Evocative Combat

[Kannik]

As a player, before a game begins, many a time I have told myself that if and when combat should begin, I will endeavour to be sure it is not a simple back-and-forth of action and dice rolling. We're talking description, description and more description. And interesting action(s) to go with it, of course.

But, when the time comes to leap to the task... it doesn't quite happen that way. There's some description now and again, but it doesn't flow as I want it to (and hopefully want to encourage everyone else to also add in their flavour text). It is perplexing, and I do not know why this intent seems to go unfulfilled. Is it because the combat happens late in the game and I'm a bit tired? Is it because I get caught up in the rules and the flow? Is it because I feel the others do not pick it up? Do I feel a need to go quickly?

It annoys me (as you can tell } I can think of many great images and moves for my character, but when the time comes ... I forget.

What tricks do all you out there have for ensuring more visceral and descriptive combat? (Or do you even bother?)

Thanks,

Kannik

 

[Telperion]

I have the exact same problem. Partially it is a fundamental problem with D&D: the system is complex and heavy to run. It takes some real "brain power" to run all the math/rules, think tactics and still churn out the necessary descriptions for all the actions. If you are a DM then your task is multiplied.

I try to introduce these elements into any combat scene that I run, but depending in what part of the game we do it I more or less succeed. Obviously if it is late in the game, then everyone is already tired and less enthusiastic about giving great descriptions on every beautiful move they are picturing in their heads. I do it in my head while I'm not running a game and I come up with all sorts of cool moves that I want to try out. When the actual combat scene comes up it seems that what comes out of my mouth is but a blurry shadow of all great stuff that I thought of. It's simply being crowded out by all the other stuff that I have to be thinking at the moment.

I have also run combat scenes with the World of Darkness system, and that was far more fluid and description filled. The die rolls are intuitive, you don't have to worry so much about rules and the action is much more free-form. Storytelling a combat has its downsides, but I liked it quite a lot.

So, the short answer to your question is: I read the necessary rules over and over before a combat scene comes up and then try to remember everything necessary. If I don't, then combat slows down and that's always bad. Keeping things moving along is very important in anycombat scene. One of hardest things I have tried to do as a GM/ST/DM, in the last 16 years, has been running a D&D combat scene. Unless everyone knows the rules (and everyone has to know them well) then things slow down and a single turn can take forever. Not good.

EDIT: Don't get me wrong: I like D&D. Sometimes it just irritates the life out of me.

 

[gunter uxbridge]

In the last two games I really goofed up by not describing the bad guys sufficiently enough. It's kind of embarrasing to have to tell your players after the fact, "Oh, uhh, guys. Yeah...ummm...that was a half-fiend you just took on. Sorry." A mistake like that can sometimes change the course of a combat.

This last week, I changed tactics. On my notepad where I keep the monster stats I wrote out a two sentence description for each baddie. As combat began and I started to refer to these notes, I would read the description. I think it helped the flow of the game quite a bit.

If you have some ideas for funky combat moves, just note a few before the game on a card and make sure to reference it before you move, roll, etc. It might help.

 

[pointyman2000]

I guess one of the best things to do in the situation is to fall back on those imaginative moments. Knowledge of the rules is very important, but I think it helps save on brainpower to do one thing at a time. If you're GMing, you can move back and forth in mechanics and description.

As an example:

At the start of the fight, establish where everyone is and set the mood, lay heavy on the descriptions of the location, the sights, smells and sounds of the place.

GM: "Okay, you guys are in the dank, slippery sewer, knee deep in filty, stinking sewege when the zombies shamble noisily around the corner. Thankfully you guys were ready for them, your weapons drawn"

At each players turn, ask them to declare their action and describe it. If they resort to a dull description, just nod and have them roll. After seeing the result, don't read off the numbers, instead just go straight to the description, incorporating the whole action as described by the player, but adding an entire level of fluff onto it to make it "cool".

GM: "okay fighter, you're up. What are you doing?"
PC: "I hit him, going two-handed on my bastard sword." rolls "15" rolls again "9 damage"
GM: "Alright! You run up to him, the sewer water splashing as you whirl, gripping your bastard sword in both hands and swinging it down powerfully with a loud roar. Your weapon cuts easily through the decaying corpse of the zombie, splitting it in half from shoulder to crotch!"

At the end of the round, describe the scene as it was in recap. It may seem tedious, but by running through the entire round in full narrative, you can keep the pace and mood amped using tricks such as faster talk speed and gestures.

GM: "Okay guys, last round fighter tore a zombie in half vertically with his bastard sword, while Wizard torched one with Aganazzar's Scorcher. Rogue buried his dagger in the back of another zombie's head as well. But the fight isn't over, the remaining zombies suddenly burst into action, moving faster than you've ever seen before, limbs lashing out..."

---

For a character, it's a little easier. Focus on what your character would do in the situation, and then pull it off with the rules. If the rules don't allow it, then readjust, but keep to the spirit of your character concept, and you'll do fine.

I guess the difference between D&D and White Wolf (I've GMed both) is that D&D really encourages tactics more that it can "force" a player to disregard character concept to survive by using a pure tactical level of fighting.

 

[Telperion]

Gunter uxbridge:

Good point with those notes. I'm just starting to really utilize note-cards. It takes a few more moments, but I think it would actually enhance the feeling that you are not combating just "yet another human with thus and thus weapons with so and so equipment".

I'll have to try this out on the next session.

Pointyman2000:

I have tried this with varying success. Sometimes the players just don't feel like hanging around and listening to me telling them what they just did. With the less experienced groups, like the one I'm currently running, this might really be a good idea. I think I'll try this it out as well and see how things work out.

About keeping the combat going:

I have a bunch of hardpaper cards that are covered with plastic. I can write stuff on them and when combat starts stack them in Initiative order. If someone's Initiative changes, then I just pull out his/her/its card and change the order. Also, I tend to write modifiers, hp's and such on the cards as well. Using non-water proof pens allows me to wipe the cards clean after each session without a problem.

 

[Klaus]

About a year ago I wrote an article for the Fiery Dragon website that covered ways to keep the game moving, specially for those of us who can rarely get a game going (about once every 4 or 5 months. One of the tips was Being prepared:

"Be prepared: Are you putting a ghost in your adventure? Then go over its powers and make sure you understand how to use them. Prepare strategies, complete with save DCs and effects. For my latest game, I had an evil 8th-level cleric face the party. His round-by-round strategy was something like this:

Preparation before combat (by round): 1 — magic vestment (AC 19); 2 — guidance (+1 attack); 3 — entropic shield (20% miss chance); 4 — divine favor (Str 18, attack +12/+7, damage 1d10+5+1d6, hp 60), when divine favor ends, bull’s strength (Str 17, attack +11, damage 1d10+4+1d6); 5 — summon monster II (fiendish wolf); 6 — spiritual weapon (+6 attack, damage 1d8).

Combat Round by Round: 1 — Direct spiritual weapon and cast command ("flee", DC 14); 2 and 3 — melee (Sunder at +16); 4 — hold person (DC 15); 5 — melee; 6 — contagion (DC 16); 7 — divine favor (+2 attack and damage) and direct SW; 8 — shatter; 9 — air walk and climb up 20 ft. to window, SW attacks and ends; 10 — walk away, then drink fly potion and fly faster. Substitute for healing whenever needed."

Those round-by-round reminders can really help you use those nifty spells, powers and maneuvers that would otherwise be forgotten (done that far too much...). Plus, you can get descriptions of actions done in advance. And select spells for specific purposes (like the evil troglodyte cleric that prepares "death knell" so he can boost himself up by slaying his own pet monitor lizard... nothing says "evil" like killing your own pet).

And that goes for PCs as well. Got Improved Sunder? Go for the opponent's weapon every now and then.

 

[rushlight]

As a DM, I too have tried to inject good descriptions into combat dialogue. As I was reading this thread, I had an idea.

What if you had a few tables, numbered 1-20, with short "weapon strike" descriptions? One table for each weapon type (slashing, piercing, etc.) and one for the death blow. The "coolness" of the description would increase as the number does, and the number you would use to cross-reference would be the player's actual to-hit roll (so no excessive dice rolling is needed)?

Would anyone use such a set of tables? I think I would. Hmm....

*going to start being descriptive!*

 

[Garnfellow]

As a DM, I too have tried to inject good descriptions into combat dialogue. As I was reading this thread, I had an idea.

What if you had a few tables, numbered 1-20, with short "weapon strike" descriptions? One table for each weapon type (slashing, piercing, etc.) and one for the death blow. The "coolness" of the description would increase as the number does, and the number you would use to cross-reference would be the player's actual to-hit roll (so no excessive dice rolling is needed)?

Would anyone use such a set of tables? I think I would. Hmm....

*going to start being descriptive!*

Some older game systems had pretty detailed critical hit charts, like Rolemaster. I sometimes keep a photocopy of these charts on hand for on-the-fly inspiration.

But even then, I DM for a huge group of mid-upper level characters, and vivid combat descriptions are often the first casulty of so much rule complexity.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

I've found it hard to do as well. If you have a large group (like I do) and everyone does it, it can get very tedious and repetitious. In addition, as a player, it is much harder to describe the action and effects since you do not know what exactly it will do. I find as a DM it is a lot more important to add these descriptions than as a player - but it is still hard to do without slowing things down. As a DM, I try and limit descriptions to critical hits, fumbles, near death blows (describing how the foe appears to be near death) and of course the death blow. Those 6 point hits in the middle of the fight with the 75hp creature don't get much description.

 

[ForceUser]

Describing combats is one of my most favorite things to do. I relish it, and I don't mind taking the extra time to throw in a few descriptive phrases. I think this is very important to keep combats fresh and exciting - once it comes down to "You miss. You hit." I think you've lost something. I don't get descriptive on every single attack, but I always take a moment at key events - a death, a spell being cast, a critical hit, etc. I also make sure that my NPCs aren't silent tools, having them vocalize whatever they'd be saying (even if it's just a simple "Rarrgh! Me crush yoo!") Also - and this is very important - your NPCs shouldn't always know the most tactically sound thing to do. They aren't automatons, but flawed beings trying to survive. The giant might not know it's at the leading edge of the cloudkill spell and all it has to do to exit is to step up ten feet. Maybe it panics and tries to flee back the way it came - right through the thick of the cloud. I think inserting random oddness like that is paramount to maintaining verisimilitude within the combat environment. It helps to bring the world alive for everyone. If you can share a laugh over the actions described or engaged in within the combat encounter, I think you're doing it right.