D&D 4E Streamlined 4e combat
- Thread starter Nevvur
- Start date
I just google searched it, sorry that I couldn't find anything more specific "sets of rules":
https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/2j9dom/how_can_you_do_4e_combat_quickly_or_just_faster/
https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1642i4/any_house_rules_for_speeding_up_4e_combat/
https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/2j9dom/how_can_you_do_4e_combat_quickly_or_just_faster/
https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1642i4/any_house_rules_for_speeding_up_4e_combat/
Tony Vargas
Legend
Just do what 5e did and dial the combats back. Place fewer enemies with fewer options, on simpler terrain. Lower monster hps a bit, up their damage a bit.
Instead of the typical at-exp-budget equal-number-of-Standard monsters, Elite + minions, and Solo encounters, use Elites as Solos, consistently have the party out-number standards, and use all-minion encounters freely.
Maybe around half the exp budget, but twice as many encounters.
Right in this forum:
Last edited:
RangerWickett
Legend
You could perhaps turn Dailies so they require a Long Rest of a week, and Encounters to they require a Short Rest of a Day, and then have smaller combats. But that would probably mean the PCs always win the first 7 encounters a week with no trouble.
I dunno. The appeal of 4e was the tactical combats with all their fiddliness. Everything is tuned around giving the players enough rounds of combat that they actually need to make meaningful decisions on what powers to use and when. If you shorten combats (e.g., have fewer rounds), tactical decisions become less meaningful, and you're taking away arguably the best element of 4e. If you try to shorten combats by just making the rounds go faster, hm, you might just run essentials, and disallow any attacks that mess up action economy (so no dazing or stunning, and maybe make tripping less of a chore by letting people spend half their speed to stand up).
I dunno. The appeal of 4e was the tactical combats with all their fiddliness. Everything is tuned around giving the players enough rounds of combat that they actually need to make meaningful decisions on what powers to use and when. If you shorten combats (e.g., have fewer rounds), tactical decisions become less meaningful, and you're taking away arguably the best element of 4e. If you try to shorten combats by just making the rounds go faster, hm, you might just run essentials, and disallow any attacks that mess up action economy (so no dazing or stunning, and maybe make tripping less of a chore by letting people spend half their speed to stand up).
Tony Vargas
Legend
It's kinda a machette-to-the-rule-book solution, but you could theoretically speed up rounds a lot by eliminating immediate actions, entirely, and turns by doing away with minor & free actions. Any power or item that calls for a minor, free, or immediate action, just *poof* banned/gone.
Thanks for the input, everyone.
[MENTION=996]Tony Vargas[/MENTION], that 4.5e guide was basically the sort of thing I hoped to find, but reading it, I realized the flaw in my quest. My memory of the uncomfortably long combats in 4e was more about the numerous and cumulative bonuses/penalties to every action than anything else. Magic weapon, flanking, racial feat, class feat, concealment penalty, and so on. I was hoping to find a 4e revision that addressed this specific issue, but as I revisit the core books and skim over that guide, I'm reminded how essential all those circumstantial modifiers are in delivering the tight tactical experience I otherwise loved.
In short, mine may have been a fool's errand. Still, I'll stick around and read whatever others have to say on the matter.
[MENTION=996]Tony Vargas[/MENTION], that 4.5e guide was basically the sort of thing I hoped to find, but reading it, I realized the flaw in my quest. My memory of the uncomfortably long combats in 4e was more about the numerous and cumulative bonuses/penalties to every action than anything else. Magic weapon, flanking, racial feat, class feat, concealment penalty, and so on. I was hoping to find a 4e revision that addressed this specific issue, but as I revisit the core books and skim over that guide, I'm reminded how essential all those circumstantial modifiers are in delivering the tight tactical experience I otherwise loved.
In short, mine may have been a fool's errand. Still, I'll stick around and read whatever others have to say on the matter.
Tony Vargas
Legend
Weapons, feats, &c are usually just bundled up into a bonus associated with the weapon/implement & power in question, so are available ahead of time - in the CB if you still had it, typically, or just written on your character sheet if you don't mind doing so in advance.
That leaves CA, which is just the one +2 bonus no matter how many times you may have it (no less than three ways, most rounds, for the epic-level rogues in my current campaign, for instance), concealment/cover, and any power bonus a leader or other ally may have given you.
You could take a page from 5e and toss all circumstantial modifiers into a binary Combat Advantage/Disadvantage state. Either just like 5e or +/- 2, if you want to keep it simple. If you have CA, +2, if CD -2 - if both (even if several of one and only one of the other), no modifier.
AbdulAlhazred
Legend
Precisely what I did in my own game, but it can hardly be called '4e' anymore really (though it is still not far off). In my rules system there are permanent bonuses, and they NEVER stack, level, ability, proficiency, and enhancement, that's it. Because none of them will vary (I guess enhancement and proficiency COULD if you switch weapons) and the ONLY situational modifier is (dis)advantage (5e style) things go quite quickly. There are conditions, but effects are generally either lasting the whole round or disappear at the end of the target's turn. In general combats seem to go pretty fast, though they still offer a wide range of tactical options.
Good to hear an actual play report. Did you find monsters needed redesign on an individual level? Encounter design? This is what tempered my excitement when Tony linked the 4.5e guide. Did the math generally work out without additional adjustment? For instance, if I were to run a 4e module, would the group have an approximately equal chance of success as a table who didn't implement the changes?
An aside, the source of my nostalgia is the fine class balance present in 4e. As I contemplate the sort of game I want to run, I have considered 4e + combat streamlining, 5e + class overhauls, and designing my own system from the ground up. I've already put a lot of work into the last option and will continue to do so. However, it's been a couple months since my last campaign ended and I'm getting itchy to resume DMing, while my own system is still a long ways off from being ready.
Raith5
Adventurer
Good luck! At this point is may be easier to add 4e elements (a tactical module if you will) to 5e than the other way around.
I think aside from adv/disadv, another element I would borrow from 5e is rewording minor action as bonus actions, ie you only get a minor action if you have a power and make quarrying/marking free actions. I found fishing around for minor actions in 4e to be anything but a minor inconvenience in terms of flow and time.
I think aside from adv/disadv, another element I would borrow from 5e is rewording minor action as bonus actions, ie you only get a minor action if you have a power and make quarrying/marking free actions. I found fishing around for minor actions in 4e to be anything but a minor inconvenience in terms of flow and time.
Similar Threads
AD6_gamerati_skyscraper
Recent & Upcoming Releases
-
April 16 2024 -
May 31 2024 -
June 3 2024 -
June 4 2024 -
June 18 2024 -
July 16 2024 -
September 17 2024 -
October 1 2024 -
November 12 2024 -
February 18 2025
