0
\$\begingroup\$

The long rest rule says, in part:

If the rest is interrupted by a period of strenuous activity—at least 1 hour of walking, fighting, casting spells, or similar adventuring activity—the characters must begin the rest again to gain any benefit from it.

I have always seen this interpreted as:

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.

But recently I saw someone interpret it as:

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.

At which point research reveals this latter interpretation has a significant but not dominant amount of support in internet-argument-land.

I thought I recalled a tweet clarifying that the interpretation not ignoring the 'a period of' part is the correct one, but I have been unable to locate it thus far. Which interpretation is correct?

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ SSD's answer to the linked duplicate points to some relevant Mearls tweets, and I also linked a Crawford tweet in a comment on it. \$\endgroup\$ – V2Blast Aug 22 '19 at 3:23

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.