D&D 5E There should be an option for 1 minute rounds.

Jeff Carlsen · Oct 6, 2012

Neonchameleon said:
OK. So you're changing the argument. No longer that six second exchanges being an abstraction of a flurry of blows is ridiculous (which I believe I've proved it isn't), but you find that one minute combat rounds can cover everything and fast.

The reason one minute combat rounds are horrible isn't shown by a duel. In a duel you don't need to refocus - which is when you really need to take control of your PC. Better would be Legolas vs the Oliphaunt (see clip below if you don't know the scene). Awesome scene, epic battle - and you want to make it into a single round with Legolas one-shotting everything in a single round. To me there are at least four separate decision points, three of which are unfolding as a response to what else happened.

1: Legolas jumped on the oliphaunt
2: Having swung to safety he shot the guards off the back. (And remember that those are separate targets).
3: Legolas cuts the howdah with his dagger.
4: Legolas shoots the Oliphaunt in the back of the head.

Now I take the idea that you shouldn't tie combat to set amounts of time. But I make that at least four major actions with completely distinct intent - or four rounds at a bare minimum. (It's entirely possible to argue for more). And the Oliphaunt should not be the victim of a one-shot attack. It's even clearer in skirmish fights such as in 300 or Troy.

Legolas kills the Oliphaunt - YouTube

That's a very solid example. There are a number of things that feel like rounds:

Running (movement) and then jumping onto the oliphaunt (action).
Leaping from the front leg to the rear (action) and then climbing (movement)
Shooting arrows at the orcs (action) while dodging their attacks. Also, a Dex check to keep his balance.
Cutting the howdah (action), and running to the oliphaunt's head (movement). Also, a Dex check to keep his balance.
Killing the oliphaunt (action, probably with an ability like Deadly Strike), sliding down the trunk (movement, Dex check). Gimli shouts, "That still only counts as one!" as a free action.

The whole scene lasts one minutes and fifteen seconds, making each round approximately fifteen seconds. That's right in the pocket for what I was suggesting above.

Ahnehnois · Oct 6, 2012

I prefer the six-second round, but I wouldn't mind seeing some other options in the rules.

Rune · Oct 6, 2012

B.T. said:
Why can I only attack one person in 60 seconds?
Why can I only shoot one arrow?

Neither of these were true in either of the two editions that used one-minute rounds. I suspect that D&D Next could provide much the same solution--multiple attacks.

How long does it take to reload a crossbow?
How long does it take to retrieve an item in my pack?

Depends on the crossbow, but I imagine reloading it would either be an entire round's action, or no significant action at all.

Similarly, it seems entirely reasonable for someone to take a full minute to take off a pack, rifle through it, and then pull out something specific, but easily accessed items would take no significant action at all.

What happens if I want to hunt through my inventory, retrieve a potion, move over to my unconscious friend, and it feed it to him?

If the potion was buried on the bottom of the pack, I'd say two rounds. If it was kept handy in a belt-pouch, one. Keep in mind, as mentioned in the OP, characters would likely be able to traverse any distance of the skirmish-scale battlefield to get to their allies, so the main limiting factor is not distance, but rather what obstacles bar the way.

There are ways to deal with this (most sensibly by giving characters more actions, though this can cause problems) but I really don't want to play with 2e's combat system.

I definitely don't plan to return to 2e's optional initiative system (although I don't want cyclical initiative, anymore, either), but as for the rest...that's why I said "option."

Blackwarder · Oct 7, 2012

Neonchameleon said:
OK. So you're changing the argument. No longer that six second exchanges being an abstraction of a flurry of blows is ridiculous (which I believe I've proved it isn't), but you find that one minute combat rounds can cover everything and fast.

I am not changing anything, it all fine and dandy using rapiers for your example, try doing so with an axe or a broadsword... And try sticking some distanc closing in it, now try to find an explanation for having two attacks, or three or four...

As for the Legolas example, I have no idea why you feel that every decision point should be a round, if they were than every guy on that Oliphant would have made a pin cushion out of Legolas.

Rounds are just a way of keeping track of what is happening, the way I see it is one guy, with multiple attacks, telling the DM that he wants to try and jump on the Oliphant and kill it. All the moves eats part of his movment budget for the round (if we are using 2e than 120 yards is more than enough) and most of his actions eats his attack actions.

We actually had somthing similar in one of our games where a Drizztclone ranger jumped on the back of archers carrying dragon from the top of a tower, killed two of them and then failed a balance check (or save I don't really remember it was ten years ago) when the dragon tried to kick him off falling 100 feet to his death only to be saved by my feather fall spell.

All of this has taken about 5 minutes of real time, was told in a futile and exciting way and left a lasting impresion that remained fresh in my mind for ten years. That's a good thing in my book.

Warder

Blackwarder · Oct 7, 2012

Jeff Carlsen said:
That's a very solid example. There are a number of things that feel like rounds:

Running (movement) and then jumping onto the oliphaunt (action).

Leaping from the front leg to the rear (action) and then climbing (movement)

Shooting arrows at the orcs (action) while dodging their attacks. Also, a Dex check to keep his balance.

Cutting the howdah (action), and running to the oliphaunt's head (movement). Also, a Dex check to keep his balance.

Killing the oliphaunt (action, probably with an ability like Deadly Strike), sliding down the trunk (movement, Dex check). Gimli shouts, "That still only counts as one!" as a free action.

The whole scene lasts one minutes and fifteen seconds, making each round approximately fifteen seconds. That's right in the pocket for what I was suggesting above.

I beg to differ:

Running (movement) and then jumping onto the oliphaunt (also movement).
Leaping from the front leg to the rear (movement) and then climbing (movement)
Shooting arrows at the orcs (action) while dodging their attacks. Also, a Dex check to keep his balance.
Cutting the howdah (action), and running to the oliphaunt's head (movement). Also, a Dex check to keep his balance.
Killing the oliphaunt (action, probably with an ability like Deadly Strike), sliding down the trunk (movement, no Dex check, he is Legolas, probably got 20 DEX). Gimli shouts, "That still only counts as one!" as a free action.

I have no idea how many arrows Legolas can shoot in a minute, my guess is a lot! Which is what I would expect from a fighter with bow specialization.

Warder

Lanefan · Oct 7, 2012

We used 1-minute rounds back in the early days but eventually switched to 30-second rounds and have stayed with that for 20+ years. That said, there's times when the round length needs to be variable - ship-vs.-ship naval combat, for example, might use about a 5-minute round; while psyonic combats might have a round length measured in microseconds.

30 seconds is also handy in that it (like 1 minute) is nicely divisible by 6, which is the die we roll for initiative; giving 5-second segments.

Lanefan

Neonchameleon · Oct 7, 2012

Blackwarder said:
I am not changing anything, it all fine and dandy using rapiers for your example, try doing so with an axe or a broadsword...

What length axe? Axe combat below (axe and shield vs two handed axe). It's slightly slower than sword combat, but only slightly - five slow motion exchanges in thirty seven seconds (note that it's never the first attack that hits). And each one is a complete exchange, taking the enemy off balance and with a reprise attack rather than a single blow. Below that is Hammaborg having six sparring matches in thirty eight seconds (8 second intro), most of them having a nice exchange of a handful of blows and ending up with someone losing hard. (Also when counting the blows, remember to count the shield attacks - the Hammaborg group leads with the edge of their shields.) Six seconds is a good length for an exchange.

Note that dane axe (or other long axe) vs shield looks slower because against a swordsman a lot of the time you use the long axe as a spear to fend them off.

And try sticking some distanc closing in it, now try to find an explanation for having two attacks, or three or four...

Closing works. I'm not defending iterative attacks as a general principle.

As for the Legolas example, I have no idea why you feel that every decision point should be a round, if they were than every guy on that Oliphant would have made a pin cushion out of Legolas.

The ones at the front were out of line of sight of him and didn't know there was a maniac on the back of the oliphaunt - all they saw was someone heading for its trunk then disappearing under its feet. Of the four at the back who could see him, he shot one with surprise. He beat the second on the draw. The third, fourth, and fifth all tried charging him. All the ones who knew he was there had a chance in between him landing on the back of the oliphaunt and diving to cut the rope. The ones who were still on the howdah were all on the front, facing forwards and never realised what he was up to. It was, after all, in the middle of a major battle. Objection denied.

Rounds are just a way of keeping track of what is happening, the way I see it is one guy, with multiple attacks, telling the DM that he wants to try and jump on the Oliphant and kill it. All the moves eats part of his movment budget for the round (if we are using 2e than 120 yards is more than enough) and most of his actions eats his attack actions.

Even your analysis above has three actions in it (one for the orcs at the back, one for the howdah, one for the oliphaunt. Interestingly they happen 20 seconds apart giving a 20 second combat round for what is ultimately an epic boss fight. (I've no objection to making combat rounds variable with naval combat being as long as five minutes per round as suggested by @Lanefan).

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgu6L6HHHvw&feature=related]Viking Axe Combat Moves - YouTube[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3MWvNDKdKpQ&feature=related]Large shield freefights - YouTube[/ame]

Rune · Oct 7, 2012

Jeff Carlsen said:
That's a very solid example. There are a number of things that feel like rounds:

Running (movement) and then jumping onto the oliphaunt (action).

Leaping from the front leg to the rear (action) and then climbing (movement)

Shooting arrows at the orcs (action) while dodging their attacks. Also, a Dex check to keep his balance.

Cutting the howdah (action), and running to the oliphaunt's head (movement). Also, a Dex check to keep his balance.

Killing the oliphaunt (action, probably with an ability like Deadly Strike), sliding down the trunk (movement, Dex check). Gimli shouts, "That still only counts as one!" as a free action.

The whole scene lasts one minutes and fifteen seconds, making each round approximately fifteen seconds. That's right in the pocket for what I was suggesting above.

Blackwarder said:
I beg to differ:

Running (movement) and then jumping onto the oliphaunt (also movement).

Leaping from the front leg to the rear (movement) and then climbing (movement)

Shooting arrows at the orcs (action) while dodging their attacks. Also, a Dex check to keep his balance.

Cutting the howdah (action), and running to the oliphaunt's head (movement). Also, a Dex check to keep his balance.

Killing the oliphaunt (action, probably with an ability like Deadly Strike), sliding down the trunk (movement, no Dex check, he is Legolas, probably got 20 DEX). Gimli shouts, "That still only counts as one!" as a free action.

I have no idea how many arrows Legolas can shoot in a minute, my guess is a lot! Which is what I would expect from a fighter with bow specialization.

Warder

These are two very good examples of how both approaches work--hence the desire for an option to slide the scale.

slobo777 · Oct 7, 2012

Isn't this ultimately about level of detail you want to "play" as a game.

It is interesting that all the examples of combat so far are from video. Anyone wanting to run D&D adventures inspired by written fiction? I'd guess that there would be longer rounds with less detail in a lot of written fantasy.

I'd really like rules that supported zoom in and out of levels of detail within an adventure. Even within an encounter. I do just a little of this in 4E, but nowhere near as much as I'd like, as all the PC combat abilities are set up for high detail, anything else is ad-libbing.

I'm not so sure about 1-minute "rounds" in a turn-based skirmish combat system. Movement would need a lot of adjudication. Also, things that enemies could reasonably do to oppose or prevent an action will need to be factored in somehow. A spellcaster stands 20 feet away from a horde of combat-ready orcs, rifles through his or her backback to find the right wand, and then blasts them with a complex spell? At the very least the story needs to explain the orcs' reticence to immediately leap on the magic user . . . If we end up with multiple reactions, zones of influence and other rules complexities to account for this, then we haven't really won as much as I'd like by "zooming out" to 1 minute. Edit: What I'm worried about is "fixed 1 minute" rounds. Some fluidity and not sweating the details might work better.

GMforPowergamers · Oct 7, 2012

Way back in 2e there was a type of encounter i could run with 1 min rounds that has failed in 3e 3.5 4e and 4ee although i have not tried in next nothing I have seen makes it look any better.

Something is happening and my sage or engeneer NPC says he can fix it, but he needs time, the PCs need to buy him that time. With 6 second rounds saying buy me 2 minites means 20 rounds of combat. Andeven 10 or 8 combat rounds are hard.

Ex 1: the clockwork mage Back in 2e I had a arcane machine that was charged with necritic energy. It was gringing up a dungeon and spiting out whights and allips. The wiz/Ranger Pc had the plans and new just attacking it could blow it up. HE told the other Pcs he needed 10 mins to find the weak spot and turn it off safely... so 5 other PCs went to bottle neck the monsters and buy him the time he needed.

Ex 2: the mithral golem (my 1st 3e game 3 or 4 years later) wanting my low level pcs to help fight off a 60ft tall super golem who was supported by goblins and kobolds I had an NPC tell them he could summon a great dragon if they could keep the hoard off him for 5 2 min. By round 8 all 30 something monsters were killed and the whloe thing became a story point... but there was no way the PCs could keep fightung if I threw more monsters.

"JUST BUY ME 30 SECONDS" doesnt feel as heroic to my group as " just buy me 5 min" both are 5 rounds