D&D General What are the “boring bits” to you?

Out of curiosity, have you ever tried playing miniature wargames?

overgeeked said:

When playing D&D (any edition), what are the boring bits you wish you could skip?

Try to be specific rather than general. If you don’t like combat, what parts of combat don’t you like? If you don’t like travel, what about travel don’t you like?

Click to expand...

Late to the party, but here at last.

I've never really found any aspect boring or something I would skip if the DM/group makes that aspect engaging.

Obviously that's the kicker, huh? If the DM/group doesn't make something engaging, any part can become a boring bit.

Of course, I agree with some of the others, but those points are more "frustrating" than boring for me. For example, a player taking too long to decide what their characters do, lengthy strategy sessions (especially once a strategy is in place and it is being "tweaked"), pointless NPC interaction, etc. I recognize these things are important in general, so I don't want them skipped, per se, but there are definitely times when I have to voice to the group, "Can we move things along, please?"

So, unfortunately, I can't really say there are any specific boring bits I'd rather skip in general. For me, every player (and the DM) should have time in the session to pursue what is important to them, even if it isn't something I'm keen on.

Meaningless die rolls. Admittedly, this is more of a problem with certain earlier editions of the game. It wastes valuable (and limited) play time on s*** that doesn’t matter.

Oh, there’s a locked box and no time pressure ? Yeah, we’re going to open it eventually. Just skip to that part. My shield was damaged in the fight and I gave Crafting and blacksmith’s tools? Feel free to roll a random encounter check but there is no benefit in rolling three times until I get a 10 or more on the die.

In town and not in an active combat situation, does it really matter if my 10th level fighter takes 1d6 damage because I rolled a nat 1 on climbing down a ladder?

And always, my personal favorite: roll an ability check. On a success you get a +1 to a check you may or may not make in the next hour.

In the same vein, meaningless random combat encounters that don’t advance the plot or provide actual attrition.

overgeeked said:

Exactly. I think we agreed as a table to cut 5-10% off the top of all incoming treasure so we could collectively handwave all the upkeep, rations, ammo, etc.

Absolutely. That's why I vastly prefer old-school combat. It's something dangerous that could go either way unless you drastically put things in your favor, and once you do...there's no point actually rolling. Win the fight before the dice are rolled. Mindlessly charging in and always winning is the epitome of boring to me.

Click to expand...

I've just been trying to do this on my side of the screen. I've given the players very little gold. I think all in, as a party of level 3 adventurers they would struggle to pull together 30 gold. With that said, I'm not making them track food, or ammo. They've had to pay for a few inn rooms, but that was more so I could give them the choice of private lodgings at a higher cost, or a dormitory style bunk where they might save a few coins and overhear some juicy rumors.

grimmgoose said:

Trash combats. IE, the kind of fights that 5E's "adventuring day" design pushes you towards* (1d6+2 goblins in the first room, a wight in the second room, all before the big goblin boss in the third room).

I would rather have one big fight that can be loud and crazy, with the volume cranked to 11.

*I hear the keyboards clacking now - the problem doesn't really rear its head until the latter-half of Tier 2, and yes, I'm sure better DMs can do one big fight at later levels, but that's just like, your opinion man.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I really have no idea how someone could fit what, like 6 fights into a single day? I can only imagine stretching a single in-game day over several sessions, which just sounds like a mess. Having to track spell slots and what not over potentially weeks of real life breaks sounds really annoying.

I find that in a typical 4 hour session I like one smaller fight, and one big fight. This way the PCs have to make choices about using their skills, and those that benefit from short rests get a chance to use one.

doctorbadwolf said:

When other players are impatient with the odd little interests of PCs that aren’t theirs. I’m very sorry that anything that isn’t directly “adventuring” bores you, Jimothy, but everyone else is having fun so maybe chill out.

Click to expand...

Yeah.. I've certainly been on both sides of this issue as a player before. Playing with a DM that favors a specific player, so you seem to spend a lot of time watching them roleplay out their personal story line. But at the same time I've also been in a group with a player who's attention span for anything non-combat related was perhaps 90 seconds, so even trying to RP with key NPCs to get story related information could quickly bore them.

As a new DM I'm trying very hard to keep an eye on my players and try to keep any one of them from getting too disconnected. Our session this weekend is shaping up to likely be a very RP intensive one and I'm nervous about it. Luckily my players are really good as far as their desire to work as a team goes.

doctorbadwolf said:

The Tiffany Problem used against the PCs.
That is, when someone’s false idea of accuracy in some context threatens the fun of other players because “people can’t do that” or “Tiffany is too modern a name”.

Click to expand...

This is really funny. I've never heard of anyone put this into words. I have a lot of newer players in my group so as we rolled up characters during our first session and names like Barb, Willy, Randy, and Beans were all thrown out, a small part inside of me was like "WTF.. Your silly level one sorceress is going to eventually be a super powerful mage! Do you really want her to be named BARB?!" But I decided to let it go and I'm glad I did. I wonder if Tim the Enchanter from the Holy Grail was actually a silly named sorcerer in some game John Cleese was playing.

painfully oversimplified combat with monsters that have no plausible chance of even inconveniencing PCs

Journeys for their own sake (when they are mostly conflict neutral). Playing out the trip between Waterdeep and Baldur's Gate when what we care about is in Baldur's Gate is dreadfully boring to me. If getting there is a harrowing adventure within itself (like travelling through the Mines of Moria) that can be fun, but if it's just a bunch of logistics or even worse just a travelogue I have no interest in spending table time on that.

Also, filler combat encounters to make everything fit an adventuring day. Hate those so much. So, so much.

Campbell said:

Journeys for their own sake (when they are mostly conflict neutral). Playing out the trip between Waterdeep and Baldur's Gate when what we care about is in Baldur's Gate is dreadfully boring to me. If getting there is a harrowing adventure within itself (like travelling through the Mines of Moria) that can be fun, but if it's just a bunch of logistics or even worse just a travelogue I have no interest in spending table time on that.

Click to expand...

I had this dilemma in my last session. The party was traveling several days away. I'm a new DM, with newer players, so I figured it might be fun to give them an outdoor wilderness travel adventure. I was thinking of plotting it out, putting obstacles in their way, coming up with skill challenges that would either advance them or set them back. Maybe for just this session track resources like rations and what not.

But then I sat there and thought "Do I really want to devote an entire session to essentially a filler episode?" and so I scrapped it and started the next session with:

"After several tiring, but overall uneventful days on the road you arrive in the village of Mapledale right as the sun hits it's peak in the sky."

Excessive planning, excessive timidity in exploration (the "poke everything with a 10' pole" style of play), and combats that are just there for attrition and/or XP.

Meech17 said:

I had this dilemma in my last session. The party was traveling several days away. I'm a new DM, with newer players, so I figured it might be fun to give them an outdoor wilderness travel adventure. I was thinking of plotting it out, putting obstacles in their way, coming up with skill challenges that would either advance them or set them back. Maybe for just this session track resources like rations and what not.

But then I sat there and thought "Do I really want to devote an entire session to essentially a filler episode?" and so I scrapped it and started the next session with:

"After several tiring, but overall uneventful days on the road you arrive in the village of Mapledale right as the sun hits it's peak in the sky."

Click to expand...

In my experience, the value of played out travel time is in the opportunity to tell the players more about the world and reflect the passage of time.

You can get your "here there be monsters" moments,
your "your caravan is halted as a large force of heavily armed imperial soldiers marches grimly to the west where a vast plume of smoke rises from beyond the horizon",
and your" you meet a family of immigrants who tell tales of a strange island near their hometown where the moon never sets and strange music can be heard at the changing of the tides" moments.

And these can either be backlit by a sense of urgency to get somewhere on time, or as a release valve to cleanse the combat palate, or as an opportunity for the PCs to get themselves into trouble they weren't otherwise considering.

If it's just a series of empty survival checks, yeah it's kind of the worst, but it doesn't have to be that.

Edit: I would say that this is something where there can be some diminishing returns if done too often or done for too long, and will vary in value a lot depending on the group composition.

Lord Shark said:

Excessive planning, excessive timidity in exploration (the "poke everything with a 10' pole" style of play), and combats that are just there for attrition and/or XP.

Click to expand...

This makes me think of one I don't think has been mentioned...

• Having the full suite of dangerous dungeon/hex crawl exploration challenge mechanical prep gear in an edition that does everything it can to nullify remove and kneecap those kinds of challenges.

All it really does is ensure that someone at the table says"oh I've got a 10ft pole [or whatever]" to immediately dismiss it with all the excitement of shouting skip if the gm ever introduced a rulings not rules challenge that could otherwise provided some interesting challenge.