Why do 4e combats grind?

[mach1.9pants]

Can we replace 'DPS' with 'DPR' in future discussions please? 'Damage Per Second' really has no meaning in D&D, and my irrational nit-pick-o-meter is twitching.

Nope I refuse! DPS is a recognised TLA* (and I loathe MMORPGs) whereas DPR is not






*TLA: Three Letter Abbreviation

 

[gribble]

I will have monsters who are marked by the Fighter shift away, getting attacked. I figure that the monster doesn't know about that ability and that it's a lame ability to have if it never gets used.

The monsters shouldn't be doing it out of ignorance - the 4e rules are pretty clear that creatures are always aware of any conditions affecting them, including being marked.

 

[LostSoul]

The monsters shouldn't be doing it out of ignorance - the 4e rules are pretty clear that creatures are always aware of any conditions affecting them, including being marked.

Right - they know they are marked, but they don't know the Fighter has the Combat Superiority (or is it Combat Challenge?) feature.

That's a possible way of reading it, I think. That's what I decided to go with so that I could see more Fighter goodness in action. (Once he does it, then I consider that the NPCs know his trick, and he becomes Mr. Sticky.)

 

[gribble]

That's a possible way of reading it, I think.

I interpret it as "creatures always know what the side-effects of any action will be, and should make decisions accordingly". I.e.: some low Int creatures just may not care, or some high Int creatures may decide the benefit is worth the risk. This is primarily because if the monsters don't know the side-effects of a PCs mark, then the PCs won't know the side-effects of a monsters mark, which goes against the "no surprises" guideline in the DMG.

I think it's fair to say you could interpret it either way though, as the fighter class feature technically isn't a condition affecting the creature.

 

[Pseudopsyche]

Right - they know they are marked, but they don't know the Fighter has the Combat Superiority (or is it Combat Challenge?) feature.

That's a possible way of reading it, I think. That's what I decided to go with so that I could see more Fighter goodness in action. (Once he does it, then I consider that the NPCs know his trick, and he becomes Mr. Sticky.)

I play my monsters the same way--at least the ones that are intelligent enough even to understand marking. I agree that otherwise the class ability simply doesn't come up often enough.

 

[Felon]

There seem to be two factors that stand for combat grind:
1) The actual length of in-game combat. Do you need 12 rounds? Do you need 4 rounds?
2) The length of each round, depending on how fast the players decide on their action and have it resolved.

I think it's a gross mistake to try to define grinding as something measured in either real time or rounds. Grinding doesn't occur because some unit of measurement is exceeded; players can go two hours without feeling a grind coming on. Conversely, a forty-minute battle can feel like it took forever.

The grind isn't about the overall length of combat. Rather, it's about that point in a battle where interesting events (which in 4e is chiefly about power availability) seem to have dried up, and the battle degenerates into monotonous hotkey-mashing. Unfortunately, in most fights players have more incentive to nova away their encounter powers in round 1 than they do to conserve them.

I think this was a good juncture at which to borrow some more notes from WoW--namely, copy the warrior and rogue's combat styles, which in WoW consist of using baseline attacks (i.e. at-wills) to build up and empower their more potent attacks (i.e. encounters and dailies). The effect would be that the player is either feeling the tension and anticipation of building up to his Sunday punch, or the pure pleasure of cutting loose; it's dynamic resource management. D&D 4e copies the hotkey bar, but left out the resource management.

 

[ExploderWizard]

The grind isn't about the overall length of combat. Rather, it's about that point in a battle where interesting events (which in 4e is chiefly about power availability) seem to have dried up, and the battle degenerates into monotonous hotkey-mashing. Unfortunately, in most fights players have more incentive to nova away their encounter powers in round 1 than they do to conserve them.

The DM needs to make sure that the decent monsters have phases that can make unloading all the power up front a bad idea. Really, as long as we are using button mashing combat anyhow we might as well have more mobs that pull WAHOO powers out of any available orifice at certain health levels/conditions. Make the players lrn2dps slowly, " and by slowly I mean......"

What if ogres did 3X damage when at 1/4 hp or less? How about rolling a die for a troll? It will go berserk for the round scoring automatic crits on any hit (1 in 6 chance, check each round with chance increasing by another 1 in 6 every other round). This kind of stuff would help keep the fingers a little further away from the strong attack button.

 

[Dausuul]

I think this was a good juncture at which to borrow some more notes from WoW--namely, copy the warrior and rogue's combat styles, which in WoW consist of using baseline attacks (i.e. at-wills) to build up and empower their more potent attacks (i.e. encounters and dailies). The effect would be that the player is either feeling the tension and anticipation of building up to his Sunday punch, or the pure pleasure of cutting loose; it's dynamic resource management. D&D 4e copies the hotkey bar, but left out the resource management.

Yeah, I'm on board with that. A simple "power-up" mechanic need not complicate the game particularly and could add a lot more excitement and strategy, particularly if you have to decide whether to keep charging for a big payoff or strike now.

What if ogres did 3X damage when at 1/4 hp or less? How about rolling a die for a troll? It will go berserk for the round scoring automatic crits on any hit (1 in 6 chance, check each round with chance increasing by another 1 in 6 every other round). This kind of stuff would help keep the fingers a little further away from the strong attack button.

Doesn't that just mean grind comes at the start of the battle instead of the end?

 

[LostSoul]

The grind isn't about the overall length of combat. Rather, it's about that point in a battle where interesting events (which in 4e is chiefly about power availability) seem to have dried up, and the battle degenerates into monotonous hotkey-mashing. Unfortunately, in most fights players have more incentive to nova away their encounter powers in round 1 than they do to conserve them.

How was this avoided in earlier editions of D&D?

 

[Dausuul]

How was this avoided in earlier editions of D&D?

Sometimes it was avoided by trading grind for swinginess. Other times it wasn't avoided at all. Does it matter?