Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Vampire's new "three-round combat" rule
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ParanoydStyle" data-source="post: 7593484" data-attributes="member: 6984451"><p>I don't know about ninjayeti, but that addresses all of my concerns. Initially I thought the "three round combat rule" meant FIGHTS MUST END AFTER THREE ROUNDS which would have been an unspeakably crappy game mechanic (except perhaps in a very niche game designed around a very niche concept that fits that rule).</p><p></p><p>It's weird yet not unexpected that there's been so much discussion within the D&D frame in this thread about the new Vampire. I have not played a lot of WoD and the WoD that I did play was ages ago when I was a teenager and EVEN THEN as a teenager--the height of the appeal of the Trenchcoat McKatanas style of VtM play--combat was not particularly common. Now, as for D&D...I've heard many a player say that fights virtually never last more than three rounds anyway, and it's not usually said like it's a good thing. It's not that players want longer combats, but in various editions of the game (including, I think, the current one) certain abilities and parameters will never be relevant within that time-space. In 5E, a duration of one minute might as well be a duration of forever because I don't think I've ever seen a ten turn combat (not that I'd necessarily want to). In 3.X frequently various spells or spell-like abilities had a duration of Caster Level rounds. Because combats lasting more than three rounds are almost unheard of, this meant that there was no meaningful difference in duration between a spell cast by a 3rd level character and a spell cast by a 15th level character.</p><p></p><p>Because I have Legendary Resistance 3/Day, I will <strong>choose</strong> to succeed my Wisdom save against launching into my rant on how painfully idiotic the 3-6 second combat turn is right here and now. I will say that I have come to the conclusion that the combat turn should really be, at a minimum, 10 seconds, for a ratio of six turns to one minute, but I won't justify that assertion because I think then I'd fall into the rant I said I was avoiding.</p><p></p><p>I don't know that I'd go so far as to say I <em>want</em> longer combats (in rounds) in my D&D, but I do know that the most fun D&D combats I've run have all been the ones that ran well over three rounds. That said I'm broadly in favor of the thinking on this new Vampire rule, but in the D&D context I don't think it needs a rule as such. If after three rounds the party is getting its ass kicked, the logical thing for the party to do is to run away. If after three rounds the enemies are getting their asses kicked, the logical thing for the DM to do is to have them runaway or surrender, assuming they're not mindless--even the dumbest orcs, goblins, bugbears, troglodytes, whatever, are smart enough to realize that hey, 12 seconds ago there were ten of us and now there are three of us, let's GTFO (this is also why I've never felt a need for morale mechanics; a glance at the board state is usually enough to let me tell when the enemies would lose morale and retreat). If after three rounds the fight is undecided then play on, play on, play on! </p><p></p><p>Oh, and the last thing I wanted to say is...while I definitely understand, as a game designer, the desire to make fights resolve faster, I think there's an external limit on what you can accomplish with the actual system and mechanics. No matter how much you simplify and streamline, you are still going to run into the fact that many players are very slow. If your game has meaningful choices for PCs to make in combat--and honestly a game that doesn't probably shouldn't even <em>have</em> combat--a certain portion of players are going to fall into analysis paralysis and slow things way down, no matter how many times the DM has asked them to PLEASE have their decision ready when their turn comes up. A certain portion of players will struggle with the mechanics of any game system that is remotely new to them, and that too slows things down. A certain portion of players will have two, or three, or five, or ten, or fifteen questions about the battle situation--at least half of which you have already told them the answer to, they just weren't paying attention. And finally some players are just jerks and slow down combat with dumb arguments. I don't think there's anything to be done about any of this, I just don't think combat in an RPG is ever going to run at anything close to the ideal speed it would run at in a perfect world (which I'd say is probably 1-2 minutes of real time to each full combat turn) unless the players have been selectively curated. My only real point with all of this is that there is only so much MECHANICS can do to "make combat fast".</p><p></p><p>Those are my random thoughts.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ParanoydStyle, post: 7593484, member: 6984451"] I don't know about ninjayeti, but that addresses all of my concerns. Initially I thought the "three round combat rule" meant FIGHTS MUST END AFTER THREE ROUNDS which would have been an unspeakably crappy game mechanic (except perhaps in a very niche game designed around a very niche concept that fits that rule). It's weird yet not unexpected that there's been so much discussion within the D&D frame in this thread about the new Vampire. I have not played a lot of WoD and the WoD that I did play was ages ago when I was a teenager and EVEN THEN as a teenager--the height of the appeal of the Trenchcoat McKatanas style of VtM play--combat was not particularly common. Now, as for D&D...I've heard many a player say that fights virtually never last more than three rounds anyway, and it's not usually said like it's a good thing. It's not that players want longer combats, but in various editions of the game (including, I think, the current one) certain abilities and parameters will never be relevant within that time-space. In 5E, a duration of one minute might as well be a duration of forever because I don't think I've ever seen a ten turn combat (not that I'd necessarily want to). In 3.X frequently various spells or spell-like abilities had a duration of Caster Level rounds. Because combats lasting more than three rounds are almost unheard of, this meant that there was no meaningful difference in duration between a spell cast by a 3rd level character and a spell cast by a 15th level character. Because I have Legendary Resistance 3/Day, I will [B]choose[/B] to succeed my Wisdom save against launching into my rant on how painfully idiotic the 3-6 second combat turn is right here and now. I will say that I have come to the conclusion that the combat turn should really be, at a minimum, 10 seconds, for a ratio of six turns to one minute, but I won't justify that assertion because I think then I'd fall into the rant I said I was avoiding. I don't know that I'd go so far as to say I [I]want[/I] longer combats (in rounds) in my D&D, but I do know that the most fun D&D combats I've run have all been the ones that ran well over three rounds. That said I'm broadly in favor of the thinking on this new Vampire rule, but in the D&D context I don't think it needs a rule as such. If after three rounds the party is getting its ass kicked, the logical thing for the party to do is to run away. If after three rounds the enemies are getting their asses kicked, the logical thing for the DM to do is to have them runaway or surrender, assuming they're not mindless--even the dumbest orcs, goblins, bugbears, troglodytes, whatever, are smart enough to realize that hey, 12 seconds ago there were ten of us and now there are three of us, let's GTFO (this is also why I've never felt a need for morale mechanics; a glance at the board state is usually enough to let me tell when the enemies would lose morale and retreat). If after three rounds the fight is undecided then play on, play on, play on! Oh, and the last thing I wanted to say is...while I definitely understand, as a game designer, the desire to make fights resolve faster, I think there's an external limit on what you can accomplish with the actual system and mechanics. No matter how much you simplify and streamline, you are still going to run into the fact that many players are very slow. If your game has meaningful choices for PCs to make in combat--and honestly a game that doesn't probably shouldn't even [I]have[/I] combat--a certain portion of players are going to fall into analysis paralysis and slow things way down, no matter how many times the DM has asked them to PLEASE have their decision ready when their turn comes up. A certain portion of players will struggle with the mechanics of any game system that is remotely new to them, and that too slows things down. A certain portion of players will have two, or three, or five, or ten, or fifteen questions about the battle situation--at least half of which you have already told them the answer to, they just weren't paying attention. And finally some players are just jerks and slow down combat with dumb arguments. I don't think there's anything to be done about any of this, I just don't think combat in an RPG is ever going to run at anything close to the ideal speed it would run at in a perfect world (which I'd say is probably 1-2 minutes of real time to each full combat turn) unless the players have been selectively curated. My only real point with all of this is that there is only so much MECHANICS can do to "make combat fast". Those are my random thoughts. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Vampire's new "three-round combat" rule
Top