D&D 4E Streamlined 4e combat

Myrhdraak said:

With the Bounded Accuracy rules I have in the 4.5 Edition the "To-Hit" issue you have when facing tougher challenges in 4th Edition somewhat disappears. The cumulative bonuses and penalties do not become as important to hit. Damage and Hit Points becomes more important and allow you to use a wider level range of monsters. However, if you still find it an issues, you could consider adopting the advantage concept from 5th Edition which is more straight forward I would say.

Click to expand...

Yeah, in my game I didn't set out to use 'bounded accuracy' per-se. I don't really subscribe to Mearles logic on that to be honest. Still, I did end up with a more compressed overall bonus range. In 20 levels you get about 17 point increase in attack bonus, so maybe half what 4e gives you overall (there are only 20 levels in HoML). The idea was less about broadening the range of monster effectiveness across levels and more about just de-emphasizing the constant bonus seeking. The most benefit you can get from permanent bonuses is generally +3 (they don't stack, if you had a +3 weapon then you've pretty much maxed your permanent bonus, though +3 weapons are pretty much mythic items). Likewise +5 is the maximum attribute bonus (and attribute increases are modest, you could start with a +4 and likely increase that by one over the course of the game). I did find that I had to have a bit stronger level bonus than in 4e to keep damage and hit point increases in check though. The upshot is you don't NEED to run after pluses. Even if you had NOTHING but what you started with at level 1 you'd only be behind the most maxed-out PC by 4 points of attack bonus at 20th level. Significant, but small enough that you could compensate with other build elements.

The upshot is, the range of levels you can use a monster at is numerically about the same as 4e, but that represents a 50% greater swath of the total play range. By level 5 you are about 3 points ahead of level 1, and the level 5 damage expression is about 2x the level 1 damage expression. Level 5 monsters have about 2x the hit points of level 1 monsters as well, and of course their defenses will increase by about 3 points. PCs actually don't quite keep up in base damage increases and hit points, though they aren't far behind. The difference is made up more by increases in their other capabilities. Power effects tend to be a little more weighty in HoML, but simpler to handle and a little less frequent (you can trade 'surges' for more power uses though, which is an interesting dynamic).

I think you end up feeling a bit more outmatched in raw fighting damage-generation than in 4e, where PCs tend to be quite far ahead on that score. It FEELS more dangerous, and it can BE more dangerous if you get into a bad spot, but you always have the option to dig into your daily resources and fix it. At least if you don't keep getting into those spots! I feel like this rewards thoughtful play a bit more. 4e is tactical, but it tends to reward just wading in and relying on clever combos and such to be your edge. That might not be enough in a HoML game...

AbdulAlhazred said:

Certainly combat in 13a isn't in any sense 'tactical' (I'm sure there are tactics in some sense, but it isn't built around concepts of maneuver and tactical principles). I never liked the way it eschews a common power system either, I thought that was a great strength of 4e, and the 13a classes come across as rather incoherent designs.

Click to expand...

Well, regarding the tactical combat, we'll probably have to agree to disagree. It lacks some of the dynamic of 4e's maneuvering of course, since movement is abstract, but the system still rewards (and requires) good tactics.
I have yet to see a better tactical combat system than 4e's, but it comes at the cost of taking more time.

Instead of the common power system 4e used in its beginning, 13th Age represents 4e Essentials in that it offers the whole scale from very simple, beginner-friendly classes without any powers to complex classes that have the whole range of dynamic attacks, powers and rituals. But even the most complex classes are still rather easy to play compared to D&D 3e.

Personally, I wouldn't consider playing any of the low-complexity classes since I'd probably get bored by them rather quickly, but there's plenty of great choices remaining. Also, with the introduction of multiclassing rules in '13 True Ways', these simple classes make for good choices as secondary classes.

I'm not sure which approach is better. It probably depends on the group. In our group no player ever asked for classes that were easier to play than the standard 4e classes, but we're all veterans.

Nevvur said:

Anyone know of some collected house rule sets for more streamlined combat mechanics in 4e?

Click to expand...

Someone collected a huge set of these house rules and put them all together in one book. They called it 13th Age Core.

Seriously, though, you should look at 13th Age because it is in many ways 4e with an eye towards streamlining combat. Even if you don't wind up using it ideas like the escalation die could be ported over to 4e pretty easily.

D'karr said:

The combat fiddliness area is where I have done the most house ruling tweaks, which I'm not putting here because of length.

Click to expand...

Hi D'karr, I read your post and am very interested in seeing these house rules of yours. In fact, I subscribed to the forum for this purpose. Unfortunately, the fact I only subscribed now also means I can't send you a PM because I didn't write the minimum required amount of posts yet. So I'm trying to reach you like this and would very much appreciate your response

LordSchnulzBulz said:

Hi D'karr, I read your post and am very interested in seeing these house rules of yours. In fact, I subscribed to the forum for this purpose. Unfortunately, the fact I only subscribed now also means I can't send you a PM because I didn't write the minimum required amount of posts yet. So I'm trying to reach you like this and would very much appreciate your response

Click to expand...

You can create a 'mention', like [MENTION=336]D'karr[/MENTION] which most users will get a notice about.

Thank you very much!

Also, your HoML sounds quite interesting, too... I wouldn't mind taking a look at that, if you feel like sharing it ;-)

LordSchnulzBulz said:

Thank you very much!

Also, your HoML sounds quite interesting, too... I wouldn't mind taking a look at that, if you feel like sharing it ;-)

Click to expand...

I keep prodding him to fully develop HoML but I also hand him ideas that have him rewriting things every time he turns around so its partly my fault.

Garthanos said:

I keep prodding him to fully develop HoML but I also hand him ideas that have him rewriting things every time he turns around so its partly my fault.

Click to expand...

LOL, well this is somewhat true. Honestly I have been kind of in another world the last several months, not doing a lot of work on it. I must say, the whole question of simplified hit points and 'combat modes' in the 'What Sticks' thread could lead to deep reworking of the basic combat engine, assuming I really want to go that far.

Already HoML has the issue that, at high levels, you get to large and unwieldy dice quantities. There are obviously ways to fix that (d6 for instance simply let you average the first N dice and only roll a few 'on top' if you wished vs rolling 30 or 40 d6). Those ways are not terrible, but the option of reducing or eliminating increases in hit points and using some kind of 'shift' mechanism IS tempting.

In a nutshell you'd have a relatively limited number of hit points, say maybe 30 give or take, with elites and solos getting 2 or 4-5 times that, and minions 1 or a small number (less than 5) but with the 'die or take no damage' rule in effect. Then you'd just rely on defenses and attack bonuses to provide all the 'power curve', with PCs getting the option to 'act like an elite' or 'act like a minion' (IE as an 'elite' your attack bonus would go down but you'd get more attacks and a better defense, and 'act like a minion' would do the opposite). This would let you fight a wider range of creatures. There COULD also still be a small hit point increase, and there could definitely be an increase in the pool of HS with levels (more than in 4e since the size of each HS would be fixed). I have a feeling though that this kind of a system would tend to discount the sense of 'epic scale'. Anyway...

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1hDqxN9WDlPUruYUIuDZo1YJcMcEqMSLm links to a pretty fresh version. It is never really entirely clean, but you could probably play, at low levels, with some classes. There simply really aren't enough boons sorted out, and some things need to be reworked to conform to the current design. Still, its cool.

Nevvur said:

Thanks for the input, everyone.

@Tony Vargas, 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.

Click to expand...

I think that folding all off turn powers and action options into 1 Reaction per round helps, but it does reduce off turn engagement somewhat.

Otherwise, make untyped bonuses not stack with other untyped bonuses, and tighten up the circumstantial stuff that doesn’t come from powers and feats and items. Maybe simplify item bonuses to all always give an “item bonus”, which never stacks with other item bonus, etc.

youll still have engaging, complex combat, but it’s less likely to get out of hand.

On the encounter design end of things, you’ll want fewer enemy turns. Combine groups of minions into a single turn, roll 1 attack and compare it to all affected characters’ defense, and use more elites and fewer standards and brutes.

Also, retrofit 5e legendary actions, and lair actions, to your boss enemies, and reduce the number of enemies. This way, there are fewer turns, just as many factors to consider, and equally engaging enemy rounds.

doctorbadwolf said:

I think that folding all off turn powers and action options into 1 Reaction per round helps, but it does reduce off turn engagement somewhat.

Click to expand...

I feel it makes the artificiality of turn based combat more obvious to me... in 1e action was planned but simultaneous. (relying on the DM to merge them)