Playing with the Averages - A simplistic approach

DND_Reborn · Mar 16, 2019

Hi all,

I wanted to mention last week when we played our group tried something a bit different for us.

First, we tried the roll-and-repeat standard initiative system instead of the older roll-every-round variant.
Second, we also used average damage for everything. No rolling. A fireball was simply 28 damage, the rogue's sneak attack added 11 (from 3d6), etc.

While it was definitely different, the game not only played much quicker, but also much more smoothly. Our DM gave each of us a d12 to place in front of us to represent our average weapon damage until he had them memorized. He would glance at it and automatically know how much damage we did. Monsters worked the same, using the average damage listed in the stat blocks.

Sure, sometimes it hurt when I knew that if he had rolled, I might have still been conscious if I was lucky, but instead I went to 0 and my character went down.

We also found the game, for whatever reason, became more narrative and descriptive for all of us. It was strange, I will admit, but very enjoyable.

While I just wanted to share the experience, I was wondering has anyone else experienced anything similar or tried average damage?

MarkB · Mar 16, 2019

An interesting approach. While I don't think I'd run a campaign that way, it'd be good for a combat-heavy one-shot, especially at higher levels.

Ancalagon · Mar 16, 2019

It's been recommended that the DM don't roll for damage to speed things up, but the players too? Intriguing...

One thing that is lost from the damage roll being averaged is the loss of the glancing/heavy blow.

Let's say you are in a big fight with lots of orcs that do 8 points of damage per hit.

If you have 7 hit points left, you *know* that you are going down on the next hit. If you have 9 hit points left, you *know* you can take one (non critical) hit and keep going.

On the other hand, if the orcs do 1d12+2 well... If you have 7 or 9 hit points, you might survive a hit, or you might not.

I'm not sure that this loss of uncertainty is worth the gain in speed?

aco175 · Mar 16, 2019

Looks like it works fine and I see where it may speed some things up. Kind of like stats using standard array instead of rolling. Not sure if I will use it. We tend to like a bit of randomness and the excitement of rolling high or low. I can see a bit of metagaming if I know that the bad guy needs to hit me twice instead of could take me out in one good hit. May changesome actions on healing or movement.

Blue · Mar 16, 2019

I started using average damage for monsters all the time to speed things up last campaign and I'm a convert. Players only have to deal with a single foe and, let's be honest, like rolling dice so I leave them to do so.

EDIT: With some feats and fighting styles that allow re-rolls I would definitely not reduce those to just "math adjustments". The success stories of turning lousy rolls into big damage stays a lot more then the small math adjustment when averaged over all rolls.

Oofta · Mar 16, 2019

I've done this as well for damage for PCs and monsters alike. It really does speed up the game, especially for those people who can't do math quickly in their heads. It also works well for spells with way too many dice to roll (I'm looking at you meteor storm).

Once people got used to it the game goes faster and we can focus more on description and RP. I think a big part of it is that your brain isn't as busy going out of character and focusing on math instead of the scene at hand.

May not work for every group, but I think it can be a better way to play.

GMMichael · Mar 16, 2019

dnd4vr said:
We also found the game, for whatever reason, became more narrative and descriptive for all of us. It was strange, I will admit, but very enjoyable.

While I just wanted to share the experience, I was wondering has anyone else experienced anything similar or tried average damage?

Concur. Take out the dice, and the game becomes less focused on dice.

I leave it as an option for my players, but it's pretty much the rule for me. I'll still roll if it adds dramatic effect, though.

aco175 · Mar 16, 2019

Blue said:
I started using average damage for monsters all the time to speed things up last campaign and I'm a convert. Players only have to deal with a single foe and, let's be honest, like rolling dice so I leave them to do so.

EDIT: With some feats and fighting styles that allow re-rolls I would definitely not reduce those to just "math adjustments". The success stories of turning lousy rolls into big damage stays a lot more then the small math adjustment when averaged over all rolls.

I have the players roll damage against their PCs. It frees me up to focus on other things and speeds play up as well. I haven't found problems with players being the one that kills their PC if it comes to that.

DND_Reborn · Mar 16, 2019

Wow, thanks for all the feedback and opinions!

Ancalagon said:
I'm not sure that this loss of uncertainty is worth the gain in speed?

The loss of randomness, oddly, is hardly noticeable IMO. And the speed is much faster, especially since one player in particular has problems even with simple math due to vision issues.

Blue said:
I started using average damage for monsters all the time to speed things up last campaign and I'm a convert. Players only have to deal with a single foe and, let's be honest, like rolling dice so I leave them to do so.

EDIT: With some feats and fighting styles that allow re-rolls I would definitely not reduce those to just "math adjustments". The success stories of turning lousy rolls into big damage stays a lot more then the small math adjustment when averaged over all rolls.

Hmm... that is a point we haven't addressed yet since they haven't come up. Things like Great Weapon Fighting style where you would reroll 1's and 2's becomes irrelevant. We'll have to give those some thought. Thanks!

Oofta said:
Once people got used to it the game goes faster and we can focus more on description and RP. I think a big part of it is that your brain isn't as busy going out of character and focusing on math instead of the scene at hand.

May not work for every group, but I think it can be a better way to play.

Better or worse depends I suppose, but I definitely like it. It does focus more on other stuff. Why? Not sure, but it does.

DMMike said:
Concur. Take out the dice, and the game becomes less focused on dice.

I leave it as an option for my players, but it's pretty much the rule for me. I'll still roll if it adds dramatic effect, though.

That is a good point. Our DM was thinking about using the average unless it would automatically reduce a character to zero, and then actually roll in those cases to give the character a chance to keep going after the hit. He would also use it for BBEGs, etc.

S'mon · Mar 16, 2019

I sometimes use monster average damage, mostly to take off a load from me in larger fights, or if it's a buckets-of-dice breath weapon. Works well, does speed things up.

Playing with the Averages - A simplistic approach

DND_Reborn

The High Aldwin

MarkB

Legend

Ancalagon

Dusty Dragon

aco175

Legend

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal

Oofta

Legend

GMMichael

Guide of Modos

aco175

Legend

DND_Reborn

The High Aldwin

S'mon

Legend

Similar Threads