PCs fleeing thru Sigil's sewers on Friday the 13th

[Quickleaf]

5 players total, although last Friday there were only 3. We play Essentials only, use Group Initiative and I cut HP by about a third for all monsters.

We're finding our groove, which has been about a 10 month process.

Huh. 5 in my group too, mostly non-Essentials, I pre-determine monster initiative, and halve monster HP for standards (among many other monster tweaks). Thing is this particular group came together just last month thru a bit of serendipity, and we started at 6th level with new PCs, so we're still in the learning phase.

15-45 minutes been the norm for us, so far. But I don't throw a leveled encounter at them every time and have gone to lengths to shorten combat. It's an ongoing process.

What are some of your tricks?

I await it expectantly!

Well before Friday I need to assemble and paint 20 skaven GW minis (posing as wererats). Maybe when the PCs see all of them traipsing around a retreat could be sounded.... Then again they just might yell the name of their deity, flip over a cot, and attack the wererats en masse.

A sneaky reference to the 2e PHB's introduction to D&D.


[MENTION=98255]Nemesis Destiny[/MENTION] I've noticed the same thing in 4e. A game with 3 or 4 players goes noticeably faster than 5 or 6 (of course), but my sense is it's exacerbated by something systematic in the rules.

 

[Viking Bastard]

What are some of your tricks?

I'm not a good tactical player. I think it's mostly that, really.

Edited to add: I use Haze's Hit Box system, I have yet to throw a condition other than Immobilized (once) at the players and I use Group Initiative.

The party is still only 4th level. Because my players are all newbies, I've been introducing elements one-by-one to the game, as I didn't want to overwhelm them. We've yet to use Action Points, for instance.

I do worry that the combats are gonna get longer.

 

[Nemesis Destiny]

A sneaky reference to the 2e PHB's introduction to D&D.

That was Ignatz! He was my brother! Rawr!

@Nemesis Destiny I've noticed the same thing in 4e. A game with 3 or 4 players goes noticeably faster than 5 or 6 (of course), but my sense is it's exacerbated by something systematic in the rules.

Yeah, conditions tracking, decision points, and interrupts. This can be very group-dependent as well, i.e. some players get analysis paralysis. Given the number of options and decision points in tactical combat, it can become more of an issue than under previous systems.

Knowing what your character can do, and making decisions ahead of time can help, as can deciding not to care if every move is tactically perfect. It's not chess - it's supposed to be a chaotic melee - and it's easy to lose sight of this at times.

(I'm not directing this at anyone specifically, it's just easier to write this way sometimes)

 

[Dr_Ruminahui]

I actually find that having an extra player speeds up combat. My core group of 4 doesn't hand out much damage - it's a wizard, a pacifist cleric, a warlord/wizard hybrid & a chaladin (so, not even a strong melee basic for the warlord to order around). However, I sometimes have a two-weapon ranger - and find that when I do the fights run faster, even adding monsters to keep the challenge rating the same.

So, while I do think that generally smaller parties will generally play faster than large parties, its a bit more complicated than that, and that the party's ability to deal damage is a large part of how fast things go.

 

[Quickleaf]

Edited to add: I use Haze's Hit Box system, I have yet to throw a condition other than Immobilized (once) at the players and I use Group Initiative.

Do you find Hit Boxes actually speed up the game? I remember trying it out once secretly on my side and it seemed like it took about the same amount of time, just maybe required less mental energy.

With group initiative do you have conditions/effects last until the creature ends its turn (as opposed to when the creature's *side* ends their turn)?
I'm tempted to try out Group Initiative, there are only two things holding me back: screwing high-initiative PCs by using average initiative, and making delay/hold actions a headache if they'd intermix PC and monster turns. What's your experience been?

 

[Viking Bastard]

Yeah, conditions tracking, [...] and interrupts.

Neither of which have gotten any use in my games. I want to use conditions, but I'm wary.

[...]...as can deciding not to care if every move is tactically perfect. It's not chess - it's supposed to be a chaotic melee - and it's easy to lose sight of this at times.

This is kind of what I mean by not being a very tactical player. I implore my players to go with their instincts and not worry too much about it all.

 

[Viking Bastard]

Do you find Hit Boxes actually speed up the game? I remember trying it out once secretly on my side and it seemed like it took about the same amount of time, just maybe required less mental energy.

I don't know, really. Maybe. I like it a lot, but my adaptation of it has nothing to do with speeding up combat, but rather mental clutter. It's easier for me to keep track of the visual of a bunch of boxes, rather than a collection of numbers. I feel faster, but that may just be the feeling of a tidier brain.

With group initiative do you have conditions/effects last until the creature ends its turn (as opposed to when the creature's *side* ends their turn)?

No. All Saves take place at the beginning of each side's turn. Players/monsters can use their actions in whatever order they want (A uses a Standard; B uses a Standard and Move; C uses a Minor; A then uses a Move and a Minor; etc.), but if a player/monster has Saves to be rolled, they must roll them before they can take any actions.

I know this messes with some powers, but there have been no headaches so far.

I'm tempted to try out Group Initiative, there are only two things holding me back: screwing high-initiative PCs by using average initiative [...]

Yeah. I don't know yet how to deal with that. One of the players' Initiative is way higher than the rest of the party. She doesn't seem to mind, but I want to fix that somehow.

...and making delay/hold actions a headache if they'd intermix PC and monster turns. What's your experience been?

Hasn't come up yet.


But Group Initiative has been working great for us, overall. Much better party synergy and people feel less pressure when it's their turn.

 

[Quickleaf]

No. All Saves take place at the beginning of each side's turn. Players/monsters can use their actions in whatever order they want (A uses a Standard; B uses a Standard and Move; C uses a Minor; A then uses a Move and a Minor; etc.), but if a player/monster has Saves to be rolled, they must roll them before they can take any actions.

I know this messes with some powers, but there have been no headaches so far.

Wow, so you put saving throws at the start of each side's turn instead of at the end? So that makes "until end of next turn" powers much stronger, since there's a chance a save ends power might not effect you at all if you save against it at the start of your turn's side... Or have you changed "until end of next turn" powers too?

Forgive all the questions. I'm just not at all familiar with what you do running group initiative.

Yeah. I don't know yet how to deal with that. One of the players' Initiative is way higher than the rest of the party. She doesn't seem to mind, but I want to fix that somehow.

Well she is contributing to a higher average initiative for the entire party right? If you wanted to spotlight her individual quick reflexes you could give her a surprise round every now and then.

But Group Initiative has been working great for us, overall. Much better party synergy and people feel less pressure when it's their turn.

Yeah the more you talk about it, the more it sounds like the benefits outweigh the drawbacks. Especially for allowing the players to take their turns in an organic fashion and letting the more prepared go first.

I'll run this by my group and see what they think about testing it out.

 

[Viking Bastard]

Wow, so you put saving throws at the start of each side's turn instead of at the end? So that makes "until end of next turn" powers much stronger, since there's a chance a save ends power might not effect you at all if you save against it at the start of your turn's side... Or have you changed "until end of next turn" powers too?

Actually, I powered up "Save Ends" powers. You don't get to Save the turn after you're hit. I figured that since the attack had already hit, it made in-game sense. It was just more organic to do Saves at the start of Turns. In the first session using GI, we did Saves at the end of Turns, but it messed with the flow of play. "Save first, then act" just worked better for us.

This is all WiP, though, and will probably change/get fine-tuned over time. There haven't been that many Saves per session so far, really, so it may start to chafe later.

Well she is contributing to a higher average initiative for the entire party right? If you wanted to spotlight her individual quick reflexes you could give her a surprise round every now and then.

Since she's the only one with Initiative worth a damn, the Group Initiative only goes up by one point. I've been thinking about giving her an extra action at the start of combat, maybe, or something like that.

I also want to do something similar for 'quick' monsters.

Yeah the more you talk about it, the more it sounds like the benefits outweigh the drawbacks. Especially for allowing the players to take their turns in an organic fashion and letting the more prepared go first.

That's by far the biggest strength of the system. But results may vary. I have played more games in my gaming career that use some kind of a group/side Initiative system than ones that use the 3e/4e model, so I'm very comfortable with it.

 

[Quickleaf]

[MENTION=509]Viking Bastard[/MENTION]
You know I never thought of this till now but the gaming groups I've been part of have tended to suggest new players start with a ranger or rogue - often with the highest initiative. So there we were asking the newest player to (often) act first in combat. Which explains how often I saw new players say "Uh...I wait to see what (someone else) does."

Thanks for breakig down your group initiative system. If you get the chance, write it up in a post or blog. It's certainly piqued my interest.