Speeding up combat in 4th edition D&D (Reposted from general RPG area)

[MarauderX]

I can't see how an encounter vs equal level monsters could go 10+ rounds.

Heh, I thought that would draw some responses. I suppose I could call into question the tactics of any DM who couldn't maximize their equal-level encounter to 10 rounds. I run a game that kills if the party can't pull themselves together. They aren't subequipped or suboptimal, and there aren't any goofy houserules that interfere.

In the combats I run there tends to be a lot of movement in a 3D setup. This adds to characters/foes spending a round in movement instead of dishing out damage each round. Add traps, domination or immobilization powers, deception on the roles of enemies, and a bull rush rush or two and the party can be pulled apart as contact is made. It leads to .

Currently the 4 member party make-up (11th level) has a standard cleric, a maxed out warlord/blood-mage, a warforged fighter, and a well-rounded fighter/mariner. While there are no strikers, the party can deal out a good amount of damage in a round when optimized (~150+ to numerous foes in a single round). As the DM, I've been able to keep them off balance to drop one or more of them when they get stretched. As a turn-based game, it is interesting how combat objectives can shift from round to round.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Well, I guess I have no OBJECTION to a combat that lasts 10+ rounds if its doing what you want it to do. Personally I have plenty of tactical fu but I save some of it for the smart monsters. Dumb monsters just try to gnaw your leg off. Some smart hobgoblins will try to beat you with positioning and mass tactics. High intelligence foes will utilize innovative tactics. Still, even with swinging around and playing with various terrain and such I think 6 rounds is enough for a fight. Once everyone gets a good look at the monsters its time for something new.

 

[Mengu]

Well, I guess I have no OBJECTION to a combat that lasts 10+ rounds if its doing what you want it to do. Personally I have plenty of tactical fu but I save some of it for the smart monsters. Dumb monsters just try to gnaw your leg off. Some smart hobgoblins will try to beat you with positioning and mass tactics. High intelligence foes will utilize innovative tactics. Still, even with swinging around and playing with various terrain and such I think 6 rounds is enough for a fight. Once everyone gets a good look at the monsters its time for something new.

At low heroic, I can see 6 round combats. But at paragon, when you have 4 encounter powers, if you have a 6 round combat, it means using a class at-will power maybe twice, and maybe less if you use a daily, or have to use a basic or charge attack, maybe more if you have minor/interrupt powers or use an action point. But then again you may sometimes need to double move, or stand up and move, or second wind, or waste a blind/immobilized turn trying to make saving throws. 6 rounds at paragon doesn't feel quite right. I expect heroic tier combat to be 6-7 rounds, paragon and up to be 7-9 rounds. 10+ rounds is probably too much except for the occasional big fight where everyone is prepared for a slug fest.

Having said that, at mid-heroic, I've played through a 20 round combat that wasn't utterly dull, so if the DM and the group enjoy it, why not? There isn't really a right or wrong way to play.

 

[keterys]

Eh - I'm okay with not using a lot of at-wills as you get higher level I like 5-6 round combats at all tiers.

 

[Mengu]

Eh - I'm okay with not using a lot of at-wills as you get higher level I like 5-6 round combats at all tiers.

This is going to go back to modifying monsters again, but unless you give monsters a damage bonus like half level, monsters you can kill in 5-6 rounds can't really put out enough front loaded damage to be considered a serious threat at paragon levels either. So there's another quandary.

Perhaps more frequently denying short rests between encounters (aka using waves) could help with both problems.

 

[keterys]

That or truly gratuitous use of minions and terrain/statuses? Well, and combats that can wrap up quickly via routing enemies or linked foes (like summoned creatures that disappear or monster generators that turn off)

But, yes, I'm okay with altering monsters appropriately.

I'll admit I'm also okay with some combats that run a little longer, especially climactic ones, but not all of them.

 

[keterys]

monsters you can kill in 5-6 rounds

Actually, looking more closely at what you put for a moment - I suspect that this particular metric varies _wildly_ from group to group. Like between two paragon groups I play with, I'd easily say there's a 50% difference in what we kill in 5-6 rounds, depending on the combat. And another group I DM for can be another solid jump lower, itself.

Back to that optimization for speeding up combat comment, I suppose.

 

[Turtlejay]

As with all previous editions, and in fact ALL games, the key is to either not play with people who pay no attention to the game until it's their turn, then drop their chin on hand to 'ponder' the situation before deciding that to do; or to not allow those people to pull that crap at your game table. Time limits are usually effective, but if you can't, then lose those chumps!

As for me, I'm done playing with people who are too busy socializing during the game, then when it's their turn, sigh heavily and reach for their books.

Ha! Yes! A thousand times I agree with you!

I noticed this playing Scrabble with my wife on Monday. We got a little too clever with linking words and ended up playing a few short words in a row, and got ourselves in a couple pickles where we were really constrained about what we could spell with. It took a lot of staring at the board and rearranging letters to play your word. A few times, my wife or I left the table when it wasn't our turn to do something (with the kids? get a drink?). Coming back and taking it all in again really took an adjustment.

D&D is not as complicated as all that, but if you get around to your turn, and you are totally unaware of what is going on, you waste everyone's time catching up. So, since even scrabble comes with one of those little hourglass timers, I am not against time limits in most cases.

A funny anecdote. . .in our last game, someone called out our Swordmage's name to indicate that it was his turn, and he replied "How much?". He had been in outer space thinking about rabbits or somesuch, and since he is *always* being hit, he just assumed his name should be followed by a damage total. He's usually pretty on top of things, so he gets a pass this time...

Jay

 

[Blackbrrd]

I am really wondering if the mass-attack version mentioned above could work. It would be really fun to try. Complete mayhem and really fast rounds

Currently we are using init as usual, but I say which player is next AND the player that goes after him. In addition if you can't decide what you are going to do, we skip you until you can say what you are doing. You are using a special form of waiting action that doesn't change your init. (Changing init takes time for the DM)

 

[eriktheguy]

A friend of mine explained what he called Chaos Combat to me. Over time my own additions have resulted in the following. I've used this for 2nd and 3rd edition, so there will probably have to be some modifications for 4th.

• We play on a large whiteboard flat on a table. That way everyone knows where everyone is at and it is easy to draw the battlefield and make notes.
• There is one roll for monster initiative even when there are different types of monsters. All players roll initiative.
• I roll monster initiative and announce to everyone, "Before <whatever number>, go!"
• While they are going, if I think a monster will make it to the next round, I'm already rolling their to hit, who they are going to hit and damage.
• Players will ask me AC of monsters and roll their own to hit and damage and write the damage on the whiteboard next to the monster. If I notice that the monster damage is over a certain amount I lay the figurine down. (Don't worry, the players will remind you)
• Players can stack their initiative if they want, but after a certain amount of time if they aren't done, they lose their turn. If I catch them cheating their initiative rolls, The hit points of their monsters go up, or I auto hit them next round, no muss, no fuss.
• Magic and area effect is all handled by the players except for saves and damage.
• After a certain amount of time (usually by the time I don't have anything else to do or keep track of I move all of the monsters, remove dead monsters and then start announcing which players got how much damage. In a pinch I might point to a player and tell them to roll their own damage (fun to watch sometimes).
• I then announce "After <whatever number> in the first round and before <whatever number> in the second round, go!"
• repeat the process (keeping the same initiative rolls)

Probably leaving a few things out, but that is it in a nut shell. Yes, you have to trust the players as you as pushing a lot of the bookkeeping to them.

Rounds can take as little as 30 seconds. Even with 10 players at the table and tens of monsters I can keep all of the players almost constantly moving. (most players will be standing up around the table). The best battle I've had like this was 8 players around 7th level against waves of Orcs (about 20 at a time, numbering 250). We finished in 15 minutes and even the non-smokers had to go out for a smoke after that.

To me this is a more accurate system of battle as a well-tuned group can avoid most mistakes, but a disorganized group ends up walking into their own spells, doing extra damage to an already dead monster, etc.

Sure you lose some individual fun cutting all of the corners, but the group fun goes WAY up, and I've never had a serious complaint due to everyone really having fun with it.

Warning, if you play like this and go back to the normal initiative based system, you'll want to claw your own eyes out in boredom.

I am very interested in this system and am going to give it a shot. Does anyone have some more experience, or more detailed information on it?