This week’s Rule of Three article by Wizards’ R&D team includes a question and answer that is near and dear to my heart: faster combat!
I have a lot of strong opinions on this (and a related project I’ve been working on), as what element of D&D better exemplifies the classic balance of immersive cinema and tactical brilliance than its exhilirating combat encounters?
In D&D 4e, faster combat is at a premium simply because of the new mechanics of this rules set and combat system: rich and deep, but also too frequent, complex or slow to both decide upon and resolve. Still, trust me when I say that faster combat is achievable in 4e, or any RPG, with the proper tools, approach and mindset.
R&D’s Advice
If you haven’t seen this week’s Rule of Three article on this, here’s a snippet from question #3:
Here are a few suggestions [to speed up your combats]:
- Avoid using too many monsters that deny actions to the characters. Each time a monster stuns a character, it prolongs the battle.
- Avoid using too much terrain that significantly slows or impedes characters, and avoid monsters that immobilize or restrain characters. If the heroes can’t reach the enemy to attack, that’s just another form of action denial.
- Avoid using too much terrain that provides cover or obscures the battlefield. When the monsters have terrain-based boosts to their AC, it takes longer to kill them.
- Avoid using too many monsters that impose the weakened condition or that are insubstantial. Imposing half damage adds rounds to the fight.
- Avoid using too many soldiers. Their high defenses mean more misses, and the more the characters miss, the longer it takes to beat the monsters.
Immediately following the bulleted mechanical advice, there are two additional points briefly discussed: 1) lightly seasoning combat with the above high restriction/high slowdown mechanics is okay, and 2) alternative ways to end or be victorious over a combat encounter are also a good option.
My Initial Reaction
Initially, I have to say I was conflicted reading the bulleted R&D advice. On one hand, it was practical. On the other hand, it also bothered me. Why? I think it’s because, despite having quite the mechanical machine when it comes to D&D combat in 4e, there’s still all these exceptions or caveats.
It’s like saying, here’s your Ferrari, but don’t drive faster than 80 mph, or it’ll break down. Shouldn’t the well-oiled machine of D&D combat be more fine tuned than this? Combat shouldn’t degenerate into boring, grindy garbage by using the very mechanics (i.e. conditions, terrain, roles) the monsters and combat are built around, right?
Regarding the advice on only lightly seasoning combats with high restriction/high slowdown mechanics, and on including alternative ways to conclude combat earlier, this rings true enough. The latter certainly could use more attention and experimentation by us all – though the transition from mechanics-heavy combat into story-oriented combat conclusions is sometimes clunky and unsatisfying, for both DMs and players.
As Robert J. Schwalb pointed out once on his blog, “sometimes you just wanna fight some orcs.” Unfortunately, even that simple, classic D&D fight can get grindy, and it shouldn’t!
The Root of the Problem?
I’ve DMed and played D&D since Basic, through 2e and 3.x e, and now three years into 4e, and no edition has had me searching for faster combat solutions more than this one. What exactly is the problem? And how do we best improve combat speed – while maintaining a balance of good story pacing and tactical options?
There are multiple issues and solutions, certainly, when it comes to achieving faster combat. Still, a couple of the lowest hanging fruit or largest issues stem from recent player feedback and discussions in my very own D&D playgroup.
“Character damage is too low.”
Recently, I’ve been more inclined to find ways to increase PC damage rather than change monster damage output. The R&D advice above talks about action denial and conditions that essentially slow down character damage ouput. The toughness of 1st level PCs in 4e is wonderful, but there is a price to pay: everything takes longer to kill now, not just you. Which leads us to the next major issue…
“Characters have too many actions.”
It’s fine if everyone’s moving briskly through each of their 3-5 actions on their and/other people’s turns, but most people aren’t that good at execution as a group. Never mind the DM who has a multitude of monsters and around five times as many actions to manage! And we wonder why a stock 5 standard monster vs. 5 PC toe-to-toe combat in D&D 4e is often an anticlimactic drag.
Better bust out your minions… though the reality is that the diet Coke of monsters doesn’t always make for a satisfying combat. The standard D&D combat should be that perfect balance of speed and complexity between a swarm of minions and a solo encounter.
Right now, however, we’re not quite there, though R&D’s advice and the advice here is getting us closer with every game and every combat.
Solutions: How Far Would You Go?
You’ll find plenty of advice on how to speed up combat in the article links below; I’ll let you explore at your own pace rather than repeat them here.
What I want to do instead here is ask you these questions:
- How far would you go in improving character damage output?
Maximize all damage? Deal double damage on crits instead of maximum damage? Damage-enhancing terrain features in every encounter?
- How far would you go in limiting combatants’ actions?
Remove attacks of opportunity? Remove immediate and/or opportunity actions? Allow only two actions on a turn: standard and move?
Related Articles
- Faster D&D 4e Combat: Top Tips
- Faster Combat: Encounter Triggers Checklist
- Not So Immediate Actions
- Six Ways to Scale Back Immediate Actions
- Monster Complexity and Selection
Kilsek
I’m reluctant to change the game’s action economy by removing action types. I personally like the concept of opportunity attacks as a way to discourage certain actions in melee, and immediate actions are generally fun in combat. I also have focused mostly on heroic tier play where the number of immediate actions is probably lower than what you run into with epic characters.
If I decided to adjust hp/damage math, the first thing that I’d try is cutting monster hp in half. I think modifying hp is easier than adjust damage especially since my players use sheets/cards from the character builder which doesn’t have a good way to adjust the damage of all of their powers.
Glimm the Gnome recently posted..Taking September Off
Glimm, I agree with you when it comes to the *idea* of OAs and IAs, it’s just their execution is often slow and clunky. The worst example is when someone says “Hold on, I need to read this entire block of text outloud to understand *if* this’ll work!” Ugh…
I’ve seen my brother try the monster hp downward adjustments in one paragon tier campaign, and it was all right. The good: faster combat. The bad: ocassionally too fast, with challenge levels for encounters becoming very difficult to eyeball as DM. Me, I like giving the PCs more offense, just because it makes them feel and actually be stronger and more powerful. Even if it’s subtler things like special encounter phenomena or terrain features. And yet… that’s sometimes just not enough to keep the pacing and threat level high enough for my tastes.
Great point about the CB – there’s so much promise to that amazing tool, and yet it’s still missing some key utilities, such as custom items like the old CB use to have, and by extension more customized rules options overall. Hopefully that comes soon.
Increasing PC damage output is a good way to go. I wouldn’t want to just max out their damage, as part of the fun is rolling the dice. My suggestion is to let PCs add 1 damage die per tier to all rolls. On crits, max normal damage plus that roll. This way, you’re not just rolling D20’s all night.
Also, encounter design definitely plays a huge part in this. If there’s a way clever players can utilize the terrain to take out a few monsters or impose a status effect on them, all the better. Having intelligent monsters make a morale saving throw or run away when bloodied is something you could look at as well.
Sully recently posted..Happy Labor Day!
Sully, one extra die is a good idea too to go along with my most recent crit dice alternatives. It’s pretty close to what I’m suggesting there, albeit with an extra roll. Do you think the damage might be a bit too low with only a single die tacked on? With crit dice resembling +5d6 and +6d6 in the epic tier, for example, I’m wondering if that’s enough. What would you do?
Simple rules around a morale roll are an excellent idea, something that’s been on my list of things to write about. Especially because it’s one of those blended story-mechanical game elements – my favorite! (Just don’t bring up skill challenges… haha)
My original proposal was to add one extra die of damage per tier, so Paragon players would add 2, and at Epic, 3. That would be for all damage rolls. On a crit, I would go even further to make it truly critical: max out all normal damage from the crit, including the new “extra” die rolls AND the bonus dice from magic item riders, AND then on top of it add the normal damage roll (with the new extra dice). Because really, why not? In 4E, critical hit should be devastating, as befits the more cinematic style of combat.
Sully recently posted..Happy Labor Day!
[…] Leonine Roar Amp Up Your D&D Game « Faster Combat: Rule of Three […]
I have big issues with changing character’s mechanics. For example, if you’re maxing all their damage, what is the point of a brutal weapon? Or 2d6 vs a d12? Also the random factor when rolling damage is really fun.
It will be really hard to change any mechanic without destroying how a whole bunch of other mechanics work.
That’s why my preferred approach is to change the monster stats – I find myself lowering the hitpoints and upping the damage of monsters. Particularly the conditional damage of monsters such as extra damage when granting CA or against players grabbed by another creature – it encourages the party to play tactically.
Good approach, Abominable Egg. Conditional bonus damage is a great alternative – easy to remember and execute for the DM. And here, going with flat bonus damage instead of or in addition to any listed dice is pretty seamless as well.
i agree with the issues of speeding up combat.
what i actually think though is that 4e works better with decisive players who know their characters and what they can do, build them with that in mind so they never have that “that one action has totally screwed my turn”
also enforced delaying: if a player does not know what to do tell them they delay until they decide, the game can continue.
for stuns i read an idea on another blog that i now use: no more miss a turn, instead gain vulnerable 5 per tier to all damage and -4 to all defences.
daze remains the same.
dominate is a weird one: instantly the player moves if necessary and then makes an at will/basic attack with CA and +5 damage per tier.
if it is until end of monsters next turn then it happens next turn, if save ends then as normal. the pc is still dazed, but this action does not take up their own one action.
this way they still *do* things in the combat.
and the stun variant makes people think: the defender can still mark but is it a good idea now that their defences are lower than anyone elses and they have vulnerable?
has made a big and positive difference in my sessions.
Eddie, thanks for your comment and welcome to Leonine Roar!
Your “enforce delaying” tip really makes such great sense. With the potentional of rules and tactics analysis paralysis being so high in 4e, it makes more sense to enforce delays to give players more time than ever. You’re aboslutely right about hearing “that one action screwed up my turn” often – that’s one of the downsides of the nature of 4e’s otherwise wonderful tactical complexity.
And now that you suggest that, I see even less of a problem with the other powerful action-denial conditions. Much of the problem simply sounds like accepting your fate, PC or monster, and *quickly* moving on with your turn and onto the next one.