Set damage for summons and stooges

One issue that has come up at tables is how summoned creatures take time to run. I've seen good advice to just let other players run them (NOT the caster), but I was also thinking about how much time they add.

Then I was thinking about the same thing from the DM side, where if you want a horde of stooges it's still a lot of individual rolls to hit. Even D&D 4e Mooks or 13th Age Minions still require rolls to hit.

It occured to me, what if all summons, and any foes way below the PC's level did flat damage - no roll needed. Take the average damage listed in the MM and halve it. Round down, because your AC has probably gone up since the levels they were relevant.

So if your 12th level cleric was surrounded by eight goblins, that's just "16 damage" (5 / 2 round down = 2). No need for eight to-hit rolls.

YES, those with very high ACs would suffer, but the amount would probably only be a few HPs in any given fight - within variation easily.

The idea is that hordes are only interesting in numbers, and the DM can run enough numbers to be interesting without slowing things down too far. And that PC summons are run quicker as well, not needing dice rolls most of the time.

Why not scale the fraction based on relative accuracy? If There are ten goblins, and they would hit on a 17, then deal full damage from two of the goblins.

I have always been tempted to treat a horde of flunkies as a swarm, with anyone in the horde's space taking a set amount of damage per round unless they have uncanny dodge (or are immune/resistant to the horde's damage type). As for how much damage, that depends on how serious a threat the horde should be, from one flunky's average hit damage to 8 flunky's average hit damage. Ditto the horde's hitpoints. AOE would do double damage to the horde.

Saelorn said:

Why not scale the fraction based on relative accuracy? If There are ten goblins, and they would hit on a 17, then deal full damage from two of the goblins.

Click to expand...

Because I can't do that math as quickly as multiplying two integers. Trying to work out fractions and having different damage for every character (as their AC varies) would lose all the time saved by not rolling to hit. That doesn't meet the stated goals.

If you can work out "I have +8 with this monster and they have an AC of 16 so I need an 8 or higher which is 13/20 so what's 13/20s of 17 damage?" quickly in your head and that extra exactness to eliminate 1 HP per attack inaccuracy will increase your fun enough, then go for it.

MechaTarrasque said:

I have always been tempted to treat a horde of flunkies as a swarm, with anyone in the horde's space taking a set amount of damage per round unless they have uncanny dodge (or are immune/resistant to the horde's damage type). As for how much damage, that depends on how serious a threat the horde should be, from one flunky's average hit damage to 8 flunky's average hit damage. Ditto the horde's hitpoints. AOE would do double damage to the horde.

Click to expand...

This is sort of like that for damage, but still pays attention to the tactics and being able to stop enemies from getting to all targets in all numbers.

As for HPs, I yoinked 13th Age's Mooks rules. If eight goblins have 12 HP each, I just do a pool of 96 HPs for them, killing one off every 12 HP dealt. So yes, a crit might kill two - and I'm fine with that. I just have the player describe how they cleave or whatever. Comes across suitable heroic for the type of game I run, though wouldn't be what I used for grimdark low fantasy.

Blue said:

Because I can't do that math as quickly as multiplying two integers. Trying to work out fractions and having different damage for every character (as their AC varies) would lose all the time saved by not rolling to hit. That doesn't meet the stated goals.

If you can work out "I have +8 with this monster and they have an AC of 16 so I need an 8 or higher which is 13/20 so what's 13/20s of 17 damage?" quickly in your head and that extra exactness to eliminate 1 HP per attack inaccuracy will increase your fun enough, then go for it.

Click to expand...

Many characters spend class features on defense. They make tradeoffs like getting a higher Strength to wear heavy armor. They take spells like Shield or take Defensive Fighting or feats like Heavy Armor Mastery or cast spells that grant disadvantage or take actions to help them deflect attacks. If the party pools resources to buy full plate, they kind of expect it to work like it says it does. It's just cheating the players to ignore that. You also have to consider that eliminating all die rolls will eliminate the tension from a lot of combats. The players know exactly what will happen. There's never going to be a spike in damage. They're never going to catch a lucky break.

Average damage alone is perfectly fine and a good compromise. And I mean... if you don't want to roll 8 attack rolls, maybe don't put 8 trash NPCs in the encounter? Ignoring attack rolls and just assigning 50% damage is lame. It punishes characters with defensive features, and detracts from the unpredictable nature of the game that many players thrive on. Just don't run that encounter if you hate it so much or roll all the attack dice at once. If you really need it to speed up, find a game manager that will roll all the attacks and damage for you.

Blue said:

Because I can't do that math as quickly as multiplying two integers. Trying to work out fractions and having different damage for every character (as their AC varies) would lose all the time saved by not rolling to hit. That doesn't meet the stated goals.

Click to expand...

If it helps, you only need to be accurate in your math to within the fraction that you're rounding. So if you're only attacking with eight enemies, you only need to intuit their accuracy to within 12.5 percent. If you think their accuracy is closer to three-eighths than to two-eighths or four-eighths, then you can say that three of the eight hit. It's the exact same strategy as is used to speed up mass combats, where you assume the full distribution of 1-20 on attack rolls for each twenty attackers.

Although, if 50 percent is actually a reasonable guess for their accuracy (to within whatever tolerance you care about), then your method could also work. Even if you do that, though, I would seriously recommend that you have half of the attackers hit and the other half miss. Changing it to perfect accuracy for half damage really doesn't sit well with me.