Combat: Round by round or three rounds at once?

[Krug]

How has combat worked for you? Do you go round by round or two-three rounds at once?

 

[Creamsteak]

Depends on the number of players and the circumstancers. Over four players and I prefer to run at least two rounds at a time.

 

[Isida Kep'Tukari]

For me it depends upon the level of the characters. If the characters are low-level, there are limited options for both them and the monsters. Which means that there are only so many things they can detail for their characters to do, and I, as a DM, don't feel like I'm going to accidentally screw over someone by overlooking an ability.

At higher levels everyone has so many different powers and abilities that trying to run multiple rounds simultanously would lead to a lot of back-tracking and second-guessing. PCs tend to know their own abilities, and at higher levels, I let them worry about them. I have my hands full with the monsters.

 

[Old Fezziwig]

I prefer three rounds at a time, as it speeds things up, although I've not run a high-level combat, so... It takes a long time for me to post multiple rounds, but it feels less choppy than doing them individually.

Nick

 

[Thanee]

One round at a time, things are changing too fast and I like to leave the decisions to the players. With 6 players (with few exceptions), we manage to do one combat round per day or per two days at most (sometimes even two rounds in one day) in my current PbP game, so that's definitely fast enough.

Also, the last combat round (quite large combat with 6 PCs and 18 NPCs on a torch-lit graveyard - Take a look!) took me about 1.5 hours to complete with all the (virtual) dice rolling, map updating, writing... which really is more than enough time to spend on that stuff in one evening.

In an incredibly straightforward combat, I could see multiple rounds at one time to speed things up (and have done this already in a combat against only 3 opponents (and only one of them was actually dangerous), where the dice rolling was so bad, that it took 17 rounds to defeat them), but in general one round at a time is my preference for sure.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

Some questions to those who like multiple rounds at a time better:

Do you use a battle map for combat?

Do players just give general guidelines instead of specific actions (as specific as exact squares to move into, and what kind of move action/standard action/full round action they are going to do) then?

I can see this kind of combat work well in a more narrative style, but if using the D&D combat, which is a bit more tactical after all, it doesn't sound like such a good idea to me (also see above).

Bye
Thanee

 

[Old Fezziwig]

Some questions to those who like multiple rounds at a time better:

Do you use a battle map for combat?

Do players just give general guidelines instead of specific actions (as specific as exact squares to move into, and what kind of move action/standard action/full round action they are going to do) then?

I can see this kind of combat work well in a more narrative style, but if using the D&D combat, which is a bit more tactical after all, it doesn't sound like such a good idea to me (also see above).

If I can, I prefer to use a battlemap. As for the players, I'd love for them to give specific information -- the more specific the better -- but I don't always get it. I usually label each axis of the map with either letters or numbers (something I picked up from a few different DMs that I've played with online) and ask that the players give me some ideas as to what their PC's typical combat actions are (Is your cleric a fighter or healer first? Does your druid cast buffs on others before entering combat?). Most people will, if they're going to be detailed, break it down into move action/standard action/full round action. If everyone's on the same page, it usually works well. If not, I can certainly imagine it being less than satisfying for the players.

Nick

 

[Thanee]

I usually label each axis of the map with either letters or numbers (something I picked up from a few different DMs that I've played with online)...

Yeah, that certainly helps to be able to name the squares directly.

I also have this numbering (letter+number) in the map I'm using (see above).

and ask that the players give me some ideas as to what their PC's typical combat actions are (Is your cleric a fighter or healer first? Does your druid cast buffs on others before entering combat?). Most people will, if they're going to be detailed, break it down into move action/standard action/full round action. If everyone's on the same page, it usually works well. If not, I can certainly imagine it being less than satisfying for the players.

In the current combat in my game, I really cannot see how most of the players could have stated their actions three rounds in advance. Sure, they could say something like "try to attack already damaged opponents and stay away from opponent X", but in the end it would be like I was controlling an NPC, coordinating actions between them, but then it would be my specific decisions not theirs, which I cannot really see as the point of it. They are the players' characters, after all, and the lack of control involved in stating actions in advance or in only a vague way would probably take away from the fun.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Old Fezziwig]

In the current combat in my game, I really cannot see how most of the players could have stated their actions three rounds in advance. Sure, they could say something like "try to attack already damaged opponents and stay away from opponent X", but in the end it would be like I was controlling an NPC, coordinating actions between them, but then it would be my specific decisions not theirs, which I cannot really see as the point of it. They are the players' characters, after all, and the lack of control involved in stating actions in advance or in only a vague way would probably take away from the fun.

I understand this, but it's not an experience that I've had when I've done this as a player or that my players have voiced to me. Also, I've never had a player tell me that their character wouldn't do such and such a thing after I've posted the results of combat (most of the time their actions are specific enough to keep that from happening). My default choice (if given a lack of options) is to play the character as conservatively as possible, aiming to keep the character alive and healthy. In the end, I feel like combat bogs down so much in a PbP/PbeM that something has to give if the medium's going to serve my needs well.

Nick

 

[Thanee]

Yep, combat can be quite a hassle. I'm happy that it runs pretty smooth in my game so far (one full combat round per day on average).

When I have to override the player's stated action (because it isn't possible anymore, like when the target is no more, for example), I also try to replace it with something pretty conservative as you put it. Or simply use delay, as appropriate for the situation.

Bye
Thanee