Imaro
Legend
See, again I think this is more about formatting of stat blocks than it actually being more complex to run them. But I understand where you're coming from.
4e A different type of disconnect??
- Thread starter Imaro
- Start date
See, again I think this is more about formatting of stat blocks than it actually being more complex to run them. But I understand where you're coming from.
seusomon
Explorer
OP: I haven't really felt much of the disconnect you are referring to, and I think it is because we don't make heavy use of stunts or skills in combat. I think the intention of 4e is that combat be mostly a fun tactical game, using the character's powers most of the time. Creative stuff is encouraged (and the DM is given a lot of open-ended latitude for adjudicating it), but it is meant to be for the occasional cool move that supports the narrative, not to supplant the basic rules of the tactical game to any significant degree.
Of course, this depends on a kind of implicit social contract among the people in your play group, whether you want to enjoy combat as a tactical miniatures game with an occasional bit of free-form theatrics, or whether you have more fun stunting and skilling your way through combat, making the powers and rules irrelevant.
Of course, this depends on a kind of implicit social contract among the people in your play group, whether you want to enjoy combat as a tactical miniatures game with an occasional bit of free-form theatrics, or whether you have more fun stunting and skilling your way through combat, making the powers and rules irrelevant.
re
So do I Steely Dan. I say you're wrong about combats going faster in this edition. I ran 3.5 just as fast. Standard combats are 30 minutes to an hour or more depending on the number of monsters. I'm finding that combats against lower level monstes takes longer in empirically measured time in 4E than in 3E.
For example, if I fought 6 hobgoblins at 3rd level in a 3E game they died in less than 20 minutes. In a 4E game 6 hobgoblins die in about 30 to 40 minutes.
I would like some people to measure the time and prove there is no difference.
Because I'm finding 4E combat as long if not longer than 3E with real time measurements.
Why?
1. Each monster and each player can do more.
In 3E a hobgoblin could swing a weapon.
In 4E a hobgoblin can swing a weapon and move, swing a weapon and slow his opponent, and has a ton more hit points than a 3E hobgoblin so they die much slower.
4E combat is longer than 3E combat by quite a large margin given equal level encounters. I think if you take the time to run 3E at similar levels you will find what I say to be true.
Maybe at high levels it will even out when 3E casters have huge spellbooks and tons of magic items. But at low level 4E is tougher to run than 3E and takes longer.
I have actually measured the time as I run both games as well. You can't tell me that 4E characters can't do more than 3E characters at the same level. You also can't tell me that 4E monsters have far more tricks than 3E monsters at similar low levels.
It all adds up to longer combats with more bookkeeping.
If you have experience, than run a group of 3rd level 3E characters in a combat against standard hobgoblins versus a group of 4E characters against a hobgoblin encounter of the same number. I'd bet money right now that the 4E combat takes longer, just like it did for me.
4E monsters do more. So do 4E characters.
I don't mind admitting that 3E gets complicated at higher level and it may even out. But 3E at low levels is less complicate than 4E with all the encounter, dailies, racials, and magic item powers available to characters as well as all the abilities available to monsters.
It just takes longer at low level. I'll tell you how it compares at higher levels when spellbooks used to expand. I know with absolute certainty that 3E low level combats took less time. Low level 3E monsters and characters just weren't that tough or complicated compared to 4E monsters and characters at low level.
So do I Steely Dan. I say you're wrong about combats going faster in this edition. I ran 3.5 just as fast. Standard combats are 30 minutes to an hour or more depending on the number of monsters. I'm finding that combats against lower level monstes takes longer in empirically measured time in 4E than in 3E.
For example, if I fought 6 hobgoblins at 3rd level in a 3E game they died in less than 20 minutes. In a 4E game 6 hobgoblins die in about 30 to 40 minutes.
I would like some people to measure the time and prove there is no difference.
Because I'm finding 4E combat as long if not longer than 3E with real time measurements.
Why?
1. Each monster and each player can do more.
In 3E a hobgoblin could swing a weapon.
In 4E a hobgoblin can swing a weapon and move, swing a weapon and slow his opponent, and has a ton more hit points than a 3E hobgoblin so they die much slower.
4E combat is longer than 3E combat by quite a large margin given equal level encounters. I think if you take the time to run 3E at similar levels you will find what I say to be true.
Maybe at high levels it will even out when 3E casters have huge spellbooks and tons of magic items. But at low level 4E is tougher to run than 3E and takes longer.
I have actually measured the time as I run both games as well. You can't tell me that 4E characters can't do more than 3E characters at the same level. You also can't tell me that 4E monsters have far more tricks than 3E monsters at similar low levels.
It all adds up to longer combats with more bookkeeping.
If you have experience, than run a group of 3rd level 3E characters in a combat against standard hobgoblins versus a group of 4E characters against a hobgoblin encounter of the same number. I'd bet money right now that the 4E combat takes longer, just like it did for me.
4E monsters do more. So do 4E characters.
I don't mind admitting that 3E gets complicated at higher level and it may even out. But 3E at low levels is less complicate than 4E with all the encounter, dailies, racials, and magic item powers available to characters as well as all the abilities available to monsters.
It just takes longer at low level. I'll tell you how it compares at higher levels when spellbooks used to expand. I know with absolute certainty that 3E low level combats took less time. Low level 3E monsters and characters just weren't that tough or complicated compared to 4E monsters and characters at low level.
re
Thanks for all the suggestions on how to deal with the minis. I'll see which one is convenient for us to use.
I wasn't trying to start an edition war.
I've read a ton about how 4E is easier to run. Before I played it, I could not speak confidently on the matter. After playing 4E I can speak confidently that it is not easier to run, though it is much easier to prep for. Combats do not take less time and I know this because I actually decided to time our fights rather than just go by the nebulous "feeling".
After timing our fights they take the same amount of time for the same amount of mobs, and often take far longer when a controller or leader is involved on the side of an enemy force. At low level everyone can do much more than they used to be able to do at low level.
I'm sure it will even at higher level, but right now these combats are taking a a while and have a huge amount of round to round bookkeeping. And the only people I feel won't admit this are people so interested in defending 4E that they don't want to talk honestly about the game.
4E is just as complicated as any previous edition. The bookkeeping is round to round. This is especially true at low level.
It may not be so much at higher level when players and monsters get a ton of buffs. But right now I'm finding it just as complicated as previous editions. I make a ton of notations on monsters for player effects and on players for monster effects. I have to remember if a monster has used its recharge power, its encounter power and just a ton of small bookkeeping details that are important to the game.
Doesn't mean it's a bad game. I'm just not as enamored of it as I was. And I feel the billing of easier to run was false. When you have five or six players shooting off their encounter powers every fight and mixing in dailies and magic item powers, that is alot to keep track of. And the monsters doing the same just increases the bookkeeping load. That's honesty about 4E. Alot of round to round bookkeeping that slows the game down.
Even tossing chits out there to cover every condition lengthens the time it takes to run combat.
Though I will admit the minis make visualization of the combat easier. That is helpful.
Thanks for all the suggestions on how to deal with the minis. I'll see which one is convenient for us to use.
I wasn't trying to start an edition war.
I've read a ton about how 4E is easier to run. Before I played it, I could not speak confidently on the matter. After playing 4E I can speak confidently that it is not easier to run, though it is much easier to prep for. Combats do not take less time and I know this because I actually decided to time our fights rather than just go by the nebulous "feeling".
After timing our fights they take the same amount of time for the same amount of mobs, and often take far longer when a controller or leader is involved on the side of an enemy force. At low level everyone can do much more than they used to be able to do at low level.
I'm sure it will even at higher level, but right now these combats are taking a a while and have a huge amount of round to round bookkeeping. And the only people I feel won't admit this are people so interested in defending 4E that they don't want to talk honestly about the game.
4E is just as complicated as any previous edition. The bookkeeping is round to round. This is especially true at low level.
It may not be so much at higher level when players and monsters get a ton of buffs. But right now I'm finding it just as complicated as previous editions. I make a ton of notations on monsters for player effects and on players for monster effects. I have to remember if a monster has used its recharge power, its encounter power and just a ton of small bookkeeping details that are important to the game.
Doesn't mean it's a bad game. I'm just not as enamored of it as I was. And I feel the billing of easier to run was false. When you have five or six players shooting off their encounter powers every fight and mixing in dailies and magic item powers, that is alot to keep track of. And the monsters doing the same just increases the bookkeeping load. That's honesty about 4E. Alot of round to round bookkeeping that slows the game down.
Even tossing chits out there to cover every condition lengthens the time it takes to run combat.
Though I will admit the minis make visualization of the combat easier. That is helpful.
Scribble
First Post
What I;m seeing isn't that the real world time you spend playing out one fight (at least at the low levels) is less, but the amount of stuff that happens in that time is more. More rounds go by, and more actions happen.
I liken it to a good thing because while it doesn't take any less time for combat, I enjoy the combat much more, and don't mind the time.
So it's not that combat as a whole is faster, it's that the stuff in the combat happens at a faster pace, with more to keep me occupied.
Imaro
Legend
See, I would argue that 4e at low levels takes longer...so you're actually not getting more done in a comparable amount of time...you're getting more done in more time.
It's funny that peoople argue it's less complicated to run than 3e, but readily admit more is going on. Well somebody has to keep track of all that "more" that's going on and how it all interacts... thus increased complexity for the DM and the players seems to be a given (though, as always, the brunt of it falls on the DM).
Scribble
First Post
Possibly? I'm speaking anecdotally, so I can't say my experience is the same as everyone.
In my group, more stuff happens, more rounds happen... All of it combines to make the fights more fun for me. (yeah, I know fun is one of those WoTC used it too much words.)
Yep, more is going on, but what I've also noticed is that since stuff is more standardized, there's less for my brain to really do while I'm tracking it.
I'm not tracking how long does this effect last, or how often does this effect happen, how does this effect work, what dice does this use etc... All of it falls into place, and works pretty similar to the other things going on.
Net effect- it's easier for me to track.
Your experience of course, might differ.
I think mainly it's that I only really have to think about the round right now, as opposed to 1 or more rounds in the future/past.
Obryn
Hero
Exactly my experiences.
edit: As an example, effects no longer affect ability scores directly. They don't get drained, and they don't get boosted. By only modifying derived values like attacks & damage directly, my workload is dramatically reduced.
Also, much of the "stuff" that's going on is stuff done by the players - so my bookkeeping is hardly affected at all.
Additionally, I think there's a bit of a disconnect when we're talking about the amount of stuff going on in an encounter... In 3e, I seldom if ever ran combats with more than 2 distinct groups of combatants. Sometimes I did, mind you, but at most it was along the lines of minions-bodyguards-boss. These got very complex to track and run.
Now, in 4e, combats with 2-4 distinct groups are the norm. I'd argue that, by and large, combats with similar complexities are easier to run unless it was a particularly simple 3e combat (along the lines of 3 different levels of hobgoblins or whatever).
-O
Last edited:
Obryn
Hero
I agree - the stat blocks could be better, and the DMG2/Expedition stat blocks were an improvement. They were more usable in-game than the basic 3.5 ones.
(OTOH, they were less useful for the kind of reverse-engineering I often needed to do in 3e for ability score damage, power attacks, and the like.)
Nevertheless, I see the Spell-Like Ability issue as a big deal, and I've felt like this well before 4e was anywhere on the horizon. On the one hand, a quick summary of simpler spell effects would go a long way towards making the various creatures easier to actually use. On the other hand, this is not so easy for more complex spells - Dispel Magic, for one. Also, when a creature has several, this leads to pretty serious stat-block inflation.
-O
You know, when you have to put solo monsters into the group (solo monsters being the ones you're supposed to fight alone) or amp the CR level to twice the party's level, that's not really a sign that combat is hard. It's a sign that combat isn't hard at all, and it's up to you to fix it.
Just like 3e.
Just like 3e.
