Average Length of Combats [Poll]

[Endur]

I voted 3.

Most of our combats are decided in two rounds. After two rounds, one side or the other is winning and the other side is either fleeing or about to flee. Many times, a powerful spell will end a combat in one round: Entangle, Calm Emotions, Web, Briar Web, Fireball, Flame Strike, Greater Command, Slay Living, Harm, etc.

Every once in a while, there is a combat that goes three rounds or more.

So the average is probably three.

There are some combats that are really multiple combats with no delay between combats. i.e.
Encounter 1: Defeat Flunkies, after they flee ...
Encounter 2: Enter the #1 Henchmen ... after he loses ...
Encounter 3: The Boss fights the PCs

For purposes of the poll, I'm treating this as three seperate combats, since the GM doesn't intend the PCs to fight all three at once.

Tom

 

[el-remmen]

You see, I would count that as one combat - if there was no break in the action, no time to recover, etc. . . then is only one extended melee.

 

[Celtavian]

Re

Nemmerle,

1. Does your group have a combat leader?

I usually play the combat leader of my group. I tend to militarize things very quickly. I rarely play a character who would not have a military point of view. For example, if there are any Paladins in your group, they should be pushing your group to fight using military tactics.

Just as in real life, a good combat leader shortens the length of combats as does a good arcane caster.

2. Does your cleric specifically state at the start of the combat that he or she is constantly checking on the other party members?

Our cleric indicates that she is keeping an eye on the other party members in combat. Only if they leave her field of vision or are magically masked does she not realize they are hurt.

Even though it does say in the rules, as a player and DM, I am assuming that a damage players begins to show the seriousness of his or her wounds at around half hit points and immediately after a critical. It is usually assumed that blood is seen trickling down the armor or soaking through the players clothing.

3. Do you consider pre-buffing part of the combat?

Our group often scouts ahead and pre-buffs before entering a combat. I can tell you right now, the gods help the villain we are prepared for. When we enter battle prepared, we usually wipe the floor with the enemy very quickly.

We usually buff at least the casters with Death Ward and [/i]Protection from Elements[/i]. We often use more buffs than this depending on the enemy.

We even enter combat and retreat at times just to determine what the enemy can do. This really helps prepare for the next battle.

I would really love to hear how other folks fight. Tactics and roleplaying is why I consider D&D the most entertaining game I can play.

 

[el-remmen]

A reply after 8 months. . .

I came looking for this thread to revive it and see if we could get some new data from those who have never seen it - and found that the last post was questions for me!

So I am answering them - but am hoping some new people will discuss the topic as well as I find it fascinating. . .

Nemmerle,

1. Does your group have a combat leader?

I usually play the combat leader of my group. I tend to militarize things very quickly. I rarely play a character who would not have a military point of view. For example, if there are any Paladins in your group, they should be pushing your group to fight using military tactics.

Just as in real life, a good combat leader shortens the length of combats as does a good arcane caster.

No. The group is too stubborn and fractured to have one combat leader - there are times when one person steps up to yell suggestions in-game (usually the half-orc ranger/cleric) - but this doesn't mean he is listened to - and usually isn't - it is just not in the characters' personalities to do so.

2. Does your cleric specifically state at the start of the combat that he or she is constantly checking on the other party members?

You're assuming here that that is the cleric's job - we have two priests and a paladin - and yet usually it was the witch (sorcerer variant) that did the healing using her maxed out healing skill - anyway, no, no one ever declares that - and if they did I would likely give them a circumstance penalty to combat rolls.

If someone is clearly hurt or drops within sight of a character that is one thing - trying to watch everyone while fighting one or more opponents in melee is not only difficult, but dangerous.

3. Do you consider pre-buffing part of the combat?

Only if the PCs are in danger while it is happening - if someone starts charging you and you ar casting buffing spells - that counts as combat to me - if you buff and i]then[/i] find a fight the buffing rounds are not counted for the purposes of determining how long the fight is.

 

[Joseph Elric Smith]

If my player would choke less when it comes to the finial fight and throw a few less ones the fights might go by a bit quicker. the deadliest opponent my party has ever faced was them selves as they tend to stand around and miss a lot when the bad guy does make an appearance.
ken

 

[green slime]

The average combat in my games last 12+ rounds. Due in part to the large number of combatants, partly to terrain, tactics, and in part to reinforcements arriving at the scene, halfway through the battle. Quite a few go beyond 30 rounds...

Some of it is also due to the characters tending to get themselves split up. Which has lead to quite a few deaths. One of these days they'll wisen up. Not soon, I hope.

But I'll admit, no games in the 15th+ area yet.

 

[WizarDru]

Well, my group has reached 19th, and it still hasn't changed much. Two most recent combats: A CR24 Blue Dragon accompanied by 4 Coal Golems over a pool of lava and the other was three advanced Learnean Pyro-Hydras on a shelf over a volcano. The party consisted of 6 players, 1 NPC cohort, 2 copper dragon NPCs and a Solar summoned via Planar Ally.

The battle against the pyrohydras took three rounds, and was all but decided by the second. The battle against Zephyrrin the Blue was much more involved, and was as exciting a game as ever I've run. It took about five rounds to complete, give or take.

 

[Henry]

Oour group's D&D battles rarely go more than 5 or 6 rounds, occasionally taking up to 8 or so.

Our d20 Modern battles, I have found, are taking longer, mainly because the battles are moving.

In our last session (d20 Modern), we had:

• 1 Battle requiring 3 rounds
  
• 1 Battle requiring 1 round
  
• 1 Battle requiring 10 rounds (sniper, they had a hard time pinpointing him, until they grenade-fished him out of a tree)
  
• 1 Battle requiring 13 rounds (it ranged from outside a complex to the inside, involving much cover, grenades, and gunplay.)

D&D battles, because there is less likelihood of chases and the like, generally duke it out once a combat is engaged. In any case, unless reinforcements arrive in waves, or unless a stalemate is forced for a few rounds (wall of force, blade barrier, a third external threat to the combatants, etc.) then one side or the other is no longer functional to fight after 5 or 6 rounds. The only time I ever saw the contrary was a battle in which EVERYONE at the table was suffering horrible dice roll luck; the end result probably looked like a 15-round ballet performance, than a life-and-death struggle.

 

[Grog]

In my experience, 3E combats tend to be quite short. The main reason for this is the way 3E monsters are designed. 3E monsters tend to have high damage capability and low hit points.

Look at an orc. It has 4 hit points, and does 1d12+3 damage. It can do up to 15 points without a crit, and does 9.5 points on average. Its damage is way out of proportion to its hit points.

Other monsters aren't quite that bad, but the same theme persists throughout the Monster Manual. An ogre has 26 hp and does 14 points of damage on average. So an ogre would take two hits to drop another ogre, or an average 2nd level fighter. And then you have girallons and the like. Lots and lots of "high damage, low hit points" monsters in 3E. And this leads to short fights.

 

[Harlock]

My group seems to me to be more story and plot driven. Combat isn't so much enjoyed as it is tolerated. Our longest combat was nearly two hours of real time and it was tragically boring for all of us. No amount of desscription can overcome the feelings we all share inside of, "rinse, lather, repeat" or in this case, roll, hit, roll. Fancy descriptions of combat after 21 years of D&D is simply so much mental masturbation for us. We'd rather get to the meat of the matter and delve into the plot. Find the cotact, get to the next plot hook, meet the next plot goal. For us combat is a necessary evil. Don't get me wrong, tactics are very much appreciated and do well, but so much more can be done before a fight actually happens to sway things in your favor, and outwitting the BBEG is far more rewarding to us than going toe to toe with him for 15 rounds and four hours. It's all a matter of taste, and obviously everyones' varies. BTW, for the poll I chose four, but it may be closer to five, and that because of a learning curve for 3e and the party dynamic. Note to self: Groups of 7 gnolls is a boring fight.