4e One-trick ponies: Why is it the DM's fault about combat grind?

[Hella_Tellah]

In addition, let me remind everyone that an Intimidate check vs. Will defense can force a bloodied enemy to surrender (p 184, PHB), thereby ending the combat before the grind gets tiresome.

Yeah, but if they're in combat, they're hostile, so they get a +10 to Will defense. A 1st-level character with CHA 20, training, and skill focus (+13) has to roll an 8 or higher to scare off a Dire Rat (Will 11 + 10 = 21)--and that's a brute, so it's got one of the lowest Will defenses out there. That's competitive with attack rolls, but you really have to build the character with that tactic in mind. Lose the skill focus, and you might as well just pound it with a mace until it dies.

 

[Truename]

I think soldiers should be used sparingly, and so should brutes. Putting a few of both in the same encounter, and combining that with a choke point takes a number of minor "grind" issues and stacks them all together at once. I've noticed that our fights tend to end with "and now kill the last 2 soldiers." We're really brainstorming how to beat down soldiers efficiently, and it is tough.

What if you had replaced one brute with a skirmisher, and added a second skirmisher instead of the extra soldier?

The brutes weren't really a problem--my group has three strikers, so they can pound on the brutes pretty hard. I really think the problem was the lvl+2 elite soldier--the high level + soldier made him very hard to hit, and the 'elite' aspect gave him way to many hit points.

If they hadn't tossed the elite in a forge and immobilized him there (10 fire damage for starting the turn, + 5 ongoing fire), we'd still be playing. But moments like that are part of what make the game great, and they were all talking (in a good way) about how tough he was afterwards.

I think the monster composition would have been fine (even the elite) had I been a little more creative/prepared in the second act. But that's also when everybody had a string of bad rolls, so maybe it was just bad luck.

 

[Pbartender]

Yeah, but if they're in combat, they're hostile, so they get a +10 to Will defense. A 1st-level character with CHA 20, training, and skill focus (+13) has to roll an 8 or higher to scare off a Dire Rat (Will 11 + 10 = 21)--and that's a brute, so it's got one of the lowest Will defenses out there. That's competitive with attack rolls, but you really have to build the character with that tactic in mind. Lose the skill focus, and you might as well just pound it with a mace until it dies.

Right, but remember this is, effectively, a "save or die" effect. It should be a little more difficult than a typical attack roll. But if it works, it effectively and completely removes an enemy combatant from the encounter without having to slog through his remaining hit points.

For creatures that have a lot of hit points, it's worth a try.

 

[Storminator]

The brutes weren't really a problem--my group has three strikers, so they can pound on the brutes pretty hard. I really think the problem was the lvl+2 elite soldier--the high level + soldier made him very hard to hit, and the 'elite' aspect gave him way to many hit points.

If they hadn't tossed the elite in a forge and immobilized him there (10 fire damage for starting the turn, + 5 ongoing fire), we'd still be playing. But moments like that are part of what make the game great, and they were all talking (in a good way) about how tough he was afterwards.

I think the monster composition would have been fine (even the elite) had I been a little more creative/prepared in the second act. But that's also when everybody had a string of bad rolls, so maybe it was just bad luck.

My point was, the brutes weren't a problem, the chokepoint wasn't a problem, and the soldiers weren't a problem... until you put them all together. Granted a high level elite soldier is a special case, but if your PCs could have surrounded him on turn 2, with 4 PCs flanking, do you think he would have lasted a long time? All the other issues in the fight prevented that, which is why he became so frustrating.

*shrug* Or maybe I'm wrong.

PS

 

[Wootz]

It really does depend on the DM. I've played a game run by a DM who just backed us into a corner and swarmed us with rats and goblins (that was real fun :/ ) the fight lasted almost 2 painful hours. But, another time we played with someone else in our group DMing it was really fun, there were more or less the same amount of monsters but they actually worked together, the fight lasted about 20 minutes and was a real agressive challenge that felt really rewarding (even though I got screwed trying to keep the goblin warcaster from escaping) the encounters just have to be given some forethought or else they feel very grind-y.

 

[FourthBear]

One aspect I've been seeing in some of the published modules that I think might need rethinking is terrain that only hinders the PCs or can only be exploited by the opponents (webs that spiders can walk through, poison pools with poison immune enemies). I've seen this happen to the party a bunch of times, in which the terrain just becomes one more thing for the characters to worry about and avoid, while the opponents can actively exploit the environment with ease. This places the heroes in the role of passive victims, and the bad guys come across as more active and dynamic. Yes, it may be more realistic that the bad guys lair in areas that they can exploit much more effectively than the heroes, but does that make for a fun encounter? If you want the heroes to be exploiting the terrain, give some explicit thought as to how the heroes might do so, not just to how the monsters can screw over the PCs with it.

Also, I feel that DMs should in general be generous with information and descriptions of monsters, traps and hazards. Remember that while you may have all of the data on the encounter at your fingertips for the running of your opponents, the players are seeing everything for the first time in a moment before combat. It's tricky enough to work out tactics under such conditions on the fly, it's hard to be heroic when everything is a surprise in the encounter as well.

 

[Rechan]

These are all great suggestions, but one thing that's also important: variety.

Like the above poster notes, terrain that is a threat to only the PCs, that the NPCs can exploit, is frustrating - especially if it's the only kind of terrain that's around. Choke points are frustrating - if it's the only terrain around. Minions are disappointing - if they're used too often. Enemies fleeing or ending the fight early is crappy - if you do it all the time.

Mixing and matching, using each of the above ONCE in an adventure, will at least offer a variety so that each encounter feels different.

This even goes for good things you can do: Objective-based encounters. interactive terrain, planned events - use it too frequently and the shiny wears off of them.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Well, yes and no. Over the long term, math does say so. At least as far as math is able to make the statistical prediction based on certain assumptions of the distribution of the random variables.
But with respect to any single attack or even single fight, it says a whole lot less. Depending on how the random distribution turns out, there will be whole fights in which that hit bonus is completely irrelevant.

So, yes, math says so... but with extensive caveats.

QFT, this is the point I was going to make. Most combats probably don't last long enough for a +1 or +2 here or there to make a statistically significant difference. You've got to have combats lasting 20+ rounds (and that bonus there every one of those rounds) in order to start seeing the mathematical benefits that some have claimed.

Regards

 

[Storminator]

QFT, this is the point I was going to make. Most combats probably don't last long enough for a +1 or +2 here or there to make a statistically significant difference. You've got to have combats lasting 20+ rounds (and that bonus there every one of those rounds) in order to start seeing the mathematical benefits that some have claimed.

Regards

I had one round (one round!) where Priest's Shield, a +1 bonus, stopped 3 hits, and probably a TPK. All three attacks missed by a single point... You think the other players heard about Kord that session?

PS

 

[Sadrik]

To go a little more with the math. (note this is not scientific)
Assume that there are two fighters, a cleric, a rogue, and a wizard. If 5 party members over make an attack (every round) for 5 rounds, that is 25 attacks (with a 50% hit chance), they hit 12.5 times and do average damage.

Level 1-
Fighter (2 handed) 1d10+4 9.5
Fighter (sword and shield) 1d8+4 8.5
Cleric 1d8+4 8.5
Rogue 1d6+4 7.5 (+7 for sneak attack)
Wizard 2d4+4 9

9.5 + 8.5 +8.5 + 7.5(+7 sneak attack) + 9 +10(average damage for group) +10(average damage for group) = 70 damage

5 level 1 goblins have 29*5=145

This combat will easily take at least 10 rounds and likely more considering maneuvering and hindering conditions. If each player takes an average of 1 minute and the DM takes an average of 3 minutes, one cycle around the table would take 8 minutes. 10 rounds times 8 is 80 minutes, that is an hour and 20 minutes for 5 goblins. You could probably shave time off of this but it is just an estimate. And these are average times, yes you can have a 30 second round but you could also easily have a 1.5 minute round too.

Dropping dailies and encounter powers during this combat would do an extra die or two of damage per player but half of them would miss. So, my guess would be: if dailies and encounters were used, it might increase damage by 20 *maybe* and that is a big maybe. Altogether that might make it take 7 or 8 rounds to kill the 5 goblins while dropping the daily and encounter powers.

Level 11-
Many more variables here but I would suspect that it is similar to first level, the only difference is you have more encounter and daily powers to drop. This means that you can more reliable increase damage. Githzerai soldier have 108*5HP, 540 damage in five rounds (12.5 attacks) seems like a lot of damage. In fact it seems that the amount of HP out scales damage capabilities.

Level 21-
This probably continues a trend of critters outpacing HP to damage.