Talk:Short Sleeper (3.5e Feat)

Ratings

	Eiji-kun dislikes this article and rated it 1 of 4.
	The feat by itself is a lovely Low feat worth a Like or Favor. The wizard level bit is absolutely a hard no and should be removed for reasons which appear on the discussion page.

Hehehe

Take this 7 times (all of your feats) with a sorcerer 20 and you will get 8 hours->4 hours->2 hours->1 hour->30 min->15 min->7.5 min. Why not wizard 20? Because sorcerers don't have to spend time memorizing. With 2 flaws, human, and 3 human paragon levels for another feat, you can get it down to 7.5 min->3.75 min->1.875 min->9.375 rounds->4.6875 rounds. Now technically, the D&D rule is usually round down, but this would likely be a round up sort of situation. So 5 rounds to get all of your spell slots back. What do you do during those 5 rounds? Time_Stop is a good start. With a rod of extend, that will be pretty close to a 3/day recharge all your spells(on a roll of a 1 you have to wait one more round). I'm not sure if it is possible to cast Time Stop within a Time Stop, but if it is, this build just went infinite because 3 Time Stops will be needed to ensure a recharge and you will have access to 3 at all times. And during that time you can summon a billion monsters and put down a few zillion delayed blast fireballs. --Andrew Arnott (talk, email) 21:32, October 1, 2010 (UTC)

Lol... wut? I don't think that's how it works. Recharging spells isn't about sleeping eight hours (or whatever elves do), it's about resting eight hours. Check it out. So, yeah, you can get it so many times. So what? You'd still have to sit down and stare at blankness for the remaining 7h59min4seconds, waiting for your mind to freshen up (kinda like rebooting the computer methinks). So, no. Simply put, no. What this feat does is allow you to sleep for a short time so you can keep watch/benefit from Heal skill/re-use spell-like abilities. Casting spells is different. Besides, where did you get the idea that sorcerers don't prepare spells? In fact they do. They don't prepare them per se, but they have to meditate for one hour after eight hours of complete rest in order to regain their magical powers.--Soulblazer 87 21:47, October 1, 2010 (UTC)

First off, I was talking about the wizard-level variant (the one that does decrease spell recharge time). Second, the sorcerer does not need to meditate for 1 hour. Where did you get that idea? From Sorcerer:

“	Unlike a wizard or a cleric, a sorcerer need not prepare his spells in advance. He can cast any spell he knows at any time, assuming he has not yet used up his spells per day for that spell level. He does not have to decide ahead of time which spells he’ll cast.	”
—SRD

.

Seems to work to me, unless I'm missing something. --Andrew Arnott (talk, email) 21:54, October 1, 2010 (UTC)

Looks like sorcerers do have to spend 15 min readying (See: SRD:Arcane_Spells#Daily_Readying_of_Spells). Darn. No infinite timestopping with this feat :(. --Andrew Arnott (talk, email) 22:08, October 1, 2010 (UTC)

I'll eat my words again. Apparently a Psion or better yet, Wilder can go crazy nuts with Temporal Acceleration (See SRD:Psionic_Powers_and_Power_Points#Regaining_Power_Points). --Andrew Arnott (talk, email) 22:14, October 1, 2010 (UTC)

It'll take you a whole 6 rounds to get your power points back, which is more than the length of your Temporal Acceleration. Also, you've just spent enough feats to get you 3 or 4 stupid game-breaking combos, but you're only getting one. --Foxwarrior 04:27, October 2, 2010 (UTC)

There's no reason that I can see that you can't manifest Temporal Acceleration while inside a Temporal Acceleration. I'd hope by level 20 you'd be capable of manifesting it several times with some PP to spare. --Andrew Arnott (talk, email) 14:56, October 2, 2010 (UTC)

I suppose you could, but then you'd have to add to your resting time (either 1 hour or 1 round, depending on whether you can divide it with this). If it's 1 round then you do get infinite time, I suppose. That would be a little excessive. Is it excessive enough that I should limit it so you can't take the feat more than 5 times? --Foxwarrior 19:14, October 2, 2010 (UTC)

Or you can just say that it doesn't reduce the time you need to rest to recover spells. Just like being an elf doesn't reduce the time needed to memorize (wizzies), meditate (sorcies) or seriously take a nap (psions). At least, that's how it went in 3e. So, even if you have it 9.999 times (shout out to FF), you'd still need to wait eight hours. It would help with things like fatigue or heal checks. Not to mention crafting, after all, the work day is eight hours long. If you only need 30seconds to rest, you can pull three work days per day without a problem.--Soulblazer 87 19:37, October 2, 2010 (UTC)

Magical crafting wouldn't work if it didn't reduce that time; You do have to cast the prerequisite spell(s) during the work day, so they would count against your limit and you'd be ruined. It would help you, yes, but not nearly as much as taking half a dozen Spellcasting feats. --Foxwarrior 19:48, October 2, 2010 (UTC)

I meant non-magical crafting. Besides, if we really wanna go in the real power of gamebreaking, this feat just doesn't cut it. But it could let you forge a sword, enchant an item and heal someone. Until you burn your spells out or something of course. Also, it would really help against ambushes, which I personally love using.--Soulblazer 87 20:26, October 2, 2010 (UTC)

Infinite summoning is still a little bit game-breaking, isn't it? Also, if you're going to do non-magical crafting, you don't deserve to be a caster. Being a creature that doesn't need to sleep is a far more efficient way of reducing your normal rest time; taking this feat a half-dozen times is a silly alternative unless you're a Nonlinear Fighter. --Foxwarrior 20:22, October 2, 2010 (UTC)

Of course on both accounts. I agree completely. --Soulblazer 87 20:26, October 2, 2010 (UTC)The point however was about whether it was possible, not logical to take this feat so many times. Once or twice is enough for me, and even that's a stretch. It would be annoying to just say 'Oh, I went unconscious. I shall wake up after sleeping for six rounds'. Sure to make the DM look at you with a WTF?!? look.--Soulblazer 87 20:44, October 2, 2010 (UTC)

You're a level 20 Wizard-level character. If you don't make the DM look at you with a WTF?!? look every once in a while, you're doing it wrong. --Foxwarrior 20:32, October 2, 2010 (UTC)

Point taken. There's just many other ways to do it, rather than wasting a dozen feats to do it. Unless you can undo it via Wish. Heck, weirder things have happened.--Soulblazer 87 20:44, October 2, 2010 (UTC)

A random point from the world of science: this feat would cause long term brain damage. the standard unit of sleep is 1 hour, 30 minutes, aka the Rapid Eye Movement cycle (REM). Really what I would do is have this feat take an hour and a half off how long you sleep, to the limit of an hour and a half. Then this feat would be less retarded, more balanced and have the element of science!--Teh Storm 08:36, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

What's the standard unit of sleep for a Gibbering Mouther? --Foxwarrior 08:40, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

Aberration is the type used for Lovecraftian monsters, and those never sleep. Everyone knows that.--Teh Storm 08:42, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

Don't be so ignorant. Do the research. --Foxwarrior 08:45, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

And thank you for providing a link that prove my theory. Seriously, the very first blurb is the criteria used to determine the "validity" of a monster in Lovecraft fanfic.--Teh Storm 08:50, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

No no no no no. It says "Aberrations eat, sleep, and breathe." Which means that they sleep. When I provide you with a link, that almost always means I've read it in order to make sure it proves my point. --Foxwarrior 08:54, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

So when do GMs sleep? 'cause I have a barbarian who wants his arm back... --Teh Storm 08:56, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

DMs don't sleep. They are worse than aberrations. Heck, they are worse than Cthulhu itself! Burn the heretics!!! BUUURN THEMZ!!!--Soulblazer 87 09:03, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

I meant Gibbering Mouthers. And seeing as how I've been on both sides of the screen... I agree completely. GMs are slimy rat bastards!--Teh Storm 09:06, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

REM

Above, Fox brought up an excellent point that makes this feat even worse- how long do D&D creatures sleep? For all I know my girlfriends felid ranger need 20 hours a day! Or a dragon taking this feat... what the hell would that mean? Does the dragon now only need 10 minutes, hours or days?--Teh Storm 09:09, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

Sudden brain storm- should we have, on this wiki, a list of references for AD&D? I just remembered that AD&DMM listed the time of activity (diurnal, nocturnal, etc.) for each entry, and that might help this feat. Or condemn it to the rejection pile of shame. either one of them two...--Teh Storm 09:21, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

For the sake of simpleness, it is assumed that each creature needs to sleep 8 hours unless otherwise specified. REM isn't mentioned in the SRD/WOTC books, so it doesn't actually exist without variants; variants that would make FATAL look good. --Havvy 09:08, October 5, 2010 (UTC)

Until a pesky player like me shows up at your table with weird questions that turn out to be super important. It's players like me that get your acid breathing dragon killed because you told him that they have a reptilian digestive system (shoulda gone with avian...), or demand that the cat-thing he is torturing should be getting worse at resisting on the basis that he is using sleep deprivation and denying it the full 20 hours cats need, or permanently disable all your recurring villain by making called shots to the spine. While not every detail is important, if you are making a feat that reduces sleep time, you better know how long things sleep.--Teh Storm 06:55, October 6, 2010 (UTC)

And then an irritated DM like me allows you to find the Doom Stone. Thanks for playing, cya next week, maybe you won't try to break the rules with retarded things like called shots which don't even exist in D&D for that every reason next time. kthxbai --Ghostwheel 07:31, October 6, 2010 (UTC)

i second that motion.--Stryker-Fyre 07:32, October 6, 2010 (UTC)

Crippling a recurring villain via mere paralysis isn't likely to stick in a game system where *death* isn't a guarantee that they won't come back. --Quantumboost 07:37, October 6, 2010 (UTC)

Called shots are a listed variant in the DMG. Any other rules I "broke"?--Teh Storm 08:14, October 6, 2010 (UTC)

You're wrong. Please stop making incorrect statements, or I'm going to start accusing you of either being stupid or lying. -2 to a check, according to the "damage to specific areas" variant rule, is far from severing someone's spine and paralyzing them forever. --Ghostwheel 08:28, October 6, 2010 (UTC)

-2 to fucking everything you do is close enough, if you want to be vindictive about interpretations of a variant rule.--Teh Storm 08:33, October 6, 2010 (UTC)

I had hope for you. I see it is mistaken. --Foxwarrior 08:36, October 6, 2010 (UTC)

-2 is miles and miles and miles away and over the rainbow from being paralyzed, but cool story,bro. kthnxbai.--Stryker-Fyre 08:39, October 6, 2010 (UTC)

So which is it? Lying, or just stupid? --Ghostwheel 08:44, October 6, 2010 (UTC)

You sited the same rule I sited. My interpretation brought in medical knowledge and personal experience. Your interpretation is declaring the rule "as is" despite it being clear that target the specified location of the back of the neck would result in much more than a -2 to something. I'll let you judge.--Teh Storm 08:48, October 6, 2010 (UTC)

Just stupid then? Gotcha. --Ghostwheel 08:56, October 6, 2010 (UTC)

I think this has some relevance--Stryker-Fyre 08:59, October 6, 2010 (UTC)

Ghost, I need to make this clear: while I hate your gods damned miniscule box that you seem to enjoy living in, I respect and admire that you can think and think well. We need more people like you, just not as any kind of lawyer.--Teh Storm 09:03, October 6, 2010 (UTC)

Ooooh, does my li'l box come with cable? But srsly, you just wrote a blog on how D&D doesn't coincide with the real world virtually whatsoever. So any "knowledge" or whatever else you're trying to pimp that you know is worthless here, and your "interpretation" of a variant rule that breaks the game is not only useless, but detrimental to the game at large. I'm not sure how I can impress upon you the retardedness of such a misconstruction of a variant rule, but there it is. If you want something with more "realism", including actual rules for called shots, I once more recommend you look at the Grim-N-Gritty system. For some rules that balance that even better, I recommend using the first two points here (E6 and minor changes to GnG). --Ghostwheel 09:50, October 6, 2010 (UTC)