Combat takes too long

[Lauberfen]

Anyone who hasn't allready should check out the poll on this subject, an interesting addition to the discussion here.

 

[Tellerve]

Fighter AC 20 Rogue AC 17. Kobold minion does 3.9% of the fighter's HP per swing & 6.9% of the rogue's. Add in the fighter's extra surges & you see why you don't want Rogues to be taking flack.

Eh, I agree, you don't want them being attacked, but I dunno if I'd call it a wet bag scenario. It just seems like 4e has made hit points much closer to everyone and the seperation point is moreso in the healing ability. Assuming you have clerics, warlords, and paladins around yeah, having more healing surges allows the defender to stay up much longer than the striker who has 3 or so less healing surges.

I'll have to see how it plays out when I run my group, as I haven't actually played anything yet, just theoretically putting it together in my head, and reading what other people's combats have been like.

Tellerve

 

[Bump2daWiza]

What is your party size?
Can you provide examples of a fight or two (as in what monsters did you fight)
And what is the length of your sessions?

5 Party Members: fighter, Paladin, Wizards, Rogue and Warlock.

I don't have the monster manual but we fought some bandit skirmishers and a warlock last game.

3-4 hours.

 

[keterys]

That's plenty of control and damage output. Back to the earlier suggestion - examine your play dynamic because you're probably not working well together, and you could probably speed things up considerably.

Barring a _lot_ of roleplaying of every little thing, the combat taking that long likely lies within one or more of the people at the game.

 

[Jack99]

5 Party Members: fighter, Paladin, Wizards, Rogue and Warlock.

I don't have the monster manual but we fought some bandit skirmishers and a warlock last game.

3-4 hours.

That kind of encounter (assuming it is a level appropriate encounter) shouldn't take more than 30-60 minutes. Now of course, it isn't my business to tell people how to play their game, but if it takes 3 hours or more, as your posts seem to indicate, either your DM, your fellow players, or a combination of both are slow, doing something wrong, just simply not focused the least. Or maybe, as K states in the post above, it could be that there is "too much" roleplaying (if you roleplay every combat move extensively). Aside from that, I don't know why it would take you so long. I do know that it is not the system, as in, my group (and many others) have little trouble running that kind of encounters in under and hour (and some even less).

If you need further help, we are going to need more info, like a very thorough description of what goes on at your table.

 

[TheNovaLord]

once everyone knows the rules well it will be fast. Ive GMed 20 minute combat lasting 5-6 rounds.
In 5 hour sessions ive been trying to get the party to level once per session
maybe 10-14 encounters of one sort or another, but only 4-5 being unavoidable combats.
keep the skill challenges pacey and upbeat and everyone generally knowing what they are gonna do

4e feels like Savage Worlds, heavy....which is good IMO

 

[Infiniti2000]

I think 4E is a lot faster, and I have a lot of experience/knowledge of 3.x rules. I consider myself a "combat-oriented" DM (I like story/RP, too, but I excel at adjudicating combats). I'm quite frankly astonished at claims to the contrary and can only think that there's some other, non-4E-related issue at hand. Specifically, the WWGD adventure was a breeze. I had 5 players brand new to 4E and we got through the whole thing in under 4 hours (including several distractions like putting our kids to bed, etc.). We almost had time to do the white dragon encounter. This weekend, we may start KotS with pregens until everyone gets fully comfortable.

I also don't agree with the silly comments about how boring it is. "Hey, we had an encounter in the middle of a plain, nondescript field and no PC or monster used any other abilities or tactics besides basic attacks. And it was boring." Well, no duh.

 

[s0l0m0n]

Curious: People complaining about monster hit points:

Then to reverse things - are you similarly dissatisfied with the damage output of monsters and feel they should do damage more quickly?

Actually, that was my initial reaction, to up damage across the board. A few rounds in, encounter powers had been spent, maybe an enemy was down, at it was obvious the PCs were going to win. Chipping away those last two critters seemed just a formality, and ultimately a waste of time. Upping damage would result in enemies going down faster, but they would inflict a comparable amount of damage within their shortened lifespans.

In return, it would be riskier for players, as an occasional crit with higher damage would present greater immediate danger. In our party (warlord, paladin, mage, rogue) the healers/leaders had enough opportunities to make everyone spend a healing surge or two-three per combat, and healing surges were plenty. Coupled with the fact that damage received was very incremental and to some extent predictable, it gave a lessened feeling of danger and urgency.

 

[Ginnel]

5 Party Members: fighter, Paladin, Wizards, Rogue and Warlock.

I don't have the monster manual but we fought some bandit skirmishers and a warlock last game.

3-4 hours.

6 party Members: Fighter, Paladin, Cleric, Warlord, Warlock, Wizard

fight with kobolds: wild mage, dual wielding short swords, a kobold who threw pots, 2 kobolds with pikes I assume these all came from the article in Dragon, and 4 Kobold minions

this was apparently a level 2 challenge for us and took around 1hour 30 maybe a bit longer.
It ate up around 10/11 healing surges from the party, fighter paladin and cleric mostly.

In our sessions around 20:00 - 23:30 we normally spend half and half on roleplay and combat getting in a fight per session so far, 2 fights if we don't hang around much

though we haven't got to a dungeon esque scenario yet so we might be able to manage 4/5 especially if we start at 19:30 instead

 

[AntiPaladin]

In my experience 4E combat is about 25-50% faster than 3.5E. It is true that there are generally more rounds of combat involved, but I find that the turns go much more quickly due to reduced complexity of the rules.

I've run every single encounter in KotS, and some additional baddies from the MM for a level 3 and level 4 party. Dragonborn Pally, Elf Ranger (20 Dex), Elf Cleric (20 Wis), Eladrin Wizard (20 int). The innate +5 to hit seemed to often make the difference between a hit or a miss, and the extra damage adds up of course. The party is very experienced and tends to go for a no-holds-barred maximum-damage strategy, focus firing and flanking, coup-de-gras on the sleeping enemies, etc. The longest fights were generally due to a combination of bad rolls and foes wielding shields, the 18-20AC range is tough to hit at low levels, and heavy shields are fairly plentiful.

As a DM, my style is to do everything possible to keep things moving. I try to limit each players' turn to under 60 seconds, so 1 full trip around the table (1 combat round) takes a maximum of 6-7 minutes. I keep the initiative order visible to the players and instruct them to take their turns one after another, without waiting for me to call on them. Everyone uses printed cards for powers and magic items so it is easy and expedient to keep track of what has been used, and the PH tends to sit unused on the floor throughout the fight. A balanced combat takes anywhere from 25-40 minutes. Big fat solo mobs take longer of course, and defensive, terrain-heavy fights can also drag. On the other hand the wizard does a good job of nuking minions so the mass-minion encounters are usually over in under 30 minutes.

Bottom line: 4E is fast and furious. Experienced players with a commitment to moving through turns quickly should finish more rounds in less total time than 3.5E fights.