Would you use or allow average damage to speed up gameplay?

[Lanefan]

Average damage: sounds remarkably dull to me. Also unrealistic: one hit that gets through your armour might connect somewhere it doesn't hurt very much, while the next hit might hurt a whole lot more.

What's next: not rolling to hit?

Lanefan

 

[Crothian]

I don't feel that it is the dice that slows down high level game play. So, average damage doesn't solve the problem.

 

[Mercule]

For the most part, I'm opposed to the idea. I like the variability brought by dice.

Like most things, though, there are exceptions. Most notably, I might apply something like this to the player who never digs out his damage die until it's time to roll it, then puts it back in his bag, thus condemning the rest of the group to 60 seconds (or more) of lag every round. It might also get thrown at the mage who doesn't bring enough d6 for her own fireball.

Regardless, if I did use it, it'd be actual integer average, not rounded to the closest 5. 1d6 is 3, 2d6 is 7, etc. Closest 5 takes it into that unholy realm.

 

[Piratecat]

I do it very occasionally for epic-lvl NPCs; it can definitely speed up combat, if I have a lot of bad guys tossing around spells. I have the PCs roll dice.

 

[Voadam]

I could see using average damage at any level. Dice and mechanics are secondary to other aspects of the game IMO.

If it helps a person's game then yes, take 10 on everything you want and move on to the action without the extra step of rolling dice to resolve an action.

 

[AuraSeer]

With a high level encounter of 8 PCs with 2 cohorts going up against 6 monsters, you're looking at about 500 dice rolls versus 50 with average damage PER ROUND

500 dice rolls? What, you roll each die of damage individually? I've never seen that.

The worst I've ever seen is the common case, where players roll the attack die first and then roll damage only for hits. At worst, this means 50 attacks generate 100 die rolls-- and that's if everything hits.

If speed is a factor, though, we roll everything at once. If the d20 indicates a hit, the damage dice are already there to be read off. Special damage, like energy effects or sneak attack, is rolled with dice of a different color so it can be separated out if it turns out to be ineffective. (And on later rounds, everyone knows not to bother rolling that type of damage at all.)

 

[Conaill]

I don't think I would remove the damage rolls entirely. I've yet to see any game where either side hit so frequently that rolling the damage had a significant impact on the game. If that is the case in your game, you may want to consider using average damage for normal hits, but rolled damage for crits - just to keep things somewhat unpredictable. (For extra simplicity and unpredictability, roll crit damage once and multiply, rather than rolling multiple times and adding.)


A neat trick for when you often need to roll lots of d6 at once:

10d6 = 1d20+25

1d20 actually has a standard deviation which is very similar to 10d6, and the rule is easy to remember. Of course, rolling those 10d6 is a lot more satisfying

 

[Terwox]

I'm currently running True20... so, I guess I'm alright with static damage.

Calling 1d6 and 2d6 is funny though. It applies to monsters too, right? It overvalues special abilities on weapons. (Which isn't a big deal, of course.)

 

[Jaws]

I voted for "verage damage" because nothing is sweeter than that. Verage is the new vorpal.


Peace and smiles

j.

 

[ruleslawyer]

I can't see how this speeds up play. IMX, calculating mods and deciding spells is what bogs down play, not rolling dice (unless, of course, you don't have enough to roll all at once... )