Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Skyscraper" data-source="post: 5771499" data-attributes="member: 48518">[MENTION=27897]Ryujin[/MENTION]: yeah, that's what I'm concerned about. Likewise, I'm afraid that brute monsters would one-shot some of my players. (I'm thinking of removing crits from monsters.)The thing is, 4E for us is a good game, but really we've never been able to manage fights in a sensible timeframe. By never, I mean that we've been playing it from the start and we're still at the 2-hour fight for normal fights and 3 hours for long ones. This eats too much time into battle for my taste. I've read dozens of threads on speeding up combat, nothing improves the timeframe significantly. We have one player that handles initiative, we roll damage dice at the same time as we roll attack dice, I cut down on usage of soldiers and solos, I have the enemies surrender or flee when it's apparent they'll loose, and recently, I even ended up preparing shortened PC sheets for my players in a short (few-sessions long) paragon tier adventure that look like monster stats (with powers having double or triple uses instead of having multiple different powers) to cut down on the PC sheet reading time, but even that wasn't enough.  All that to no avail, although the battles are slightly (say, 5-20%) shorter, they're still way too long. We do include a bit of roleplay pretty much at each creature's turn, but asking us to do away with that is too much. I don't think we go overboard there, however.Anyway. Thanks for everyone's comments so far. Hopefully more people will chime in, especially those that have tried this. The comments so far surprise me as I was not expecting the suggestion of halving monster HP but keep player HP as is. To me, this would have meant increasing the number of opponents to keep the fights balanced, which would have defeated the purpose. Now it seems some people do that however.</blockquote>

Verification