How long should a round represent?

[Ahnehnois]

I really like the math of 6 second rounds.

I've seen games work well with 3 seconds, but that's hard to sell for D&D. I definitely wouldn't go any longer than 6 seconds. Round length is a sort of temporal resolution for the simulation of combat; the longer the round, the worse resolution you have. Anyway, battles commonly last only a few rounds anyway, so I see no need to lengthen the round and reduce battle duration (in rounds).

 

[howandwhy99]

I voted 1 minute, but I think it really should be Variable.

Psionic combat rounds occur in small fractions of a Second.
Mass combat rounds occur in 10 minute Turns.
All of these have Segments (we roll a d6, so have 6/rd), if one wants to play around with those things.
I think simultaneous initiative should be accounted for too.
And enable shared initiative.

 

[BobTheNob]

You needed a "it doesnt really matter" option. Im perfectly fine for time to be abstract just as 4e made distance abstract. It doesnt "not work" because its not in real world terms

Hey, I just noticed that I voted for abstract space-time. Does that means 5e becomes a rule of everything if I can consolidate it with abstract quantum theory?

 

[Lanefan]

Looking back, I believe 6 seconds is the standard. It dates back to older editions when you had 10 round turns which represented a full minute (60 seconds).

Erm...not quite. A turn was 10 rounds, sure; but those rounds were a minute long each. Thus, 6 turns per hour.

Each round had 10 6-second segments (if spellcasting) and 6 10-second segments (if doing other things); messy, and I long ago put everything on the 6-segment system.

That said, I voted for 30-second rounds. The 1e standard of a minute always seemed too long (I went to 30-second rounds ages ago), but anything shorter and things that last in terms of minutes or "turns" break down. And, 30 divides nicely by 6 to give 5-second segments; where 20 seconds - the other option I seriously considered - doesn't.

There is, however, one situation where I'd like to see rounds be about 3 or 4 minutes each; and that's ship-vs.-ship naval combat where things happen quite slowly in comparison to other types of combat.

EDIT:

I think simultaneous initiative should be accounted for too.
And enable shared initiative.

I second this motion.

Lanefan

 

[Kingreaper]

Anyway, battles commonly last only a few rounds anyway, so I see no need to lengthen the round and reduce battle duration (in rounds).

Increasing the length of a round only means decreasing the number of rounds if you think the length of a combat (in seconds) is right.

Given as a typical combat is over in under a minute, many in under 30 seconds, with 6-second rounds, I think there's plenty of room for stretching it out a bit.

 

[Ahnehnois]

Increasing the length of a round only means decreasing the number of rounds if you think the length of a combat (in seconds) is right.

Given as a typical combat is over in under a minute, many in under 30 seconds, with 6-second rounds, I think there's plenty of room for stretching it out a bit.

I kind of agree, but I think at that point we're talking more about stylistic conventions and health mechanics than round length. If battles are easy, they end fast. Hard ones generally go longer (unless they're too hard). If you have a system where characters are harder to kill in general (unlike pe-4e low-level characters, which are ridiculously easy to kill) then combat lasts longer.

I just don't want to see five rounds worth of events, obesrvations, and choices condensed even more.

 

[El Mahdi]

If I were to make a change, 10 seconds would be what I'd choose. But 6 works fine for me right now.

 

[SensoryThought]

Considering how much gets done with a minor, move, standard, and free action, plus action point actions, standard actions that give bonus basic attacks (like bladesinger dailies), to say nothing of triggered actions between rounds (opportunity attacks and immediate reactions) I think 6sec is too darn short.

I routinely see a player drink a potions, run 6 squares (30 ft), do an attack that then gives extra movement (hit and slide away), and shout a comment to their friends, then before their next round use a counter-attack power when the enemy moved in a strikes. Whew!

I use 30sec blocks and assume there is joustling, exchanging of minor blows, a chance for shouting to other pcs or enemies etc.

Does anyone have a combat in 4e last 10 rounds? Mine usually are resolved in closer to 5. That makes all battles under a minute.

 

[enigma5915]

Considering how much gets done with a minor, move, standard, and free action, plus action point actions, standard actions that give bonus basic attacks (like bladesinger dailies), to say nothing of triggered actions between rounds (opportunity attacks and immediate reactions) I think 6sec is too darn short.

...all if these actions in one round from one person is what I would like to see go away. All of these activities extend and prolong combat. If we nix the action bloat in a round we wouldn't need long combat rounds. Minor, move, standard, action point should reduce to just one action plus move.

 

[SensoryThought]

I think the action economy is less of a problem for combat speed than the fact D&D has to be now played on a grid with minis. Having to position and reposition, flank and avoid flanking, in addition to attacking makes the big difference in my opinion. In the old days we squared off in our heads and took turns rolling d20s without studying a map every 5 seconds.

The minor actions (heals, drinking a potion, changing stance etc,) usually only take a few seconds and don't happen every round in my games.