D&D 4E How long are your 4e combats taking, real time?

[evilbob]

I thought I'd chime in again after some interesting developments that made a difference in combat time for our group.

This weekend we went through 2 "sessions," one long and one short. The long one only had 2 combats and lots of RP, but the combats took a long time (I'd guess two hours or more each, aka "normal"). The short session had 3 combats and no RP, and the combats were MUCH faster (average of 1 hour, 15 mins, aka "fast").

There were several things that were different between the two sessions: first, I as a DM was using my own encounters for the "long" session and pre-made encounters (Dungeon Delve) for the "short" ones. This made a big difference: flipping around referencing lots of different places for monsters really slowed me down, while the Delve has EVERYTHING on two facing pages. I was honestly surprised by how much this helped. I would advise any DM to actually copy and paste ALL monster stat info onto one piece of paper and/or electronic document and use that when you run the encounter. You don't need to purchase pre-gens but the concept is good; keeping everything together helped me a ton. Also, I noticed that the pre-gen encounters used fewer enemies that were tougher, whereas I tend to use more enemies that are weaker. As long as you can still reasonably hit the monsters, clearly fewer monsters is faster.

Another difference was that between the two sessions, the players leveled up. After reading about the PHB2, I let all my PCs take the Weapon/Implement Expertise feats. This, I think, made things slightly faster because they could hit more often. I know it was only 5% more, but in one battle I particularly remember one enemy was only hit because of that 5% about 4 times. Another major difference was our warlord: he really respec'd and rethought his character, and when he started his new level he was MUCH more effective (at making others effective). Thus, the "tactical" nature of battle was increased, the PCs did better, and the fights were shorter.

I don't think I'm mentioning anything too new to this thread, but this is some (admittedly empirical) evidence that some of the suggestions are right on target: better tactics, better builds, and most importantly a better organized DMs can make a really big difference.


As an aside, I have been using initiative cards (made from 3x5 index cards) and our own types of markers - which honestly work better than anything I've read/heard about - for a while, and I cannot imagine trying to go back and play without them. These both speed things up a great deal - which I think also reinforces the whole "anything that helps the DM makes battles faster" principle.

 

[cbbakke]

We do a few things to try to speed up combat but I agree with the overall thought that they are too long right now.

1. Roll attack and damage at the same time. Some of our players refuse to do it but it saves time.
2. Know what youa re doing on your turn. The same playesr who dont roll dice at the same time are the ones who have to assess the situation when their turn comes up.
3. For initiative everybody rolls and the DM rolls for the monsters. We determine how many people beat the monsters. The high roll goes first and the second high roll decides if we go clockwise or counterclock wise around the table. If three people beat the monsters then three people go from that spot then the monsters. It helps things go in a circle which speeds it up abit.
4. We have cards for our powers wtih the + to hit and damage already on them.

5 I tried the plus half level to damage for a few weeks and overall I have went against it. I think it creates some balanace issues that I didnt care for hurts some classes and helps other classes a bit too much.

 

[keterys]

I've actually been doing that for a bit of putting monsters on a sheet - it's one of the reasons I love things from DDI - I copy the image for the stat blocks into paint on a single page, and go. If I can't fit them all in one page, it's usually a good indication I should simplify the combat some, but I two page some encounters.

 

[Chocolate Thief]

I roll initiative for all the monsters before the game and note them on a strip of paper (per encounter) printed with 30-1 down the side. Then add the PCs as they roll. Doesn't save much time but every little helps.

 

[Nebulous]

Our last session lasted about 3.5 hours and featured one small encounter, some exploration, and one large very dangerous encounter that turned out harder than i thought. We have one player dedicated to tracking initiative on a dry erase board for everyone to see, with little magnetic markers with PC names. We used colored tabs to denonte conditions, and everyone uses power cards. In general, i have found combat to flow very fast in 4e, although i have yet to throw a solo boss against the party. The one time they did meet one the party ran for the hills and didn't go back.

 

[Mengu]

This weekend we did 3 encounters in 6 hours or so with 6 PC's (one absent player, NPC'ed by another player, me).

First encounter was about a level equivalent ambush with 1 controller, some brutes, some minions, and a hazard.

Second encounter was about a level+1, pretty much a "wolfpack" encounter with about 3 high level and 4 low level skirmishers, also an ambush. We were poorly positioned for this one, and it was more difficult than it should have been.

Third encounter was level+1 or level+2, involved some terrain which essentially split the party 4 and 2. There were 6 or 8 skirmishers, and 2 higher level artillery.

I think both our groups are averaging about 2 hours per encounter with 5-6 players depending on the day.

 

[Wormwood]

The last two sessions I played were six hours long, each containing three full combat encounters (with roleplaying and various skill challenges thrown in).

The combats themselves lasted about 1.5 hours each at levels 8 and 9 respectively.

Honestly, were I running the games I would have gotten each combat done in under and hour---but I tend to end encounters when the party is down to At-Wills and the "4e Grind" begins to set in.

That said, 4e's strength in these cases is that individual turns tend to come much more quickly than they did under 3e; so while the combats are long, each *player* is acting frequently enough that they never feel bored.

 

[keterys]

Ran one tonight, 2.5 hour adventure - one pure RP encounter, then a skill challenge (sorta two really), then a level +1 combat, then a 5 or so minute break, then a skill challenge, then two quick RP encounters, then a level +2 combat, quick RP, then a narration. I wasn't timing the combats themselves, but I'm guessing ~40 mins?

 

[jorrit]

3. For initiative everybody rolls and the DM rolls for the monsters. We determine how many people beat the monsters. The high roll goes first and the second high roll decides if we go clockwise or counterclock wise around the table. If three people beat the monsters then three people go from that spot then the monsters. It helps things go in a circle which speeds it up abit.

How do you handle things like delaying and readying actions that way? These game actions change the initiative order while then encounter is busy so as soon as someone delays you can't keep the order of initiative constant. Also does your system mean that all monsters always go together (when it is the DM's turn)?

Greetings,

 

[DrSpunj]

Since I usually have 2-4 various creatures and/or types in a battle I usually roll their initiatives separately (ahead of time to save time). That means the Goblin Hexer, Goblin Warriors, the Sharpshooters & Cutters (Minions) are all at their own initiative. Since Nail now runs our magnetic Combat Pad initiative board and gives people a heads up about their upcoming turn (including my multiple groups) I really like having different baddies going at different spots in the initiative.
This is certainly one place where I know putting all the mobs at one spot in the initiative would definitely speed up our play but I just don't find that type of battle to be very fun, personally. It turns the combat into an overly complicated ping pong match if it's just "Party goes, Mobs go, Party goes, Mobs go". Things are more fluid for both sides this way which I think adds a lot of tactical choices for everyone involved but admittedly costs a good chunk of time. Is it worth it is a question each group will have to ask themselves, of course.