Why is 4E so grindy?
- Thread starter Shazman
- Start date
It's grindy because the designers wanted monsters to hang around long enough to use their powers, and tactical situations enough time to develop in interesting ways. They wanted to get away from the 3e 3-round fight towards more of a 6-round fight as standard.
I think this works well for big set-piece battles, but can be a problem in conjunction with 4e's emphasis on having several fights in an adventuring day.
One thing I often do is halve monster hp (especially on Elites and higher-than-party- level monsters), count them as 2/3 XP, and increase their number by 50%. This gives increased damage output with reduced staying power, and I find it reduces grind quite considerably.
I think this works well for big set-piece battles, but can be a problem in conjunction with 4e's emphasis on having several fights in an adventuring day.
One thing I often do is halve monster hp (especially on Elites and higher-than-party- level monsters), count them as 2/3 XP, and increase their number by 50%. This gives increased damage output with reduced staying power, and I find it reduces grind quite considerably.
JediSoth
Voice Over Artist & Author
I've often wondered this myself. I DMed about 5 sessions of 4E, and while most of the combats weren't too bad, there were a couple of extended ones, including one that lasted the entire game session (about 5 hours). The characters were only about 3rd level.
I encountered it at Gen Con, too, where one combats during the Dungeon Crawl Classics tournament took up 3 hours of the 4-hour time slot. Of course, both the Paladin and the Fighter were petrified near the beginning of that combat (against a gorgon and a manticore), so that probably contributed. Not a lot of fun for the players of those two characters, though, since they just got to sit around and watch for several hours while the combat ground on and on and on.
I encountered it at Gen Con, too, where one combats during the Dungeon Crawl Classics tournament took up 3 hours of the 4-hour time slot. Of course, both the Paladin and the Fighter were petrified near the beginning of that combat (against a gorgon and a manticore), so that probably contributed. Not a lot of fun for the players of those two characters, though, since they just got to sit around and watch for several hours while the combat ground on and on and on.
Piratecat
Sesquipedalian
All your questions are answered here:
http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/254630-stalker0s-guide-anti-grind.html
I found this thread incredibly helpful.
http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/254630-stalker0s-guide-anti-grind.html
I found this thread incredibly helpful.
Here's my take on why...
A lot of gamers like playing tactical combat games. For them, combat should last long enough for there to be multiple decisions made, and for those decisions to have impact - if the fight is too "swingy", then player choices have less impact.
From there - it is a fine, fine line between a combat that is long enough for you to use your possibilities in interesting ways, and a grind. It seems to me that small variances in luck turn a fun tactical exercise into slugging it out with at-wills until one side or another is finished off.
That seems the probably "why?" The question left is how to better ensure you're on one side of that fine line, and not the other.
A lot of gamers like playing tactical combat games. For them, combat should last long enough for there to be multiple decisions made, and for those decisions to have impact - if the fight is too "swingy", then player choices have less impact.
From there - it is a fine, fine line between a combat that is long enough for you to use your possibilities in interesting ways, and a grind. It seems to me that small variances in luck turn a fun tactical exercise into slugging it out with at-wills until one side or another is finished off.
That seems the probably "why?" The question left is how to better ensure you're on one side of that fine line, and not the other.
The only times I've encountered a problem with grind in 4e have been when 1) The players are new and aren't familiar with how to use their powers synergistically with each other; and 2) on the 5th or 6th encounter between extended rests when everyone has used their daily powers, most of their healing surges and action points. Even then, #2 doesn't happen with every fight, usually only against encounters against Solos or against party level +2 or more challenges.
I have encountered complaints about grind at other times, mostly from players who are more accustomed to other games, like AD&D, 3e, Savage Worlds and C&C where combats tend to be just a few rounds or the rounds go much, much quicker because of the less tactical nature of combat. I don't really consider these instances of grind, however, because the issue wasn't that the monsters were sticking around for many rounds while the PCs whittled away a few HPs each round. The issue was just that the fight was lasting longer than 10 minutes real time (even though there were a lot of interesting things happening during each round). In those instances, I don't think there was anything wrong with the 4e system per se, I think 4e just wasn't a good match for those players.
I have encountered complaints about grind at other times, mostly from players who are more accustomed to other games, like AD&D, 3e, Savage Worlds and C&C where combats tend to be just a few rounds or the rounds go much, much quicker because of the less tactical nature of combat. I don't really consider these instances of grind, however, because the issue wasn't that the monsters were sticking around for many rounds while the PCs whittled away a few HPs each round. The issue was just that the fight was lasting longer than 10 minutes real time (even though there were a lot of interesting things happening during each round). In those instances, I don't think there was anything wrong with the 4e system per se, I think 4e just wasn't a good match for those players.
Obryn
Hero
I think the main difference in 4e is that there aren't any "minor" combats. I'm finding that fights take about the same time as they did in mid-level 3.5, overall, but that there's less variability in their duration. I don't consider it a grind most of the time, though - that's a rather loaded term. I do think it's fair to say that if you like short, random encounters you'd be better served by OD&D, RC, or 1e.
-O
-O
JediSoth
Voice Over Artist & Author
That's a good point. When ever I run something other than D&D, one of my players inevitably looks for something to use as a miniature and makes me break out graph paper so he can tactically plan out his characters combat actions. It's irritating when I'm trying to run something fast, loose, and off-the-cuff.
The_Gneech
Explorer
My experience as a 4E player was that we'd burn up our encounter powers in the first couple of rounds, and then spend the rest of the fight hitting at-wills until the monsters finally ran out of hit points. The weird bit was that our strikers never seemed able to hit anything (we called our party "The Missed-By-Ones"), which didn't help. Playing a warlord, I was constantly moving the strikers into position, only to have them completely unable to do anything once they were there.
We went through the entirety of Keep on the Shadowfell and stopped there, plus one session of a homebrew that I was the GM for, and again the same thing happened (striker never could land a hit).
Presumably if you manage to get some member of the party actually doing damage, that would speed things up a bit.
-The Gneech
We went through the entirety of Keep on the Shadowfell and stopped there, plus one session of a homebrew that I was the GM for, and again the same thing happened (striker never could land a hit).
Presumably if you manage to get some member of the party actually doing damage, that would speed things up a bit.
-The Gneech
