Help me break my houserule

[Tiadoppler]

Setup:

I'm running a narrative-heavy, long-running campaign that has just switched to 5e. I, and all of my players, are pretty new to 5e. The narrative structure and playstyle is such that:
* The characters stick to a pretty sane/realistic sleep and rest cycle. The usual day involves a morning of activity, a lunch break (short rest), and afternoon/evening of activity and then making camp (including a watch cycle) for the night.
* Combat encounters are fairly frequent, but irregular. If they're passing through dangerous territory, they might have 6+ minor combats in a single day, with 3-4 short rests. If they're delving into a specific dangerous location, they might have 2 combats in a row: a medium difficulty 'defeat the guards' then a brutal 'boss+bodyguards' encounter.
* Multiclassing requires a narrative reason and is not limitless. None of my players minmax to a significant degree. RAI beats RAW.

The Issue:

The party has a warlock and a monk, who both are heavy damage dealers, and both restore 90+% of their lethality on a short rest. When I have a lot of minor combats, they tend to utterly outshine the rest of the party. When I have a single major combat (or a string of continuous combats), they're down to the bottom tier.
Edit: I'll say this specifically: I've talked to these players, and they agree that they want their characters to keep the theme+class that they have, but they'd prefer to match the rest of the party in terms of power/flexibility better. This isn't a case of me trying to nerf a couple characters without player consent.



The Potential (Houseruled) Solution:

Warlocks have 3x spell slots, but recover them on long rests only.
Monks have 3x ki points, but recover them on long rests only.




My Request:

Please, 5e Maestros, Minmaxers and RAW/RAI experts, break this houserule open. Expose my naivete, and explain why this is a terrible idea.

[Potato_Priest]

One thing you might see is that warlocks and monks start to act a bit more like paladins- hoarding their burst damage smackdown abilities for the boss fights.

It's a useful thing to be able to do, but probably not game breaking.

I actually recently suggested this exact thing but for all classes over in the "pick tree things to fix about 5e" thread, because I think it's a great idea. This means that I might not be the best person to poke holes in the idea, however.

[Provo]

Yeah, I was going to say essentially the same thing about players hoarding their abilities.

At level 5, the monk could cause a boss to make 12 Stunning Strike saveing throws in just 3 rounds.

It shouldn't be too big of a problem though. i imagine the players will want to be effective in the fights leading up to the boss as well.

[Davrix]

Your sort of trying to fix something that's kind of the point of the classes. Now I'm not saying that you cant or shouldn't do this but Monk and warlock are designed around being able to regain power quickly via a short rest while other classes have stronger abilities based on a long rest. These players shine during quick encounters that have lots of short rest in between. Your other players sound like they are not as limited by these mechanics of 5th based on whatever classes they have. So wouldn't it be unfair to just bump the warlock and monk up in power? If they don't always shine in every combat? How do your other players feel when the warlock and monk are kicking ass and taking names? woudn't they feel the same as the warlock and monk do now?

The point I'm trying to make is every class can and will shine in different combat situations. You as the Dm control how these flow and work and it is perfectly ok for some party members to shine over others in certain fights as long as you pass the special stick around every so often. Also I am not sure if your aware but a short rest in 5th I think is an hour of downtime now. I don't have my book nearby so someone please feel free to correct me if I'm not remembering it right. so keep in mind if your having 3 or 4 short rests per day that's defiantly giving he advantage to the short rest based classes. So they have gotten used to being able to nova and spend their points willy nilly knowing they will probably be able to simply rest after and get them back after. That doesn't lead to very good game tension or possibility of danger. So I would suggest instead of buffing them you look more on how you run encounters and the pacing you set. PC's should not always be able to rest as frequently and as often as they want.

[the secret fire]

I'd suggest that the less disruptive change is simply to cap short rests at 2 per long rest. This achieves the same effect as your proposal (i.e. capping the stamina of the short rest-dependant classes) while avoiding the "nova effect" described above where these classes will tend to play more like paladins.

Removing the short rest, entirely, is not a wonderful idea, as short rests are also used by other specific classes (like wizards, to recover spell slots), and by all characters for HP recovery. Just cap how many of them the party can take in a day.

[Malapterus]

Here's an idea; instead of such a big change to the classes getting the benefit of the situation, make a minor change to the ones getting the short end of the stick.

House-rule that they can recharge on a short-rest once per day.

If that's not complicated enough, make room for a 'partial recover' An idea would be a short rest allows them to regain a number of spell slots, of their choice, equal to their primary casting stat bonus. So, if your cleric has a Wis of 18, he can re-fill 4 spells of his choice on a short rest.

If that number doesn't work, you could make it character level, caster level, 2x casting stat, something - but overall it seems better the boost the affected than to penalize the ones playing fairly built characters.

[Potato_Priest]

So I would suggest instead of buffing them you look more on how you run encounters and the pacing you set. PC's should not always be able to rest as frequently and as often as they want.

It's fairly common for people to suggest DMs regulate the adventuring day differently, but personally I think that this often shouldn't be their job.

The PCs are the ones who decide what they do within an established world, a world where some areas are predictably more dangerous than others and monsters have limited capabilities, both of movement and magic.

If the party figures out a way to safely rest, whether they're using leomund's tiny hut, a locked room, or some other defense that their enemies won't be able to easily bypass, then they rest. Similarly, if the PCs successfully use the rules or the situation to avoid fights then they avoid fights and receive fewer encounters. The DM could of course throw extra fights at the players to make up for the ones they dodged or add enemy wizards to break the Leomund's tiny hut, but doing so is eroding player agency and breaking the general rule that the world is an already established thing that doesn't spontaneously adapt to counter the players in unnatural ways. Adapting to the players by means of NPCs learning is fine, but spontaneous changes to "fix" the adventuring day should be rarely, if ever, engaged.

In summary, the DM is often blamed for pacing issues, but in reality having pacing issues is often a good indication of a DM that gives their players agency to affect what they do during the day.

[DarkKnightJin]

I'm not seeing a big problem here. Monk and Warlock are short rest classes that are made to spend their resources, but get them back just as quick.

If the party can rest up after every fight, they are going to be stronger. If they can't recharge very often, they're going to have to pick and choose when to spend their big resources.

Not sure if you need to mess with things to 'fix' anything.

But, I'm working off the sessions I've been a part of tend to work out. With me as the Cleric being the only Long Rest dependant one.

[Kane0]

The Issue:
The party has a warlock and a monk, who both are heavy damage dealers, and both restore 90+% of their lethality on a short rest. When I have a lot of minor combats, they tend to utterly outshine the rest of the party. When I have a single major combat (or a string of continuous combats), they're down to the bottom tier.
Edit: I'll say this specifically: I've talked to these players, and they agree that they want their characters to keep the theme+class that they have, but they'd prefer to match the rest of the party in terms of power/flexibility better. This isn't a case of me trying to nerf a couple characters without player consent.

The Potential (Houseruled) Solution:

Warlocks have 3x spell slots, but recover them on long rests only.
Monks have 3x ki points, but recover them on long rests only.


The balancing of the classes doesn't change, but it will alter how they play. As others have said, resource hoarding and alpha-strike tactics will become more common. As players begin to naturally gravitate towards maximum efficiency you may even start to see 5-minute adventuring days.

Short rest classes excel at reliability and longevity over prolonged periods, long rest classes excel at dumping impressive displays when really necessary. It's best to have some of both for well-roundedness and vary your encounters to keep them on their toes. This is one of those things easier fixed without houseruling, just alter your DMing strategy slightly to knock the players out of their comfort zones.

You shouldn't always have the same pattern of recommended encounters and rests. Throw spanners in the works every now and again to force the party to blow resources or take less optimal rest opportunities. Also make sure to provide a couple encounters that require more than just straight damage as the primary solution, and over time throw in encounters that specifically counter certain player abilities if they are used repeatedly. You should find that the players will be far less comfortable and more challenged as a whole when they feel a little less secure in their rest patterns and resource expenditure.

Edit: An easy way to tilt your party is to start the day strong with a difficult encounter, then go easy for a bit then give another difficult one in the middle rather than the end of the day. If you do it right they will be expecting the 'boss' at the end and hold back a bit, so they will manage the difficulty themselves. Won't work more than a couple times but it should make for some fun times.

[Tiadoppler]

Thanks for helping out!

First: I don't think this change would only help or hurt the Warlock/Monk. It would make them more capable on days when they cannot rest as much, or when a single battle is especially difficult, and make them less capable on days when there are a lot of spread out encounters.

Second: I'm not removing short rests, or any of the other short rest benefits. My players take short rests when it makes sense that they would have time to do so.

Third: The nova aspect is kind of cool, and I like it. If a character wants to store up his energy from the whole day and unleash it on a single target, that's their choice.

Fourth: I'm not interested in limiting or redefining short rests. They take an hour and require a safe spot, but if my players can secure that, they should get the benefit.


I think I may reduce the multiplier to 2.5x. Other than that, I'm not seeing any huge problems yet. The purpose of this houserule isn't to make Warlocks/Monks stronger or weaker. It's to make them more consistent and more similar to the rest of the party (Bard, Wizard, Fighter) in terms of power usage, and also to make it easier for me to design encounters that will be challenging but not overwhelming.

At the moment, the party is really, really bad at hard encounters (because the warlock+monk have little staying power) and insanely good at skirmishing and easy encounters (because the party plays smart and the warlock+monk nuke things).

[Tiadoppler]

The balancing of the classes doesn't change, but it will alter how they play. As others have said, resource hoarding and alpha-strike tactics will become more common. As players begin to naturally gravitate towards maximum efficiency you may even start to see 5-minute adventuring days.

I'm hoping that they'll start having to think about resource management more often. I'm okay with alpha-strikes and hoarding. In this particular campaign, there is no opportunity for a 5-minute adventuring day: the players are not 'adventurers going on quests'. They're hideously unprepared people trying to survive a hostile world that is falling apart in an active apocalyptic event. They've got places to get to, people to see, and enemies that are actively trying to get them.




Short rest classes excel at reliability and longevity over prolonged periods, long rest classes excel at dumping impressive displays when really necessary. It's best to have some of both for well-roundedness and vary your encounters to keep them on their toes. This is one of those things easier fixed without houseruling, just alter your DMing strategy slightly to knock the players out of their comfort zones.

I hear you (or, more literally, I read you). The more I vary encounters, the more inconsistent the two groups of classes are. If I stuck to a stable 2 short rests then a long rest adventuring day, this wouldn't be an issue, because the short rest classes would get a chance to shine, then the long rest classes would, then we'd be fine.

However, I don't like how formulaic the 'ISO standard adventuring day' becomes. For plot reasons, and to entertain my players, I want to have a single challenging battle in a day, or a dozen little battles, without actively screwing over one type of character or another.




You shouldn't always have the same pattern of recommended encounters and rests. Throw spanners in the works every now and again to force the party to blow resources or take less optimal rest opportunities. Also make sure to provide a couple encounters that require more than just straight damage as the primary solution, and over time throw in encounters that specifically counter certain player abilities if they are used repeatedly. You should find that the players will be far less comfortable and more challenged as a whole when they feel a little less secure in their rest patterns and resource expenditure.

This is what I'm doing. I frequently have dangerous situations develop, have enemies adapt to PC strategy, have ambushes and enemies tracking the players. The 'recommended encounter and rest pattern' is not a thing in this game. I'll try to add some 'damage is not the solution' encounters. Do you have any suggestions?

[Kane0]

Sure, what's the party and what do they normally use?

[Tiadoppler]

Sure, what's the party and what do they normally use?

Level 3 atm

Bard (Healing, Vicious Mockery, Rapier) - the party face, leader - persuasion, performance, deception
Wizard (Abjurer) - the smart, sarcastic one - int skills
Fighter (Greataxe, very tough) - the stoic, reliable one - strong and intimidating
Warlock (Fiend, a blaster) - the cowardly buffoon
Monk (Open Hand, iirc) - snarky, smarter than she looks - stealth, acrobatics and more stealth

[Mongobear]

The Potential (Houseruled) Solution:

Warlocks have 3x spell slots, but recover them on long rests only.
Monks have 3x ki points, but recover them on long rests only.


My Request:

Please, 5e Maestros, Minmaxers and RAW/RAI experts, break this houserule open. Expose my naivete, and explain why this is a terrible idea.

First, a few questions. When you say you sometimes throw 6ish minor encounters, do you mean unimportant dungeon trash/wilderness random, or just unimportant to the narrative, but still tied to the overall storyline? Also, are they Easy xp threshold, Medium? Or varied across all 4 but minor in that they don't matter?

If you throw a lot of Easy/Medium combats at a party, and long rest classes are blowing higher end resources on them, that's not your problem. Why use a Fireball when Burning Hands will do the same results? Why upcast Magic Missile when a cantrip like Firebolt will do roughly the same damage? It sounds to me like your long rest players need a crash course in resources management.

For the tougher combats, working as intended. That's where a Wizard chucking back to back Fireballs, upcasting Scorching Ray and Haste, and a Barbarian uses their Rage, Paladins use Channel Divinity and Smites, and any Long Rest mechanics really shine, not against a fight vs 10 CR 1/8s where the only threat is having your dice turn against you.

If you are dead set on implementing this houserule, I wouldn't go quite as far as you are planning. I would perhaps double the number of uses of any Short Rest mechanics, then add an ability that allows them to get a partial recharge like Arcane Recovery for Wizards. Perhaps Monks regain their Wisdom modifier Ki on a short rest, Warlocks regain 1 spell slot, Fighters regain 1 use of Second Wind/Action Surge, and half their Superiority Dice if BM, or 1 use of Arcane Shot or whatever the other abilities are from XGtE.

[Kane0]

Some easy examples to mess with your party:

- Simple obstructions like ravines or walls. Spells have set ranges and require direct line of sight, but ranged weapons (especially thrown ones) can arc even if they are at disadvantage to hit.

- A social situation where a subtle metamagic sorcerer or similar is messing with the party. The challenge isn't in killing him, it's in locating him.

- Ambush monsters like cloakers, piercers, etc. Throw their range/mobility advantage out the window.

- 'Noncombat' encounters, including but not limited to traps. The best ones are more than simple gotchas, such as something (could be a creature) that has the sole function of summoning minions or simple hazards. Make sure the source is difficult to reach or dispatch but the things they bring in are both numerous and easy to deal with (though not bypass entirely). Poison gas is an example. The Traps UA (which I think made it into Xanathar's?) is an excellent reference for this.

There's plenty more, i'm sure others will chime in.

Edit: Also, Kobold Fight Club is your friend.

[Tiadoppler]

First, a few questions. When you say you sometimes throw 6ish minor encounters, do you mean unimportant dungeon trash/wilderness random, or just unimportant to the narrative, but still tied to the overall storyline? Also, are they Easy xp threshold, Medium? Or varied across all 4 but minor in that they don't matter?

Minor as in: plot-relevant, but not meant to be overwhelmingly challenging. Things like dealing with a checkpoint on the road, or a team of scouts, or ambushing a patrol. Varies between easy and medium xp values.



If you throw a lot of Easy/Medium combats at a party, and long rest classes are blowing higher end resources on them, that's not your problem. Why use a Fireball when Burning Hands will do the same results? Why upcast Magic Missile when a cantrip like Firebolt will do roughly the same damage? It sounds to me like your long rest players need a crash course in resources management.

At the moment, they don't have much 'high level' resources to spend. Anyway, I'm very darwinian in my approach to teaching resource management :) and they're doing pretty well in terms of holding spells back for later.


For the tougher combats, working as intended. That's where a Wizard chucking back to back Fireballs, upcasting Scorching Ray and Haste, and a Barbarian uses their Rage, Paladins use Channel Divinity and Smites, and any Long Rest mechanics really shine, not against a fight vs 10 CR 1/8s where the only threat is having your dice turn against you.

Hmm. Part of the issue is that I'm not railroading the players into a few easy combats followed by a single hard combat. Sometimes the players will go multiple sessions - and multiple ingame days - without a big battle for the long-resters to shine. Conversely, sometimes the players are dealing with only a few, extremely tough, enemies per day, and the short-resters get bored.


If you are dead set on implementing this houserule, I wouldn't go quite as far as you are planning. I would perhaps double the number of uses of any Short Rest mechanics, then add an ability that allows them to get a partial recharge like Arcane Recovery for Wizards. Perhaps Monks regain their Wisdom modifier Ki on a short rest, Warlocks regain 1 spell slot, Fighters regain 1 use of Second Wind/Action Surge, and half their Superiority Dice if BM, or 1 use of Arcane Shot or whatever the other abilities are from XGtE.

I'll certainly consider that. 3x seems like it might be too far in the 'damage spike' direction.



Edit:


Some easy examples to mess with your party:

- Simple obstructions like ravines or walls. Spells have set ranges and require direct line of sight, but ranged weapons (especially thrown ones) can arc even if they are at disadvantage to hit.

- A social situation where a subtle metamagic sorcerer or similar is messing with the party. The challenge isn't in killing him, it's in locating him.

- Ambush monsters like cloakers, piercers, etc. Throw their range/mobility advantage out the window.

- 'Noncombat' encounters, including but not limited to traps. The best ones are more than simple gotchas, such as something (could be a creature) that has the sole function of summoning minions or simple hazards. Make sure the source is difficult to reach or dispatch but the things they bring in are both numerous and easy to deal with (though not bypass entirely). Poison gas is an example. The Traps UA (which I think made it into Xanathar's?) is an excellent reference for this.

There's plenty more, i'm sure others will chime in.

Edit: Also, Kobold Fight Club is your friend.

I like the social sorcerer idea a lot. I should probably read more UAs, and reread Xanathar's for ideas. They've met the kobold fight club, and they will again, soon... :D

[Kane0]

Oh, also for your enjoyment here's a small list of interesting ways you can threaten your party without using HP damage:

- Max HP reduction (great for poisons/diseases/curses whittling you down over time)
- Exhaustion (6 stage death spiral)
- Target Death Saves directly (Three strikes and you're out! Good for simulating drowning/choking)
- Attribute reduction (straight up from previous editions)
- Prof bonus reduction (Emulates previous editions energy drain nicely, also a handy death spiral)
- Save or Bad Stuff (Save or Suck, Save or Lose, Save or Die)
- Overhealing (explode when THP exceeds your max HP)
- Ageing (in both directions)
- Drain spell slots
- Damage vulnerability (as in giving it temporarily)

And interesting defenses/counters:
- Adaptive armor (become resistant or immune to last damage type(s) that harmed you)
- Spell Absorbtion (successful save against spell grants THP or bonus damage)
- Spell Reflection (missed spell attacks get redirected at creature of choice)
- Spell Stealing (can benefit from buffs cast by enemies within certain range)
- Damage Reduction (reduce all damage taken by X)
- Damage Reversal (damage heals it, healing damages it)
- Retributive damage (ala Armor of Agathys)
- Reaction defenses (reaction AC boost, invisibility, teleport swap with ally, etc)
- Immunity to specific abilities (smites, sneak attacks, AoEs, etc)
- Doesn't stay dead (reanimates/reincarnates after X time)

[Pelle]

When I have a lot of minor combats, they tend to utterly outshine the rest of the party. When I have a single major combat (or a string of continuous combats), they're down to the bottom tier.


As I understand it, one of the design goals of 5e is to allow different characters to shine in different situations. If everyone are always contributing equally, no one gets to ever be in the spotlight. Seems like it is working as intended, with the Warlock/Monk dominating in some situations, and not in other situations.

Just wanted to check if you agree with this, as it is fair to want a different paradigm where everyone can contribute equally all the time; team effort over alternating between who gets to save the day.

Is the issue that it is not satisfying to dominate/shine in "unimportant" combats while not contributing equally in the "important" ones? If so, try make every combat important enough, or make sure they have consequences so that what the Warlock/Monk contributed with earlier matters for when they finally meet the boss and so on.

[BobZan]

Set a cap of 2 short rest/day and let them manage their resources.

[Davrix]

It's fairly common for people to suggest DMs regulate the adventuring day differently, but personally I think that this often shouldn't be their job.

The PCs are the ones who decide what they do within an established world, a world where some areas are predictably more dangerous than others and monsters have limited capabilities, both of movement and magic.

If the party figures out a way to safely rest, whether they're using leomund's tiny hut, a locked room, or some other defense that their enemies won't be able to easily bypass, then they rest. Similarly, if the PCs successfully use the rules or the situation to avoid fights then they avoid fights and receive fewer encounters. The DM could of course throw extra fights at the players to make up for the ones they dodged or add enemy wizards to break the Leomund's tiny hut, but doing so is eroding player agency and breaking the general rule that the world is an already established thing that doesn't spontaneously adapt to counter the players in unnatural ways. Adapting to the players by means of NPCs learning is fine, but spontaneous changes to "fix" the adventuring day should be rarely, if ever, engaged.

In summary, the DM is often blamed for pacing issues, but in reality having pacing issues is often a good indication of a DM that gives their players agency to affect what they do during the day.

I'm not saying I disagree with you in fact I actually agree mostly but I think your missing the point of why I said what i said. In the OP case he is trying to buff classes that shouldn't need to be buffed. They are VERY good at what they do, his encounter pacing is causing them to complain that they don't feel useful at times. So he is trying to buff them so they can always feel useful. Which I am sorry, that's part of playing the classes they chose. Yes it very much is up to the party to decide if they want to rest and where they do it. But that's not the real complain. The complain is the monk and warlock are crying when they cant get enough short rests in to feel special in every fight. Which I still say how is this fair to your other players in buffing these two when they don't get anything and will once again be delegated to second fiddle so the monk and lock can nova everything in sight. Now i don't know your table and maybe these players don't care and this feedback is useless but I would still argue that your trying to fix something that isn't broke.

[Tiadoppler]

Oh, also for your enjoyment here's a small list of interesting ways you can threaten your party...

Why thank you, I'm sure my players will appreciate that. As of last night's game, I'm using Save-Or-Exhaustion for a homebrewed undead type. Wow, that guy got focus fired.



As I understand it, one of the design goals of 5e is to allow different characters to shine in different situations. If everyone are always contributing equally, no one gets to ever be in the spotlight. Seems like it is working as intended, with the Warlock/Monk dominating in some situations, and not in other situations.

Just wanted to check if you agree with this, as it is fair to want a different paradigm where everyone can contribute equally all the time; team effort over alternating between who gets to save the day.

Is the issue that it is not satisfying to dominate/shine in "unimportant" combats while not contributing equally in the "important" ones? If so, try make every combat important enough, or make sure they have consequences so that what the Warlock/Monk contributed with earlier matters for when they finally meet the boss and so on.

In general, I agree with the design methodology. If this campaign was less open-world, I simply wouldn't bother with a houserule and let the Warlock/Monk shine or suck as the situation demanded. In this specific scenario, this campaign has had three sessions in a row, with multiple combats in each one, that took up less than two hours of in-game time total. I don't want to show favoritism by giving out free, five minute long, rests mid-session.

Having spoken with my players again last night, they aren't looking for five minute short rests, or some arbitrary limitation, they just want a Warlock/Monk variant that works more like a long-rest class, and is more in line with the rest of the party's power-over-time curve.

The other choice seems to be letting the warlock (who has an in-character, extremely plot related, deal-with-a-demon-for-power backstory and current character arc) play a fiend-themed sorcerer, and the monk play some sort of houseruled unarmed combat fighter or (let's call it 'serene balance' instead of 'rage') barbarian.

[Azgeroth]

your only really running into these issues due to the level.

your bard will never get spell slots back on anything but a long rest, but they will get the bardic inspiration back on a short rest in not too many levels.

your wizard can regain half his level rounded down (so 1) in spell slots on a short rest, once per long rest.. but he also has more slots than the warlock, and as they advance in level the wizard is going to get a LOT more slots than the lock..

assuming your fighter is BM, he is also on the happy short rest train, so all in all, your pretty much on track. the short rest classes do shine in the lowwer levels, but the full casters will soon be the big hitters for most situations, its just up to them if they want to do it in that encounter, or wait for the next to go nova.
(please read, by 'big hitter' i dont mean single target damage, but fireball is the best anti-mook spell, and they both have great utility spells that trump anything the other 3 can do.)

just be glad you dont have a moon druid..

try varying your encounters a bit more, have some flying reasonably hard mob abduct the warlock.. unless your fighter has a bow, its down to the wizard to save the day, monks are pretty much powerless at range.

have some one cast slow on the party, sorry mr monk, 1 attack per round... spell casters can take up to 2 rounds to get a spell off, thats really going to level the playing field.

golems.. with 'resistance to everything', that will be a struggle..

BEWARE : the short rest mechanic of those classes is a big part of their balance, if you double/triple their resources and make it long rest, they will beat out the other classes.

[Tiadoppler]

...In the OP case he is trying to buff classes that shouldn't need to be buffed. They are VERY good at what they do, his encounter pacing is causing them to complain that they don't feel useful at times. So he is trying to buff them so they can always feel useful...

Thanks for helping think this through. The reason I'm asking for advice is that I don't want to buff or nerf either of these classes, I just want to find a fair long-rest-style variant for them. I've been convinced already that a straight up 3x multiplier is too much nova for these classes, so I'm looking at 2x and 2.5x.



...The complain is the monk and warlock are crying when they cant get enough short rests in to feel special in every fight. Which I still say how is this fair to your other players in buffing these two when they don't get anything and will once again be delegated to second fiddle so the monk and lock can nova everything in sight. Now i don't know your table and maybe these players don't care and this feedback is useless but I would still argue that your trying to fix something that isn't broke...

Yes, sometimes the monk and warlock are unhappy, and sometimes everybody else is unhappy. If I, as the DM, want to balance the two groups' happiness, I have to take a degree of control over their adventuring day that does not fit in with the campaign style or the plot. This game started in 4e, a game that was extremely well balanced between the classes and could be played in a very freeform manner. Upon switching to 5e, the 'length of the adventuring day' suddenly became a major problem.

I understand your concern about stunlocking and absurd novas, but there are no five minute adventuring days in this campaign. If the warlock/monk is able to survive for sixteen hours without using a single spell slot or ki point, and is willing to gamble that they won't need a single spell slot or ki point for the next eight, more power to them. Go ahead and blast away. :smallbiggrin:

Edit:
I do understand the concern re: doubling or tripling resources of a short rest class. The party was not always this low level - there's some time travel **** going on and they had previously maxed out at around 12.

Edit 2:
The warlock being abducted is already a running joke in this campaign. I think it's happened more than six times so far. Also, monk has a shortbow, high speed and high dex. Fighter throws hand axes for fun and profit.

[Davrix]

Yes, sometimes the monk and warlock are unhappy, and sometimes everybody else is unhappy. If I, as the DM, want to balance the two groups' happiness, I have to take a degree of control over their adventuring day that does not fit in with the campaign style or the plot. This game started in 4e, a game that was extremely well balanced between the classes and could be played in a very freeform manner. Upon switching to 5e, the 'length of the adventuring day' suddenly became a major problem.

I understand your concern about stunlocking and absurd novas, but there are no five minute adventuring days in this campaign. If the warlock/monk is able to survive for sixteen hours without using a single spell slot or ki point, and is willing to gamble that they won't need a single spell slot or ki point for the next eight, more power to them. Go ahead and blast away. :smallbiggrin:


Ah I can provide a bit more help now that I understand you came from 4th. My own table converted abut a year ago from 4th and there have been some growing pains. My paladin had to take a big hit to how he controlled the field vs what he got in 5th. So I now have a better view of what your dealing with here.

My advice do what we did and bend things a little. Offer some extra feats that fit with what they had in 4th. You did say multi-class needs a story reason but they might find better results with multi classing if they look around. Sorc / warlock can be a very good combo along with a monk / fighter. But you have to keep in mind 5th is not 4th and they took the power back A lot from what 4th offered. And trust me I miss my 4th ed days but there is just no support anymore for it so we moved to 5th

So list of things to consider
Check UA for other sub-classes
Award bonus feats to fill out needs of the party members
Don't be afraid to bump them a few more lv's if you want to get to a certain power point. a 10th lv 4t ed character is like only a lv 6 5th I think.
Look to multi-classing for good ideas

And last but not least feel free to home-brew / edit any sub class with powers of the same level. They are fairly modular and while might not be completely balanced you will break your game less by doing this.

Oh and I almost forgot check the DMG it has some additional rules like Marking from 4th that will help with that tactical feel for combat if you want it.

[LordEntrails]

Short rests are 1 hour and you are letting your players take 3-4 of them a day and still get anything done? I mean if a normal day is something like 8 hours of travel and you are using up almost half of that resting...

But, one solution is simple to say that you can not get the benefits of a short rest more than twice per day. You can also then start throwing in some random encounters to disrupt their short rests.

[LeonBH]

The Potential (Houseruled) Solution:

Warlocks have 3x spell slots, but recover them on long rests only.
Monks have 3x ki points, but recover them on long rests only.




My Request:

Please, 5e Maestros, Minmaxers and RAW/RAI experts, break this houserule open. Expose my naivete, and explain why this is a terrible idea.

This is a very sensible house rule, and I encourage you to pursue it.

[sir_argo]

If you track rations and encumbrance, you might consider any rest to use up 1 ration. You are automatically assumed to use up 1 ration at the end of the day. Have any long or short rest use up another. This is just a gameplay mechanic. Most people ignore rations because they have very little to do with the game. Tie them to rests and they become little "potions" that give you the benefits of the rest. It isn't so much, "I have 14 days of rations," as it is, "I have 14 rests." Take 4 short rests in a single day and you're burning through your allotment of rests. Individual characters could decide to get the benefit of a rest or not. "We take a short rest. Everybody who needs the benefit, scratch a ration. If you don't need the benefit, keep your ration--you're on watch." This might motivate the players to use some discretion as to when they take a short rest or not. Obviously, this won't have any effect if you don't track rations or encumbrance, and also it will have near zero effect if there's a Bag of Holding in the party.

[Demonslayer666]

I think the current short rest method works just fine and you don't need a houserule.

Granted, I'm not at your table and seeing what you are experiencing, but I have not seen the monk or warlock outshine anyone with frequent short rests at our table. Their abilities just aren't that significant, and as a player, you never know when you are going to get the next short rest. When I played my warlock, I never spent all my spell slots unless the combat got really hard. I never expected a short rest, I was always concerned the next one would not even come.

If you are tipping your hand and they know they can frequently rest, and as a result they use up all their resources, then you need to mix it up more so they are more worried about not getting one.

[Davrix]

I think the current short rest method works just fine and you don't need a houserule.

Granted, I'm not at your table and seeing what you are experiencing, but I have not seen the monk or warlock outshine anyone with frequent short rests at our table. Their abilities just aren't that significant, and as a player, you never know when you are going to get the next short rest. When I played my warlock, I never spent all my spell slots unless the combat got really hard. I never expected a short rest, I was always concerned the next one would not even come.

If you are tipping your hand and they know they can frequently rest, and as a result they use up all their resources, then you need to mix it up more so they are more worried about not getting one.

The main issue I think is that his players are used to 4th and you COULD do more in 4th and i think his players are just having growing pains with how 5th works vs 4th

[Easy_Lee]

If your players are on board with it, I think it's fine.

Another common one for warlocks is to convert them to use spell points instead of slots so they can choose the level at which to cast their spells and actually make use of spells like Shield. But that's another matter.

[Vaz]

This works perfectly, to the extent that every player has the option in my games to play with the short rest mechanic as a long rest with triple resources. Short rest still exist to allow recovery, and certain things to trigger, such as Arcane Recovery, and the players control as and when they take those rests.

So, let's look at a Warlock.

1 LR, 2 SR is the balance, so 3/6/9/12 spell slots. Any more SR, and LR classes fall behind. Any less, and the SR class falls behind. If the SR class isn't able to utilise those spell slots in each of the 'encounter slots' between midmorning snack, and afternoon tea, then they are at less efectiveness.

The onus is currently on the DM to ensure that a monk or a warlock that utilizes certain abilities isn't being deprived of those abilities, by giving them the same window of opportunity that all other classes do with the same action window.

With this mechanic, you leave the issue of balance to the players. They can choose to use as many stunning strikes, step of the winds, manouevres, spells as there class allows them within the same action window, balanced around the same economy as any other class. However once they've blown their load, that is it. They will modulate themselves, without you massaging the resource the resource teat for them.

[Kane0]

I'd recommend waiting to level 5 or 6 before making the change in any case, level 3 can be really early in the game to change based on what you're seeing from LR classes (especially cleric and wizard who really start picking up speed from 5 onwards).

[Louro]

Stop that short rest dependancy bull****. Send in guards, reinforcements, protection spells that disrupt rest, urgency, URGENCY!!!, chasers, allies with new secondary inminent tasks, random stuff...
Either that or Warlock/monk regain 1 *stuff* per short rest. One or half the stuff.

5e is solid. And it is solid because of its simplicity.

[Easy_Lee]

Stop that short rest dependancy bull****. Send in guards, reinforcements, protection spells that disrupt rest, urgency, URGENCY!!!, chasers, allies with new secondary inminent tasks, random stuff...

I read this often, but this advice does not suit every campaign. If you can imagine a quiet, somber campaign - more Breath of the Wild than Majora's Mask - creating urgency might go against the design.

[Louro]

Ah, that's... You made a point there.

Healing time was obnoxiously long in AD&D, but this granted plenty of time for off-adventuring stuff, which seem to be missing in 5e.
5e is great, as master is not very difficult to have your players on the edge of the TPK following the encounters rules, XP budgets and that. This leads (naturally I think) to a more bloody and exciting sessions, but less character development.

It seems that the players are either adventuring or doing off-adventure stuff.
Just my general impression as master.

[Gryndle]

Setup:

I'm running a narrative-heavy, long-running campaign that has just switched to 5e. I, and all of my players, are pretty new to 5e. The narrative structure and playstyle is such that:
* The characters stick to a pretty sane/realistic sleep and rest cycle. The usual day involves a morning of activity, a lunch break (short rest), and afternoon/evening of activity and then making camp (including a watch cycle) for the night.
* Combat encounters are fairly frequent, but irregular. If they're passing through dangerous territory, they might have 6+ minor combats in a single day, with 3-4 short rests. If they're delving into a specific dangerous location, they might have 2 combats in a row: a medium difficulty 'defeat the guards' then a brutal 'boss+bodyguards' encounter.
* Multiclassing requires a narrative reason and is not limitless. None of my players minmax to a significant degree. RAI beats RAW.

The Issue:

The party has a warlock and a monk, who both are heavy damage dealers, and both restore 90+% of their lethality on a short rest. When I have a lot of minor combats, they tend to utterly outshine the rest of the party. When I have a single major combat (or a string of continuous combats), they're down to the bottom tier.
Edit: I'll say this specifically: I've talked to these players, and they agree that they want their characters to keep the theme+class that they have, but they'd prefer to match the rest of the party in terms of power/flexibility better. This isn't a case of me trying to nerf a couple characters without player consent.



The Potential (Houseruled) Solution:

Warlocks have 3x spell slots, but recover them on long rests only.
Monks have 3x ki points, but recover them on long rests only.




My Request:

Please, 5e Maestros, Minmaxers and RAW/RAI experts, break this houserule open. Expose my naivete, and explain why this is a terrible idea.

This is what we do at our table. 'Short Rest" abilities are instead 3/day or 3/long rest. It does require a certain amount of investment from both players and DM to avoid the 5-minute work day problem. Just be clear with them and enforce that the game world doesn't stop just because they decide to rest.
Once that was established, we haven't had any abuse problems at my table. I push my PCs pretty hard, and they don't try the nova-rest-nova tricks. More than anything they tend to be stingy with resources until they know they are in a serious fight.

[N810]

Maybe just limit them to 3 short rest a day ?
(to prevent abuse)

[rbstr]

Thanks for helping think this through. The reason I'm asking for advice is that I don't want to buff or nerf either of these classes, I just want to find a fair long-rest-style variant for them. I've been convinced already that a straight up 3x multiplier is too much nova for these classes, so I'm looking at 2x and 2.5x.

The balance for the multiplier here is tough. The guidance is ~2 short rest per long. And that number is particularly significant to Warlock since it puts them at roughly the same number of spell points a day as a full caster.
So, if you go less than 3x the Wizard is going to significantly outclass that Warlock in terms of what he can cast. Particularly because the Wizard still has some short-rest slot recovery.
The other aspect of this is that the Warlock is designed around the idea of not using many spells per combat, that's why they've got Eldritch blast, higher hit die, armor proficiency and invocations that cast things without a slot.

My suggestion would be to do 2x and allow one slot to recover per short rest. There won't be so much pressure to conserve, they can't toss 6 fireballs in a row against a boss-monster at level 5, and it preserves the feel of the class somewhat.

If you're stuck on removing short rest recharge then maybe just give them the fullcaster slot progression. Follow the warlock's table for spells-known but add an additional spell known each time they get a Mystic Arcanum. (They'd end with 20 I think)

[Tiadoppler]

This is what we do at our table. 'Short Rest" abilities are instead 3/day or 3/long rest. It does require a certain amount of investment from both players and DM to avoid the 5-minute work day problem. Just be clear with them and enforce that the game world doesn't stop just because they decide to rest.
Once that was established, we haven't had any abuse problems at my table. I push my PCs pretty hard, and they don't try the nova-rest-nova tricks. More than anything they tend to be stingy with resources until they know they are in a serious fight.

Yeah, it does requires a bit of player cooperation, and a game world that keeps moving even when the PCs don't. I've now had the chance to run a combat-heavy session, and a combat-free RP only session using these rules (3x/day), and it's been working very well.

I'm not suggesting that this would work for every campaign, or every group. This party isn't min-maxed, and we're not running pre-made adventures that are balanced for the RAW classes and standard adventuring days.