Lower Level combat & grind

[Dannyalcatraz]

Answering what I can at the moment:

The DM has been using WotC's own low-level stuff (don't know which): over the past couple of months, we've faced kobolds, hobgoblins, an ogre and some kind of small white dragon (or something similar). They do provoke AoOs- good thing, too, since otherwise, the Fighter wouldn't have gotten to capitalize on them like he did.

Misses have been a mixed bag of low rolls and high defences. My Starlock, for instance, typically has followed up rolls of 13+ with 7s or less*...modified with +3 for stats, perhaps +2 from the Cleric and occasionally +1 for his Fate of the Void feature. He rarely gets his Prime Shot bonus. He has powers that hit each NAD, and as a dwarf, he's somewhere around a +3 bonus level with his warhammer.

* 2 powers target- AND reduce- Will, so it's especially galling that I haven't pulled off the combo.

As for the iterative attacks thing: it's true that you didn't get iteratives at low levels in prior editions, but you also didn't get as many foes with double-digit HP totals at low levels in those editions, either. But for a handful of minions, we haven't faced anything without HP totals close to our own.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

The fighter doesn´t need to hit for marking, and the cleaved target is not marked...

I'll have to discuss that with the guy who plays the fighter- it won't affect his hit/miss ratio, but it's still good to know! Thanks!

 

[ExploderWizard]

I'll have to discuss that with the guy who plays the fighter- it won't affect his hit/miss ratio, but it's still good to know! Thanks!

Actually it might. Being marked means that his foe cannot make an attack that does not include the fighter or shift without the fighter getting a chance to hit. More chances to hit will hopefully bring up the hit/miss ratio.

 

[surfarcher]

I'm guessing your DM is using monsters higher than your level. That won't make the fight more dangerous, just more grindy.

That or you have made up a batch of really suboptimal characters

In general I think there's lots of possible sources of grind. I loosely categorise them as player related or DM related...

Player related all amounts to taking too much time on your turn or making plain bad choices in combat...
* Not realising it's your turn
* Taking more than say 60 seconds on your turn
* Using your MBA
* Not undderstanding how and when to best use each power

DM related seems to be to be combat design and how the DM handles the actual encounter. I remember when I first read http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/254630-stalker0s-guide-anti-grind.html I marvelled at how he had so eloquently captured my own messy thoughts and more than doubled them! It's a must read for grindy sufferers. Highlights...
* Monsters higher than level+0 tend to be grindy.
* Many solos are very grindy, you need to be careful which solos you use, how and when
* Soldiers tend to be grindy
* Artillery and Leader monsters are what really spice things up
* There's plenty more in there!

My brand new, shiney 4e group (2x utter RPG noobs, 1x player for less than a year and 2x experienced RPG but fairly new to 4e guys) polished my encounters off in about 45 minutes. There was plenty of tension too, like when I accidentally knocked the cleric to -5hp with ongoing 5 fire damage.

Well a bit of a brain-dump but hopefully you, your party and your DM get something useful out of it!

 

[malraux]

This also means there is no advancement, so we've seen a lot of low level combat.

This also strikes me as an non optimal choice. First level is really limited for options.

 

[corwyn77]

Answering what I can at the moment:

The DM has been using WotC's own low-level stuff (don't know which): over the past couple of months, we've faced kobolds, hobgoblins, an ogre and some kind of small white dragon (or something similar). They do provoke AoOs- good thing, too, since otherwise, the Fighter wouldn't have gotten to capitalize on them like he did.

Well, kobolds are okay but Hobgoblins are, IMO, really bad monsters for level 1 because of the boost to AC for adjacent hobgoblins. When I use them I tend to have them of a lower level than the PCs. As for the Dragon, at least it was white.

Misses have been a mixed bag of low rolls and high defences. My Starlock, for instance, typically has followed up rolls of 13+ with 7s or less*...modified with +3 for stats, perhaps +2 from the Cleric and occasionally +1 for his Fate of the Void feature. He rarely gets his Prime Shot bonus. He has powers that hit each NAD, and as a dwarf, he's somewhere around a +3 bonus level with his warhammer.

Even with just +3 you should still be hitting more than half the time, especially targeting different NADs. If you must use the hammer, at least be flanking.

* 2 powers target- AND reduce- Will, so it's especially galling that I haven't pulled off the combo.

As for the iterative attacks thing: it's true that you didn't get iteratives at low levels in prior editions, but you also didn't get as many foes with double-digit HP totals at low levels in those editions, either. But for a handful of minions, we haven't faced anything without HP totals close to our own.

Well, virtually all monsters you face are going to have more HPs than any of the PCs. That's by design - monsters have more HP, characters do more damage, especially strikers, some of whom do close to double. OTOH, they generall start with 25-30 hp wheras monsters will typically start with 30 to 40.

 

[dvvega]

In general most of the combats I have run have lasted around 5 rounds on the average. However my last session saw one go on and on and on ... it was the longest grind fest I had seen for a while.

The only contributing factor I could find to this were monster hit points versus bad player tactics.

Up until this time, there were very few monsters with 150+ hit points in my encounters except for solos. Last session saw a combat with 3 Ogre Maulers, 1 Hobgoblin Fleshcarver and 6 Goblin Cutters.

The Cutters fell quickly as expected, allowing the Maulers and Fleshcarver to set up positions. However the party at this point decided to split up in groups of 1 and 2. This was bad. Now I know one of them kept focusing on the Ogre that was first hit - assuming that everyone would pile on.

So it just became grind. And my encounter did more damage than expected because of the grinding nature of it.

That is the only time I've seen grind - when players forget that they are a group of adventurers and start going it alone against monsters.

D

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I'm guessing your DM is using monsters higher than your level. That won't make the fight more dangerous, just more grindy.

That or you have made up a batch of really suboptimal characters

In general I think there's lots of possible sources of grind. I loosely categorise them as player related or DM related...

Player related all amounts to taking too much time on your turn or making plain bad choices in combat...
* Not realising it's your turn
* Taking more than say 60 seconds on your turn
* Using your MBA
* Not undderstanding how and when to best use each power

1. Well, like I said, this is a published low-level adventure, so its doubtful the monsters would be "too tough" for us.
2. I don't think optimization is the issue, either- one guy is a math wiz and has been optimizing PCs for 20+ years.
3. Nobody's missed a turn.
4. Tactics are rarely an issue in this group- as noted in other threads, we don't have 15 minute workdays, and often go 6+ encounters between rests.

Well, kobolds are okay but Hobgoblins are, IMO, really bad monsters for level 1 because of the boost to AC for adjacent hobgoblins. When I use them I tend to have them of a lower level than the PCs. As for the Dragon, at least it was white.
Even with just +3 you should still be hitting more than half the time, especially targeting different NADs. If you must use the hammer, at least be flanking.

1. Most of the Hobgoblins were minions, which the Wizard was picking off with his MM (revised).
2. Some of the non-minion kobolds had some kind of teamwork option that made them tougher, as I recall.
3. The Warhammer doesn't usually see use when I'm flanking because when its in use its because someone or someones have engaged ME.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

This also strikes me as an non optimal choice. First level is really limited for options.

This is for a limited time- only until everyone gets at least 1-2 encounters under their belt- because we're doing more of a test drive than anything else.

After that period, we'll get awarded our XP and we'll pick our permanent PCs.

 

[Jools]

Well remember to put points into your attack stat and choose a race with an appropriate stat bonus if you're concerned about accuracy. If want truly high accuracy choose a dex 20 dagger wielding rogue, that's about as accurate as you can get.