ErichDragon
First Post
Hey Wolffenjugend, I would love a copy of that spreadsheet too!
*Grumble* I'm supposed to be good at DMing!
- Thread starter Rel
- Start date
BlackMoria
First Post
Chalk it up to an 'off night' and move on.
There have been occasions when I thought the session I ran sucked big time but the players themselves thought the session was good. You can't infer that because the players were having side conversation that they were bored or thought things sucked. They could have realized that the combat was getting detailed and were taking advantage of the moments that didn't involve them directly to converse.
Sounds like the only problem was the pacing. What I do if a protracted combat occurs and the pacing starts to lag is this - I discard the dice and make it up as I go to pick up the pacing and the tension. Don't resolve mook battles that don't directly involve the PCs. Describe them in general detail.
Example - "Gordo (npc) is holding his own against the two Barbazu and is fighting energically. Seizing a opening, he lunges at one Barbazu and drops it with a thrust through the throat......" Don't roll dice. The Barbazu or Gordo dies when you decide. Make the battle your canvas and by deciding how and when the mooks fall, you can control the pacing and tension of the battle.
Only use dice for the direct battles that involve the PCs. In this way, you can control the pacing without the battle grinding down to tedium. In this way, large or medium scale battles can be run in a timely fashion.
There have been occasions when I thought the session I ran sucked big time but the players themselves thought the session was good. You can't infer that because the players were having side conversation that they were bored or thought things sucked. They could have realized that the combat was getting detailed and were taking advantage of the moments that didn't involve them directly to converse.
Sounds like the only problem was the pacing. What I do if a protracted combat occurs and the pacing starts to lag is this - I discard the dice and make it up as I go to pick up the pacing and the tension. Don't resolve mook battles that don't directly involve the PCs. Describe them in general detail.
Example - "Gordo (npc) is holding his own against the two Barbazu and is fighting energically. Seizing a opening, he lunges at one Barbazu and drops it with a thrust through the throat......" Don't roll dice. The Barbazu or Gordo dies when you decide. Make the battle your canvas and by deciding how and when the mooks fall, you can control the pacing and tension of the battle.
Only use dice for the direct battles that involve the PCs. In this way, you can control the pacing without the battle grinding down to tedium. In this way, large or medium scale battles can be run in a timely fashion.
Last edited:
Keeper of Secrets
First Post
Maybe I am taking a different approach and looking at it from a different position.
The last time I ran games where the characters were getting close to that higher level (10+) or in some fairly epic style of games there was always something that nagged at me. You want the games to be exciting and memorable but you also always find that you are trying to top yourself. Maybe by sending the characters to Hell you were creating a pretty big expectation for excitement. But now maybe you have to raise the bar. After all, any time I thought about sending characters into Hell or having them do something that saves the world, etc., I knew that anything after that would have to be really exciting to have anything nearly as memorable.
The last time I ran games where the characters were getting close to that higher level (10+) or in some fairly epic style of games there was always something that nagged at me. You want the games to be exciting and memorable but you also always find that you are trying to top yourself. Maybe by sending the characters to Hell you were creating a pretty big expectation for excitement. But now maybe you have to raise the bar. After all, any time I thought about sending characters into Hell or having them do something that saves the world, etc., I knew that anything after that would have to be really exciting to have anything nearly as memorable.
Duncan Haldane
Explorer
cildarith said:
I think this is definately a good idea, and what I would have tried to do in this situation. It does, however, depend somewhat upon your players.
For instance, if you have a player who loves to play arcanists, and doesn't know anything about grapples, trips, etc, then s/he is going to be out of place both in a magic-dead area and being asked to run a warrior.
If, OTOH, your players enjoy different classes, and different characters, getting them to play the warriors would work well.
There is another way to look at it too - in any fight going on between two NPCs, you could always ask a player to play one of the monsters fighting - that way they can indulge their nasty streak, and try as hard as possible to damage the "good guys" without taking any flak for it. And it can be refreshing too - it's hard for a DM to represent different characters by their actions in combat if s/he has to worry about what 15 different critters will do. But hand out three to each PC, and suddenly you have a vibrant game, with grapples, trips, AOOs, all sorts of things happening - ideas which you, as DM, may not have considered.
My players are pretty good. Three of the five are very rules savvy, and the other two are reasonable. Often they will pick me up on rules, and say things like 'he should do .... rather than ...., because of the bonuses' . It helps keep me on my toes, and I reward them for being open about situations - they even point out things that are to their detriment. It's good to work with a reasonable group.
Duncan
kamosa
Explorer
Sounds like you just had an off night. It does happen.
Things I've tried to salvage the situation.
a) Take a short break in the middle of the fight. When the players get back together tell them you realize that the fight is taking a long time, and ask them to try to rally to get through it.
b) Stand up. Don't know why, but when you stand during a combat, it gets peoples attention.
c) Simplify the fight mid stream. Have equal numbers bite it in the same round. Have some pop onto another plane of existance. etc. Get the numbers down, so the players have more actions.
d) As others have suggested, go to a simpler tracking for the NPC combat. Have them roll opposed combat checks and reduce each sides number appropriately.
Above all, keep your chin up and realize that having an off night does happen.
Things I've tried to salvage the situation.
a) Take a short break in the middle of the fight. When the players get back together tell them you realize that the fight is taking a long time, and ask them to try to rally to get through it.
b) Stand up. Don't know why, but when you stand during a combat, it gets peoples attention.
c) Simplify the fight mid stream. Have equal numbers bite it in the same round. Have some pop onto another plane of existance. etc. Get the numbers down, so the players have more actions.
d) As others have suggested, go to a simpler tracking for the NPC combat. Have them roll opposed combat checks and reduce each sides number appropriately.
Above all, keep your chin up and realize that having an off night does happen.
Greatwyrm
Been here a while...
Having spent plenty of time on both sides of a DM screen, I'd chalk this one up to your players dropping the ball, not you. Before anyone goes jumping to conclusions, hear me out.
First, the players knew they were going to Hell. A place with lots and lots of unfriendly beings. They should have expected a long, nasty fight.
Second, the players were planning on rescuing a group of people already in Hell, who couldn't get out on their own. They should have expected this to be difficult, at the least.
Third, you set up a really cool encounter. I can see the whole thing in my head. Heroes and allies at the top of the pyramid, Hell's blazing sky behind them, and a fountain of divine power erupting all around them. All while a steady stream of demons claws their way to the top.
Now, it sounds like the players handled #1 and #2 pretty well. When confronted by #3, they chose poorly. Why? This wasn't a fighting encounter--it was a trap. You may not have planned it that way but that's what it was. They were stuck in a confined area and steadily taking damage until they could find a way out. The paint job may have been a fight, but under the hood, it's a trap.
Not having all the details, it sounds like your players chose to slug it out in the trap, instead of focusing on a faster way to get out of it. Maybe you could have dropped some hints as to how you really exepected them to make a quicker escape, but it was ultimately their decision.
Anyway, as long as they all come back next week, they must have forgiven you for anything you think you did.
First, the players knew they were going to Hell. A place with lots and lots of unfriendly beings. They should have expected a long, nasty fight.
Second, the players were planning on rescuing a group of people already in Hell, who couldn't get out on their own. They should have expected this to be difficult, at the least.
Third, you set up a really cool encounter. I can see the whole thing in my head. Heroes and allies at the top of the pyramid, Hell's blazing sky behind them, and a fountain of divine power erupting all around them. All while a steady stream of demons claws their way to the top.
Now, it sounds like the players handled #1 and #2 pretty well. When confronted by #3, they chose poorly. Why? This wasn't a fighting encounter--it was a trap. You may not have planned it that way but that's what it was. They were stuck in a confined area and steadily taking damage until they could find a way out. The paint job may have been a fight, but under the hood, it's a trap.
Not having all the details, it sounds like your players chose to slug it out in the trap, instead of focusing on a faster way to get out of it. Maybe you could have dropped some hints as to how you really exepected them to make a quicker escape, but it was ultimately their decision.
Anyway, as long as they all come back next week, they must have forgiven you for anything you think you did.
evildm
Explorer
Personally, I've found that handling epic battles in an ultra-simple fashion works best. For instance, if the players are soldiers in the battle, then the entire battle depends on their performance. If they take brutal hits and start losing pretty bad, so will their side (may people dying, etc). The players aren't going to stop and count how many people are still standing on either side of a massive battle, so it's not imperative that you're accurate. Basically, keep it as cinematic as possible. The other combatants are just a description.
Rel
Liquid Awesome
Thanks for all the replies, guys. I'm taking the approach that I just had an off night. I wish that in the heat of battle that I'd come to the realization that I needed to change my methods to pick up the pace but I didn't. I'll know better next time and there will almost certainly be a next time. I wanted to take a couple minutes to reply to some of your specific points:
I agree but this campaign is rapidly moving toward its pre-planned conclusion. Big events are afoot and the PC's will play a major role. The setting for my campaign is pretty low-magic in general and the PC's are among the more powerful individuals actively making a difference in the conflict I've put before them. So the upcoming events will be on par or better than this when it comes to excitement and drama.
We use minis. I've discovered something about my personality as a roleplayer (and it applies to me whether I'm GMing or playing): I'm a Tactician. I derive enjoyment out of closely considering the resources at my disposal and using them to achieve my goal. This is why it runs counter to my nature to handwave big parts of a combat or just let the outcome be determined by a couple of general die-rolls. That is not to say that doing such is not a very good idea but it doesn't come naturally.
For this reason, I'm more drawn to the idea of letting the players run some of the other combatants rather than just glossing over the "crunchy bits" of the combat for those besides the PC's. Again, that may not be the best idea. Perhaps my players would rather that I did just give a few lines of descriptive text about what was happening around them and skip to the part where their characters are the focus. That's why I'm going to point blank ask them their preference and do whatever they want next time. Because clearly doing things "my way" doesn't always result in a lot of fun, even for me.
I understand why you would draw this conclusion from my description but it wasn't exactly like this. Right from the start, the PC's wanted to get out of there asap. The primary problem was that the NPC's they were rescuing were scattered all over the top of the pyramid and, with the din of battle, continual attacks by Devils and the geyser of god power, it took a few rounds to organize everyone. This was further complicated by a language barrier between the Orcs and a lot of the party members.
This confusion was essentially broken when the party Wizard, the one who was going to be transporting the lot of them out of there, gave a "drill sargeant style" set of orders, full of expletives, to "Get down off this ****ing pyramid, right the **** now or I'll ****ing leave every one of your ****ing ***es here in Hell!!!" After that, the exfiltration got under way fairly quickly.
I also complicated the situation by having some of the NPC's attempt to escape through the rift above since they were ignorant about the Forbiddence. These same NPC's (who are pretty smart) also came up with the idea of tossing a chunk of the anti-magic stone through the rift in order to suppress the Forbiddence. This was a viable option for escape but would have been tricky to pull off. In the event, the PC's decided to stick with the plan they already had (probably a good idea) and evacuated the NPC's away from the pyramid's anti-magic zone before escaping.
Thanks again for all of your replies and I'll make sure to keep these suggestions in mind in the big battles to come.
Keeper of Secrets said:
I agree but this campaign is rapidly moving toward its pre-planned conclusion. Big events are afoot and the PC's will play a major role. The setting for my campaign is pretty low-magic in general and the PC's are among the more powerful individuals actively making a difference in the conflict I've put before them. So the upcoming events will be on par or better than this when it comes to excitement and drama.
MerricB said:
We use minis. I've discovered something about my personality as a roleplayer (and it applies to me whether I'm GMing or playing): I'm a Tactician. I derive enjoyment out of closely considering the resources at my disposal and using them to achieve my goal. This is why it runs counter to my nature to handwave big parts of a combat or just let the outcome be determined by a couple of general die-rolls. That is not to say that doing such is not a very good idea but it doesn't come naturally.
For this reason, I'm more drawn to the idea of letting the players run some of the other combatants rather than just glossing over the "crunchy bits" of the combat for those besides the PC's. Again, that may not be the best idea. Perhaps my players would rather that I did just give a few lines of descriptive text about what was happening around them and skip to the part where their characters are the focus. That's why I'm going to point blank ask them their preference and do whatever they want next time. Because clearly doing things "my way" doesn't always result in a lot of fun, even for me.
Greatwyrm said:
I understand why you would draw this conclusion from my description but it wasn't exactly like this. Right from the start, the PC's wanted to get out of there asap. The primary problem was that the NPC's they were rescuing were scattered all over the top of the pyramid and, with the din of battle, continual attacks by Devils and the geyser of god power, it took a few rounds to organize everyone. This was further complicated by a language barrier between the Orcs and a lot of the party members.
This confusion was essentially broken when the party Wizard, the one who was going to be transporting the lot of them out of there, gave a "drill sargeant style" set of orders, full of expletives, to "Get down off this ****ing pyramid, right the **** now or I'll ****ing leave every one of your ****ing ***es here in Hell!!!" After that, the exfiltration got under way fairly quickly.
I also complicated the situation by having some of the NPC's attempt to escape through the rift above since they were ignorant about the Forbiddence. These same NPC's (who are pretty smart) also came up with the idea of tossing a chunk of the anti-magic stone through the rift in order to suppress the Forbiddence. This was a viable option for escape but would have been tricky to pull off. In the event, the PC's decided to stick with the plan they already had (probably a good idea) and evacuated the NPC's away from the pyramid's anti-magic zone before escaping.
Thanks again for all of your replies and I'll make sure to keep these suggestions in mind in the big battles to come.
Darklone
Registered User
I'm not so sure how I can help here... I often have big battles with easily more than 50 combatants. Guess it's a matter of practice. You'll get used to it. Battles take long on my table (we had one battle with more than 200 combatants going over three nights) but it's usually the players who need that much time... At least I tell myself that I'm a horribly good and fast DM
Most of my opponents are rather simple though... not that many spellcasters or dudes with special abilities, spells, special attacks or tactics.
Most of my opponents are rather simple though... not that many spellcasters or dudes with special abilities, spells, special attacks or tactics.
Similar Threads
