resource management game. Ultimate responsibility for that falls with the DM. The challenge and balance of the game revolves around it.

This does not match my experiences. Most games I've played and all of the games I've run have been about overcoming encounters. Sometimes limited resources were an issue, but often the only limited resource people had to worry about during the encounter was HP. Again, I've heard that games of attrition are a thing, but I've never been fond of that kind of campaign.

[Daithi]

Except you can only use the ability once per long rest, so less army more constant companion (until it dies)

Ooops, you're right, apparently my reading comprehension needs a little work.

[Bahamut7]

This does not match my experiences. Most games I've played and all of the games I've run have been about overcoming encounters. Sometimes limited resources were an issue, but often the only limited resource people had to worry about during the encounter was HP. Again, I've heard that games of attrition are a thing, but I've never been fond of that kind of campaign.

I am putting my group through tales of the yawning portal as a find dungeon, beat it, find next, beat next, etc. Until the beat the TOH at the end, the BBEG I put in the world won't be addressed. While they are doing these dungeons (all with multiple floors and encounters) resource management is key especially because half the group recharges on long rests.

[Easy_Lee]

I am putting my group through tales of the yawning portal as a find dungeon, beat it, find next, beat next, etc. Until the beat the TOH at the end, the BBEG I put in the world won't be addressed. While they are doing these dungeons (all with multiple floors and encounters) resource management is key especially because half the group recharges on long rests.

Then in this case, resource management would be a major concern. Giving one player infinite resources would give that player an edge. But that wouldn't change anything as the rest of the party would still need rest.

Notably, most rogues already have infinite resources provided that they bring enough healing potions. Other than some archetypes, rogues don't have any features they need to recharge via resting until level 20. Champion fighter also gains an always-on healing effect, and his archetype features never run out. But few besides me seem to consider that archetype to be very good.

Which is to say that certain builds have advantages in certain campaigns. If you're fighting big, relatively slow giants, suddenly the mobile archers have a huge advantage over the martials. But I've never seen anyone argue that archery needed to be banned. And if your campaign usually only has one big fight per day and lots of social stuff, then full CHA casters have a huge advantage. But I've never seen anyone propose a ban on Bards or sorcerers.

[CantigThimble]

Okay, let's get this clarified. The reason people don't like this build:

It takes two abilities (Sorcery points and pact magic) and combines them in such a way that it produces a new completely different ability that was pretty clearly not the intent of either ability individually AND is completely unique within the system (Having 10 spell slots of one spell level at once). It feels like the person doing this is trying to pull a fast one on the game designers and the DM, it stinks of munchkinry.

Whether or not this is a powerful piece of munchkinry or not doesn't come up until justifications after the fact.

[Malifice]

So in other words, you're making a house rule, since what you just said flatly contradicts "It is never mandatory to take a long rest", and you're forcing someone to take a long rest.
Thanks for providing an example of a house rule that can be used!

A long rest is 8 hours of doing nothing.

If your PC tells me he spends 8 hours doing nothing, he long rests.

You can't sit around resting for 1 hour and it not be a short rest either.

Subject to the DM of course.

I'm not forcing you to take a long rest. You're the one choosing to take one by resting 8 hours.

[Bahamut7]

Okay, let's get this clarified. The reason people don't like this build:

It takes two abilities (Sorcery points and pact magic) and combines them in such a way that it produces a new completely different ability that was pretty clearly not the intent of either ability individually AND is completely unique within the system (Having 10 spell slots of one spell level at once). It feels like the person doing this is trying to pull a fast one on the game designers and the DM, it stinks of munchkinry.

Whether or not this is a powerful piece of munchkinry or not doesn't come up until justifications after the fact.

It is a neat and hilarious thematic trick that can provide an advantage in one area but does little otherwise. As for munchkin, yes this is something a munchkin would do but as Easy_lee (I believe) pointed out, the build itself doesn't break the game or adventure.

As I pointed out in a resource management heavy campaign, yes this character would always be ready but it wouldn't matter as the rest of the party wouldn't really benefit and be able to keep going.

This is kinda like the Darkness + Devil's Sight combo. Works great for the Warlock but not the group. The Coffelock in question would be a boon to his/her group as they could always count on key spells from the Coffeelock but would still be limited by the capabilities of the rest of the group and their recharge mechanics.

[Caelic]

So in other words, you're making a house rule, since what you just said flatly contradicts "It is never mandatory to take a long rest", and you're forcing someone to take a long rest.
Thanks for providing an example of a house rule that can be used!

Of course, if we want to go by the letter of the rules, then there's no need for a houserule.

A short rest is defined as



...a period of downtime, at least one hour long, during which a character does nothing more strenuous than eating, drinking, reading, and tending to wounds.


Note that a short rest does not have a fixed duration of one hour; nor does it have a maximum duration. It's not "a period of downtime between one and eight hours long."

An eight hour rest, being a period of downtime at least one hour long, qualifies as a single short rest.

Ergo, all the DM needs to do is say:

"You have rested for eight hours. That can qualify as either a short rest or a long rest. The choice is up to you. However, it was one rest. You did not engage in several periods of downtime, you engaged in one period of downtime."

Strictly by the rules; no houserule needed. The warlock who rests for eight hours has completed one short rest, not eight.

[Malifice]

This does not match my experiences. Most games I've played and all of the games I've run have been about overcoming encounters. Sometimes limited resources were an issue, but often the only limited resource people had to worry about during the encounter was HP. Again, I've heard that games of attrition are a thing, but I've never been fond of that kind of campaign.

Sadly your knowledge of the game isn't great. Dnd is (and always has been) a resource management game.

Hit points and hit dice. Spell slots. Charges. Rages per day. Wild shapes per rest. Action surge and sup dice. Second wind. Ki points. Sorcery points. Etc etc etc. They are the core of the game.

It's why terms like Nova strike and 5MWD exist. Dumping resources and then falling back to recover them is a tactic used all the time.

This problem takes on a new dimension in 5e in that every class recovers resources at a different frequency. Some are long rest based and get nothing from a short rest other than healing. Some are short rest based and get little from a long rest other than HP. The rogue is rest neutral.

The game is balanced around 6-8 medium to hard encounters per long rest (featuring enough time for 2-3 short rests in that time). At this frequency of rests and encounters the game balances.

That's the baseline for my games. Sometimes you will have to deal with more encounters per long rest and sometimes less. Sometimes you'll get more short rests and sometimes less.

But that's the baseline.

A Paladin able to nova long rest resources in a single encounter is going to outclass a fighter doing the same. Push the classes into a 6ish encounter adventuring day featuring 2ish short rests, and the classes balance. The Paladin has to ration smites and LoH over 30 combat rounds/ 6 encounters. The fighter is now getting 12+ superiority dice and 3 action surges and 3 second winds over the same period. It evens out.

Some classes (casters, Paladins, barbarians) are long rest dependent. Some (fighters, warlocks and monks) are short rest dependent.

I would allow spamming short rests as much as I would allow spamming long rests (The 5MWD).

All classes balance around this expectation. If you're not policing the adventuring day as DM you're not doing your job.

[Malifice]

Of course, if we want to go by the letter of the rules, then there's no need for a houserule.

A short rest is defined as



Note that a short rest does not have a fixed duration of one hour; nor does it have a maximum duration. It's not "a period of downtime between one and eight hours long."

An eight hour rest, being a period of downtime at least one hour long, qualifies as a single short rest.

Ergo, all the DM needs to do is say:

"You have rested for eight hours. That can qualify as either a short rest or a long rest. The choice is up to you. However, it was one rest. You did not engage in several periods of downtime, you engaged in one period of downtime."

Strictly by the rules; no houserule needed. The warlock who rests for eight hours has completed one short rest, not eight.

This. Exactly this.

[krugaan]

Of course, if we want to go by the letter of the rules, then there's no need for a houserule.

A short rest is defined as



Note that a short rest does not have a fixed duration of one hour; nor does it have a maximum duration. It's not "a period of downtime between one and eight hours long."

An eight hour rest, being a period of downtime at least one hour long, qualifies as a single short rest.

Ergo, all the DM needs to do is say:

"You have rested for eight hours. That can qualify as either a short rest or a long rest. The choice is up to you. However, it was one rest. You did not engage in several periods of downtime, you engaged in one period of downtime."

Strictly by the rules; no houserule needed. The warlock who rests for eight hours has completed one short rest, not eight.

I rest for an hour. I take the dash action and sprint around camp. I rest for an hour...

Look, by RAW, it works. I would never use it, or allow it to be used in any campaign I DM (not that I DM). Still, it's RAW, and messing with a characters "sleep cycle" is just a poor way of disallowing it.

[Mortis_Elrod]

not sure if anybody mentioned it (since it is UA) but wu-jens can channel psi points in a similar manner o make spell slots. anybody ever played a 6/6/6 wujen warlock sorcerer split? I imagine i'd roleplay it as as someone who believed that magic is a very fluid thing and can take many forms and you are very good at changing its form.

Of course the drawback is high level magic and some other things. Would be a Cool Tiefling though.

[Malifice]

I rest for an hour. I take the dash action and sprint around camp. I rest for an hour...

Look, by RAW, it works. I would never use it, or allow it to be used in any campaign I DM (not that I DM). Still, it's RAW, and messing with a characters "sleep cycle" is just a poor way of disallowing it.

You talk RAW but isn't this just blatantly attempting to game the resource and rest mechanic?

I've seen people try and label DMs that would shut this crap down as being 'tyrannical'. For mine it says a lot more about the player than it does the DM.

'System gaming jerk.'

It's like when players started carrying around buckets of water to heal people from negative HP in 3e. (Drowning set your HP at zero).

Still, if your table supports these kinds of shenanigans, go nuts. It's not a table id want to play at.

[krugaan]

You talk RAW but isn't this just blatantly attempting to game the resource and rest mechanic?

I've seen people try and label DMs that would shut this crap down as being 'tyrannical'. For mine it says a lot more about the player than it does the DM.

Hey, don't project all that stuff onto me.



It's like when players started carrying around buckets of water to heal people from negative HP in 3e. (Drowning set your HP at zero).


That sounds retarded.



Still, if your table supports these kinds of shenanigans, go nuts. It's not a table id want to play at.

Sigh, I already said I don't like it and wouldn't support it.

[Malifice]

Hey, don't project all that stuff onto me.



That sounds retarded.



Sigh, I already said I don't like it and wouldn't support it.

Wasn't directed at you.

I was talking generally.

[krugaan]

Wasn't directed at you.

I was talking generally.

Right. Despite the quote, and "you talk RAW".

That's ok though, it's too late to apologize, I've forgiven you already.

[Malifice]

Right. Despite the quote, and "you talk RAW".

That's ok though, it's too late to apologize, I've forgiven you already.

Are we really arguing about this?

It wasn't directed at you. I'm either lying (I'm not) or it wasn't.

[krugaan]

Are we really arguing about this?

It wasn't directed at you. I'm either lying (I'm not) or it wasn't.

TOO LATE! I FORGAVE YOU FIRST!

ITS OVER MALIFICE!

I HAVE THE HIGH GROUND!

/oldstarwarsmeme

[greenstone]

I rest for an hour. I take the dash action and sprint around camp. I rest for an hour...

You've already been active for 8 hours today, so for the 9th hour, can I have a CON save please. You failed? One level of exhaustion. And for the 10th hour. And for the 11th hour. And so on.

[krugaan]

You've already been active for 8 hours today, so for the 9th hour, can I have a CON save please. You failed? One level of exhaustion. And for the 10th hour. And for the 11th hour. And so on.

They have an invocation for that.

[Easy_Lee]

Sadly your knowledge of the game isn't great. Dnd is (and always has been) a resource management game.

No, Malifice, your understanding of how games are played is backward.

Not everyone plays your way.

Video games are fixed - you can't change the rules while playing them. And games still came up with the terms scrub and stop-having-fun-guy to describe players at different ends of the spectrum who try to force everyone else to play their way.

Not everyone plays your way.

D&D has loose rules, 5e more than ever. People play the game every sort of way. A build that's strong in one campaign may be useless in another. A build that's useless in one campaign may be God in another.

Not everyone plays your way. And there is no "right" way to play.

Do you understand, Malifice? I really hope I've made my point, because I'm not going to tell you again.

[Malifice]

No, Malifice, your understanding of how games are played is backward.

Not everyone plays your way.

Video games are fixed - you can't change the rules while playing them. And games still came up with the terms scrub and stop-having-fun-guy to describe players at different ends of the spectrum who try to force everyone else to play their way.

Not everyone plays your way.

D&D has loose rules, 5e more than ever. People play the game every sort of way. A build that's strong in one campaign may be useless in another. A build that's useless in one campaign may be God in another.

Not everyone plays your way. And there is no "right" way to play.

Do you understand, Malifice? I really hope I've made my point, because I'm not going to tell you again.

I don't care if they play my way or not dude.

Doesn't change the fact that what I said wss true: DnD is a resource management game.

That's mechanically what it is.

You can deny that all you want but that's the mechanical reality of the game. Spell slots, HP, HD, rages, action surge, Ki points, sorcery points, sup dice, lucky re-rolls, second wind, potions, charges, Gp, xp, lay on hands etc etc etc etc.

Unless you're not using any of the above, when you play the game youre expending/ depleting resources (HP, slots, ki, action surge, sup dice etc) to overcome challenges, in order to gain more respurces (xp, loot, GP, levels, more and more potent abilities etc)

This is why the 5MWD exists as a trope. This is why 5e actually contains advice and guidance to the DM on how to manage the PCs use of these resources during an 'adventuring day.'

Stick your fingers in your ears all you want brother, but you're wrong on this one. Just take a second to think about it.

You can play a game where the 5MWD is a thing and nova strikes/ rocket tag is par for the course. Good on you. But you're still playing a resource management game. The game would also be totally unbalanced and boring as heck but hey.

[Solunaris]

I don't care if they play my way or not dude.

Doesn't change the fact that what I said wss true: DnD is a resource management game.

That's mechanically what it is.

You can deny that all you want but that's the mechanical reality of the game. Spell slots, HP, HD, rages, action surge, Ki points, sorcery points, sup dice, lucky re-rolls, second wind, potions, charges, Gp, xp, lay on hands etc etc etc etc.

Unless you're not using any of the above, when you play the game youre expending/ depleting resources (HP, slots, ki, action surge, sup dice etc) to overcome challenges, in order to gain more respurces (xp, loot, GP, levels, more and more potent abilities etc)

This is why the 5MWD exists as a trope. This is why 5e actually contains advice and guidance to the DM on how to manage the PCs use of these resources during an 'adventuring day.'

Stick your fingers in your ears all you want brother, but you're wrong on this one. Just take a second to think about it.

You can play a game where the 5MWD is a thing and nova strikes/ rocket tag is par for the course. Good on you. But you're still playing a resource management game. The game would also be totally unbalanced and boring as heck but hey.

D&D is only a resource management game if you make it about resource management. The game encourages it, and mechanically supports it by giving you resources to manage for sure. But D&D is a social game about characters that fight with resources. The game suggests you have a number of encounters to be challenging or to whittle your character's down but you don't need to do that. You could have an entire game without a single combat; and the PCs would still level. Conversely, you could have a game that only ever has the PCs fight bad guys and leaves out all manner of political intrigue or adventuring.

The point is that D&D is only a resource management game if you make it one.

As for the topic of RAW on taking a short rest and a long rest, if a character decides to blast a tree or a rock with a cantrip at the end of an hour then they have ended the short rest since casting a spell is more strenuous than any of the allowed activities in the Short Rest ruling. As such, they should be able to start a new short rest immediately afterwards. (I'd argue that the act of converting spell slots to spell points and then back to slots would also be more strenuous too, but I'll stick to what the book specifically calls out here.)

With a Long Rest, it specifically calls out Standing Watch for no more than 2 hours as a light activity in the same group as all the other activities allowed with a Short Rest. As such, the Coffelock in question need only stand watch for the entire Long Rest duration to keep themselves from accidentally taking a Long Rest instead of having to cast spells for an entire hour at least once during the Long Rest duration.

Combining the two, when the party goes down for a Long Rest the sleepless Coffelock takes watch and after an hour gains the benefits of a short rest. Then then cast any cantrip ending the timer for the Short Rest, convert their spell slots over and start a new short rest. At the end of this short rest they again convert spells over. And then they cast another cantrip ending the timer on this Short Rest so they can start another. A few minutes into this rest they have now stood watch for over 2 hours invalidating the possibility of taking a Long Rest by accident and can repeat until the rest of the part is prepared to adventure again.

And if you want to say that standing watch for over 2 hours keeps the Coffelock from Short Resting as well (despite the Coffelock only standing watch for a single hour in the Short Rest) the Coffelock need only stand watch for 2 hours and 1 minute; trade watch positions with another party member and then start the third Short Rest and taking an additional minute after the rest of the part is done with their Long Rest. A negligible amount of time unless the party really needs to get moving, but then the Coffelock is only down a single Short Rest taking them from 8 to 7.

Edit: It is totally gaming the system, but fits entirely within RAW. I wouldn't personally allow it at my table, but that would be a house rule.

[Knaight]

D&D is only a resource management game if you make it about resource management. The game encourages it, and mechanically supports it by giving you resources to manage for sure. But D&D is a social game about characters that fight with resources. The game suggests you have a number of encounters to be challenging or to whittle your character's down but you don't need to do that. You could have an entire game without a single combat; and the PCs would still level. Conversely, you could have a game that only ever has the PCs fight bad guys and leaves out all manner of political intrigue or adventuring.

D&D, the system, is a game heavily optimized for resource management that does it pretty well and tends to do other things poorly. D&D, the set of sessions played in that system, is a game that generally includes some level of resource management but has a definite strain of played sessions where that's just not what's being done. It gets used for stuff it's not actually very good at pretty routinely, largely because learning multiple RPG systems to find one that's better for what you're looking for is more of a process than most people really want to deal with.

[Mikal]

I don't care if they play my way or not dude.

Doesn't change the fact that what I said wss true: DnD is a resource management game.

That's mechanically what it is.

You can deny that all you want but that's the mechanical reality of the game. Spell slots, HP, HD, rages, action surge, Ki points, sorcery points, sup dice, lucky re-rolls, second wind, potions, charges, Gp, xp, lay on hands etc etc etc etc.

Unless you're not using any of the above, when you play the game youre expending/ depleting resources (HP, slots, ki, action surge, sup dice etc) to overcome challenges, in order to gain more respurces (xp, loot, GP, levels, more and more potent abilities etc)

This is why the 5MWD exists as a trope. This is why 5e actually contains advice and guidance to the DM on how to manage the PCs use of these resources during an 'adventuring day.'

Stick your fingers in your ears all you want brother, but you're wrong on this one. Just take a second to think about it.

You can play a game where the 5MWD is a thing and nova strikes/ rocket tag is par for the course. Good on you. But you're still playing a resource management game. The game would also be totally unbalanced and boring as heck but hey.

So in other words everyone
"No items, Fox only, Final Destination" is the only way to play apparently.

Thank you for finally clarifying it for us ignorant masses.
I'm sure WotC is calling you any day now for that new design position.

[CantigThimble]

So in other words everyone
"No items, Fox only, Final Destination" is the only way to play apparently.

Thank you for finally clarifying it for us ignorant masses.
I'm sure WotC is calling you any day now for that new design position.

Yeeeeah. I'll agree with Malifice that the system was designed to be played in that way, but I will not agree with him that it is the only interesting way to play the game or that that way of playing the game is fun. I've played in a campaign where for sections of it the DM was trying to police the adventuring day and get in the 6-8 servings of vegetables medium-hard encounters and other times where he didn't try to do that, and all the memorable, exciting and really enjoyable parts of the game came from the times where he didn't try to police the adventuring day.

That's not to say that resource managment meant nothing, I think resource management is a fun part of the game, but only when it's player driven, or at least when the DM doesn't try to set up the world to artificially manage it. That leads to some amount of imbalance, but honestly all that's done is convince me that balance isn't that important to enjoying the game.

[Caelic]

I rest for an hour. I take the dash action and sprint around camp. I rest for an hour...

Look, by RAW, it works. I would never use it, or allow it to be used in any campaign I DM (not that I DM). Still, it's RAW, and messing with a characters "sleep cycle" is just a poor way of disallowing it.

Does it work by RAW? Can you show me a clear rule for how much action is necessary to end a rest? As far as I can tell, the only actual rule stipulates a full hour of strenuous activity.

I'm not suggesting messing with a character's sleep cycle; I'm pointing out that both a strict reading of the rules and common sense support the idea that one rest, regardless of length, is one rest--not eight.

[krugaan]

Does it work by RAW? Can you show me a clear rule for how much action is necessary to end a rest? As far as I can tell, the only actual rule stipulates a full hour of strenuous activity.

I'm not suggesting messing with a character's sleep cycle; I'm pointing out that both a strict reading of the rules and common sense support the idea that one rest, regardless of length, is one rest--not eight.

A full hour of strenuous activity eh? How long do your average combats last?

I do see what you're saying though. I just dislike that people are trying to counter not-particularly broken gaming with DM sleep-gaming.

You rest. The unspoken rule is that you rest until you gain the benefits you want, short or long. I'll quote passage and scripture when I get hold of my book, I suppose.

[Ganymede]

The unspoken rule is that you rest until you gain the benefits you want, short or long.


Umm, what?

The actual spoken rule is that you describe the actions your PC wants to take, and your DM then adjudicates the results of those actions.

[krugaan]

Umm, what?

The actual spoken rule is that you describe the actions your PC wants to take, and your DM then adjudicates the results of those actions.

Fine, I want to take a short rest.

[Ganymede]

Fine, I want to take a short rest.

The DM gives you a blank look then says, "Do you mean you want to sit by a fire for a while while nibbling on that cheese wheel you found earlier? Don't tell me what mechanical outcomes you want. Instead, tell me what you want your character to do and I will tell you what mechanical outcomes result."

[krugaan]

The DM gives you a blank look then says, "Do you mean you want to sit by a fire for a while while nibbling on that cheese wheel you found earlier? Don't tell me what mechanical outcomes you want. Instead, tell me what you want your character to do and I will tell you what mechanical outcomes result."

I grumble, "I really hope you don't plan on doing the whole campaign like this, because 'I take a short rest' is a perfectly apt description of what I want my character to do ... I sit and 'do nothing more strenuous than eating, drinking, reading, and tending wounds, for a period of an hour.' Oh, hell, say an hour and 5 minutes. If I have regained my pact slots, I convert them into sorceror spell points. If not, tell me.'"

[Malifice]

Fine, I want to take a short rest.

Your character doesn't know what a short rest is.

Abusing the rest mechanic isn't unique to warlocks by the way. All classes get advantages from resting (resource replenishment). See also: the 5MWD.

It's the DMs job to manage that.

[Ganymede]

I grumble, "I really hope you don't plan on doing the whole campaign like this, because 'I take a short rest' is a perfectly apt description of what I want my character to do ... I sit and 'do nothing more strenuous than eating, drinking, reading, and tending wounds, for a period of an hour.' Oh, hell, say an hour and 5 minutes. If I have regained my pact slots, I convert them into sorceror spell points. If not, tell me.'"

If you don't like having to describe the actions of your PC and deferring to your DM regarding their mechanical impact, I suggest you give DMing a shot yourself. It sounds like way more your speed.

[EvilAnagram]

I'm with the coffeelock proponents until they say, "just take eight consecutive short rests." That's a long rest. Spending eight hours engaged in light activity is a long rest. That's how the PHB defines the concept.

[krugaan]

Does it work by RAW? Can you show me a clear rule for how much action is necessary to end a rest? As far as I can tell, the only actual rule stipulates a full hour of strenuous activity.

So short rest is "downtime ... at least one hour ...[doing] nothing more strenuous than eating, drinking, reading, and tending to wounds."

A long rest is "downtime ... at least 8 hours ... during which a character sleeps or performs light activity ... for more than 2 hours. If the rest is interrupted by a period of strenuous activity ... at least 1 hour of ... adventuring activity, the characters must begin the rest again to gain any benefit from it."

PHB says nothing about sleep related exhaustion, only that long rest removes one level of it. Wow, that's odd, I actually never noticed that before. Moving on to Xanathars.

p77 "A long rest is never mandatory..." Wait, what the hell does that mean, really?
"... but going without sleep does have it's consequences." I'm noting the change in terms here...
"Whenever you end a 24 period without finishing a long rest ... one level of exhaustion." ... why the hell do they synonomize sleep and long rest when they explicitly include an invocation which removes the need for sleep in the same book. ARGH. The invocation in question:

Aspect of the Moon, prerequisite blahblah: "You no longer need to sleep ... to gain benefits of a long rest, you can spend all 8 hours doing light activity, such as blah." So sleep is no longer a necessity to avoid exhaustion gain the benefits of a long rest.

Going back the PHB, light activity in terms of resting is "reading, talking, eating, or standing watch for no more than 2 hours."

Ok, so by RAW, a coffeelock cannot avoid taking exhaustion while doing his slot hoarding, if the DM chooses to use the additional rules. That's fine. By RAW, a long rest is 8 hours of rest, comprising of at least 6 hours of sleep and the rest with light activity, with NO MORE than an hour of adventuring activity, either continuous or in aggregate (this might be a point of contention). Prepare to get your stopwatches out, ladies and gents...

Two points, well, three points:
1) by RAW, a long rest can comprise of up to 8 short rests if you don't require sleep. If you have taken 8 short rests and not "done an hour of adventuring", the DM can legally say you have gotten a long rest and gain all the benefits and drawbacks thereof.
2) by RAW, you can do up to an hour of "adventuring" in any 9 hour period and get the full benefits of a long rest, if you don't need sleep.
3) this isn't nearly as interesting as i thought it would be as a thought exercise.

So, the definition of long resting would appear to require you to:

- not require sleep via invocation
- have a way to remove exhaustion, probably via spell, or potion
- take either a maximum of 7 short rests and spend the last hour pacing around camp, or make everyone wait around for more rests.

[sithlordnergal]

Your character doesn't know what a short rest is.

Abusing the rest mechanic isn't unique to warlocks by the way. All classes get advantages from resting (resource replenishment). See also: the 5MWD.

It's the DMs job to manage that.

They don't know what a short rest is? That statement makes very little sense. I am pretty sure most characters can grasp the idea of a short rest. If not, then abilities like Song of Rest must be absolutly worthless at your table. It can only be used during a Short Rest, but if you don't know what a Short Rest is then how do you use it? Or maybe characters like Fighters and Bards are just shocked every time when their Short Rest abilities come back after resting for an hour.

[krugaan]

If you don't like having to describe the actions of your PC and deferring to your DM regarding their mechanical impact, I suggest you give DMing a shot yourself. It sounds like way more your speed.

I might. Although my friends aren't really much for RP. Our gaming sessions go super slow because we're either mocking each other, explaining the rules to the noobs, or eating.

If one of them wanted to play a coffeelock I'd probably tell him it's not worth the trouble, honestly, but if he wanted to that would be fine.

Well, regardless ... what happens?

[sithlordnergal]

If you don't like having to describe the actions of your PC and deferring to your DM regarding their mechanical impact, I suggest you give DMing a shot yourself. It sounds like way more your speed.

Saying "I take a short rest" is a valid and reasonable description of doing something though. And I say that as a player and DM. Sure, maybe the player can add in some fluff, tell us what they plan to do. But that's just the fluff, it isn't required. Forcing your players to describe their actions and then have them hope you give them a Short or Long Rest for it is an asinine way of DMing.

[Ganymede]

I might.

So, what happens?

You'd do prep work, help the players roll up their characters, work with them on their PC backstories and integrate them into the game as potential plot hooks, and run the adventure itself (either a module or something you've made yourself).

A fair amount of work can go into it. For instance, I use Roll20 to enhance my in-person sessions by projecting a map onto a big screen TV that the players manipulate with a wireless mouse. This means I have to devote some time to making both the map and the required tokens (I generally paste screenshots of monsters or spell effects into Photoshop, shrink them down, and give them a beveled border).

You'll also be responsible for both knowing a lot of rules and for adjudicating sticky situations when the rules are not clear.

[krugaan]

I'm with the coffeelock proponents until they say, "just take eight consecutive short rests." That's a long rest. Spending eight hours engaged in light activity is a long rest. That's how the PHB defines the concept.

Well, minus the sleep requirement, that's where i'm arriving after perusal of all the relevant rules. In fact, by RAW, if your long rest is interrupted halfway through by goblins, you get the benefits of 4 short rests.

Also by RAW, if you slaughter them all in less than an hour, you can just go back to sleep for 4 more hours and get the benefits of a long rest.

[krugaan]

You'd do prep work, help the players roll up their characters, work with them on their PC backstories and integrate them into the game as potential plot hooks, and run the adventure itself (either a module or something you've made yourself).

A fair amount of work can go into it. For instance, I use Roll20 to enhance my in-person sessions by projecting a map onto a big screen TV that the players manipulate with a wireless mouse. This means I have to devote some time to making both the map and the required tokens (I generally paste screenshots of monsters or spell effects into Photoshop, shrink them down, and give them a beveled border).

You'll also be responsible for both knowing a lot of rules and for adjudicating sticky situations when the rules are not clear.

No, I'm not talking about that. I have a fairly good idea of the effort it takes to DM. It's a ton of work. I help my DM with RAW questions, he overrides whenever it doesn't suit him.

I'm talking about our rest scenario, if you're still game to play that through.

[Caelic]

A full hour of strenuous activity eh? How long do your average combats last?

I didn't say I LIKE the rule. I think it's sort of silly that a half hour of protracted combat isn't considered enough to interrupt a rest. That is the rule as written, though.



I do see what you're saying though. I just dislike that people are trying to counter not-particularly broken gaming with DM sleep-gaming.

You rest. The unspoken rule is that you rest until you gain the benefits you want, short or long. I'll quote passage and scripture when I get hold of my book, I suppose.


I'd say the unspoken rule is "You rest. It's "a rest." It's not "eight rests."

If someone sits around on his butt for eight hours, and I then ask a hundred observers how many rests he just took, I'd be willing to bet that not one of them would answer "He took eight rests."

I don't really like builds that require twisting both the wording of the rules and common sense in order to work. (Heck, it's one of the reasons I wrote the Rules of Practical Optimization way back when.) It's not about the power level, it's about the contortions needed to get there.

If a given table wants to allow this build, that's awesome--I just wish people would stop saying "If you don't allow it, you're not going by the rules as written," because that's not so.

[krugaan]

Saying "I take a short rest" is a valid and reasonable description of doing something though. And I say that as a player and DM. Sure, maybe the player can add in some fluff, tell us what they plan to do. But that's just the fluff, it isn't required. Forcing your players to describe their actions and then have them hope you give them a Short or Long Rest for it is an asinine way of DMing.

I wouldn't say asinine, but having to describe every little action would get ... tiring real fast.

[Ganymede]

In fact, by RAW, if your long rest is interrupted halfway through by goblins, you get the benefits of 4 short rests.

This is 100% incorrect.

The PHB is crystal clear that a short rest lasts "an hour or more."

If you spend four hours engaged in nothing more strenuous than light activity, you've enjoyed a short rest.


It is the same thing for long rests: if you fall under a sleeping curse and wake up 100 years in the future, you've enjoyed a single long rest because long rests last "eight hours or more."



I'm talking about our rest scenario, if you're still game to play that through.

I'd be like, "Look, just tell me when you'd like to pack up camp and continue on with your adventuring day and I'll adjudicate what benefits you qualify for then."

[Caelic]

.

Two points, well, three points:
1) by RAW, a long rest can comprise of up to 8 short rests if you don't require sleep. If you have taken 8 short rests and not "done an hour of adventuring", the DM can legally say you have gotten a long rest and gain all the benefits and drawbacks thereof.



Again, not so. A short rest is not defined as "an hour long period of downtime." It's defined as "a period of downtime at least an hour long."

A short rest, by the rules, can be eight hours long. It can be FIFTY hours long. As long as it's a single period of downtime, and at least an hour long, it qualifies as one short rest.

If it's at least eight hours long, it can also qualify as a LONG rest, and I think it's entirely reasonable at that point to let the player choose which he or she wants.

There's no support in the rules as written for the idea that you accumulate short rests at the rate of one per hour.

[Easy_Lee]

I'm with the coffeelock proponents until they say, "just take eight consecutive short rests." That's a long rest. Spending eight hours engaged in light activity is a long rest. That's how the PHB defines the concept.

That's the player's decision. He'll be molding spell slots (multiple bonus actions) between rests, which isn't exactly light activity. But again, it's up to the DM whether the build is allowed. My advice is: either allow it or don't. I've seen a lot of passive-aggressiveness regarding this build, and no one appreciates that sort of thing.

[krugaan]

I didn't say I LIKE the rule. I think it's sort of silly that a half hour of protracted combat isn't considered enough to interrupt a rest. That is the rule as written, though.


Wrote a thorough dissection of the relevant rules, as i see them.



I don't really like builds that require twisting both the wording of the rules and common sense in order to work. (Heck, it's one of the reasons I wrote the Rules of Practical Optimization way back when.) It's not about the power level, it's about the contortions needed to get there.

That's kind of the fun of it, though. Some people like the complexity, being clever and whatnot.


If a given table wants to allow this build, that's awesome--I just wish people would stop saying "If you don't allow it, you're not going by the rules as written," because that's not so.

There should be nothing wrong with saying that, because it's the truth. The problem comes when the player gets salty he can't use his "overpowered" build or the DM gets annoyed that he has to deal with a "rules lawyer". The mature (and ultimately more fun) way is for the player to say "yo can i play a coffeelock, it's RAW" and the DM says "fine, but you just took a long rest, keep track of your points" or "nah, man, it's gonna throw my encounter balance out of whack". If the player says anything but "ok, cool" then he becomes the problem.

[krugaan]

This is 100% incorrect. How can you make a blanket statement like 100% incorrect...



The PHB is crystal clear that a short rest lasts "an hour or more."

If you spend four hours engaged in nothing more strenuous than light activity, you've enjoyed a short rest.


You're probably right, not that it matters in the long run. The short rest is taken.


It is the same thing for long rests: if you fall under a sleeping curse and wake up 100 years in the future, you've enjoyed a single long rest because long rests last "eight hours or more."


Hah, tru dat.



I'd be like, "Look, just tell me when you'd like to pack up camp and continue on with your adventuring day and I'll adjudicate what benefits you qualify for then."

Nah, no need to pack up, the others can keep sleeping. Not like I need sleep anyway. I go for a jog, tend the fire, wonder what that ranger looks like under those leathers, for 5 minutes. I also convert my pact slots to spell points.

[krugaan]

Again, not so. A short rest is not defined as "an hour long period of downtime." It's defined as "a period of downtime at least an hour long."

A short rest, by the rules, can be eight hours long. It can be FIFTY hours long. As long as it's a single period of downtime, and at least an hour long, it qualifies as one short rest.

Yes, so long as you do "nothing more strenuous than eating, drinking, reading, and tending to wounds." So go for a 5 minute jog after 1 hour of rest.



If it's at least eight hours long, it can also qualify as a LONG rest, and I think it's entirely reasonable at that point to let the player choose which he or she wants.

There's no support in the rules as written for the idea that you accumulate short rests at the rate of one per hour.

Yeah, that's been pointed out. Again, go for a jog. You have to read the *whole* post, not just the top. If we're going to discuss this fairly, I put the work in to explore the rules.

[Malifice]

That's the player's decision. He'll be molding spell slots (multiple bonus actions) between rests, which isn't exactly light activity. But again, it's up to the DM whether the build is allowed. My advice is: either allow it or don't. I've seen a lot of passive-aggressiveness regarding this build, and no one appreciates that sort of thing.

I'd allow it.

But bear in mind I police the AD. You'll generally get 2-3 short rests per long rest, and around 6-8 medium to hard encounters over that same period.

As a baseline/ median.

Nova strikes and the 5MWD don't happen at my table. Well nova strikes do, but they're incredibly rare because you never know when you can rest again. Pcs rest when they absolutely need to (and the DM approves the rest functions as one).

Now maybe at your table your DM doesn't police the adventuring day for some reason, and Pcs can rest loop and hit every encounter mashing buttons, nova striking and dumping resources from round one.

I would find such a game insanely boring (mashing buttons lacks finesse and meaningful player choice) and unbalanced (in favor of long rest classes) personally. But if it's your cup of tea, go nuts.

[Ganymede]

Nah, no need to pack up, the others can keep sleeping. Not like I need sleep anyway. I go for a jog, tend the fire, wonder what that ranger looks like under those leathers, for 5 minutes. I also convert my pact slots to spell points.

"You have no pact magic slots to convert yet. Five minutes of you micromanaging your downtime passes... when do you plan on packing up camp and starting your adventuring day?"

[EvilAnagram]

That's the player's decision. He'll be molding spell slots (multiple bonus actions) between rests, which isn't exactly light activity. But again, it's up to the DM whether the build is allowed. My advice is: either allow it or don't. I've seen a lot of passive-aggressiveness regarding this build, and no one appreciates that sort of thing.

I can see reading it that way, but that gives the player at most a single short rest because it's still a single period of inactivity.

[krugaan]

"You have no pact magic slots to convert yet. Five minutes of you micromanaging your downtime passes... when do you plan on packing up camp and starting your adventuring day?"

I'll give it another hour. Pact slots back yet?

*this is going to be really tedious, if we role play it out, can we skip to the part where someone else wants to take a short rest, and not just me?

[Malifice]

Yes, so long as you do "nothing more strenuous than eating, drinking, reading, and tending to wounds." So go for a 5 minute jog after 1 hour .

Why is your character going for a jog for 5 minutes, on the hour, every hour?

Why? Explain it from the Pcs perspective. Not the players perspective. The characters.

Who does this?

[krugaan]

I'd allow it.

But bear in mind I police the AD. You'll generally get 2-3 short rests per long rest, and around 6-8 medium to hard encounters over that same period.

As a baseline/ median.

Nova strikes and the 5MWD don't happen at my table. Well nova strikes do, but they're incredibly rare because you never know when you can rest again. Pcs rest when they absolutely need to (and the DM approves the rest functions as one).

Now maybe at your table your DM doesn't police the adventuring day for some reason, and Pcs can rest loop and hit every encounter mashing buttons, nova striking and dumping resources from round one.

I would find such a game insanely boring (mashing buttons lacks finesse and meaningful player choice) and unbalanced (in favor of long rest classes) personally. But if it's your cup of tea, go nuts.

Whats 5WMD again? Not sure if I ever heard of that.

[krugaan]

Why is your character going for a jog for 5 minutes, on the hour, every hour?

Why? Explain it from the Pcs perspective. Not the players perspective. The characters.

Who does this?

If I'm going it from a character perspective, i would say i'm spending the entire time meditating, slowly siphoning energy from my pact patron and storing it for use to augment my sorcerous abilities...

You, in fact, are the ones making *me* contort myself into a clockwatching, HIIT interval taking crazy person.

[gloryblaze]

Why is your character going for a jog for 5 minutes, on the hour, every hour?

Why? Explain it from the Pcs perspective. Not the players perspective. The characters.

Who does this?

"Ever since I made my pact with (Baphomet/Titania/Cthulu/The Raven Queen/whoever) I don't seem to need sleep. In fact, I can't seem to sleep. Every night, while my companions sleep, I meditate to build my power. But communing with such an eldritch entity is really intense for me - every hour or so, I have to break off my meditation and take a breather so my mind doesn't snap from contemplating the dark secrets I've learned. I find that going for a jog or chopping firewood - anything physical, really - helps a lot. Once I clear my mind a bit, I return to my meditation. By the time my friends awaken, my magic is brimming with power. I feel like a limitless font of energy - who knows how far I can push myself. Honestly, I'm almost afraid to find out."

[Malifice]

I'll give it another hour. Pact slots back yet?

DM: 'No. They are not. Its still the same rest from before.'

'Just so you're aware, you can expect to get around 2-3 short rests per long rest (on average) in this campaign. Expect around 6 or so encounters over that time frame. Occasionally it'll be more, ans ocasionally less. Any attempt to game the rest mechanic, fails, and if that's how you play the game we're probably best playing at different tables.'

'Your move.'

[Malifice]

"Ever since I made my pact with (Baphomet/Titania/Cthulu/The Raven Queen/whoever) I don't seem to need sleep. In fact, I can't seem to sleep. Every night, while my companions sleep, I meditate to build my power. But communing with such an eldritch entity is really intense for me - every hour or so, I have to break off my meditation and take a breather so my mind doesn't snap from contemplating the dark secrets I've learned. I find that going for a jog or chopping firewood - anything physical, really - helps a lot. Once I clear my mind a bit, I return to my meditation. By the time my friends awaken, my magic is brimming with power. I feel like a limitless font of energy - who knows how far I can push myself. Honestly, I'm almost afraid to find out."

Nice!

Still a single short rest.

Your move.

[Ganymede]

I'll give it another hour. Pact slots back yet?

*this is going to be really tedious, if we role play it out, can we skip to the part where someone else wants to take a short rest, and not just me?

It is only tedious because you refuse to answer an incredibly basic question - when do you plan on packing up camp and continuing with your adventuring day? I cannot determine when you get the benefits of a rest until I know when you plan on continuing your quest.





Whats 5WMD again? Not sure if I ever heard of that.

Five Minute Work Day: it involves a party taking a short rest after every encounter. It isn't really a rules issue, it is more of an adventure pacing issue as it can make it more difficult to design combat challenges.


Nice!

Still a single short rest.

Your move.

lol, he has to take a break from his break.

[krugaan]

DM: 'No. They are not. Its still the same rest from before.'

'Just so you're aware, you can expect to get around 2-3 short rests per long rest (on average) in this campaign. Expect around 6 or so encounters over that time frame. Occasionally it'll be more, ans ocasionally less. Any attempt to game the rest mechanic, fails, and if that's how you play the game we're probably best playing at different tables.'

'Your move.'

1} you're not ganymede
2} that's fine, you don't like coffee locks, I'm just a bog standard sorlock then.

See how easy that was?

[Bahamut7]

"Ever since I made my pact with (Baphomet/Titania/Cthulu/The Raven Queen/whoever) I don't seem to need sleep. In fact, I can't seem to sleep. Every night, while my companions sleep, I meditate to build my power. But communing with such an eldritch entity is really intense for me - every hour or so, I have to break off my meditation and take a breather so my mind doesn't snap from contemplating the dark secrets I've learned. I find that going for a jog or chopping firewood - anything physical, really - helps a lot. Once I clear my mind a bit, I return to my meditation. By the time my friends awaken, my magic is brimming with power. I feel like a limitless font of energy - who knows how far I can push myself. Honestly, I'm almost afraid to find out."

This right here. You win!

[gloryblaze]

Nice!

Still a single short rest.

Your move.


A short rest is a period of downtime, at least 1 hour long, during which a character does nothing more strenuous than eating, drinking, reading, and tending to wounds.

Can't be. Jogging or chopping firewood is more strenuous than eating, drinking, reading, or tending to wounds. So either you, as the DM, are saying that despite the strenuous activity taking place ~once an hour, you still qualify as having taken a rest (that's a house rule!) OR you, as the DM, are saying that my character only benefits from the first of approximately 7 periods of 1 hour downtime that they took that night, denying my character the benefits of the 6 other rest-qualifying periods. Unlike long rests, which can occur only once every 24 hours, there is no limit to the number of short rests per time period. So, again, that would be a house rule. It's totally fine if you want to use either of those house rules, but acting like you're right and being smug is kinda rude.

"Your move."

[Malifice]

Whats 5WMD again? Not sure if I ever heard of that.

The 5 minute work/ adventuring day.

How have you never heard of this?

It's a phenomenon in DND and resource management games like it where the Pcs (nova) resources in the first encounter of the day, then fall back to rest overnight (recovering all resources used in the single encounter the day before).

They only adventure for 5 minutes per day.

It's one of the main reasons for class imbalance in 5e unless it's policed by the DM (due to the fact long rest resources are always far more potent than short rest resources). Paladins nova better than fighters for example.

The DMG suggests the game was balanced around 6-8 (medium-hard) encounters per long rest, with a short rest every 2-3 encounters.

If you stray from that as a baseline, the game goes out of kilter mechanically (and becomes boring rocket tag).

[krugaan]

It is only tedious because you refuse to answer an incredibly basic question - when do you plan on packing up camp and continuing with your adventuring day? I cannot determine when you get the benefits of a rest until I know when you plan on continuing your quest.

It is at this point that now you are trying to dictate my characters actions in the terms of "are you resting or are you packing up and leaving".



Five Minute Work Day: it involves a party taking a short rest after every encounter. It isn't really a rules issue, it is more of an adventure pacing issue as it can make it more difficult to design combat challenges.

Ugh, that sounds terrible and easily broken up by wandering monster encounters.



lol, he has to take a break from his break.

I'm forced to ... apparently.

[krugaan]

The 5 minute work/ adventuring day.

How have you never heard of this?

It's a phenomenon in DND and resource management games like it where the Pcs (nova) resources in the first encounter of the day, then fall back to rest overnight (recovering all resources used in the single encounter the day before).

They only adventure for 5 minutes per day.

It's one of the main reasons for class imbalance in 5e unless it's policed by the DM (due to the fact long rest resources are always far more potent than short rest resources). Paladins nova better than fighters for example.

The DMG suggests the game was balanced around 6-8 (medium-hard) encounters per long rest, with a short rest every 2-3 encounters.

If you stray from that as a baseline, the game goes out of kilter mechanically (and becomes boring rocket tag).

Yeah, that sounds terrible and unfun for both player and DM.

[Malifice]

"Your move."

DM: 'm telling you it counts as the same rest. I'm the DM and this is my game.

You can agree, or leave the table.

Your move.

[gloryblaze]

I'm telling you it counts as the same rest. I'm the DM and this is my game.

You can agree, or leave the table.

Your move.

And I'm telling you that I'm perfectly fine with your house rule, since "you're the DM and this is your game". :smallwink:

EDIT: I'm sure I'd be perfectly happy at your table, since in actual games instead of absurd theorycrafting, I play rangers anyways =P

[sithlordnergal]

DM: 'No. They are not. Its still the same rest from before.'

'Just so you're aware, you can expect to get around 2-3 short rests per long rest (on average) in this campaign. Expect around 6 or so encounters over that time frame. Occasionally it'll be more, ans ocasionally less. Any attempt to game the rest mechanic, fails, and if that's how you play the game we're probably best playing at different tables.'

'Your move.'

...that is some bad DMing right there. Not even going to bother sugar coating it. If you require your players to put as much detail as Gloryblaze did to gain a short rest, you are doing it wrong. What must combat look like for you? Do you require your players to be super precise, down to the swprd technique they use? Because from what I have seen of your posts, "I swing my mace at it" isn't enough.

EDIT: And I don't mean the 6 encounters a day. That is good to keep it balanced. I only mean the part where you seem to have players bending over backwards to try and reach your defenition of a short rest.

[krugaan]

Since i have to go make dinner and play Heroes of the Storm with my friends, I'm going to just say this:

1) Coffeelock is RAW, as best I can tell.
2) I do not feel, after careful consideration, that coffeelocks are as overpowered as suggested earlier, and even have tons of flavor (like coffee).
3) DMs do not have to like coffee or drink any at their table.
4) There is nothing wrong with with not liking coffee. Don't drink coffee. If someone has to have coffee, don't feel obliged to drink coffee.
5) Drinking coffee when you hate it just leaves a bitter taste in your mouth. Just say so.

Edit: I preemptively agree with anything easy_lee says about coffeelocks, we seem to be on the same page. Refer all theoreticals back to him.

/flees

[Malifice]

Yeah, that sounds terrible and unfun for both player and DM.

Sadly many DMs don't realise it and have no other response when it happens other than to ramp up encounter difficulty. Next thing your fighting CR15 critters at 6th level.

This of course just MANDATES rocket tag/ nova strikes just to stay alive.

If your barbarians are raging round 1 of every combat, and your casters are blatting off those highest level slots, and your Paladins are smiting with every attack, your game is rocket tag. it's boring, there are no meaningful player choices other than 'mash buttons' and classes are going to be widely unbalanced.

Police the Adventuring day DMs. Doom clocks, random monsters, or a stern 'you rest and nothing happens because (reason)' works.

[Ganymede]

It is at this point that now you are trying to dictate my characters actions in the terms of "are you resting or are you packing up and leaving".

Going on an adventure and taking a rest from your adventure are mutually exclusive options; you're either doing one or the other.


What's next, are you going to be mad if I restrict your class choice to either "cleric" or "not a cleric?"

[Malifice]

...that is some bad DMing right there. Not even going to bother sugar coating it. If you require your players to put as much detail as Gloryblaze did to gain a short rest, you are doing it wrong. What must combat look like for you? Do you require your players to be super precise, down to the swprd technique they use? Because from what I have seen of your posts, "I swing my mace at it" isn't enough.

EDIT: And I don't mean the 6 encounters a day. That is good to keep it balanced. I only mean the part where you seem to have players bending over backwards to try and reach your defenition of a short rest.

Stopping a player from gaming the rest mechanic (or any other part of the system) is 'bad DMing?'

The DMs job is to:

1) entertain and challenge the players,
2) keep the game balanced and fun for everyone, and
3) adjudicate the rules, making rulings where necessary to comply with the above two objectives.

Not policing the adventuring day is the DM failing in literally all three of those objectives.

[EvilAnagram]

It seems really odd to me that everyone is touting this as such an amazing, game-breaking build. It's a fun multi-class, certainly, but relying on the DM failing to police the rest system is kind of silly. You might as well say, "I'm going to play a paladin and take a long rest after every combat so that I can always nova!"

That's really dependent on the DM being bad at his or her job, and any DM who lets you take eight short rests in a row is being similarly negligent.

[krugaan]

It seems really odd to me that everyone is touting this as such an amazing, game-breaking build. It's a fun multi-class, certainly, but relying on the DM failing to police the rest system is kind of silly. You might as well say, "I'm going to play a paladin and take a long rest after every combat so that I can always nova!"

That's really dependent on the DM being bad at his or her job, and any DM who lets you take eight short rests in a row is being similarly negligent.

Ugh. THIS. Police it however you want, but don't append "because RAW". Just police it. Jesus.

Coffeelock isn't even that strong! You need at least 9 levels in divine sorc and 3 in lock before it even comes online! And even then you're accumulating power at a fairly glacial pace.

edit: you need 7 levels of lock to make a single 5th level slot from pact magic alone...

[Malifice]

And I'm telling you that I'm perfectly fine with your house rule, since "you're the DM and this is your game". :smallwink:

EDIT: I'm sure I'd be perfectly happy at your table, since in actual games instead of absurd theorycrafting, I play rangers anyways =P

DM: 'Its a ruling, not a houserule. In this case its a ruling made to keep the game balanced and fun for all players. Abuse of the adventuring day/ rest mechanic doesnt fly at this table. Don't try and you won't be disappointed.'

"Get used to rulings by the way; its part of my job to make them.'

'Now where were we.. that's right - you've all rested for 8 hours overnight. Everyone gets the benefit of a long rest. The warlock got up for a run every hour for 5 minutes... after the first 4 hours... (looks at warlock player) I presume he does this every night? I just need to be sure when checking for random encounters (grins).'

[gloryblaze]

DM: 'Its a ruling, not a houserule. In this case its a ruling made to keep the game balanced and fun for all players. Abuse of the adventuring day/ rest mechanic doesnt fly at this table. Don't try and you won't be disappointed.'

IC: "Sounds good man, I don't really want to get into semantics. Mind if I reroll my character as a single classed warlock? Or maybe a ranger?"

OOC: Again, the in-universe sequence is:

1. Warlock spends one hour doing nothing but light activity, then attempts to convert pact magic slots to SP to sorcerer slots.
2. Warlock engages in strenuous activity for around 8 minutes.
3. Repeat steps 1 and 2 six times.

If you pull out your PHB and take a look at the resting rules, you'll see that any one of those 1 hour periods would qualify as a short rest. You'll also see that there is no upper limit on the number of short rests you can take per time period. You'll further see that there is such a limit for long rests (once every 24 hours), for precisely the reason you've been espousing - preventing the 5 minute adventuring day and allowing the DM to use techniques such as a doomsday clock to encourage players to not spend 24 hours per encounter. This indicates that the lack of such a restriction for short rests is not an oversight, and that a player can indeed take as many short rests as they'd like in any given period of time.

So if you want to tell me that either (a) only the first of those 7 different rest-qualifying periods counts or (b) all 7 of those periods are a single short rest, despite the strenuous activity occurring, then I'm going to have to insist that those would be house rules (perfectly justifiable ones, but house rules nonetheless) unless you can quote some RAW supporting either adjudication. Not a quote from the DMG saying "your job is to make the game fun" or "the game is balanced around 6-8 encounters between long rests with 2-3 short rests in between", but a quote indicating that either there is an upper limit on the number of short rests you're allowed to take in a time period or one indicating that you're allowed to engage in strenuous activity mid-rest.


'Now where were we.. that's right - you've all rested for 8 hours overnight. Everyone gets the benefit of a long rest. The warlock got up for a run every hour for 5 minutes... after the first 4 hours... (looks at warlock player) I presume he does this every night? I just need to be sure when checking for random encounters (grins).'

That's actually pretty funny. (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ActuallyPrettyFunny) Well played :smallbiggrin:

[sithlordnergal]

Stopping a player from gaming the rest mechanic (or any other part of the system) is 'bad DMing'?

Bahahahahaha.

Seriously though. Hahahaha.

The DMs job is to:

1) entertain and challenge the players,
2) keep the game balanced and fun for everyone, and
3) adjudicate the rules, making rulings where necessary to comply with the above two objectives.

Not policing the adventuring day is the DM failing in literally all three of those objectives.

So, policing is all well and good, and a DM does need to do that. That said, I accidentally snagged your quote instead of Ganymede's while I was on mobile, as it was Ganymede I was disagreeing with there. You kind of jumped in with a reply to Krugaaan, and I used your reply by mistake. Ganymede's method of policing seems to be having you describe every action you plan to do and hope it gives you a short rest. Case in point:


Fine, I want to take a short rest.


The DM gives you a blank look then says, "Do you mean you want to sit by a fire for a while while nibbling on that cheese wheel you found earlier? Don't tell me what mechanical outcomes you want. Instead, tell me what you want your character to do and I will tell you what mechanical outcomes result."

Policing is all well and good. Requiring a player to jump through nonsense hoops where they have to try and guess as to what counts as a short rest is not that good of DMing. A player should be able to just say "I take a short rest"and not have the DM reply with what Ganymede did.

[Ganymede]

1. Warlock spends one hour doing nothing but light activity, then attempts to convert pact magic slots to SP to sorcerer slots.
2. Warlock engages in strenuous activity for around 8 minutes.
3. Repeat steps 1 and 2 six times.


The DM is who adjudicates what activity does or doesn't count as light activity.

Generally speaking, I allow players to fluff their downtime however they wish. One might want to sit quietly with a book. Another might want to do some sit-ups by the campfire. A third might want to teach some parrying techniques to an NPC that's tagging along. The last might want to entertain his companions by using prestidigitation to change the color of the campfire, or even to prank the one reading the book by making his tea taste like walrus butt. I allow all of that to count as light activity: it does not put the PCs in the risk of mortal danger, it does not grant any sort of mechanical advantage or reward, and it does not generate any adventure progress (outside of strictly roleplay progress in the case of NPC interaction).

Heck, a PC could spend an entire hour repeatedly holding his breath until he gasped for air while punching himself in the stomach; I'm still going to count it as light activity for those same three reasons above.

[Ganymede]

Policing is all well and good. Requiring a player to jump through nonsense hoops where they have to try and guess as to what counts as a short rest is not that good of DMing.

You're misinterpreting my statement.

The players know damn well that, as long as they enjoy downtime for at least an hour, they will get the benefits of a short rest as soon as they stop resting and continue their adventure.

If a no-frills group said "We make camp for an hour and then we continue with our quest," I'ma give them their short rest benefits.

[gloryblaze]

The DM is who adjudicates what activity does or doesn't count as light activity.

Generally speaking, I allow players to fluff their downtime however they wish. One might want to sit quietly with a book. Another might want to do some sit-ups by the campfire. A third might want to teach some parrying techniques to an NPC that's tagging along. The last might want to entertain his companions by using prestidigitation to change the color of the campfire, or even to prank the one reading the book by making his tea taste like walrus butt. I allow all of that to count as light activity: it does not put the PCs in the risk of mortal danger, it does not grant any sort of mechanical advantage or reward, and it does not generate any adventure progress (outside of strictly roleplay progress in the case of NPC interaction).

Heck, a PC could spend an entire hour repeatedly holding his breath until he gasped for air while punching himself in the stomach; I'm still going to count it as light activity for those same three reasons above.

Might wanna take a look at your PHB again.


A short rest is a period of downtime, at least 1 hour long, during which a character does nothing more strenuous than eating, drinking, reading, and tending to wounds.

Are you tryna tell me that jogging, woodcutting, or self-harm are equally or less strenuous than eating, drinking, reading, or tending wounds? If so, I doubt you've done much woodcutting.

[krugaan]

You're misinterpreting my statement.

The players know damn well that, as long as they enjoy downtime for at least an hour, they will get the benefits of a short rest as soon as they stop resting and continue their adventure.

If a no-frills group said "We make camp for an hour and then we continue with our quest," I'ma give them their short rest benefits.

... then why all the pageantry?

[LeonBH]

Strenuous activity needs to take place over 1 hour, or 600 rounds of combat, to interrupt a rest.

Source: PHB 186: "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."

Also verified in RAI by Mearls's tweet (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/42123/does-a-short-combat-or-casting-one-spell-interrupt-a-long-rest). Though he didn't need to verify it, since it is already RAW, but now we know RAI and RAW are aligned.

[gloryblaze]

Strenuous activity needs to take place over 1 hour, or 600 rounds of combat, to interrupt a rest.

Source: PHB 186: "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."

Also verified in RAI by Mearls's tweet (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/42123/does-a-short-combat-or-casting-one-spell-interrupt-a-long-rest). Though he didn't need to verify it, since it is already RAW, but now we know RAI and RAW are aligned.

That quote is for long rests, not short ones. A short rest specifically calls out that you can do nothing more strenuous than blah blah blah... not that you can only do up to 59 minutes of blah blah blah. If you could, then a short rest would only last 1 minute, since the other 59 could be spent conducting adventuring. That's just silly =P

Of course, if you're claiming that because of this, you would rule that the 7 hours of short rests and 1 hour (broken into ~8 minute segments) qualifies as a single long rest instead of 7 short rests, I would have two responses:

1) the character did conduct at least 1 hour of strenuous activity. The rule does not mandate that this hour be contiguous.

2) if the DM won't buy that, just do 6 short rests interrupted by brief jogs and then 1 uninterrupted hour of jogging/woodcutting.

[Ganymede]

Are you tryna tell me that jogging, woodcutting, or self-harm are equally or less strenuous than eating, drinking, reading, or tending wounds? If so, I doubt you've done much woodcutting.

They all seem less strenuous than spending an hour holding your breath while punching yourself in the stomach, so yeah.


Look, the game does not give us any metrics or rules to determine whether any individual activity is more or less strenuous than those listed, and I'm not going to punish a player because he roleplays his character gathering firewood, hauling a helmet-full of water from a nearby brook, or having an arm-wrestling contest with a fellow character.

As far as I am concerned, they are all reasonable activities one would expect to see at a camp-out, and I'll rule them as light activity because they represent no mortal danger, they grant no in-game mechanical advantage, and they result in no adventure progress.


... then why all the pageantry?

I was merely reminding people of the central dynamic of D&D: the players describe what their characters do and the DM describes what happens.

Saying, "I take a short rest and recharge my spell slots" is in the same vein as "I roll for diplomacy." In both instances, the DM says, "No, you tell me what your character will do and I'll tell you whether anything happens or if you need to make any rolls."

[krugaan]

That quote is for long rests, not short ones. A short rest specifically calls out that you can do nothing more strenuous than blah blah blah... not that you can only do up to 59 minutes of blah blah blah. If you could, then a short rest would only last 1 minute, since the other 59 could be spent conducting adventuring. That's just silly =P

Of course, if you're claiming that because of this, you would rule that the 7 hours of short rests and 1 hour (broken into ~8 minute segments) qualifies as a single long rest instead of 7 short rests, I would have two responses:

1) the character did conduct at least 1 hour of strenuous activity. The rule does not mandate that this hour be contiguous.

2) if the DM won't buy that, just do 6 short rests interrupted by brief jogs and then 1 uninterrupted hour of jogging/woodcutting.

This. The "DM's control rest" crowd are saying that 8 hours of "rest for an hour, then exert self for 8 minutes" is really just 8 hours of unbroken rest, therefore short.

Edit: or long, depending on how the DM in question is trying to break coffeelock. Sometimes the same DM.

[krugaan]

They all seem less strenuous than spending an hour holding your breath while punching yourself in the stomach, so yeah.

Look, the game does not give us any metrics or rules to determine whether any individual activity is more or less strenuous than those listed, and I'm not going to punish a player because he roleplays his character gathering firewood, hauling a helmet-full of water from a nearby brook, or having an arm-wrestling contest with a fellow character.

As far as I am concerned, they are all reasonable activities one would expect to see at a camp-out, and I'll rule them as light activity because they represent no mortal danger, they grant no in-game mechanical advantage, and they result in no adventure progress.

That is fine. Trying to contort the meanings of words to enforce it is not.

Look, the thread originally started off as a "is coffeelock RAW" argument. You are arguing it is abusing game mechanics.

NOT.
THE.
SAME.
ARGUMENT.

[gloryblaze]

They all seem less strenuous than spending an hour holding your breath while punching yourself in the stomach, so yeah.

No wonder that activity doesn't appear in the list of light activities, then.



Look, the game does not give us any metrics or rules to determine whether any individual activity is more or less strenuous than those listed, and I'm not going to punish a player because he roleplays his character gathering firewood, hauling a helmet-full of water from a nearby brook, or having an arm-wrestling contest with a fellow character.

As far as I am concerned, they are all reasonable activities one would expect to see at a camp-out, and I'll rule them as light activity because they represent no mortal danger, they grant no in-game mechanical advantage, and they result in no adventure progress.

No where in the rules does it suggest that short rests are meant to be equivalent to camping trips, or that activities undertook on a camping trip would qualify as a short rest. I camp a lot. I live in the US, and I'm an Eagle Scout. I still go camping with my friends regularly whenever work permits. Camping is not light activity or restful at all times. Sitting around a campfire and talking is restful. Sleeping is restful. Reading is restful. Taking a walk and picking up wood from the ground for the fire - even that can be restful. Using an axe to actually cut wood for the fire? Not so much.

[krugaan]

I was merely reminding people of the central dynamic of D&D: the players describe what their characters do and the DM describes what happens.

Saying, "I take a short rest and recharge my spell slots" is in the same vein as "I roll for diplomacy." In both instances, the DM says, "No, you tell me what your character will do and I'll tell you whether anything happens or if you need to make any rolls."

/facepalm

So, during my fair minded effort to illustrate how your views are inconsistent with RAW, you decided to twist our hypothetical to reflect how you think the game should be played, as a lesson.

I should have quit while i was ahead. LET THIS THREAD GO DOWN IN FLAMES!

[Ganymede]

Look, the thread originally started off as a "is coffeelock RAW" argument. You are arguing it is abusing game mechanics.


I think you're confusing me with other posters.

I've been talking about how claiming it is RAW is actually problematic, and involves some squishy assumptions about the player-DM relationship.



/facepalm

So, during my fair minded effort to illustrate how your views are inconsistent with RAW, you decided to twist our hypothetical to reflect how you think the game should be played, as a lesson.

Fair minded? That exercise fizzled out as soon as you refused to say whether you were going to continue to rest or move on to your adventuring day.

[krugaan]

I think you're confusing me with other posters.

I've been talking about how claiming it is RAW is actually problematic, and involves some squishy assumptions about the player-DM relationship.

No, I'm really not. But I'll double check.


Fine, I want to take a short rest.


The DM gives you a blank look then says, "Do you mean you want to sit by a fire for a while while nibbling on that cheese wheel you found earlier? Don't tell me what mechanical outcomes you want. Instead, tell me what you want your character to do and I will tell you what mechanical outcomes result."


The players know damn well that, as long as they enjoy downtime for at least an hour, they will get the benefits of a short rest as soon as they stop resting and continue their adventure.

If a no-frills group said "We make camp for an hour and then we continue with our quest," I'ma give them their short rest benefits.

So a "rest" is being defined by you. Not the book. Which is totally fine. You are the DM. It is not RAW.

S'ok, you seem like an alright guy.

[LeonBH]

That quote is for long rests, not short ones. A short rest specifically calls out that you can do nothing more strenuous than blah blah blah... not that you can only do up to 59 minutes of blah blah blah. If you could, then a short rest would only last 1 minute, since the other 59 could be spent conducting adventuring. That's just silly =P

Of course, if you're claiming that because of this, you would rule that the 7 hours of short rests and 1 hour (broken into ~8 minute segments) qualifies as a single long rest instead of 7 short rests, I would have two responses:

1) the character did conduct at least 1 hour of strenuous activity. The rule does not mandate that this hour be contiguous.

2) if the DM won't buy that, just do 6 short rests interrupted by brief jogs and then 1 uninterrupted hour of jogging/woodcutting.

Well, the short rest must still be completed over an hour, so they can't rest in a minute and consider themselves healed up. But yes, the rule is for long rests.

Yes, I'm saying this rule legitimizes the DM to say 8 short rests in a row is 1 long rest.

If the single hour was broken up such that the character spent 8 minute segments across the 8 hours of rest, then they have interrupted themselves from completing a long rest and get no benefits from that rest.

And since strenuous activity doesn't end a short rest either, the 1-hour intervals of resting that are spaced apart by 8 minutes of strenuous activity still qualifies as a single short rest.

EDIT: Well, actually, the Errata says a long rest must involve 6 hours of sleep now, so there is an actual in-fiction difference between a long rest and 8 short rests in a row. So I do take it back. You can qualitatively differentiate a single long rest with a chain of short rests.

The most I can say now is that the chain of multiple short rests can be considered one short rest, but not be converted into a long rest.

[gloryblaze]

Well, the short rest must still be completed over an hour, so they can't rest in a minute and consider themselves healed up. But yes, the rule is for long rests.

Yes, I'm saying this rule legitimizes the DM to say 8 short rests in a row is 1 long rest.

If the single hour was broken up such that the character spent 8 minute segments across the 8 hours of rest, then they have interrupted themselves from completing a long rest and get no benefits from that rest.

And since strenuous activity doesn't end a short rest either, the 1-hour intervals of resting that are spaced apart by 8 minutes of strenuous activity still qualifies as a single short rest.

Again, for the people in the back.


A short rest is a period of downtime, at least 1 hour long, during which a character does nothing more strenuous than eating, drinking, reading, and tending to wounds.

If I rest for one hour, I've taken a short rest. I think we all agree. If I then proceed to do literally anything more strenuous than the above, I am no longer taking a short rest. If I then stop doing that strenuous thing and rest for 1 hour? I've taken another short rest.

of course, if the DM wants to ban these shenanigans via house rules, I not only do not contest his right to do so, I would in fact support his efforts. :smallwink:

Edit: Just saw your edit and I appreciate your dedication to a truthful and fair reading of the RAW. Good show.

[Ganymede]

If I then proceed to do literally anything more strenuous than the above, I am no longer taking a short rest.

While true, it is the DM that decides what counts as strenuous.


No wonder that activity doesn't appear in the list of light activities, then.

No where in the rules does it suggest that short rests are meant to be equivalent to camping trips, or that activities undertook on a camping trip would qualify as a short rest. I camp a lot. I live in the US, and I'm an Eagle Scout. I still go camping with my friends regularly whenever work permits. Camping is not light activity or restful at all times. Sitting around a campfire and talking is restful. Sleeping is restful. Reading is restful. Taking a walk and picking up wood from the ground for the fire - even that can be restful. Using an axe to actually cut wood for the fire? Not so much.

At this point, you're having a debate as to what activities are more strenuous than others.

Hopefully, this illustrates just how up-to-DM-interpretation the resting rules are, and how a DM ruling (not house rule, ruling) regarding rests can put the entire underpinnings of this exploit in jeopardy.

Hell... remember all those rules discussions as to the relative strenuousness of concentrating on a spell?

[krugaan]

Well, the short rest must still be completed over an hour, so they can't rest in a minute and consider themselves healed up. But yes, the rule is for long rests.

Yes, I'm saying this rule legitimizes the DM to say 8 short rests in a row is 1 long rest.

If the single hour was broken up such that the character spent 8 minute segments across the 8 hours of rest, then they have interrupted themselves from completing a long rest and get no benefits from that rest.

Totally fine with this.



And since strenuous activity doesn't end a short rest either, the 1-hour intervals of resting that are spaced apart by 8 minutes of strenuous activity still qualifies as a single short rest.

Two scenarios.

1) 8 hours of uninterrupted resting
2) 1 hour intervals spaced by 8 minutes, a total of 8 hours of rest.

For you, 1 is a long rest. 2 is a short rest. If any argument is to be made here, 2 is also a long rest, or 7 short rests, but NOT ONE SHORT REST.

[krugaan]

While true, it is the DM that decides what counts as strenuous.

At this point, you're having a debate as to what activities are more strenuous than others.


There is the common sense version of "strenuous", and then there is the "I want to disallow coffeelock" version of strenuous.

[LeonBH]

Again, for the people in the back.



If I rest for one hour, I've taken a short rest. I think we all agree. If I then proceed to do literally anything more strenuous than the above, I am no longer taking a short rest. If I then stop doing that strenuous thing and rest for 1 hour? I've taken another short rest.

of course, if the DM wants to ban these shenanigans via house rules, I not only do not contest his right to do so, I would in fact support his efforts. :smallwink:

Edit: Just saw your edit and I appreciate your dedication to a truthful and fair reading of the RAW. Good show.

Well, I do agree that the CoffeeLock is RAW. It always has been. I'm saying it is fair and legitimate for the DM to declare a chain of X short rests as a single short rest, and he may support his ruling by showing that strenuous activity does not stop long rests (though as the DM, he doesn't need support, it's nice to still have it).

[Ganymede]

So a "rest" is being defined by you. Not the book. Which is totally fine. You are the DM. It is not RAW.


I'm not sure you're following.

The book defines the requirements to benefit from a short rest, and the DM determines if the PCs actions qualify to benefit from a short rest.

[krugaan]

I'm not sure you're following.

The book defines the requirements to benefit from a short rest, and the DM determines if the PCs actions qualify to benefit from a short rest.

What does RAW stand for... Again?

[LeonBH]

Totally fine with this.



Two scenarios.

1) 8 hours of uninterrupted resting
2) 1 hour intervals spaced by 8 minutes, a total of 8 hours of rest.

For you, 1 is a long rest. 2 is a short rest. If any argument is to be made here, 2 is also a long rest, or 7 short rests, but NOT ONE SHORT REST.

Actually, no, a long rest must involve 6 hours of sleep by the Errata (unless we're assuming AotM, which I'm not, since CoffeeLocks don't technically need it). 1 hour intervals spaced by 8 minutes cannot qualify as a long rest, unless 6 of those 1 hour intervals involve the character sleeping.

So it can only qualify as a short rest at most, or 7 short rests. But not one long rest.

[gloryblaze]

Well, I do agree that the CoffeeLock is RAW. It always has been. I'm saying it is fair and legitimate for the DM to declare a chain of X short rests as a single short rest, and he may support his ruling by showing that strenuous activity does not stop long rests (though as the DM, he doesn't need support, it's nice to still have it).

Not to be obstinate, since I for the most part find you agreeable (especially since you say you agree coffeelocking is RAW :smallbiggrin:), but what makes you say that a chain of short rests = one short rest? Considering the quote:


A short rest is a period of downtime, at least 1 hour long, during which a character does nothing more strenuous than eating, drinking, reading, and tending to wounds.

As for the thing about long rests, isn't it true that the transitive property doesn't apply to D&D rules? =P Just because something is true for long rests doesn't mean it's true for short rests, even if they both have "rest" in the name :smalltongue:

[krugaan]

Well, I do agree that the CoffeeLock is RAW. It always has been. I'm saying it is fair and legitimate for the DM to declare a chain of X short rests as a single short rest, and he may support his ruling by showing that strenuous activity does not stop long rests (though as the DM, he doesn't need support, it's nice to still have it).

Then you have it right.

[Ganymede]

There is the common sense version of "strenuous", and then there is the "I want to disallow coffeelock" version of strenuous.

For one, the rulings I've outlined for rests were not made with the "coffeelock" in mind. They've been in place for years. While you're free to disagree with those rulings, I don't think you have a strong argument for why they are unreasonable or contrived.

Secondly, did you really just drag "common sense" into a RAW discussion? I've found this phrase to be the "last gasp" of a RAW discussion.

[krugaan]

Actually, no, a long rest must involve 6 hours of sleep by the Errata (unless we're assuming AotM, which I'm not, since CoffeeLocks don't technically need it). 1 hour intervals spaced by 8 minutes cannot qualify as a long rest, unless 6 of those 1 hour intervals involve the character sleeping.

So it can only qualify as a short rest at most, or 7 short rests. But not one long rest.

We are, actually, assuming that, because that's a core requirement of CoffeeLock.

[krugaan]

For one, the rulings I've outlined for rests were not made with the "coffeelock" in mind. They've been in place for years. While you're free to disagree with those rulings, I don't think you have a strong argument for why they are unreasonable or contrived.

Secondly, did you really just drag "common sense" into a RAW discussion? I've found this phrase to be the "last gasp" of a RAW discussion.

You are explicitly, *literally* not having a RAW argument here.

[Ganymede]

You are explicitly, *literally* not having a RAW argument here.

You're confusing rulings with house rules.

Allow me to clarify.

Claiming that the Coffeelock is RAW is faulty because it depends on favorable rulings from a DM.

It is the exact same thing as claiming it is RAW that you can still get the benefits of a short rest while concentrating on a spell; being able to do so depends on a favorable ruling from your DM.


Edit: To further clarify, it is RAW that a sorlock can gradually bank spells slots over a period of time by converting pact magic slots into sorcerer spell slots. It is absolutely not RAW that this can be done by chaining together multiple short rests in a row as the ability to do so is contingent upon a DM ruling in your favor.

[krugaan]

You're confusing rulings with house rules.

Allow me to clarify.

Claiming that the Coffeelock is RAW is faulty because it depends on favorable rulings from a DM.

It is the exact same thing as claiming it is RAW that you can still get the benefits of a short rest while concentrating on a spell; being able to do so depends on a favorable ruling from your DM.


Edit: To further clarify, it is RAW that a sorlock can gradually bank spells slots over a period of time by converting pact magic slots into sorcerer spell slots. It is absolutely not RAW that this can be done by chaining together multiple short rests in a row as the ability to do so is contingent upon a DM ruling in your favor.

Lets settle this conclusively. What is your definition of RAW?

[LeonBH]

Not to be obstinate, since I for the most part find you agreeable (especially since you say you agree coffeelocking is RAW :smallbiggrin:), but what makes you say that a chain of short rests = one short rest? Considering the quote:



As for the thing about long rests, isn't it true that the transitive property doesn't apply to D&D rules? =P Just because something is true for long rests doesn't mean it's true for short rests, even if they both have "rest" in the name :smalltongue:

You're right about transitivity. It's just that a short rest only needs to be at least an hour long, but can go on to be 8 hours long since there's no upper limit to the rest period. It is reasonable to impose transitivity there once your short rests starts resembling what is otherwise a long rest (if not for the sleep).

You could argue that if the strenuous interruption happened before the 1st hour was completed, the short rest is interrupted (no short rest benefits). And if the strenuous interruption happened just after the 1st hour is completed but the character goes on to take a second short rest, then the first short rest was interrupted. You could say that the character was attempting a 2-hour short rest, but got interrupted in the middle of it and hence did not earn the short rest at all, or only earned the last hour of the short rest, since cutting a single 2-hour short rest with a strenuous activity in the middle is not the only way to read the RAW.

[LeonBH]

We are, actually, assuming that, because that's a core requirement of CoffeeLock.

If you guys are assuming AotM, then I suppose I shall join along. But it isn't a core requirement of CoffeeLock. CoffeeLocks have existed since the release of the PHB, back when AotM wasn't available yet. AotM just speeds up your spell slot generation.

But you're looking for an extended period of down time anyway, like one day of inactivity. Surely the campaign will enter some down time period. If you have no fights for the day, you can spend 16 hours of wakefulness short-resting (or maybe just 8 hours, depending on what the DM has you do to break up those short rests) and that cannot be a long rest, since you've just completed a long rest and you can't take two long rests in a 24 hour period.

AotM makes it possible to generate spell slots while everyone is taking a long rest, outside of down time activities. Certainly, it makes the CoffeeLock more efficient. But it is not a core requirement.

[krugaan]

If you guys are assuming AotM, then I suppose I shall join along. But it isn't a core requirement of CoffeeLock. CoffeeLocks have existed since the release of the PHB, back when AotM wasn't available yet. AotM just speeds up your spell slot generation.

But you're looking for an extended period of down time anyway, like one day of inactivity. Surely the campaign will enter some down time period. If you have no fights for the day, you can spend 16 hours of wakefulness short-resting (or maybe just 8 hours, depending on what the DM has you do to break up those short rests) and that cannot be a long rest, since you've just completed a long rest and you can't take two long rests in a 24 hour period.

AotM makes it possible to generate spell slots while everyone is taking a long rest, outside of down time activities. Certainly, it makes the CoffeeLock more efficient. But it is not a core requirement.

No, AotM is necessary *now* because there weren't any rules governing not sleeping or taking long rests before... were there?

[gloryblaze]

You're right about transitivity. It's just that a short rest only needs to be at least an hour long, but can go on to be 8 hours long since there's no upper limit to the rest period. It is reasonable to impose transitivity there once your short rests starts resembling what is otherwise a long rest (if not for the sleep).

You could argue that if the strenuous interruption happened before the 1st hour was completed, the short rest is interrupted (no short rest benefits). And if the strenuous interruption happened just after the 1st hour is completed but the character goes on to take a second short rest, then the first short rest was interrupted. You could say that the character was attempting a 2-hour short rest, but got interrupted in the middle of it and hence did not earn the short rest at all, or only earned the last hour of the short rest, since cutting a single 2-hour short rest with a strenuous activity in the middle is not the only way to read the RAW.

While I continue to disagree with the first paragraph (I would argue that transitivity never applies, no matter how long the short rest is), the second paragraph actually makes a lot of sense and I would agree that a DM could choose to make that ruling. I would argue that a) the multiple short rest argument follows equally as well, and in fact better, from a close reading of RAW and that b) your ruling would be an antagonistic ruling from the DM and it would be better to simply outright request that the players not bring coffeelocks, but I won't say it's impossible to read the rules that way

[LeonBH]

No, AotM is necessary *now* because there weren't any rules governing not sleeping or taking long rests before... were there?

Technically, there were.

"A long rest is a period of extended downtime, at least 8 hours long, during which a character sleeps or performs light activity: reading, talking, eating, or standing watch for no more than 2 hours."

I may spark up a great derailing here, but at least we have the Errata to point us in the right direction. The above rule was supposed to be read:

"A long rest is a period of extended downtime, (at least 8 hours long), (during which a character sleeps) or (performs light activity: reading, talking, eating, or standing watch for no more than 2 hours)."

If you take a long rest, you must spend 8 hours resting. During the rest, you can either be sleeping or doing light activity. But, you can do light activity for no more than 2 hours, which means you needed at least 6 hours of sleep to accomplish a long rest.

The Errata explicitly states now that you need 6 hours of sleep to finish a long rest, but it was always there in the vaguely worded rules for long rests.

As for the penalties due to not sleeping, you can sleep but you can opt to not take a long rest. In the new Xanathar's rule, it says: "A long rest is never mandatory, but going without sleep does have its consequences. If you want to account for the effects of sleep deprivation on characters and creatures, use these rules."

Even without AotM, you can sleep for 6 hours, wake up, and break your long rest by doing non-light activity for 1 hour. This way, you get to sleep, but you do not take a long rest.

Of course, if you're using the optional rule, then CoffeeLocks cannot exist anyway because: "Whenever you end a 24-hour period without finishing a long rest, you must succeed on a DC 10 Constitution saving throw or suffer one level of exhaustion."

The optional rule imposes disadvantages on not taking long rests, and AotM does not circumvent this need. Even with AotM, you still need to complete a long rest, not a chain of short rests. Of course, there is a loophole if you're a level 9 Divine Soul/ Warlock X CoffeeLock, since you can Greater Restoration that exhaustion level away.

[LeonBH]

While I continue to disagree with the first paragraph (I would argue that transitivity never applies, no matter how long the short rest is), the second paragraph actually makes a lot of sense and I would agree that a DM could choose to make that ruling. I would argue that a) the multiple short rest argument follows equally as well, and in fact better, from a close reading of RAW and that b) your ruling would be an antagonistic ruling from the DM and it would be better to simply outright request that the players not bring coffeelocks, but I won't say it's impossible to read the rules that way

Yes, the multiple short rest reading follows equally from the RAW. I will say, though, it probably strays from RAI more, because chaining short rests this way is gaming the rest mechanic.

As to whether or not it's antagonistic, I don't know if it's antagonistic. You could call it a DM preventing players from gaming the system/rest mechanic. After all, CoffeeLocks are still Sorlocks, and Sorlocks are still incredibly powerful. But I agree it's better to ask your players to not bring CoffeeLocks. If the DM doesn't want to deal with a CoffeeLock, they should communicate as such to their players.

[krugaan]

Technically, there were.

"A long rest is a period of extended downtime, at least 8 hours long, during which a character sleeps or performs light activity: reading, talking, eating, or standing watch for no more than 2 hours."

I may spark up a great derailing here, but at least we have the Errata to point us in the right direction. The above rule was supposed to be read:

"A long rest is a period of extended downtime, (at least 8 hours long), (during which a character sleeps) or (performs light activity: reading, talking, eating, or standing watch for no more than 2 hours)."

If you take a long rest, you must spend 8 hours resting. During the rest, you can either be sleeping or doing light activity. But, you can do light activity for no more than 2 hours, which means you needed at least 6 hours of sleep to accomplish a long rest.

The Errata explicitly states now that you need 6 hours of sleep to finish a long rest, but it was always there in the vaguely worded rules for long rests.

As for the penalties due to not sleeping, you can sleep but you can opt to not take a long rest. In the new Xanathar's rule, it says: "A long rest is never mandatory, but going without sleep does have its consequences. If you want to account for the effects of sleep deprivation on characters and creatures, use these rules."

Even without AotM, you can sleep for 6 hours, wake up, and break your long rest by doing non-light activity for 1 hour. This way, you get to sleep, but you do not take a long rest.

Of course, if you're using the optional rule, then CoffeeLocks cannot exist anyway because: "Whenever you end a 24-hour period without finishing a long rest, you must succeed on a DC 10 Constitution saving throw or suffer one level of exhaustion."

The optional rule imposes disadvantages on not taking long rests, and AotM does not circumvent this need. Even with AotM, you still need to complete a long rest, not a chain of short rests. Of course, there is a loophole if you're a level 9 Divine Soul/ Warlock X CoffeeLock, since you can Greater Restoration that exhaustion level away.

Yeah, I mean, before xanathars, there was no exhaustion rule in the phb.

[Arial Black]

Of course, if we want to go by the letter of the rules, then there's no need for a houserule.

A short rest is defined as



Note that a short rest does not have a fixed duration of one hour; nor does it have a maximum duration. It's not "a period of downtime between one and eight hours long."

An eight hour rest, being a period of downtime at least one hour long, qualifies as a single short rest.

Ergo, all the DM needs to do is say:

"You have rested for eight hours. That can qualify as either a short rest or a long rest. The choice is up to you. However, it was one rest. You did not engage in several periods of downtime, you engaged in one period of downtime."

Strictly by the rules; no houserule needed. The warlock who rests for eight hours has completed one short rest, not eight.

But the warlock is not resting for 8 hours.

Rests have game mechanic benefits. In-world rests have narrative benefits. They match. You have spent energy (slots, abilities that can only be used a certain number of times per short/long rest), and you rest to regain that energy.

If, after having rested enough to regain that (kind of) energy, then if you expend that energy again you need to rest again to regain that energy.

If you were to do nothing but rest for, say, seven hours, then you would regain all your short rest stuff. You wouldn't regain it seven times, because once you have regained it then further rest has no effect because you are already fully (short-) rested.

But here's the crucial thing: if you expend those short rest resources (Pact Magic slots, Ki points, Superiority dice) then you do need to rest to regain them, and resting will regain them!

As for PCs not being aware of game mechanics: true, but they are aware that they can only cast so many spells before they have to rest to regain that ability, and they are aware of regaining their abilities.

So, no, the player isn't going to say, "I rest for X number of hours". He is going to say (and so is his character in-game) "I rest until I recover my slots. How long does it take, DM?" Any DM who says it takes longer than an hour for coffeelocks because he doesn't like coffeelocks has given up the moral authority to honestly referee the game.

When the DM answers, "You regain your Pact Magic slots after one hour" (and he should), the player can then use up those slots by casting spells or converting to sorcery points. After which, the warlock has run out of slots an can take a short rest to regain those slots.

You cannot pretend that this is the same short rest, because you only regain the slots at the end of the rest.

You cannot honestly say that the slots might or might not come back depending on what your future choices will be regarding continuing to do....nothing much. The slots are back. If not, why not? The body is rested enough for the slots to be regained; they aren't waiting for the person to complete an hour's worth of strenuous activity and then count that as rested! It would be absurd to rule that you don't count as rested after an hour of doing nothing but you do count as rested after an hour of strenuous activity!

[LeonBH]

Yeah, I mean, before xanathars, there was no exhaustion rule in the phb.

Yes. And with Xanathar's, the exhaustion rule cannot be circumvented by AotM. AotM circumvents sleep, but not the long rest rule. CoffeeLocks are boned under the optional rule, with or without AotM, unless they have Greater Restoration.

[LeonBH]

But the warlock is not resting for 8 hours.

Rests have game mechanic benefits. In-world rests have narrative benefits. They match. You have spent energy (slots, abilities that can only be used a certain number of times per short/long rest), and you rest to regain that energy.

If, after having rested enough to regain that (kind of) energy, then if you expend that energy again you need to rest again to regain that energy.

If you were to do nothing but rest for, say, seven hours, then you would regain all your short rest stuff. You wouldn't regain it seven times, because once you have regained it then further rest has no effect because you are already fully (short-) rested.

But here's the crucial thing: if you expend those short rest resources (Pact Magic slots, Ki points, Superiority dice) then you do need to rest to regain them, and resting will regain them!

As for PCs not being aware of game mechanics: true, but they are aware that they can only cast so many spells before they have to rest to regain that ability, and they are aware of regaining their abilities.

So, no, the player isn't going to say, "I rest for X number of hours". He is going to say (and so is his character in-game) "I rest until I recover my slots. How long does it take, DM?" Any DM who says it takes longer than an hour for coffeelocks because he doesn't like coffeelocks has given up the moral authority to honestly referee the game.

When the DM answers, "You regain your Pact Magic slots after one hour" (and he should), the player can then use up those slots by casting spells or converting to sorcery points. After which, the warlock has run out of slots an can take a short rest to regain those slots.

You cannot pretend that this is the same short rest, because you only regain the slots at the end of the rest.

You cannot honestly say that the slots might or might not come back depending on what your future choices will be regarding continuing to do....nothing much. The slots are back. If not, why not? The body is rested enough for the slots to be regained; they aren't waiting for the person to complete an hour's worth of strenuous activity and then count that as rested! It would be absurd to rule that you don't count as rested after an hour of doing nothing but you do count as rested after an hour of strenuous activity!

To provide you with the opposite PoV, if the player asks "I rest until I recover my slots. How long does it take, DM?" then the DM may reply "I don't know how long that will take you in particular, since the length of time is up to you, but you will regain it at the end of a short or long rest."

Then the character waits an hour and asks, "Do I have my short rest resources back?" Then DM may reply, "I don't know. Are you concluding your rest now?"

If the character says, "Yes, I am." Then the DM may say, "OK, you have your short rest resources back."

The character proceeds to convert spell slots to sorcery points and back again and then declares, "I once again rest until I recover my slots. How long does it take, DM?" Then the DM may reply, "Oh, you're resting again? Didn't you just finish taking a rest?"

The character then replies: "Yes, but I've already spent all of my short rest resources. I'll need another rest to regain them again." The DM can then reply, "Oh, but spending your short rest resources so quickly is not very wise, is it? It hasn't even been 10 minutes yet. I'll let it go this once, but if you keep on taking short rests this way, I will start interrupting your short rests. That means the rest of the party cannot complete their long rests. Are we clear on that?"

At which point, the character has been stopped from chaining short rests in a reasonable manner without antagonism on the part of the DM (assuming you do not consider nightly encounters to be antagonizing).