Grind

[Mouseferatu]

Class templates are within the core design parameters. DMG 182.

But adding them to solos is not.

I have some issues with grind myself, so I'm not saying your experiences are "imaginary" or anything; but in this one particular example, yeah, you went beyond the parameters of what the mechanics are designed to handle.

 

[renau1g]

Yeah I have seen it before when my previous group would play through a WoTC module. Those are so grind-y it hurts. I was forgetting what we were even doing in the area a lot of the time because the random battles were just getting a bit pointless.

 

[KarinsDad]

All I can say is if I were running an encounter with TWO solo monsters and one with multiple healing powers I am 100% certain it would be a very long and tedious encounter to play out to a final finish with the monsters (or party) wiped out.

How is that different than any other N+4 encounter?

Dragons are actually kind of wimpy cause they have so few multi-target attacks. They just sit there and soak damage until they finally run away or die.

They nickel and dime PCs until their breath weapon recharges. They don't even typically have Threatening Reach (which is stupid from a genre perspective, they should be engines of destruction that are hard to get near).

Even without a class template, they are mostly just long drawn out encounters. Without the class template, this encounter would have been N+3 and the dragons would have fled somewhere around round 7 or 8. Not much difference. The heals just extended it for 4 more rounds (~55% more hit points each).

Dragons and solos in general are grindy because of mega-hit points and typically inferior attacks. At low level, they are a threat. At high level, they are an exercise in dice rolling. The PCs have too many options for them to be really challenging.

Mental Note: Give all Dragons that have reach threatening reach by default.

 

[KarinsDad]

But adding them to solos is not.

No? I don't see any warnings against it. It's just making a solo tougher, not unlike increasing its level or giving it equipment or any of the other sections on bumping up monsters in the DMG.

I have some issues with grind myself, so I'm not saying your experiences are "imaginary" or anything; but in this one particular example, yeah, you went beyond the parameters of what the mechanics are designed to handle.

Did I? It's easy to say this, but the game system should allow for BBEG monsters with not only healing, but with more abilities (i.e. spells for example) than the average run of the mill monsters.

The concept of healing monsters should be a standard part of an occasional monster design without the system breaking down. Not an every day occurance, but definitely within the capabilities of the game system.

Btw, this is the only time in 16 levels that I have ever given monsters the ability to heal. It is not the only time I have experienced grind. Stun, insubstantial, and weaken can all easily lead to grind.

 

[Felon]

I voted for #1, but my answer is misleading.

This is the poll trap. You go to a poll that only offers three or four options, and see replies that say the option they wanted to vote for isn't there. So, you're inclined to think the poll should be super-particulate like this one. But then guess what? Despite having the best intentions, people will still say the poll doesn't offer an option that perfectly encapsulates their position, and now on top of that there are people who are simply befuddled by the overload of choices that are just slight variations on other choices, to say nothing of folks who TLDR the whole thing.

Trying to read through the range of options here is a recipe for a headache, but I suspect if I were to vote, I'd just view the votes and pick one of the ones that has the most votes. Which brings you back to designing a poll where less is more.

I experience grind when I play official WotC adventures, or when there's a lot of healing going (on either side of the battle). The encounter design advice offered by WotC in the DMG is pure awfulness for the most part. As for too much healing, that moves the combat backwards towards its beginning (where everyone had full HP), not forward towards a resolution. Having heal-heavy leaders in the party are often worse than having no leader because they tempt the DM into an arms race where he throws more or nastier monsters just to slough off the healing.

 

[Mouseferatu]

No? I don't see any warnings against it. It's just making a solo tougher, not unlike increasing its level or giving it equipment or any of the other sections on bumping up monsters in the DMG.

The instructions for using a template discuss transforming a standard into an elite, or an elite into a solo. There's no "category" above solo, and the rules very specifically don't address attaching templates to solos.

Sure, you can make any monster tougher, and you can easily create a tougher version of a solo that's modeled on the powers of a template. But it's not precisely the same process as just adding a template; there are a lot of other factors and changes to take into account. (Increasing level, altering hit points and defenses in ways differently than the template does, not adding too many immediate actions to a creature that already has them, etc.)

Did I? It's easy to say this, but the game system should allow for BBEG monsters with not only healing, but with more abilities (i.e. spells for example) than the average run of the mill monsters.

And it does. You can easily create such things. But again, it's not as simple as just slapping on a template, when there are other changes that have to be made.

 

[Aulirophile]

This is a weird question for me. As a DM the time I spend per round controlling creatures is basically always less then a minute, at most. Each PC gets their own color of die, I roll damage and to hit at the same time, and while I'm asking "does Y hit" I'm adding up the damage. The first time an ability is used I describe it, but otherwise it just doesn't take very long.

As a player my turn doesn't take more then 20 seconds at most (often under 10).

No one else in my group is that fast. If they were, combats would never grind. In my experience the grind is primarily a social issue (people not paying attention to when their turn is coming up, people going to the bathroom, people forgetting out of turn attacks because they weren't paying attention, people not knowing their modifiers, people dithering on power use, etc.). If you do any of those things as a player, or as a DM, and you experience grind? The grind is your fault.

 

[Festivus]

Our first few 4E games, when we were still getting our legs under us, yes, it would grind. These days, when I am a DM I can see the grind coming and adjust. As a player, if the game starts to grind I might ask the DM if the battle is certainly won could we handwave the meaningless die rolling.

 

[Wormwood]

Depends on the DM (we rotate frequently) and the encounter (I'm looking at you, Scales of War).

That said, we went from "Often" to "Sometimes" once the DMs became more aware of the problem. Anti-grind techniques have really helped.

 

[KarinsDad]

This is the poll trap. You go to a poll that only offers three or four options, and see replies that say the option they wanted to vote for isn't there.

You're always free to just not answer it. He answered exactly as he experiences it. It never happens for Piratecat, nor for his group.

I voted for #1, ... As a result, we've never had in in 50+ sessions.

The poll wasn't about "can you see that it can happen" even though he talked about that. The poll was about "does it happen to you and your group".

He answered not for him and not for his group. His answer was perfectly in line with the poll questions and his experiences of it.


People often complain about how polls are worded if the results are not in line with what they expect them to be.

Trying to read through the range of options here is a recipe for a headache, but I suspect if I were to vote, I'd just view the votes and pick one of the ones that has the most votes. Which brings you back to designing a poll where less is more.

The poll is pretty simple.

4 choices for the player answering the poll. The exact same 4 choices for his fellow players.

It pretty much comes down to 4 things, it doesn't happen, it used to happen, it sometimes happens, and it often happens for both the responder and some of his fellow players.