D&D 5E 5e--combats are too "same-y"?

brehobit · Jun 1, 2015

I've been playing one game and running another. Both parties are quite martial in nature (barbarian, ranger, fighter, warlock and barbarian, rogue, warlock, monk) and I'm finding that the fights seem to fall into a pretty standard pattern. Most have been a lot of fun, but at some point, everyone has no decisions to make, just dice to roll. Both parties are level 3.

One thing I liked about 4e was the tactical choices. The really long combats I liked a lot less. 3e was somewhere in between. I've not hit the same problems in other systems quite as much (Hero, GURPs, etc.)

I suspect it's just the martial-heavy theme that's driving this. Plus the game I'm running had "bags of hit points" that were just too big of bags (poor planning on my part).

I'm just curious if others have hit this in 5e and how to avoid it.

Warmaster Horus · Jun 1, 2015

You need to liven up your combats a bit. Add difficult terrain, introduce fliers, have strange environmental conditions, place reinforcements near at hand, mix complimentary monster types together that create creative thinking to overcome, separate the characters so they have a harder time supporting each other, etc.

ad_hoc · Jun 1, 2015

If there is no tension in the fight, just end it. Beasts and intelligent monsters will usually flee or parley.

Enemies that fight to the death should be rare and memorable like crazed cultists or zombies.

In general 5e combats are very quick. Monsters and PCs do a lot of damage. One side or the other will usually win within 3 rounds.

How long are your combats taking?

The Crimson Binome · Jun 1, 2015

Do your characters always go into combat with mostly-full HP? Combat gets much more interesting when one or more characters are mostly dead.

SteveC · Jun 1, 2015

I have pretty much found this to be true, unfortunately, unless the DM is coming from a perspective of making the fight interesting with the environment or interesting monsters.

I was pretty spoiled by 4E's combat where you had monsters, positioning and movement that made things more interesting even if the DM did nothing else to spice it up. And with that, a lot of 4E encounters purposefully put interesting terrain in just to take advantage of the push/pull/slide effects.

The trick is to keep right on doing this in 5E: add the fun terrain features back in so that they can be part of the encounter and/or choose monsters that are more than a bag of hit points. The trouble is that most of the adventures I've played in leave these details all up to the DM, and so a lot of the DMs I've played with just leave it all out.

But to answer your question: yes, I've played with a mostly martial group of characters, and combats can seem to be just "roll D20, if hit, roll damage, repeat for extra attacks." It doesn't have to be that way, but that spark is on the shoulders of the DM who can set up an interesting challenge and then allow the players to run with it. And of course the players have to want to run with it too.

JackOfAllTirades · Jun 1, 2015

We've had rather a lot of variety in our combats. I give a lot of the credit to our GM; he keeps things interesting by mixing up the terrain and the opposition. We never know who or what we'll be up against next. Our foes also tend to be very well prepared, using their spells/magic items intelligently if they have any warning that we're coming.

The flip side of this our players; our group is actually really good at avoiding combat, either by talking or just plain skullduggery. Failing that, we've gotten very good at surprise attacks and ending fights quickly. But again, no two ambushes are ever exactly the same. Each one is a unique challenge.

iserith · Jun 1, 2015

Don't build combats with the solution of reducing enemies' hit points to 0. Instead build interesting scenes with monsters pursuing their goals which may be something other than "Kill all adventurers."

Take a gander at any of my short-form scenarios for examples.

Sacrosanct · Jun 1, 2015

Also, pretty everything you did in 4e you can still do. Just because there isn't a specific rule or power or maneuver detailed, doesn't mean you can't do it. monsters and PCs have been positioning themselves and using the environment for the best advantage since I started playing in '81 with Basic.

I'm A Banana · Jun 1, 2015

brehobit said:
Most have been a lot of fun, but at some point, everyone has no decisions to make, just dice to roll.

If your players have noticed this, then the enemies have, too. Unless they are suicidal automatons, they should try to change things up at this point - surrender, parley, offer (potentially misleading) information, flee to get reinforcements, or otherwise avoid simply being slaughtered.

The easy solution is to think about your enemies' goals and how they can achieve them - and how that formula changes when the PC's start to make mischief. What's the dragon's Plan B, what's the Necromancer's real goal here, is escape a possibility?

brehobit said:
One thing I liked about 4e was the tactical choices. The really long combats I liked a lot less.

These things kind of go hand in hand. If you have longer combats, you need more choices to keep it varied and interesting, but shorter combats can have only a few choices to make and then you move onto the next one. 5e's combats are maybe 3-5 rounds, so things like surprise and novas can swing a combat more significantly. Barbarians and battlemasters can make nova decisions, while rogues and monks can be involved in surprise, though the latter isn't really in-combat as much as before-combat.

doctorhook · Jun 1, 2015

In my game, I made a laminated, double-sided handout of the Action options and Attack options (disarm, shove, distract, etc.) from the PH and DMG, and I've encouraged my melee players to make good use of those tactical options. The idea is that my fighters and barbarians should know when and how to do simple tactical maneuvers that benefit them. I don't have the file with me at the moment, but I'll upload it later if you like.

I've also thought that one of the only steps backwards that 5E took was the breadth of actions some monsters have in combat--dragons in particular. Breath weapons in 5E are kinda boring; in 4E, a blue dragon's breath weapon was basically chain lightning. I miss those kinds of unique attacks, and at one point I started 4E-ifying my 5E dragons.

D&D 5E 5e--combats are too "same-y"?

brehobit

Explorer

Warmaster Horus

Explorer

ad_hoc

(they/them)

The Crimson Binome

Hero

SteveC

Doing the best imitation of myself

JackOfAllTirades

Explorer

iserith

Magic Wordsmith

Sacrosanct

Legend

I'm A Banana

Potassium-Rich

doctorhook

Legend

Similar Threads