D&D General Do You Play Out Every Combat?

[kigmatzomat]

Why does the encounter even exist if the goblins have no chance and it's not part of a storyline?

Some combats are world building. A sizeable band of goblins will attack any small force they encounter because that's what they do to intruders. Once it becomes clear that the adventurers are going through them like a hot knife through butter, they should change tactics. Maybe scatter, set fire to everything, grovel, whatever.

Let's say the players basically say "stay out of our way" and continue on. This *could" be the end of it, or maybe not. The surviving goblins are going to talk. This will get into the gossip of the region. Hobgoblins, hill giants, orks, lizardfolk, even fey may become aware of the players, especially if they are distinctive.

This could flavor how others interact with them, or even cause them to be sought out, either to assert dominance or ask for help.

 

[GrimCo]

In 41 years I've had one TPK; and someone who walks out because their character died fair and square can just keep on walking, as they ain't coming back.

How? I get it in 4&5e, TPKs are not that common. But in 1-3e era, specially 1&2e, low level characters where wet paper. As a dm, depending on a system, 50-70% of my games ended via TPK.

 

[TiQuinn]

NOTE: This is a D&D question because a lot of games make the question moot: they have built in systems for treating a combat as another sort of gameplay element (like Dramatic Tasks or Quick Combats in Savage Worlds).

So, the 7th level party is traveling through the Goblin Forest and encounters Goblin Warband. The appropriate establishing and reaction rolls are made, and the goblins attack. The gobs have no chance outside of really, really bad rolling on the part of the players. The fight is not part of the main storyline or anything. Do you run the whole fight down to the last goblin HP? Do you run the first round or two and (assuming things are what you expect here) have the goblins run, surrender or just tell the players "you finish them off." Do you skip it entirely or fudge the dice so it was a more level appropriate encounter?

What if it isn't a random encounter? What if the Penultimate Battle (the one before the boss fight) has turned into a slog due to bad luck, bad tactics or some combination. Do you keep at it because it is important what resources the PCs use up before the boss fight? Do you cut it in the middle and "charge" the PCs some spell slots, hit dice, and/or other resources?

In D&D, have you implemented something like Quick Combats or Dramatic Tasks to deal with these sorts of things? If so, what and how do they work?

No, I think in pretty much every edition there is some concept of morale and against ever escalating losses the monsters are going to surrender or retreat. There’s simply no point to playing out an entire encounter even if it has some sort of stake as far as resource drain because ultimately the boredom of a long battle and foregone conclusion outweighs the resource concern.

 

[el-remmen]

I just can't imagine bothering to play D&D if I thought the combat was as boring as so many people claim it is. Either that, or I am just that good a DM that my and my players' experiences playing through combat are far beyond what any of those poor unfortunate folks can imagine.

 

[TiQuinn]

I just can't imagine bothering to play D&D if I thought the combat was as boring as so many people claim it is. Either that, or I am just that good a DM that my and my players' experiences playing through combat are far beyond what any of those poor unfortunate folks can imagine.

You gotta weigh a three hour session versus the time it takes to kill those last few ghouls or bugbears or whatever.

 

[el-remmen]

You gotta weigh a three hour session versus the time it takes to kill those last few ghouls or bugbears or whatever.

I do tend to play a serialized style, where we simply take up where we left off last time (and that is frequently mid-battle). Unless I am specifically running a one-shot I don't think in terms of "how much we have to fit in the session." (Not saying you do, but just that I am not thinking about the rest of the session, when combat is happening b/c we're having fun!). I do of course work to adjust pace during other parts of the game session in relation to what makes sense for what is happening and the level of detail we are working with in the moment.

 

[TiQuinn]

I do tend to play a serialized style, where we simply take up where we left off last time (and that is frequently mid-battle). Unless I am specifically running a one-shot I don't think in terms of "how much we have to fit in the session." (Not saying you do, but just that I am not thinking about the rest of the session, when combat is happening b/c we're having fun!). I do of course work to adjust pace during other parts of the game session in relation to what makes sense for what is happening and the level of detail we are working with in the moment.

We used to do that when we were younger but it never felt right to us, and I really can’t imagine it now unless there was a natural break or change in the fight. Our DM will stop a session early rather than bump up against a big fight too late in the night (we play on weeknights and I, in particular, have a longer drive to get home).

 

[el-remmen]

I love it. It makes jumping into the next session a lot easier when everyone is focused on a battle, while sessions that begin during downtime or even in the midst of travel or exploration take a little longer to "warm up." In the age of the smartphone, I find it really easy to snap a pic or 2 of battle conditions and mini positions and I have it all set up and ready to continue when everyone arrives.

 

[James Gasik]

How? I get it in 4&5e, TPKs are not that common. But in 1-3e era, specially 1&2e, low level characters where wet paper. As a dm, depending on a system, 50-70% of my games ended via TPK.

I'll admit, I started to softball my 2e games pretty quickly. Max hit points at first level, followed by roll twice for hit points (taking the better at each level thereafter), fractional hit points for multiclass characters, generous die rolling (4d6 drop 1, re-roll any 1's), and plentiful healing potions.

Eventually I learned that starting the game at higher level was even better (specifically starting with a set xp amount, enough for a Thief/Bard to start at level 3, and most others to start at 2, even if a triple multi-classed monstrosity, one class would be level 2). I also stopped using level draining undead and tried to avoid "save or die" effects. Even with all of this, just running published adventures could prove brutal, but at least I avoided TPK's and a revolving door of new characters (I'd still lose them, but far less often).

Then I discovered Earthdawn, and I never ran 2e again, not returning to DM until 3e came out.

 

[Lanefan]

We used to do that when we were younger but it never felt right to us, and I really can’t imagine it now unless there was a natural break or change in the fight. Our DM will stop a session early rather than bump up against a big fight too late in the night (we play on weeknights and I, in particular, have a longer drive to get home).

If we need to stop mid combat, it's always at the end of a round and I just take careful notes of what hit points, spells, etc. the characters are at and we pick up next session right where we left off.