Strategery: 4E combat and the insecure DM

[mattdm]

Okay, so, DM confessions time: I like to think I'm a reasonably smart person. I can do tactics to some degree. When I used to play Magic the Gathering in college, I did all right, although I'd get attached to a concept and end up losing a lot when it didn't work out to be as cool as I thought.

And I think I've done pretty okay with our 3.5E game, which is currently reaching where I'd planned for it to end at around 14th level — just in time to start up with 4E, which has a lot of things I like. We've had some memorable moments, good battles and defining non-combat RP experiences. Okay then.

What I don't have is a lot of spare time for gaming. My wife and I used to play Settlers of Catan and the like, but now with two young kids, well, there's a lot of life to juggle, so gaming night is twice-monthly and it's D&D.

Which is a roundabout way of saying that while I've been interested in D&D minis (not to mention Brikwars!), I haven't even touched it. And I'm concerned that combat in 4E is going to require a lot more thinking out of me of the kind that suddenly makes that experience relevant. I mean, I've tried to vary combat in 3.5, with monsters with interesting abilities and side-effects and movement and so on, but it seems like the 4E combat system is designed around that in a way 3/3.5 just hints at.

So what I want is twofold: First, I want to be able to present a challenging and interesting combat to my players every encounter. The "tactics" lines in the monster manual seem to be good starting points, but I'm concerned that where to go from there won't come naturally enough to me. Simultaneously, though, I don't want the whole game to devolve into a tactical minis game, so I'm pulled towards not putting much effort into that aspect. Does that make any sense at all? I want it to all go so fluidly that the system becomes invisible, yet I want to use that system in a way that makes it fun for the players to show off their cool new abilities (and to be wowed at the clever tricks the enemies pull on them). And I want to do that with the minimal time I have, and without needing to become a tactical mastermind.

Advice, anyone?

 

[Shun]

Well this is going to sound painfully obvious, and will maybe get me flamed, but just ignore the rules you don't like. Or introduce them slowly as the game progresses.

That's basically what I'm doing with KotS right now and it's going along just fine. We're probably using around 70% of the combat rules. Granted, the group consists of my kids, so they don't care and the additional rules would bore them anyway. You might get some objections from rules lawyers in your group, but if you set the expectations early on it shouldn't be that big a deal.

 

[sinecure]

Well this is going to sound painfully obvious, and will maybe get me flamed, but just ignore the rules you don't like. Or introduce them slowly as the game progresses.

That's basically what I'm doing with KotS right now and it's going along just fine. We're probably using around 70% of the combat rules. Granted, the group consists of my kids, so they don't care and the additional rules would bore them anyway. You might get some objections from rules lawyers in your group, but if you set the expectations early on it shouldn't be that big a deal.

This is good advice. Most of the rules actually are about a tactical minis game, so don't use anything that might waste your time at the table if your game isn't about tactical minis.

Also, look to other games to cover other areas of play if your group is interested in RPing something other than combat. There are plenty of good games out there to steal from.

 

[SweeneyTodd]

I think the combat rules work at least as well as 3.x's with abstracted rather than miniature&map combat, and people made that work fine, so it shouldn't be a problem. My gut tells me that the amount of interesting tactical options the players have "open things up" enough that even just running the monsters pretty much by the tactics block will still lead to interesting combat.

One really interesting idea I've seen discussed is, if you don't want to worry about the combat system at all, you could handle it with skill challenges. Kinda out there, but probably less difficult to jerry-rig than importing the combat rules from an entirely different game system.

 

[mattdm]

I think I've been misunderstood a bit. It's not that I don't like the new combat rules — in fact, I think they're exciting. And given that they're 90% of the hard rules of the game, if I wanted to cut them out, I'd certainly be better buying into a different system.

But I keep seeing posts like this one:
http://www.enworld.org/showpost.php?p=4280053&postcount=7

From what I hear, most of the TPKs come from old 3.5 players not realizing a shift in tactics is necessary.

I'm concerned about the inverse situation — is it just expected that my tactics as a DM will shift magically somehow?

 

[Andor]

I understand your worry, but the only way to find out is to try it. You may turn out to be a natural.

Put together a couple of playtests and fight them out with your players, if you stink...

Does your FLGS host DDM tourneys? Go to one and watch. Ask for advice. Ask if someone will play a pickup game with you, they'll be happy to loan you a warband. It shouldn't take too much practice to gain some proficiency.

Lastly if your players are just much better than you at tactics... Let them be! Give them tougher than normal opposition and praise them when they wipe the floor with you. When you need real tension introduce an element to the fight that plays to your strengths or that removes the PCs advantage.

EG: If the PC are the masters of turtleing up and staveing off your waves of attackers present a scenario where they have to get to the princess/McGuffin/Evil Ritualist NOW and their normal tactics will win the battle and lose the war. If they are highly mobile and always penetrate your defenses then make it so they need to protect a circle of ritual mages while the spell is cast, or protect a group of townspeople trying to repair the damage to the dam even as the lake swells with new rain and the orcs just Keep COMING!

My 2¢

 

[LostSoul]

Advice, anyone?

Play for a while using the default encounter levels. If things are too easy on the players, increase the encounter levels until they are the right difficulty. If things are too hard, do the opposite.

That should make sure that the encounters are sufficiently difficult without having to focus too much on tactics.

Now, when you're setting up the encounters, make sure that they are about something important. Success or failure in the encounter should mean something to the campaign. The easiest way to do this is to ask the players what their PCs want, give them Quests to get that, and throw encounters in their way that are obstacles to that goal.

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

Well, I'm no expert - who is at this point? But here's what I'd say:

1.) Try the maps out and skip the minis. Just use counters or make your own with bits of construction paper and brightly colored markers. I recommend this because seeing the whole thing in action really does make all of the Monster abilities -> DM tactics click.

2.) Then skip the map just get something you can write names and conditions on. You don't really need one. It adds to the fun, and you may need a drawn map even where you don't need a grid. But once you've seen how the Monster Text works from the map then you need to focus on the text without the map.

3.) Buy and/or use a few pre-made adventures. They're easy to modify, filled with crunchy ideas, and good for training DMs.