D&D 5th Edition There should be an option for 1 minute rounds. - Page 4


What's on your mind?

+ Log in or register to post
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 53
  1. #31
    1 minute rounds has never worked for me. It causes confusion plus it does not follow logically for the game. It always felt right to allow each player to do an single action or perhaps a 2-3 quick actions on their turn. So I was always playing "6 second rounds" before it even was a rule back in 1st edition. So really I was playing segments as rounds. Allowing one player to do multiple consecutive actions before another perform his just doesn't work in a combat situation. Going from 1 minute to the next minute only works in out of combat situations, and that's where it should be used.

    An NPC can mount a horse ride 200 yards away, get behind a gate, close that gate, then lite up a pipe of tobacco. Then I turn to the player on their initiative and say "okay your turn." That's absurd.
    Last edited by hamstertamer; Sunday, 7th October, 2012 at 03:55 PM.

 

  • #32
    Registered User
    Cutpurse (Lvl 5)



    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    NE Kansas
    Posts
    279
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    Ignore ArmoredSaint
    Somebody actually thinks one-minute rounds are a good idea?

    I see absolutely no benefit whatsoever to making the round a minute long.

    In fact, I've always felt that the six-second round was too long; I prefer GURPS's one-second rounds.

    I will, however, accept a six-second round long before I'll accept a one-minute round.

  • #33
    Registered User
    Enchanter (Lvl 12)

    GMforPowergamers's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    City of Sharn
    Posts
    2,881
    Reviews
    Read 2 Reviews

    Ignore GMforPowergamers
    Quote Originally Posted by ArmoredSaint View Post
    Somebody actually thinks one-minute rounds are a good idea?

    I see absolutely no benefit whatsoever to making the round a minute long.

    In fact, I've always felt that the six-second round was too long; I prefer GURPS's one-second rounds.

    I will, however, accept a six-second round long before I'll accept a one-minute round.
    To be honnest i am the exact other end of this, neaither 6 seconds or 1 min are perfect but i will take 1 min over 6 sec every time

    I actualy belive the real answer is in the middle around 20 seconds
    I'm with D&D...Any Edition

  • #34
    Registered User
    Lama (Lvl 13)

    Jeff Carlsen's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Kent, WA
    Posts
    1,405
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews
    Shadowrun

    Ignore Jeff Carlsen
    As someone who usually plays spellcasters, I'm not comfortable with having an adjustable round length. Casting a spell takes a set amount of time. In Third Edition, it takes six seconds. If the DM then says that, for this combat, rounds are one minutes, then I'll expect to be able to cast ten spells per round.

    Ranged attacks are the same.

    The only think I could see working is if the 1 minute round is part of an abstract combat module that addresses these issues. But such a module would have to alter the use of many class abilities that are designed for the less abstract normal combat.
    ApathyGames.com

  • #35
    Registered User
    The Great Druid (Lvl 17)



    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,677
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    Ignore Crazy Jerome
    Quote Originally Posted by GMforPowergamers View Post
    To be honnest i am the exact other end of this, neaither 6 seconds or 1 min are perfect but i will take 1 min over 6 sec every time

    I actualy belive the real answer is in the middle around 20 seconds
    Yes, 10 to 20 seconds is where I'd put it, though I also agree for the need for some scaling. Actually, the problems with 5-6 seconds and also with 1 minute are that they are too far to the extremes of the practical ranges, making the scaling more difficult. If the default is somewhere around 10-15 seconds, then it becomes easier to have modules scale for shorter or longer without so many side effects.

    The 1 minute round is really meant fo dungeon exploration and/or or wilderness skirmishing. It can make sense in that environment, because it's assumed that a great deal of time is spent skulking and moving. For example, "The Howling Tower", a Fafhrd and Gray Mouser early adventure as a scene where they fight some bandits while circling around the woods of a clearing, with said tower in the middle. No one wants to go out in the clearing and give away their position, but no one wants to leave the edge where they can't see the clearing. Everyone in the fight knows this. So you have pauses in the action until two opponents close, whereupon it ends rather quickly.

    Of course, you could also do a hybrid approach that had distinct "skirmish" rounds of longer duration, but then close melee rounds with limited options happening far quicker. Average spell casting to mainly work in the skirmish scale, which puts a caster at a disadvantage in melee (absent certain key spells designed just for that). Something like this might do a better job of handling the pacing (stalking, building action, followed by relatively rapid resolution) than a set scale, and would also enjoy the best of both worlds for ease of play.

  • #36
    Registered User
    The Great Druid (Lvl 17)



    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,482
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews
    Cortex+ZEITGEISTWotBSI Defended The Walls!

    Ignore Neonchameleon
    My communities:

    Quote Originally Posted by slobo777 View Post
    Isn't this ultimately about level of detail you want to "play" as a game.
    Yes. It's about whether you want intense moments and knife edge situations to be treated as intense and knife edge or whether you want to go the Tunnels and Trolls approach of just throwing a bucket of dice and moving past the combat. THe 1 minute rounds are the T&T approach without the good points.

    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?
    The most recent two videos aren't videos of fiction, but videos of training techniques and real world sparring. And were intended to show that (a) that the beats were a lot less than a minute apart and (b) anyone who thinks that you don't have several blows from each side in six seconds hasn't ever held a sword.

    I'd guess that there would be longer rounds with less detail in a lot of written fantasy.
    It depends on the fight and how much is riding on it. And what the protagonists are - whether they are warriors or more likely to want to hide under the table. I could produce very high detail snippets from Oath of Swords and generally less detailed ones from Sheepfarmer's Daughter - both books about D&D inspired Paladins (for those of you who don't know, Sheepfarmer's Daughter is the first of the three parts of the Deed of Paksennarion, and comfortably the best piece of directly and obviously D&D inspired fiction I've ever read - it's also legally free online at the link - so go and read it if you haven't ). But this is another argument for scaling.

    Quote Originally Posted by GMforPowergamers View Post
    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 the engineer you have a point. With the sage you could have said a 30 second summoning ritual rather than a 2 minute one. After all it's magic. And you simply don't tell the PCs how long they need.

    Either that or you do what I'd try as the PCs - to delay the battle and go for razmatazz rather than just grunt holding the line. It's the regroups not the fight itself where the time is really taken up.

    Quote Originally Posted by Crazy Jerome View Post
    The 1 minute round is really meant fo dungeon exploration and/or or wilderness skirmishing.
    This. A thousand times this. If you don't fully engage but just test and retreat then combat should take a long time in world. And when two people close to kill, one will walk out after not very long unless you're talking about two high level combatants swashbuckling.

    Of course, you could also do a hybrid approach that had distinct "skirmish" rounds of longer duration, but then close melee rounds with limited options happening far quicker. Average spell casting to mainly work in the skirmish scale, which puts a caster at a disadvantage in melee (absent certain key spells designed just for that). Something like this might do a better job of handling the pacing (stalking, building action, followed by relatively rapid resolution) than a set scale, and would also enjoy the best of both worlds for ease of play.
    This all works - and keeping the magic users at a disadvantage in combat is not something I see as a bad thing.

  • #37
    Registered User
    Lama (Lvl 13)

    Jeff Carlsen's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Kent, WA
    Posts
    1,405
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews
    Shadowrun

    Ignore Jeff Carlsen
    Quote Originally Posted by Crazy Jerome View Post
    Yes, 10 to 20 seconds is where I'd put it, though I also agree for the need for some scaling. Actually, the problems with 5-6 seconds and also with 1 minute are that they are too far to the extremes of the practical ranges, making the scaling more difficult. If the default is somewhere around 10-15 seconds, then it becomes easier to have modules scale for shorter or longer without so many side effects.

    The 1 minute round is really meant fo dungeon exploration and/or or wilderness skirmishing. It can make sense in that environment, because it's assumed that a great deal of time is spent skulking and moving. For example, "The Howling Tower", a Fafhrd and Gray Mouser early adventure as a scene where they fight some bandits while circling around the woods of a clearing, with said tower in the middle. No one wants to go out in the clearing and give away their position, but no one wants to leave the edge where they can't see the clearing. Everyone in the fight knows this. So you have pauses in the action until two opponents close, whereupon it ends rather quickly.

    Of course, you could also do a hybrid approach that had distinct "skirmish" rounds of longer duration, but then close melee rounds with limited options happening far quicker. Average spell casting to mainly work in the skirmish scale, which puts a caster at a disadvantage in melee (absent certain key spells designed just for that). Something like this might do a better job of handling the pacing (stalking, building action, followed by relatively rapid resolution) than a set scale, and would also enjoy the best of both worlds for ease of play.
    Perhaps it would help if we didn't call the 1 minute duration a round. If it best serves for tracking time and events at the exploration level, it would seem best to focus on that as a mechanic. For now, I'll call it a Segment.


    Segments

    A segment is a set period of time used for tracking player actions when time might matter but you don't need to detail of combat rounds. As DM, you choose how long a segment is (1 minutes, 10 minutes, an hour, etc.) based on the scale needed. In a dungeon with active inhabitants, you might want a one minute segment. When tracking actions in a city, you might choose a one hour segment.

    During each segment, ask the players what their characters do. If there are monsters or other active elements in the vicinity, determine what they do as well. You may want to keep track of this.

    PCs may take whatever actions are reasonable during a segment, and you may determine how long certain actions take. For example, if you're using one minute segments, and a PC wants to search a large room for secret doors, you may determine that doing so will take 3 segments.


    Combat During Segments

    When combat happens, players roll initiative and you start tracking rounds. When combat is finished, you return to tracking in segments. For tracking purposes while using one minute segments, it's usually best to assume that a short combat takes one full segment.

    Sometimes, you may not need to roll initiative for combat, though. A fighter holding a barricade, or a wizard casting a spell at a group of goblins that are out of melee range might best be handled using segments. These are cases that are more story driven than tactical in nature. Use your best judgement. If a situation becomes more complicated, you can always roll initiative.



    With something like this, segments are more of a tool than a mechanic, while still giving you something to hook mechanics onto. For example, random encounters or events might be rolled for each segment. Nothing here is new, but it does provide a name for a unifying concept.
    ApathyGames.com

  • #38
    Registered User


    am181d's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    1,110
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    Ignore am181d
    Quote Originally Posted by GMforPowergamers View Post
    "JUST BUY ME 30 SECONDS" doesnt feel as heroic to my group as " just buy me 5 min" both are 5 rounds
    I may be alone here, but "JUST BUY ME 30 SECONDS" feels a LOT more heroic to me than "just buy me 5 minutes". The shorter time frame suggests more urgency/immediacy, because they're SO CLOSE but not quite there.

    If you really want to cover a longer stretch of time, it feels like they should be attempting not combat delaying tactics anyway. (Barricades, traps, distractions, etc.)

    As a kid playing 1e, I always thought the 1 minute rounds were dopey. I think we house ruled them as 10 seconds pretty early on. I understand why some players who started with (and continued playing with) extended combat rounds might feel attached to them, but I think this is an evolutionary oddity to D&D. D&D was first, and was born of tactical war games that are demonstrably more abstract. Every RPG since has always had rounds substantially shorter than one minute.

    (There's a chance I may be wrong on that last point, and if so I am happy to be corrected.)
    Drew Melbourne,
    DrewMelbourne.com

  • #39
    Quote Originally Posted by am181d View Post
    As a kid playing 1e, I always thought the 1 minute rounds were dopey. I think we house ruled them as 10 seconds pretty early on. I understand why some players who started with (and continued playing with) extended combat rounds might feel attached to them, but I think this is an evolutionary oddity to D&D. D&D was first, and was born of tactical war games that are demonstrably more abstract. Every RPG since has always had rounds substantially shorter than one minute.
    As a 20 year old dude who started with 4e and has not yet played 1e, I always thought the 6 second rounds were dopey. When I read the 1e DMG for the first time a few weeks ago, this quote from Gary rang true (DMG p.61):

    "It would be no great task to devise an elaborate set of rules for highly complex individual combats with rounds of but a few seconds' length. It is not in the best interests of an adventure game, however, to delve too deeply into cut and thrust, parry and riposte...
    "The system of AD&D combat maximizes the sense of hand-to-hand combat and the life-or-death character of melee without undue complication. Because of this, you, the DM, are enabled to conduct such portions of the game without endless resort to charts, tables, procedure clarifications, and over-lengthy time requirements. Players, on the other hand, will not become bored with endless dice rolling and rules consulting, but at the same time will have a reasonable chance to seek escape for their characters should the affair go badly."

    More and more I find that the problems of modern D&D already had solutions in old-school D&D. I was born 30 years too late, dammit.
    Last edited by GX.Sigma; Sunday, 7th October, 2012 at 11:28 PM.

  • #40
    Member SILVER DEFENDER
    Enchanter (Lvl 12)

    Rune's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    2,764
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews
    I Defended The Walls!

    Ignore Rune
    My communities:

    Quote Originally Posted by ArmoredSaint View Post
    Somebody actually thinks one-minute rounds are a good idea?

    ...I will, however, accept a six-second round long before I'll accept a one-minute round.
    I sure am glad I didn't name this thread, "I DEMAND THAT YOU USE ONE MINUTE COMBAT ROUNDS!!!11!!!"

    I see absolutely no benefit whatsoever to making the round a minute long.
    May I direct you to the original post, wherein I provide three such benefits? (Benefits you may well disagree with, but benefits, nonetheless.)


    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Carlsen View Post
    As someone who usually plays spellcasters, I'm not comfortable with having an adjustable round length. Casting a spell takes a set amount of time. In Third Edition, it takes six seconds. If the DM then says that, for this combat, rounds are one minutes, then I'll expect to be able to cast ten spells per round.

    Ranged attacks are the same.
    Now that you mention it, I've never been entirely comfortable with most spells only taking 6 seconds to cast (even with 3e's explanation that they are mostly precast during preparation).

    And most ranged attacks should take longer than 6 seconds to load and aim, also.

    That said, I do favor an approach that decouples mechanics from the round length, so that a sliding scale could be employed (even to rounds as short as one-second, if desired).

    Frankly, this need not even be a module. All it has to be is something the designers pay attention to when designing spell effects & durations, and a few notes to the DM on how shifts along the scale (or "dial," if you prefer) affect the action currency.
    Last edited by Rune; Sunday, 7th October, 2012 at 11:43 PM.

  • + Log in or register to post
    Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

    Similar Threads

    1. 1 minute combat rounds
      By Bullgrit in forum Older D&D Editions and OSR Gaming
      Replies: 16
      Last Post: Friday, 14th October, 2011, 02:33 PM
    2. Help! My etool no longer have in the house rule option the Class option
      By Drusilia in forum Older D&D Editions and OSR Gaming
      Replies: 0
      Last Post: Saturday, 1st September, 2007, 03:54 PM
    3. Combat rounds -- one minute
      By Quasqueton in forum General RPG Discussion
      Replies: 63
      Last Post: Monday, 4th April, 2005, 04:05 PM
    4. rounds
      By Tranzquility in forum General RPG Discussion
      Replies: 3
      Last Post: Monday, 15th November, 2004, 06:19 AM
    5. (OT) What if being able to fire 500,000 rounds a minute is not enough
      By Dagger75 in forum General RPG Discussion
      Replies: 29
      Last Post: Monday, 30th June, 2003, 10:05 AM

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •