D&D (2024) Is Combat Tedious on Purpose?

[payn]

I remember saying early in D&D Next that having Plate Armor be 18 AC and designing so a commoner can hit a level 20 fighter on a 16 grants no room to grow.

But I was drown out by "Yeah. Small numbers!"

And now, every turn of a PC past level 3 is long and drawn out unless the player or DM goes out their way to speed them up.

The numbers were too small.
We playtested low level too much and not mid and high level... AGAIN
And now it's tedious by accident .

This is a complete misunderstanding of growth in 5E and it’s divorce of what came before.

 

[Minigiant]

This is a complete misunderstanding of growth in 5E and it’s divorce of what came before.

Not really.

There are multiple massive ripple effects of D&D Next attaching itself to Bounded Accuracy and setting the bounds to narrow.

Making Leather Armor 11 AC, Plate Armor 18AC, and a commoner +2 to hit is the source of 5e's Combat Tedium.

 

[payn]

Not really.

There are multiple massive ripple effects of D&D Next attaching itself to Bounded Accuracy and setting the bounds to narrow.

Making Leather Armor 11 AC, Plate Armor 18AC, and a commoner +2 to hit is the source of 5e's Combat Tedium.

Yes because you are using yesteryears assumption and think magic item golden showers are exciting. Game doesn’t work like that anymore.

 

[SteveC]

As noted above: I would want it to support both 4e-like play and OSR-like play. I believe this result is perfectly achievable, with the (re)introduction of various rules branches: novice levels, incremental advances, "Skirmishes", Skill Challenges, etc.

If you don't mind a recommendation, I suggest looking at the game Strike! It has combat ranging from single die roll to full-on 4E fights. I would use it as a basis for these modules in D&D. I always put a caveat in when I talk about the game that the presentation puts a lot of people off about it. So if you do take a look, get ready for a "what is this?" moment where you question my sanity at recommending it. That might be a good way to improve things at your table.

Alternatively, there are some fantastic "5E adjacent" games right now that really address these issues. I agree that 5E should be able to do a range of combat styles. That's what the playtest said, after all, but I remember going from "of course the rules for 5E will be modular" to "why did you ever think that would be the case?" ... from the same people.

 

[Micah Sweet]

If every combat is dragging and you're not seeing any part of your rpg playing as acting ... maybe there is a connection. If you, as a DM, are not infusing character into the combat and you're experiencing drag in every combat ... while many DMs I've worked with in 5E are not experiencing drag in 95% of combats and are adding personality to the enemies in the combat, I'd suggest you're not taking advantage of all anti-drag tools.

I have played many 5E games for a decade, and a decent number under 2024 rules, and I have not been experiencing drag as a player or DM except on rare occasion where a particular monster build and a particular PC design just result in a slap fight. That probably accounts for 2% of combats. If I'm not seeing it, despite a wide experience with many DMs, it must be an avoidable problem ... and seems unlikely to be the default state,

Regardless, 5E is designed to run about 10 to 13 combats per level if you follow the guidance in the books. Most DMs shrink that number by having tougher combats. If you run 20 levels with 12 combats per level, that is 240 combats. You can add tempo, environment, and other features to combats without repeating them in those 240 combats, especially as you get tools to be more diverse as players advance in abilities and gain the ability to adventure underwater, in the air, through the planes, etc...


If the monsters surviving longer is causing tedium, it could be that you're not making the encounters themselves interesting enough.

If it is the plethora of options that is slowing down combat, I'd suggest working with players to give them a more succinct view of their capabilities. I often provide players that struggle with analysis paralysis a succinct sheet of player that lists the core abilities of their PC without all the rules language embedded. It works for me.



You could put it in one $125 book or five $27 books. You could sell them in book sets to keep it at three purchases. The fear of five bindings, while perhaps a cool adventure title, is likely not as relevant as one might think. Separating them physically allows them to be used at the right time in the right way - allowing you to put training books to the side while you have only reference materials in books that get handled at the table.



Characters in a setting are in a story. If you do not grow the story through crafting and effort, it is just a bad story. The story is what adds purpose to the game. That purpose, and the PC interaction with it, is what players tend to remember looking back decades later. They forget (most) of the critical hits, but they remember when they realized their long time ally was a vampire, that the MacGuffin that the paladin was seeking would make the paladin (despite a lack of preparedness) into royalty, that the ally that had been helping them from behind the scenes was not only a famous hero of old ... but one that had become a mind flayer.

This is a main difference between BG3 and other 'RPG' video games. The storytelling is masterful compared to rivals, with great acting, significant impacts from the choices of PCs, and meaningful progression through a narrative that culminates at the end of the campaign ... and then breathes with epilogue to slowly release that connection that grew throughout the game.

You don't need a plot to have a fun game. I run all my games sandbox style, and let my players decide where to go and what to do, rather then lead them down an adventure path. Somehow, they all seem to enjoy themselves.

 

[KYRON45]

You don't need a plot to have a fun game. I run all my games sandbox style, and let my players decide where to go and what to do, rather then lead them down an adventure path. Somehow, they all seem to enjoy themselves.

Isn't what the players are currently engaged in a plot?

 

[Micah Sweet]

In my experience if combat is tedious or not depends more on my encounter design and my narration/moderation skills. I try always to run them under the premise of "roleplay doesn't stop after initiative gets rolled" and I hate the notion that combat is a mini game, different game than the rest. Its just a more granular version of the usual resolution system. Time goes into slow-mo in combat. But its still important to provide the players opportunities for meaningful decisions (roleplay) that have do be done in split-seconds and matter over life and death. Thats the exciting part of combat.

The rules of D&D feel to me like a good mix out of still being open for improvisation and roleplay but also delivering this more granular crunch. 2024 went in some directions that ease up the flow but in some other directions that slow it down. It feels relatively even to me, but I can imagine that it will feel good if we are more fluent with the new rules.

Agreed. Are people not narrating their attacks and describing their actions in combat anymore? That's what keeps me and my players engaged in short, simple fights. As you say, you keep up the roleplaying and describing of the scene.

 

[AlViking]

I remember saying early in D&D Next that having Plate Armor be 18 AC and designing so a commoner can hit a level 20 fighter on a 16 grants no room to grow.

But I was drown out by "Yeah. Small numbers!"

And now, every turn of a PC past level 3 is long and drawn out unless the player or DM goes out their way to speed them up.

The numbers were too small.
We playtested low level too much and not mid and high level... AGAIN
And now it's tedious by accident .

In 5 if I throw a band of dozen CR 2 monsters against a 6th level party I don't expect it to be deadly but it would likely be a challenge. Kick up the numbers by another half dozen and I'd likely be looking at a TPK. If it's a 10th level party I'd likely start using mob rules if I didn't for the 6th level party but once again if I throw a small army of CR 2 enemies at them it's going to be a challenge.

In 3 or 4 I would never bother because they would only hit on a 20 which meant that we just had the escalator or ever increasing numbers that gave the illusion of growth. In 5 if we use a monster that gets advantage like berserkers and don't hand out AC boosting items like candy and those CR 2 monsters are going to hit even higher level PCs in the party about half the time. In 5th I'm more likely use the CR 2 monsters as cannon fodder for the big threat but they are still more than just a speed bump.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Isn't what the players are currently engaged in a plot?

But one of their own making.

 

[Minigiant]

Yes because you are using yesteryears assumption and think magic item golden showers are exciting. Game doesn’t work like that anymore.

No, I mean 5e Base Classes don't get Accuracy bonus or AC bonus from level outside of Proficiency bonus to to hit roll.

That restriction forced WOTC to go wide on everything and vertical on HP and Damage.