Why isn't WotC acknowledging Grind issue?

[fba827]

When I DM, I find that there are a few variables involved.

1) Level appropriateness. When I run an at-level appropriate encounter, the combats generally last about 30-45 minutes. When I start taking it above level, it can go anywhere from an hour to two depending on how much higher than level it is. [of course, if the party is going to only have one/two combats before resting again, then i don't feel bad about upping the level since they'll have all their resources and having at level encounters at constantly full resources is frankly just as boring from the nonchallenge, to me.]

2) Some consideration with party composition: When filling out the non 'boss' ranks of enemies, I at least give some minor consideration for party composition (i.e. when the party is light on strikers, I won't make all the grunts be soliders unless it just fits the flavor of the boss, but if i'm trying to decide between adding another solider or skirmisher and it won't affect the flavor of the encounter, then i'd go with skirmisher in that instance)

3) Player style (part 1: tatical mind): some of the players just take a long time because they enjoy the tactical considerations and options. There is nothing wrong with that, but on the flip side it does add to the overall length of each round leading to other impatient players feeling a little bored and bemoaning the length of the encounter.

4) Player style (part 2: the unfocused): some players just take a long time because their mind wanders when it's not their turn (either they're bored or they're reading, etc) and thus everything needs to be re-explained every time their turn comes around.

5) Build choices: Some classes/feats/builds just have more complex powers and features than others. Between conditions/zones/auras/fiddly bits, some players simply have a lot more to keep track of and take in to consideration than others.

6) PC synergy: are the PCs even working together, tactic wise. For instance, lack of focused fire does keep enemies around longer which in turn makes longer rounds since it is that many more enemies that need to go every single round rather than attrition over time. Or, along similar lines, are people providing bonuses to allow themselves or others to hit better or harder to end it sooner..

7) Number of players/PCs - on days when everyone is there, the combats take disproporitionatly longer (it's not a one person adds X minutes sort of thing, it seems to be some sort of exponential increase).


Of course, different groups will have different experiences, but any time a combat takes long when I DM, I can pinpoint the reason down to one or two of the above ...

Can something be done about all those issues all the time? Probably not (at least not without veering towards some sort of strict table rules) but you can often steer away from whatever one or two those are the biggest issues at your table.

 

[Chainsaw]

We've used half hit points / increase damage by the monster's level for the past few months and it's done the trick.

Probably a stupid question, but that's just half hit points for the monsters right - not the PC's as well?

How about this though... aren't there thousands of LFR games that are consistently trying to fit in 3 encounters in a 4-hour slot? Can anyone chime in on the LFR experience?

Back when I played with an LFR group, we had 6PM-10PM time slots for up to 6 players at a table. When there were 5-6 players, the four hours was usually not enough. The solution was to a) hope that we avoided it by good luck and b) if we weren't lucky, the monsters started rolling d12s instead of d20s in the final encounter to speed things up. So, they were basically just gimped so that players were assured victory. I like the lower hit point/more damage solution personally. That ratchets up the tension through the whole game. My OD&D game is *very* tense - any battle, any monster could end my day *really* fast.

Also, in our LFR game, everyone rolls all their dice at the same time - attack and all damage. That helps alot. When you get one guy rolling his d20, then rolling six or seven or whatever individual dice for damage, that's a huge time suck.

 

[crash_beedo]

Probably a stupid question, but that's just half hit points for the monsters right - not the PC's as well?

Yes - half hit points for monsters, and monsters get a damage boost equal to their level. PC's don't change at all.

It's definitely increased the "swing" in our game, as well. A fair amount of swing = tense excitement.

There are consequences that subtly change how 4E runs... controllers that lay down damage are a lot more effective, since they reduce multiple monster hit points at a higher proportion. Our orbizard/planeshifter (with sequester) was frighteningly effective... if you cut down on the combat rounds, each status effect on the monsters is magnified. And winning initiative is much more important for both sides.

We've implemented other speed tricks too (roll to-hit and damage together, post the initiative order publicly so the next guy up can prepare, etc).

 

[Hussar]

I've often said that 4e is the RPGA edition. I honestly think that a great deal of what 4e is about is geared towards organized play. If the grind issue hasn't come up all that often in RPGA, then you will probably never see any solutions to it. OTOH, if it becomes a real issue for the RPGA, I think we'll see solutions coming out PDQ.

Chainsaw - how many encounters were you getting through in 4 hours usually?

 

[keterys]

A typical LFR adventure is an introduction with roleplaying, three combats, and two skill challenges.

I have... characters of level 15, 12, 10, 7, 5, 3, and 2. So that's over 100 LFR modules altogether, say.

I haven't run into very many problems with grind in LFR. The two major exceptions I can think of both involved two solos in the same module. I _have_ run into a few players who are very, very slow, individually. I have since chosen to avoid those players when possible.

The time to complete modules has generally increased as they got higher level - it was actually very normal to complete modules in 3 hours at low level sometime, but paragon modules almost invariably take a full 4 hour slot.

There are times that we've done slightly beefier modules (Specials) that add an extra combat and increase all the combats by 1 level, and even those have run safely in the time slot. For example, I've both run and played a level 7-10 special that started between 6:15 and 6:30 and finished before 10pm in time for me to catch my bus.

Some of that is also build-related. Last night we had less people than usual, and were playing a level 14 module with a daggermaster rogue (normal hit 1d4+3d8+15 or so, crits for 50-60), 14 swordmage (burst 2s for 1d6+15), a 13 cleric (not a lot of damage - more status effects and heals), and my 11 fighter (normal hit 1d10+22)... but we were killing stuff at a very good pace. Three paragon fights, two skill challenges (complexity 4 and 2 I think), and a lot of roleplaying, in just under four hours. Only four players though, which helps. But, still, I think if we'd had a less damage oriented party it would have been a lot slower.

Outside of LFR, I have
* a level 17 group I'm playing in that is not all that damage oriented that tends to do 4 fights, 1 skill challenge, and a moderate serving of RP per 6 hour session.
* a level 16 group I'm playing in that is slightly more damage oriented, but has a really, really slow DM - but it's okay cause we just chat while he stares at the map trying to figure ou what to do - that tends to do 2-3 fights per 4 hour session.
* a level 14 group I'm DMing in that is slightly damage oriented and has that really slow DM as a player with a complex character... it's very normal for most of the table to be chatting away about normal stuff, then suddenly go 'Nothing's happening - whose turn is it? Oh, right, it must be his' - that's more like 2 fights per 3-4 hour session. I _can_ actually amp that up to 4 fights per 4 hour session if I pressure them to succeed, and I do often do a -25% hp, +1/2 level damage thing in that game to keep things slightly more exciting while we wait.
* a level 5 group I DM online that clearcuts through 4 combats, 2 skill challenges, and a bucket of RP per 4 hour or so block. Occasionally we have like a 1 skill challenge all RP night, but they can seriously move things along and I do not forecast grind problems for them at any level.
* a level 4 group I DM that goes through encounters just fine, but has 1 person who often suffers paralysis of options, so I expect them to run into issues at paragon if that person doesn't adapt.

In general, the LFR crews are the ones who actually seem to play the fastest, since they're used to working on a clock and having play objectives. Both of my fast non-LFR games are with folks who also play LFR. My slow ones are all with those who don't. It might also be that those who are most interested in learning the game and playing a lot are those who play LFR. Hadn't really looked at it like that before.

That said, in every case where I see slowness, the biggest factor is one person at the table (same person in 2 games, different person in another). In one game, I do blame the (WotC) encounters on tending to have a lot of high defense creatures relative to our level and us being, as a party, a little AC-focused in that particular group.

 

[carmachu]

Its not a bug. Its a feature.

 

[Filcher]

I've seen, and contributed to, quite a few "grind" threads on this board and the WotC forums.....[snip]...I have currently stopped my 7 player 4E game at the Paragon Tier because we can barely get through 1 combat encounter in the 5 hour sessions we have weekly. That pace is entirely too slow for me to be able to progress a campaign.

So, in all these threads you've read and contributed to, you haven't been able to find a solution?

That's rough. Shame to kill a campaign.

 

[brainstorm]

Solution?

So, in all these threads you've read and contributed to, you haven't been able to find a solution?

That's rough. Shame to kill a campaign.

Not really. I've tried a variety of things, from reducing hp/increasing damage to changing initiative, to using more opponents, more minions (in waves), changing up my tactics, using terrain, fewer brutes/soldiers, more skirmishers, minimizing elites/solos, etc. The trick is finding a balance between faster encounters and challenging encounters. A quick combat is not the solution if it's not challenging. A challenging encounter isn't if it takes forever to get through. The ideal solution for me would be to get 3 challenging encounters into a session, which means a maximum of 1 hour per encounter. That's yet to happen.

The problem I found is that it is taking me too much time and effort trying to find the right combination of fixes to make my game work. Even if I do find a combination that works, it's not like I can use that same combination for every encounter I design, so an ongoing solution has eluded me thus far.

So, I'm taking a break from that campaign until I can come up with more ideas. If I can't, then I'll have to go to another game system for my 7 player group.

 

[keterys]

Out of curiosity, did you ever figure out what was actually taking time? I mean, if it was that 4 of your players take 5 minutes each to do their turns, no amount of work on your part is going to make a difference.

 

[Chainsaw]

Chainsaw - how many encounters were you getting through in 4 hours usually?

What keterys said - introduction with some roleplaying, three encounters, a few skill challenges. I'm not sure if there's any strict requirement though, as I have only played probably 10-15 of modules. Keeping players focused and ready for their turns makes a BIG difference. As does multiple die rolling.

Also, I have found that when we have "know-it-alls" that are quick to mumble, "oh, bad move - should have gone here, then there, then I could do this, then he could do that," it really slows things down as well - because people get really self-conscious about their turns and deliberate on the "perfect" action because they want to avoid being dressed down in front of everyone. This is probably less of an issue with groups that are familiar with each other, but in our LFR group, there was a pretty good chance that you'd have one stranger or newbie in your group every time you played.