D&D 3E/3.5 3.5/PF - Some Ideas for speeding combat.

[PowerMaster]

Hi to all,

I am going to run a Pathfinder campaign in some weeks from now.

We will start at 1st level but I would really like to bring my players toward high levels (say 11+ not epic).

My biggest concerns (due to past experiences) is on how the game became more complex because of higher levels play, but also because of some mechanics that are present even in the starting levels.

So I was wondering on how to speed and simplify combat on a 3.5 (pathfinder) framework. I need simplification and fast combat because we have time constraint and different levels of players' skills (some are beginners).

I detected some major problems that bother me actually:
1) Keeping track of multiple spell's effects or conditions
2) Keeping track of multiple durations.
3) Dealing with situations that generate a cascade of effects. For example some conditions and some effects that give bonus/penalties to ability scores.

My thoughts (that I will develop later, hopefully with your advice):
1a) Simplify the mechanics of stackable bonuses: reduce types so they don't stack or define a smaller set of always stackable bonus

1b) Reduce the number of conditions, and those remaining will be simplified for giving only clear/self-contained bonuses/penalties (e.g. a straight -2 to AC and not -2 to Dex. A straight +2 to hit and damage and not a +Y to STR).

2) Eliminate various rules for durations, make them last for the encounter or for the whole day (or another easy-to-understand-and-manage duration). Less tracking to do.

3) Eliminate those spells or conditions that imply a lot of on-the-fly recalculation (damage/bonus to ability scores, level draining).

I need some tips on how to model those modifications.

Disclaimer, I know that seems that I want to bastardize a 3.5/PF game. In truth I want to make some simplifications. Like shifting it toward the good things of the 4E that I like.

I repeat, some of the players I will have are not quick. They don't have a math-friendly or logic/optimizating mindset.
Telling them to recalculate theirs to hit, damage and AC due to an Enlarge spell will be a pain... paid with errors and delays on the table. I cannot even find people that care to write in a separate piece of paper their final to hit and damage bonues after various buffs: they recalculate (slowly and with errors) at every rolling (they even confuse dices! Why people who need a d20 and a d10 keep a mound of various size in front of them and cannot discern between a d12 and a d20 or between a d8 or d10??? /offtopic rant).

I hope you forgive me for the heresy I just wrote in this ugly english.
Just please give some advices to a DM that saw too many campaigns fail due to complexities, delay and brokeness** at certain levels.

Those are the constraints I have guys: Pathfinder rules and not 4E (but this is also my choice), time constraints of sessions (2.5-3h max) and skills efficiency of players.

Cheers and Thanks

PM

* I am not a 4E fan and neither a 4E enemy. I am more skewed toward a 3.5/Pathfinder taste (I began playing with 2E). Said that, while I dislike a little the 4E and don't play it, I really adore some of its mechanics/concept and I don't have too much problem adapting to its dissociate mechanics.

** I will use only core resources for this campaign (PF Player handbook) and no prestige classes or splat books (present or future). Too much extra material contribute to brokeness.

 

[Dandu]

Using an online character sheet which recalculates stats, bonuses, and etc as you change your ability scores makes things much easier.

I find that keeping status effects and durations on a whiteboard helps as you can write down which round of combat you are on, which round a status effect occurs, and how long the duration is.

I will use only core resources for this campaign (PF Player handbook) and no prestige classes or splat books (present or future). Too much extra material contribute to brokeness.

Er... yeah, about that... you know those base classes that get 9th level spells you find in the PF Player's Handbook?

 

[PowerMaster]

Using an online character sheet which recalculates stats, bonuses, and etc as you change your ability scores makes things much easier.

I considered it. We play at a location that now has also some IT support (a monitor, a printer I believe even a notebook but I have a netbook).

But frankly, I would try to go without computer. I hate computers (btw I am a software developer ).
The digital way will be considered when the level of stress will be too much (but I don't have experience and lack some tools).

I find that keeping status effects and durations on a whiteboard helps as you can write down which round of combat you are on, which round a status effect occurs, and how long the duration is.

We (as player but also as DM) always use to write some set of dots on an angle of the board, for our duration. Organized people use they sheets of paper. I will consider buying a whiteboard or bringing my poker chips as counter.

Er... yeah, about that... you'll know those base classes that get 9th level spells you find in the PF Player's Handbook?

Sadly, I know!
That's why I should have written: "splat books with a lot of player's options will surely contribute to an inherent and already-packaged-in-core brokeness of high level play".

Cheers

off-topic ps: what a shame! I had to use google translate (1st time) for learn on how to write "I should have written". I need english reparation classes

 

[Dandu]

Just curious, but have you considered a hyrbid of PF and 3.5 that undoes some of the nerfs PF handed out to rogues, fighters, and bards?

I repeat, some of the players I will have are not quick. They don't have a math-friendly or logic/optimizating mindset.

I think this is the crux of the problem. Have you considered replacing their parietal lobes with cortical processors?

 

[PowerMaster]

Just curious, but have you considered a hyrbid of PF and 3.5 that undoes some of the nerfs PF handed out to rogues, fighters, and bards?

I have the player handbook and I am reading it casually* those days. Sincerly, I don't think that those classes were nerfed. I really like the pathfinder fighter. I like a more robust rogue... for the bard I cannot say, it is a class I don't know too well.
If I must make an hybrid (on concepts), I prefer a Pathfinder/4E with all the mathematical adjustment needed.

I think this is the crux of the problem. Have you considered replacing their parietal lobes with cortical processors?

What a dream! Imagine they resolving in a heartbeat a full round attack routine with buff and situational bonus changing between attack.

PM

 

[Dandu]

I have the player handbook and I am reading it casually* those days. Sincerly, I don't think that those classes were nerfed. I really like the pathfinder fighter. I like a more robust rogue... for the bard I cannot say, it is a class I don't know too well.

Off the top of my head, bards can use their music for level/rounds. This adds to book keeping and reduces the amount of times the bard can be useful. Why this nerf was necessary is puzzling as Bards were never that powerful in core, and were never overpowered outside of it.

Rogues got to sneak attack everything, but spells that allowed them to sneak attack easier, for example, the Blink spell, no longer allow them to do so. It's something of a stealth nerf. Kinda makes it hard to get off a sneak attack if you don't have a flanking buddy, and makes archery based rogues unfeasible.

Also, no sneak attacking with flasks of acid and alchemists's fire at the enemy's touch AC.

If you look back at my first post you will see (along with some grammatical corrections) threads discussing the changes PF made. I'd give more weight to Saph's as it was published after the PF PHB came out, while Frank's was posted during the beta. Unfortunately, Saph doesn't talk as much about stealth nerfs as she should, but they do get mentioned in the thread.

 

[Alexander123]

I considered it. We play at a location that now has also some IT support (a monitor, a printer I believe even a notebook but I have a netbook).

But frankly, I would try to go without computer. I hate computers (btw I am a software developer ).
The digital way will be considered when the level of stress will be too much (but I don't have experience and lack some tools).

I think this is a colossally bad idea. The reason being that your hatred of computers is irrational. It only makes sense to use computers to speed up calculations which are one of the things which slow down combat to a halt.

Electronic character sheets are absolutely indispensible if you want to speed up game play.

 

[Dandu]

You may want to consider rephrasing that statement, Howard.

An Excel sheet (some are available from this site) would work wonders, but if you really don't want to use one, you kinda have to get your players used to calculations and mental math.

Otherwise 4e may be best.

 

[Alexander123]

One question Dandu, since you brought it up.

Why do you say 4e may be best? I haven't played it so I don't know what changes they have made to the system.

 

[PowerMaster]

Off the top of my head, bards can use their music for level/rounds. This adds to book keeping and reduces the amount of times the bard can be useful. Why this nerf was necessary is puzzling as Bards were never that powerful in core, and were never overpowered outside of it.

Rogues got to sneak attack everything, but spells that allowed them to sneak attack easier, for example, the Blink spell, no longer allow them to do so. It's something of a stealth nerf. Kinda makes it hard to get off a sneak attack if you don't have a flanking buddy, and makes archery based rogues unfeasible.

Also, no sneak attacking with flasks of acid and alchemists's fire at the enemy's touch AC.

If you look back at my first post you will see (along with some grammatical corrections) threads discussing the changes PF made. I'd give more weight to Saph's as it was published after the PF PHB came out, while Frank's was posted during the beta. Unfortunately, Saph doesn't talk as much about stealth nerfs as she should, but they do get mentioned in the thread.

Ok, now I understand your points about rogues and bard.
And Thanks for those links, although I already stumbled on them days ago (I especially like the 3.5<->PF handbook threadI).

I think this is a colossally stupid idea. The reason being that your hatred of computers is irrational. It only makes sense to use computers to speed up calculations which are one of the things which slow down combat to a halt.

Believe me my "hatred" of computer is very rational instead! I work with them all day long, keep them away from me when I relax playing
(btw... I was also a little sarcastic , and ... IIRC a colossal stupid idea has +32 size bonus to strenght and -8 racial penalty to INT? )

Electronic character sheets are absolutely indispensible if you want to speed up game play.

I think I would need something for quick applying of effects and statuses. But I am still reluctant, I fear that having a computer on which I am continually inputting data and giving attention would shift that last from the action and the player (and the flavor). But again, I never used a pc (on the gaming table) so I cannot say.

You may want to consider rephrasing that statement, Howard.

An Excel sheet (some are available from this site) would work wonders, but if you really don't want to use one, you kinda have to get your players used to calculations and mental math.

Otherwise 4e may be best.

4E may be best, but I believe that the workload (on book keeping) is only slightly inferior than 3.5. Those succession of 1 round conditions, aura, ongoing damage, marks... (take with a grain of salt, I am not a good 4e connoisseur, but please gents don't derail this thread on an edition war because of my slightly uninformed comments on 4e).

Ok. Now I know that I should switch to 4E or use digital helper. But that I already knew before starting this thread.

Any tips on some house-rules / modification / 4e-hybridization for my impending PF campaign? What about my proposals on 1st post?