Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Truename" data-source="post: 5784529" data-attributes="member: 78255">Combat length is one of the flaws of 4e. The 4e combat system is great for cinematic set-pieces, but not so good for wandering monsters and other speed bumps.Also, Encounters and LFR aren't the best showcases for 4e. I haven't played LFR, but Encounters is limited by its new and constantly rotating player groups, so it's short on plot and long on combat.The good news is that combat length stays pretty much constant regardless of what level you are. My group is 13th level and it takes us about an hour for a fight as well.Here's what you can do to reduce combat length in your own games:* Use monsters of the PCs level or slightly lower. Lower level means the PCs miss less, but they still provide a sense of threat.* Use combat encounters of the PCs level or slightly lower. They're faster but still exciting. 4e combat is beautifully balanced to make the PCs worried even when there's no real danger.* Don't use Soldier-category monsters. Use brutes, skirmishers, lurkers, and so forth. Soldiers have higher AC and lower damage, which stretches out combat.* Use monsters with the new math. They're re-balanced to do more damage and die faster. "New Math" monsters are in published in books starting with Monster Manual 3, which includes Dark Sun, the Monster Vault products, Neverwinter Campaign Setting, Dragon #388 and later, and Dungeon #179 and later.* Have the monsters surrender or run away once the tide of the battle has turned. You can either do it by DM fiat, or by rolling morale checks (10 or higher = success, modified according to the situation) if you prefer a little randomness.* And, of course, it's good for the players to know their characters, be prepared for their turn, roll damage and attack dice at the same time, and so forth. They should focus fire as well.Finally, if you just want "wandering monster" style encounters to add flavor to a location, consider using minions rather than standard monsters, and don't use the battle grid. For more meaty wandering encounters, use just one or two standard monsters. To make this more threatening, you can deny short rests (due to wandering monsters or some other time pressure).A lot of that has to do with the DM, but I agree that sometimes the grid gets in the way. You can play 4e combat without the grid if your group is willing to accept DM fiat on distances and so forth. I haven't tried it myself, but there was a thread recently about a group that was grid-free and used simultaneous initiative. It sounded like a neat system, and it was said to be faster.You don't have to choose. Use gridless/very easy encounters for immersion and run-of-the-mill encounters, and break out the grid for the big set-piece battles. 4e does tactical combat very well and it's the most fun I've ever had with D&D combat (and I've played since 1e). You don't have to choose one or the other.Wizards seems to be aware that combat length is a problem. You might want to get in on the 5e playtest.</blockquote>

Verification