D&D 4E Is PF combat any faster than 4e?

[Cybit]

4E can be slower up until about 10th level in my experience. Basically, the thing that slows down combat in ALL systems are options. Player choice paralysis.

Been running a 4E game for years now, and combats were kinda slow (one fight per night after an hour or so of narrative), until I made players stick to one character. After about six months, when they had gotten into a groove of what to do, they were pretty fast. Same group of players, into PF, the first ten levels, combats were short and quick, but once the casters started getting options, it got slow. (Thankfully, years of running 4E had taught me how to entertain myself while players figured out what to do next)

4E Essentials makes the game run MUCH, MUCH faster, and as an Encounters DM, I love the fact they stick to the essentials classes. A fight can usually take 30-45 minutes even at low level with new players in essentials. If you're going to start 4E, I'd highly suggest essentials first, until your players get used to their characters.

Having DM'd 3/3.5//4 for some time now (PF was DM'd at a convention), I'm convinced that it has far more to do with choices than anything else. It explains why 4E starts slow, but combat time really doesn't increase too terribly much at higher levels, while PF is super fast for the first...5 levels, and then exponentially slows down once people start getting options.

Given a magic wand, I wish I had started using timers on players during their turns much sooner than I did. (For both games).

 

[Alphastream]

I have to say that I haven't had as much fun as I thought I would. It seems like the bulk of the time I've spent in these adventures is devoted to combat encounters. Not because there are a lot of encounters in these adventures, but because it tends to take a solid hour to wrap up an encounter.

Opinions will always differ. For many players, combat speed is an issue in 3E and 4E as compared to previous editions and lighter RPGs. 4E is fairly uniform in time spent across levels, while 3E tends to be faster (slightly) at lower levels and both editions are slightly longer at higher levels. The nuances are interesting, but probably not worth discussing for your benefit.

D&D Encounters is specifically a program designed to give you a strong dose of combat. Each week's session is supposed to have a strong "bang" factor and to be lighter on the RP and exploration side (though various seasons do that as well). The reason is because this is an in-store program and the audience generally prefers coming in to roll dice and have fun in a combat setting.

LFR is a step beyond that. The adventures are 4 hours in length and while they feature 2-3 combats usually, and those combats can be the majority of the time, there are often strong role-playing aspects (though less exploration, generally). This is in part about the audience, in part historical, and in part due to the edition. Living Campaigns are often trying to sum up big events in just 4 hours, so the combats are often big movie-style cinematic scenes and then we 'cut' to the next non-combat scene. This is true of Pathfinder and other living campaigns as well (not to mention many home games).

That said, LFR has more than 100 adventures. The newer ones can be really great, including some great scenes such as decisions of how to place defenses prior to a siege or creating your own play involving two deities, then role-playing that out.

Other campaigns experiment a bit further. Living Divine and Ashes of Athas often work to challenge expectations and deliver more role-playing and a greater cohesive story. As an admin for AoA, we work hard to innovate while having a very focused story experience.

Does Pathfinder solve any of these issues? I know that people frequently use the battle map with Pathfinder, but I've heard that it's not required, and if you don't use it, it can really speed combat up.

Pathfinder/3E combat is faster at low levels, but keep in mind that Living Greyhawk (an old 3E living campaign), Pathfinder (3.75), and LFR (4E) all roughly use the same formula of 2-3 fights per 4-hour adventure. The difference between combat length in actual play is not particularly noticeable outside of really short 3E combats that aren't meant to be a challenge. On average I don't think combat length or grid emphasis will be a difference. Edition isn't the only factor. Ashes of Athas (4E) has had several grid-less combat scenes, but we also love tactical terrain-rich grid play.

In the end it likely comes down to compelling story. To give any organized play campaign a fair shot, play through a series of linked adventures and decide which you like best. Play the Calimshan LFR series, play the Jade PFS series, play a Chapter of AoA adventures, play some Arcanis linked adventures, Shadowrun Missions, etc. and go with what your group liked best. I won't be shocked if different players have different preferences.