D&D 5E Making 1-minute features or spells "encounter"-length instead.

[DND_Reborn]

From this other thread:

D&D 5E - Conundrum: Ranged attack sequence/cover bonus for players

Interesting how even after 20 years of playing RPGs, new basic rule questions crop up...: So the PC group gets into a fight with a bunch of bugbears and goblins in a long 10 foot wide tunnel with corners etc, where it's more advantageous for the goblins to shoot their short bows than go melee...

www.enworld.org

the conversation changed into the discussion of what the round is, why 6-seoncds, etc.

That got me thinking back to Basic where an encounter was always a full turn (i.e. 10 minutes) because a round was 10-seconds then and you would have 60 rounds in a turn. Most encounters will never go that long in terms of rounds (IIRC, my own experience was about 42-45 rounds once) and the additional left-over time is used for bandaging wounds, searching bodies, cleaning weapons, resting sore muscles, etc.

So, what about spellcasting. A lot of combat-oriented spells or encounter-spells have a duration of 1-minute. Which in 5E is normally 10 rounds. Since IME few encounters go that long, could we just make those spells "encounter" spells? Would it really break anything in the game?

Over 85% of such spells are concentration, and are typically broken or dropped for another concentration spell before the 1-minute is up anyway.

In other words, make the "round" into an abstract quantity of time which allow each person a turn. Spells are already instant, 1 round, or 1 minute in encounter situations. We can basically think of them really as "now", "until I go again", or "encounter". Anything longer is typically an hour or more.

Sigh... I don't know. It is getting late and this probably won't make sense. I'll revist it when I have slept. Cheers.

 

[Helldritch]

Working the night shift here.
As I said in the other thread, the idea has some merit. It does affect the structure of the assumed time flow in 5ed but it would not be that much of a problem in my opinion.

As I said in the other post, my combats are often going over the 10 round mark (if they are in the hard and deadly difficulty). So making the spells last the entire encounter might not be a bad idea (as concentration is often dropped way before the "official" end of the spell due to damage) as the game is not build around such long battles.

Again, I wonder if battles at my table lasts this long because I have 6 players.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Working the night shift here.
As I said in the other thread, the idea has some merit. It does affect the structure of the assumed time flow in 5ed but it would not be that much of a problem in my opinion.

As I said in the other post, my combats are often going over the 10 round mark (if they are in the hard and deadly difficulty). So making the spells last the entire encounter might not be a bad idea (as concentration is often dropped way before the "official" end of the spell due to damage) as the game is not build around such long battles.

Again, I wonder if battles at my table lasts this long because I have 6 players.

LOL I should have waited and replied here. I'll copy it so you can continue here instead of there.

EDIT: FROM THE OTHER THREAD:

I've played in much larger groups before. In undergrad I ran a group of 10-12 players every Friday night. The battles didn't take as many rounds (this was 1E/2E, so that is a factor), but because there were so many characters and monsters, actual play time was long.

Have you read any of my posts on HP bloat in 5E? That would make your combat take less rounds I would think.

 

[Helldritch]

From the other thread.
Yep. But I think the HP bloat is a necessary evil. In 1ed and 2ed there was what I called the 9-12th syndrome in which characters were too strong for the low level monsters, but too weak for the high level ones. It was a zone where most group were dying. It took luck, skills and good tactical minds to go over this zone.

The HP bloat does alleviate this syndrome. It brings its own trouble though...

 

[DND_Reborn]

From the other thread.
Yep. But I think the HP is a necessary evil. In 1ed and 2ed there was what I called the 9-12th syndrome in which characters were too strong for the low level monsters, but too weak for the high level ones. It was a zone where most group were dying. It took luck, skills and good tactical minds to go over this zone.

The HP bloat does alleviate this syndrome. It brings its own trouble though...

LOL, ok were are on the same page now.

Here is what I am going to try. I've play-tested it with some of our group and it seems to work well.

Monsters have half their HP (round down).
PCs get normal HP at level 1, but only HD after that, but an HD roll cannot be less than their CON modifier +1.
Damage remains unchanged.

Ex. Orc is 15 HP, now has 7. This means a longsword or other normal d8 weapon can take them down without additional bonuses. It makes them more "mook-like". However, the still have the same bonus to hit and same damage, so they are stills scary and having them in numbers is still effective.

Ex. A Fighter with CON 16 begins with 13 HP. At second level, he rolls the d10, but any 1 or 2 or 3 becomes a 4 due to the +3 CON modifier (1 + 3 is minimum 4). The cap is still 10 since your are not "adding" your CON modifier anymore. At 3rd level, he rolls another d10, again the minimum is 4, max is 10. And so on.

NOTE: a variant I considered but was too favourable was adding the CON modifier as normal, but capping at the HD-type. So, with that you would roll, say a d10, and add the +3 for CON 16, and any total of 10 or higher is treated as 10. It works either way, just depends on how much HP you want the PCs to have over the mosnters.

Think about it. Try it. You might like it. Our group is excited to implement it when I run our new game (probably late summer).

 

[DND_Reborn]

Back to the OP concept. I never played 4E, but I like the idea of 1-minute features and spells becoming "encounter" length instead as well. We will see what others think.

 

[Helldritch]

This could reduce the combat length by a large margin. On the other hand, it could bring back the 9-12 syndrome I talked earlier but to an other degree. The character will be a lot squishier. Killing characters is not a problem at my table. It's keeping them alive that is.

As for the second variant, it would more or less give the same result as above. But a reduction of monsters' hp is not a bad idea. Then again, the BBEG needs more HP if they are alone. I did a few modification to the BBEG and it works quite well. Too well in some instances where the players almost call me a cheater even if I roll in the open... No systems is perfect.

I do remember fondly of the minions in 4ed. Their greatest idea, along with their idea on how cantrip works not. Maybe reintroducing minions in 5ed would be a better answer...

 

[DND_Reborn]

This could reduce the combat length by a large margin. On the other hand, it could bring back the 9-12 syndrome I talked earlier but to an other degree. The character will be a lot squishier. Killing characters is not a problem at my table. It's keeping them alive that is.

As for the second variant, it would more or less give the same result as above. But a reduction of monsters' hp is not a bad idea. Then again, the BBEG needs more HP if they are alone. I did a few modification to the BBEG and it works quite well. Too well in some instances where the players almost call me a cheater even if I roll in the open... No systems is perfect.

I do remember fondly of the minions in 4ed. Their greatest idea, along with their idea on how cantrip works not. Maybe reintroducing minions in 5ed would be a better answer...

The point is with few HP you wouldn't have to throw big things or a lot of smaller ones at the PCs to make it a fight. I know the 9-12 issue you are talking about, but I see that in 5E anyway! Having more HP for lower CR monsters doesn't change it IMO, it just makes winning take a LOT longer.

I had numbers of the PC HP comparison to RAW at one point, but since deleted it. I'll redo it tomorrow and post it so you can see a direct side-by-side of it.

But for now, I HAVE to get some sleep LOL! zzz...

 

[The Crimson Binome]

So, what about spellcasting. A lot of combat-oriented spells or encounter-spells have a duration of 1-minute. Which in 5E is normally 10 rounds. Since IME few encounters go that long, could we just make those spells "encounter" spells? Would it really break anything in the game?

As with 4E, the major problem is that it calls into question a lot of things about how the world works. If you have Levitation (for example) until the combat ends, it creates an incentive to avoid having the combat end... whatever that means.

If your players aren't the type to ask those sorts of questions, then it should be fine.

 

[Charlaquin]

From this other thread:

D&D 5E - Conundrum: Ranged attack sequence/cover bonus for players

Interesting how even after 20 years of playing RPGs, new basic rule questions crop up...: So the PC group gets into a fight with a bunch of bugbears and goblins in a long 10 foot wide tunnel with corners etc, where it's more advantageous for the goblins to shoot their short bows than go melee...

www.enworld.org

the conversation changed into the discussion of what the round is, why 6-seoncds, etc.

That got me thinking back to Basic where an encounter was always a full turn (i.e. 10 minutes) because a round was 10-seconds then and you would have 60 rounds in a turn. Most encounters will never go that long in terms of rounds (IIRC, my own experience was about 42-45 rounds once) and the additional left-over time is used for bandaging wounds, searching bodies, cleaning weapons, resting sore muscles, etc.

So, what about spellcasting. A lot of combat-oriented spells or encounter-spells have a duration of 1-minute. Which in 5E is normally 10 rounds. Since IME few encounters go that long, could we just make those spells "encounter" spells? Would it really break anything in the game?

Over 85% of such spells are concentration, and are typically broken or dropped for another concentration spell before the 1-minute is up anyway.

In other words, make the "round" into an abstract quantity of time which allow each person a turn. Spells are already instant, 1 round, or 1 minute in encounter situations. We can basically think of them really as "now", "until I go again", or "encounter". Anything longer is typically an hour or more.

Sigh... I don't know. It is getting late and this probably won't make sense. I'll revist it when I have slept. Cheers.

I do exactly this. It causes 0 problems.