D&D 4E Revised 4E Rules for large groups

[brainstorm]

I DM two separate campaigns for 4E. One group has 4 players and the other has 7. I have found that the smaller group runs pretty smoothly with the RAW. My other group, however, requires a lot of house ruling and tinkering with monster powers/stats to challenge them and even so I find encounters to be painfully long and drawn out. After analyzing my last several sessions (I digitally record them), I believe the main reason my large group is so much more difficult to run is because the game is optimized for groups of 4-5. Every person beyond that is going to add complexity to the game. Adding more monsters, increasing monster damage while lowering hp are all solutions I've tried, but have found to be less than successful. After giving this much thought, I believe that the solution is not with making monsters/encounters more difficult, but instead, modifying the character advancement matrix.

The current character advancement matrix on p. 29 of PHB shows that every character will have 11 total powers (not including racial or magic item powers) by the time they finish the Heroic Tier. By the end of the Paragon Tier, they'll have 15 powers and at the end of the Epic Tier, 17 powers. That's a lot of powers for 1 character. Multiply that by 6, 7, 8, or more, players and you get a group of characters that literally have dozens of powers at their disposal and very difficult to challenge. Throw in magic items, racial powers, Paragon and Epic features, and you get even more powers that are available to the players. With so many options, players spend time sifting through power cards if they use them and rule books if they don't, trying to figure out what power to use every round.

My idea is to modify the character advancement matrix for groups of 6 or more players, to cap the total number of powers that characters get much earlier. The current matrix allows characters to add new powers until 13th level, at which point they begin replacing powers with the higher level powers. With my revised matrix, the power replacement begins at 6th level and continues through the end of the Epic Tier. The only new powers the PCs get are the Paragon and Epic powers. So, instead of having 11 powers at the end of the Heroic Tier, they'll have 7. Instead of 15 powers at the end of the Paragon Tier, they'll have 10. At the end of the Epic Tier, they'll have 11 powers instead of 17.

The theory is that, with fewer powers to choose from, the players will not have as many options to sift through, and will be a time saver. With fewer powers, they'll burn through them faster, and will require less monster buffing to make the encounter challenging.

Any thoughts on whether this might work as I envision or if it is completely broken. Please elaborate if you feel either way. I hope to test this out soon, but would like to get community feedback before trying it.

 

[Saeviomagy]

The main problem I foresee is that it's already pretty common for the fight to get reduced to "each player uses his best at-will, the monster nails them with it's superior recharge power... again" and that's what causes people to feel that the game is a grind. Reducing the number of powers before you reach that stage is just going to make more of the game a grind.

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

I agree with Saeviomagy that reducing player options can cause more 'grind' in combat.

I have some thoughts in my head but would like more detail... as your experience differs than mine.


I have been running a large group {7 to 9 players} for a while and most combats take just shy of two hours, but tend to be challenging. My method is to use the DMG encouter templates with equivilent level monsters. I don't use XP costs to build the encounter.
As an example, I look at the DMG and select a 'Hard' skirmisher encounter which states 7 skirmishers. The group is 15th level, so I mod the desired critter to be 15th level using DDI and use 7 of them.
The majority of combats I have run get almost everyone bloodied and maybe takes one PC down to 0.. but I have yet to burn everyone out of encounters/dailies.

I do have issues with table control, as far as players paying attention to thier turn/etc.. but that is a table issue not a mechanics issue.

So... what are you looking for when you say 'challenging' and what things in your groups mechanics do you think go counter to that?

 

[Blackbrrd]

...
The theory is that, with fewer powers to choose from, the players will not have as many options to sift through, and will be a time saver. With fewer powers, they'll burn through them faster, and will require less monster buffing to make the encounter challenging.
...

Personally I think you could speed up your game by changing how you run combat. Instead of waiting for a player sift through his power cards when it's his turn skip on to the next on initiative. The skipped player can jump in at any time between turns and do his action. More personal mistakes will be made, but if you do the same as a DM (just doing things if you can't think of anything) it balances out quite nicely.

Instead of:
Player 1.... ehh... 20 seconds... I will... ehh.. 30 seconds... ehh... Twin strike
Player 2....ehh.. 30 seconds... ehh... Brash Strike
DM: eh.. my mob wil.. uhm... yeah.. let me see here.. 20 seconds... basic attack
Total wait: 100 sec + resolution of game mechanics

You get:
Player 1 eh.. 5 sec
Player 2: Brash Strike!
Player 1: Twin strike! Twin strike
DM: Whatever basic attack
Total wait: 5 sec + resolution of game mechanics

 

[Amaroq]

I'm very interested to hear more on this topic, as the group I've been DM'ing will jump from 4 to 6 on our next session. Any advice you folks can give will be deeply appreciated!

 

[Blue]

I'm very interested to hear more on this topic, as the group I've been DM'ing will jump from 4 to 6 on our next session. Any advice you folks can give will be deeply appreciated!

I think 4-6 is the most common, so the most catered to by RAW. I wouldn't worry too much about needing to house rule to cover it.

As a side note, I play in both a 4 player and a 6 player game. 4 player is tighter, less down time in combat. But a few bad rolls and it can all go south, there isn't as much depth of defense. The six player game has +50% players, but takes easily +100% combat time, with less time spent per player. Besides the obvious as above, more monsters lead to more tactical issues. The DM for that game has sworn off using more that a single monster with controller-like abilities, otherwise it takes forever. When the group clicks tactically (like last session), it works beautifully as we delay some foes, concentrate on others, and mow through them. When the group doesn't click (like two sessions ago with the total party capture), we drop quickly because we are individually fragile compared to the monster XP budget.

 

[eriktheguy]

With so many options, players spend time sifting through power cards if they use them and rule books if they don't, trying to figure out what power to use every round.

I agree with you that this is a likely problem consuming time at your table. It can't be what is slowing down your 7 player sessions though. At any level, each player in your 7 player group has the same number of powers as a player in your 4 player group. Each player has the same number of options, and spends the same number of time sifting through rules books and cards. The only difference could be if the players from your two groups spend different amounts of time deciding for other reasons (they are less experienced, they are rules lawyers, they want to always make the perfect moves).

If you have tried giving the monsters less HP and still cannot make combat shorter, then something is wrong.

I would suggest first and most importantly, that you ban all rules books at the table. Looking up a rule etc can slow the game by at least 5 minutes. A player should never have to look something up since all the information needed for a power is written on the power card (if you aren't using the character generator start using it). You can also keep a small printout with often-cited information on hand (combat modifiers, conditions, bull rush and grab rules are a good start). On the off chance that a rules clarification is needed, make the call yourself as GM and look it up later.

I would also suggest for a large group that you use a whiteboard. Record the defenses and initiative of every PC on the top half of the whiteboard. Record monster defenses and initiatives on the bottom half. Now people can prepare for their turn when they are next, and tell you how much damage the monster takes without having to say 'I hit 28 vs reflex'. Conversely you can tell players how much damage they take without having to ask them their defenses or memorise all (4 * 7 = 28) of them. Do this and there will be a lot less yelling at the table.

Don't roll damage. With that many monsters just do about average damage without taking all the time to roll. Sometimes do more or less. You seem to have a good grasp on math and rules mechanics, so I'm assuming you can do this in your head . Now you only need a few d20s to play and combat should go faster.

Ask your players to think of what they will do before their turn. If someone's turn is coming up on the whiteboard and you notice they are chatting with their neighbor about last week's episode of Family Guy, let them know that they are next. Encourage them to act spontaneously if they still don't know what to do on their turn. This is combat after all, and 4e is forgiving. Give new players a bit of extra time on their turn. Try sitting newer players beside the helpful experienced players. If a new player wastes a daily or never uses their dailies, don't let the other players yell at or micromanage him/her. Just let them learn as they progress and give them some advice occasionally.

It is worth sitting down with the group and discussing slow combat with them. Show them the recording and explain that when they consult rules it slows things down. Explain to them that they win every combat, so they don't need to think for 5 minutes every turn about what is 'the perfect action'.

On the other hand, if everyone is visibly being social and having fun during the slow, long fights, then there is no problem. Unless you as the GM aren't enjoying the session, in which case this might not be your ideal group.

Note: If the number of options is overwhelming your characters, they probably aren't going to be too keen on the idea of such a major houserule. Moreover, I don't see how you would implement it in the character builder.

 

[brainstorm]

Good suggestions, but ultimately what I'm trying to accomplish is to streamline the rules for larger groups. No matter how you cut it, large groups = more time per round because you have more people to cycle through and more monsters to run. I've spent the last year trying all kinds of ways to modify encounters and monsters and implement house rules and it's just too much work for me. Cutting back on player options is my last resort before dropping 4E for my larger group.

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

You stated that you were trying "...to challenge them and even so I find encounters to be painfully long and drawn out."

I don't think that reducing the players options will assist in challenging them and since my experience is counter to yours, I am at a loss as to what to suggest.

There are alot of variables that go into the length of combat; party mix, group social styles, rules mastery, table rules, number of encounters per day, monster mix within encounters, availability of healing magic. There are tons of ideas regarding assistance with pretty much all of these, but I think without some more detail regarding your play experience and set-up, we would just be shooting into the dark and trying to hit an invisible target {...that is 'Tiny'.. whats that, -25 to hit?}

Anyway, I suspect one of the areas that could be tweaked is the number of encounters per day and availability of healing.. Do your players stop before anyone gets below half healing surges? Are they able to use Dailies in almost every encounter?


Regardless of the source, the two recommendations I have is to use circular initiative.. just start with the player to your left and work around the table. Sure you drop initiative rolls and some feats are pointless, but it is faster as everyone knows who is going next... and to talk to the players about the speed of combat. Suggest that if they are not sure what to do, use a basic attack.

.. as to dropping 4e with your larger group... no matter what system you run a larger group will expereince slower combat. I once ran Paranoia with 10 players... combat was ***SLOW***

 

[brainstorm]

Screwhead, I implemented circular initiative a couple of sessions ago and it's helped slightly, but not enough. Here is some detail, if it helps:

Problem #1: The group is comprise of 12th level characters; 3 strikers, 1 controller, 1 leader, 2 defenders. They do a lot of damage, impose a lot of conditions which hamper the opponents and can heal a lot of damage they take. So to challenge this party, I need to have opponents that last long enough to get at least a couple of hits in and do enough damage to make the encounter a challenge (i.e., make them use healing surges). The problem is, the fewer hp the monsters have, the faster they drop and less time they are around to do enough damage to make them a threat. Upping the damage they do is the next logical step (which I've done), but if a monster only gets 3 rounds to act (due to the fewer HP) and they miss on 2 of the rounds, then they are not much of a threat. So, the next logical step is to add more monsters (which I've done), but this means more monsters for them to take out (and me to run and track), which extends the combat. So, the next logical step is to use more minions (which I've done). Problem is, the controller takes minions out fairly effortlessly. So, use the minions in waves (which I've done). The controller, leader and one of the strikers use zones, walls and other powers that cause damage just by moving through or starting a round in and handle minions pretty efficiently. So, the answer is use tactics (done that). No, the answer is use traps and terrain (done that). No, the answer is... and so on. I am working way too hard to try and challenge the group and it is mostly because they have too many options available to them, I can't keep track of all the powers they have and so I can't design encounters that challenge them because, between the 7 of them, they can nerf just about anything I throw at them at their level. I can't use higher level opponents (tried that) because then the PCs can't hit their defenses and the battle drags out that much longer.

Problem #2: This is a social group, so they've always had a hard time focusing on the game, particularly if the combat is dragging out. But even in D&D 3.5, we've never had combats that last so long consistently. Sure, if they focused more on the game, were better prepared on their turns, etc., the encounter would be faster, but the reason we get togerther regularly is to socialize AND game, so I'm not going to harp on them because they want to chat about last week's South Park episode in between their turns. Besides, their behavior hasn't changed in all of the iterations of D&D we've played, but avg length of combat encounters has, so the problem is with the game, not the players.

In my opinion, 4E went overboard on giving characters options. It's now made the DM have to work harder (as if we didn't have to work hard enough as it was) to challenge the players instead of the players having to work to get through a challenge. Mind you, this has been more of a problem from 6th level up to their current 12th level, because they had fewer options from 1st -5th level. Having challenging encounters with reasonable durations was not a problem at low levels and it has not been a problem with my other group of 4 players, 3 of whom play in the larger group.