D&D 5E Speeding Up Combat

[Celtavian]

None of these answers help me. Not saying the advice is bad. The issue is not the players, as they are pretty quick in their decisions. The number of combats aren't the issue as they vary based upon what happens from session to session, and some sessions have none.

I have mostly noticed that enemies with more than 100 hit points take a while to kill. Maybe the party isn't doing as much damage as they should. Oh well.

Might we ask how long an average combat is?

I know for my group an average combat with nine players taking actions including two DM controlled NPCs and four monsters like Umber Hulks takes 5 to 10 minutes to run at level 4. A combat against 7 PCs and four mummies, one highly advanced CR 9 wraith, and 8 specters takes about 20 to 25 minutes. Are your combats taking longer than that? Shorter? Or about the same?

 

[Rhenny]

My combats have speeded up immensely from Pathfinder. But I could run Pathfinder combats relatively fast. It was often the players that slowed things down because it took them a while to make choices. 5E has limited their choices making combat faster.

The reason I can run combats as quickly as I do has more to do with memory than any tactic I can offer. I memorize everyone's initiative. I quickly go around the table. I know exactly what the monsters are going to do each round and waste no time having them execute their actions. I memorize the attack and damage modifiers of all the monsters. I can pretty much run the game in my head without looking at the books very often. If I miss something because of an unusual circumstance, I don't worry about it. I keep going to keep the combat going. It's very hard to offer advice that amounts to, "Use your memory more efficiently and make sure you know everything you'll need to know so you don't waste time looking at the books."

Memory is key. Also, make sure players (and DM) roll d20 before they look at or for the modifiers. Often, as DM, I can narrate the effect based on the d20 roll and my memory (or even approximation) of the applicable bonus. I love the Critical Role series at Geek and Sundry, but so often the players wait too long to roll the dice searching for their bonuses. That drives me nuts.

 

[Uchawi]

Fewer. If you can count the things, it's fewer, if you can't, it's less. There's less water in the glass after you take a sip, but fewer M&Ms in the bowl after you take a handful.

/grammar nazi threadjack complete

Thanks. Another way you can look at the simple rule is to use less for singular nouns and fewer for plural nouns.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Thanks. Another way you can look at the simple rule is to use less for singular nouns and fewer for plural nouns.

That gets complicated with moose.

 

[Azurewraith]

That gets complicated with moose.

Or sheep the English language is God awful. Even worse with today's youth and all those Americanisms

 

[iserith]

You guys must be super-fun at parties.

 

[Azurewraith]

You guys must be super-fun at parties.

Oh I am

 

[BoldItalic]

Back on topic, does the OP want less combat or fewer combats? Or that monsters are less monstrous with fewer hit points?

 

[Azurewraith]

Back on topic, does the OP want less combat or fewer combats?

I thought it was quicker combat.

 

[BoldItalic]

I thought it was quicker combat.

Yes, but less combat means quicker combats (for example if the monsters are less combative and give up sooner).