D&D 5E Length of Combat & Time Taken per Round (collecting data from my games - updated 3/13 with an hour 30 minute 11 round battle!)

[Hussar]

Here's a fairly easy combat (4 level 11 PCs vs 2 CR 7 skeletal knights). 3 rounds - 10 minutes in total.

Round 1:

• Parren lobs a fire bolt for 19 fire damage.
• Hrothkar rages, moves into melee, and strikes twice recklessly (attack rolls of 26 and 29) for a total of 25 piercing damage.
• Vermin fires her light crossbow and misses twice.
• Tordek moves into melee and misses three times. (Dice rolls of natural 3, 2 and 3).
• Skeletal warriors were surprised and don’t act.

Round 2:

• Parren fireballs both warriors (excluding the party) for 37 fire damage. (one saves, the other fails).
• Hrothkar strikes twice for a total of 24 piericng damage.
• Vermin fires her light crossbow and hits once for 16 piercing damage.
• Skeletal Knight hits Hrothkar with its enervating blade attack for 13 necrotic damage, a second time for 18 damage, then once more for 16 damage
• Tordek uses his reaction to strike the Skeletal Knight for 9 damage
• The second Knight attacks Hrotkhar three times for 15, 14 and 17 damage.
• Tordek hits a Skeletal Knight for 13 damage, killing it (it fails its Undead Fortitude check). He strikes the other for 20 damage, knocking the Knight prone.

Round 3:

• Parren casts toll the dead for 17 necrotic damage, which the Knight fails to make the DC 17 Wisdom save.
• Hrothkar strikes twice with his Dragonlance for 31 total damage
• Vermin finishes off the Knight with two well-placed crossbow bolts (9 and 12 damage).

(I'm writing up the final session of our Shadow of the Dragon Queen campaign for my blog, this comes from that).

14 different lines of actions, approximately 40-45 seconds per "turn". Played on Roll20 with D&D Beyond/Beyond 20 integration.

Cheers,
Merric

I am SOOO jealous. I have a player who would take longer than that just to decide his action, never mind resolving it.

 

[kigmatzomat]

I am SOOO jealous. I have a player who would take longer than that just to decide his action, never mind resolving it.

Yeahhh....every table has one of those. Ours is my brother. He attempts to find a "perfect" action. As a fighter-champion 12/Wizard-warmage 3 with the Mobile & Fey Touched feats, that get's complicated. Does he pinball across a battlefield making attacks to avoid AoOs, use Misty Step to bypass some of them (and if so which ones) or let a few people make AoOs so he can beat on his real target (and if so, does he use Arcane Deflection, Shield, or nothing)? he tries to plan but with our high-character count battles, it's usually futile as some npc goes shortly before he does, which doesn't give him time to recalculate.

There is an egg timer at the table for when he has bad days.

I try to offset him by completing my turn as fast as DDB can roll the virtual dice. I've spent 10x more time as a GM than player, so I'm usually pretty quick.

 

[el-remmen]

So I was able to record my remote game (we play over zoom, using OBR maps for the exploration phase and a table camera and minis for combat) and use that to extract a lot of data about combat length.

The central conclusion is obvious: This group takes significantly longer to play out combat than my in-person group.

Now there are two main reason for this, I think:
1. It is a 5th level party (with one 4th level character), while the in-person group just reached 3rd, meaning the former has more options to choose from each turn.
2. Since we play remotely via camera, I have to move all the minis and there is a lot of time spent clarifying what they see on the screen.

But I think this group just has a more laconic style.

We only had one combat in a 3 hour session (it was more like 2.5 hours b/c of technical difficulty at the beginning). It lasted slightly more than 2 rounds (I'm calling it 3 rounds)

Session #​	Encounter	Combat Type	Party Level​	IG Rounds​	RW Time​	Average / Rd​
43​	4 troglodyte grunts, 1 troglodyte meatseeker	G​	5​	3​	0:39:54:00​	0: 13: 18​

Because it was recorded I was able to determine exactly how long it took to roll and collect initiative scores (1 minute 57 seconds) and the average time per round if we subtract that initiative "round zero" (12 minutes 39 seconds) and the actual round lengths were as follows:

Rd 0: 0:01:57
Rd 1: 0:15:04
Rd 2: 0:18:31
Rd 3: 0:04:26

One other thing to consider is that no one in this party has any area of effect spells and it was in a small enclosed space, meaning even if they did, they would not have been that effective.

 

[jmartkdr2]

I appreciate all of this, but I suspect average time per turn is a much more useful metric.

Partially because we just accept that a six-player game will take longer than a three-player game, but also the number of enemy turns can actually vary a lot and be a factor. (and not always equal the number of enemies if, say, all the goblin archers fire at once)

I don't question the other factors - I can see using live minis over Zoom being a big time drain - but we can control for party/ fight size.

 

[Distracted DM]

I don't think I'd have blinked had you said that your players took 1 minute or less to take their turns. in your first post on the subject, you said you took 1 minute A ROUND. That's 20 seconds (or less) per player INCLUDING THE DM. Even less if there's more than four players!

While I don't want to say you're wrong (nor yet claim that you're being in any way dishonest) I just find it impossible to believe. I can absolutely get behind your group being quick! But THAT quick? You're right - it BOGGLES.

I've seen a couple folk on here state such incredibly quick rounds for their tables, and I just don't get it. I've also seen folk say that their quick combats go for 10+ rounds! I just can't imagine it.

I'm quick with the math, counting dice (if in-person), etc. but I definitely think about what the enemies would do when their turn comes up.

Sometimes my players take time thinking about what they'll do, they want to make the optimal moves because my games can seem pretty tough (although 5e really makes it difficult).
Or someone will make a rules mistake and I have to quickly explain what should happen.

But.. I just can't imagine these insanely quick combats!

 

[Quickleaf]

So I was able to record my remote game (we play over zoom, using OBR maps for the exploration phase and a table camera and minis for combat) and use that to extract a lot of data about combat length.

The central conclusion is obvious: This group takes significantly longer to play out combat than my in-person group.

Now there are two main reason for this, I think:
1. It is a 5th level party (with one 4th level character), while the in-person group just reached 3rd, meaning the former has more options to choose from each turn.
2. Since we play remotely via camera, I have to move all the minis and there is a lot of time spent clarifying what they see on the screen.

But I think this group just has a more laconic style.

We only had one combat in a 3 hour session (it was more like 2.5 hours b/c of technical difficulty at the beginning). It lasted slightly more than 2 rounds (I'm calling it 3 rounds)

Session #​	Encounter	Combat Type	Party Level​	IG Rounds​	RW Time​	Average / Rd​
43​	4 troglodyte grunts, 1 troglodyte meatseeker	G​	5​	3​	0:39:54:00​	0: 13: 18​

Because it was recorded I was able to determine exactly how long it took to roll and collect initiative scores (1 minute 57 seconds) and the average time per round if we subtract that initiative "round zero" (12 minutes 39 seconds) and the actual round lengths were as follows:

Rd 1: 0:15:04
Rd 2: 0:18:31
Rd 3: 0:04:26

One other thing to consider is that no one in this party has any area of effect spells and it was in a small enclosed space, meaning even if they did, they would not have been that effective.

Really great breakdown of your session! I love what you’re doing here. Yeah, there’s a big shift in time/turn as you hit higher level benchmarks.

My felt sense was that turns at 11th level took 2-3 times as long as turns at 3rd level (with my four to six person party of experienced players mostly playing same PCs in a Tomb of Annihilation game).

One of the things I’ve done as GM is shift my combat encounter design based on whether it’s low-level/high-level, in-person/online, and casual/hardcore players. For example, knowing that combat usually takes longer when run online, I focus more on high offense / low defense monsters & hazardous terrain / terrain elements that can be weapon-ized to great effect. Those are decent guidelines in general, actually, but I focus on them more for the online games.

 

[el-remmen]

I suspect average time per turn is a much more useful metric.

At first I was resistant to going back to the video and doing this because I did not want to risk getting into a situation where it felt like I was shaming a player by posting how long they take to take their turn. But then I could not resist my own curiosity and started doing it.

I am so glad I did!

Because I realized that for my game at least, it is very difficult to identify where one turn ends and another begins or who gets "credit" for a period of time spent doing/asking/suggesting X, Y, or Z.

For example, is the time I spend describing the effect of a PC's blow on a troglodyte part of their turn or get subtracted b/c it is the DM using the time. If another player interrupts the current player's turn to make a suggestion or correction, is that the current player's time? What if an opponent's readied action goes off and that attack needs to be resolved in the middle of the player's turn?
In other words, it gave me evidence to refute @jmartkdr2's suggestion that "by turn" is the important metric just due the potentially fluid nature of turns in our style of play. It may be that "by turn" is a more important metric in a different style of play.

Anyway, I did break down one round. If you add up the times, you will see it is less than the amount of time listed in my previous post - that is because of time I was having a hard time accounting for between and even during turns.

Round One (5 PCs + 1 sidekick vs. 4 troglodyte grunts, 1 troglodyte meatseeker)

1. Player A (Lore Bard 4): moves, gives inspiration, casts vicious mockery - 2 min, 45 sec
2. DM (moves meatseeker who then readies action): 32 seconds
3. Player B (Devotion Paladin): charges in and attacks meatseeker twice (but meatseeker's readied action also took place here) - 2 min, 14 seconds
4. Player C (Arcane Trickster 5): moves, kills the trog player A weakened - 1 min, 35 second
5. DM (one trog attacks twice): 46 seconds
6. Player D (Ranger 3 Rogue 1): attacks trog twice - 1 min, 6 seconds
7. Player E (Eldritch Knight 3, Abjurer 2): moves and attacks same trog as player D, killing it (but there was an opportunity attack against him on the way there) - 3 min, 9 seconds
8. DM: (moves two trogs who attack - 2 attacks each) 1 min, 24 seconds

The total time if you add it up this way is 13 min and 31 seconds, which leaves 1 minute and 33 seconds of "slippage." If need be, I'll put that on myself as DM, describing stuff or being slow to move the minis.

I will admit, a first, I was a little taken aback by the data I gathered from this combat, but breaking down the round actually served to make me feel like we are doing pretty good. A lot slower than the in-person game, but given the circumstances we are playing in and different play styles of the player's involved (only one player is in both games), a good pace.

Edit to add: The reason stopped after one round of breaking down is that I found the process tedious! So I can't promise I will do it again for every combat - but if I record my in-person game as I plan, I may do it for one of their combats.

 

[el-remmen]

Really great breakdown of your session! I love what you’re doing here.

Thanks!

My felt sense was that turns at 11th level took 2-3 times as long as turns at 3rd level (with my four to six person party of experienced players mostly playing same PCs in a Tomb of Annihilation game).

yeah, as I mentioned earlier, my games tend to end around 10th - but doing this project has inspired me to maybe start a campaign at 10th in the near future.

One of the things I’ve done as GM is shift my combat encounter design based on whether it’s low-level/high-level, in-person/online, and casual/hardcore players. For example, knowing that combat usually takes longer when run online, I focus more on high offense / low defense monsters & hazardous terrain / terrain elements that can be weapon-ized to great effect. Those are decent guidelines in general, actually, but I focus on them more for the online games.

My games are all about terrain and tactics within the context of narrative stakes that matter to the characters - so I am right there with you. I may be too old and stubborn to adjust my style specifically for remote play - but it is definitely something I should consider moving forward.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

That's interesting stuff @el-remmen I think you are right - that's probably doing fine. Makes it seem even more impossible to do a whole round in under a minute!

 

[jmartkdr2]

At first I was resistant to going back to the video and doing this because I did not want to risk getting into a situation where it felt like I was shaming a player by posting how long they take to take their turn. But then I could not resist my own curiosity and started doing it.

I am so glad I did!

Because I realized that for my game at least, it is very difficult to identify where one turn ends and another begins or who gets "credit" for a period of time spent doing/asking/suggesting X, Y, or Z.

For example, is the time I spend describing the effect of a PC's blow on a troglodyte part of their turn or get subtracted b/c it is the DM using the time. If another player interrupts the current player's turn to make a suggestion or correction, is that the current player's time? What if an opponent's readied action goes off and that attack needs to be resolved in the middle of the player's turn?
In other words, it gave me evidence to refute @jmartkdr2's suggestion that "by turn" is the important metric just due the potentially fluid nature of turns in our style of play. It may be that "by turn" is a more important metric in a different style of play.

Anyway, I did break down one round. If you add up the times, you will see it is less than the amount of time listed in my previous post - that is because of time I was having a hard time accounting for between and even during turns.

Round One (5 PCs + 1 sidekick vs. 4 troglodyte grunts, 1 troglodyte meatseeker)

1. Player A (Lore Bard 4): moves, gives inspiration, casts vicious mockery - 2 min, 45 sec
2. DM (moves meatseeker who then readies action): 32 seconds
3. Player B (Devotion Paladin): charges in and attacks meatseeker twice (but meatseeker's readied action also took place here) - 2 min, 14 seconds
4. Player C (Arcane Trickster 5): moves, kills the trog player A weakened - 1 min, 35 second
5. DM (one trog attacks twice): 46 seconds
6. Player D (Ranger 3 Rogue 1): attacks trog twice - 1 min, 6 seconds
7. Player E (Eldritch Knight 3, Abjurer 2): moves and attacks same trog as player D, killing it (but there was an opportunity attack against him on the way there) - 3 min, 9 seconds
8. DM: (moves two trogs who attack - 2 attacks each) 1 min, 24 seconds

The total time if you add it up this way is 13 min and 31 seconds, which leaves 1 minute and 33 seconds of "slippage." If need be, I'll put that on myself as DM, describing stuff or being slow to move the minis.

I will admit, a first, I was a little taken aback by the data I gathered from this combat, but breaking down the round actually served to make me feel like we are doing pretty good. A lot slower than the in-person game, but given the circumstances we are playing in and different play styles of the player's involved (only one player is in both games), a good pace.

Edit to add: The reason stopped after one round of breaking down is that I found the process tedious! So I can't promise I will do it again for every combat - but if I record my in-person game as I plan, I may do it for one of their combats.

Heh - I think you read a little too deeply into this. I was thinking "time per round / number of turns per round," otherwise you're just measuring party size rather inefficiently. So in the above example it would be 13 min / 11 turns, or just over one minute per turn. Which is pretty snappy in my experience. If the round of 11 turns took a half hour that would be on the high end. But if (and I've seen this) it was 9 players vs 20+ monsters, a half hour round would (again) be about as fast as you could hope for.

The only reason to break it down by individual player turns is if you have a hypothesis that a specific player is mostly responsible for dragging things out.