Options of Choice for Fast Combat [Archive] - Wizards Community

Options of Choice for Fast Combat [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Romulus LoneWolf
01-02-06, 11:51 PM Ok, the game sessions I have with my usual party seldom last more then 3-4 hours, due to schedualing problems. But I still want to try to stuff in as much rping as I can into that time. But combat is kind of a problem, as it takes time. I'm considering the optional Injury system, along with Defense Bonuses and Damage Reduction for speeding up the tallying of damage. But I'm somewhat unsure..

...My stated goal is to make combat run fast and easy.. What would you recommend?
Lina_Inverse
01-03-06, 04:38 AM Change all monster stats to DCs, have PCs roll everything.
Never use non-monsters in combat.
Use intelligent monsters that will TPK in 2-3 rounds....

Injury bonus will GREATLY slow down your game, most monsters have fort saves of 20+ at high levels. Damage reduction also slows down the game, stick to the normal rules for both if you want speed.
Sosthenes
01-03-06, 06:54 AM From my experience, it's not that amount of rounds is a problem (where increased lethality would help), but the sheer amount single rounds take.
Some tips that might prove useful:

1) Don't roll damage. Assume the average, round down after adding dice (i.e. 1d8+4 = 8, 10d6 = 35). Do the same for healing rolls, of course.
Note: Tried it, doesn't get you that much.

2) Don't confirm criticals. A threat that hits is automatically a critical, though you'd need to reduce the threat range and/or multipliers for this to work. As another option, keep the normal damage and every threat that exceeds the AC by a certain amount is a critical.
Note: If you've got a large number of attacks with a high threat-range this might get you something.

3) Do most of your dice rolling at the same time. Multiple D20 for multiple attacks or at least attack and damage at the same time.
Note: I prefer the attack+damage version, not as abstract as pools of D20 plus pools of damage die, YMMV.

4) If you don't know all the effects/details of your spell at once, you're not allowed to cast it. Have a reference ready.
Note: Big time-saver. Especially for clerics/druids _and_ DMs, who generally have a lot of spells they're not intimately familiar with.

5) Know your abilities. Casters need to know their spells, players need to know frequent buffs and special abilities. Keep separate statistics for rages and the like, probably on an additional sheet. Note down several permutations ("Well, I'm raging, enlarged, hastened and now I smite my opponent")

6) Less AoO. Figuring out how to avoid Attacks of Opportunity or when they occur can occupy some time. Moving, casting and ranged attacks in melee should probably stay, but Bull Rushes, Unarmed Strikes, Disarms, and standing up from prone can probably go. This will also encourage more "stunts" in play.
Note: You'd be surprised at the effect. Less stalling during the combat, and they simple don't _seem_ to last as long.

7) Less encounters, more reinforcements. To challenge the players, you need several battles between rest periods. If I recall correctly, the standar rules assume four encounters of your CR. Just one or two is too easy for the players and increasing the CR can have some bad results.
But outside of some dungeons, four groups of enemies per day is a little hard to do. You need to prepare the encounters (both in preparation time before the session and with narrative during play).
One idea would be waves of reinforcement during one main battle. They have less recovery time as with separate encounters, but their buffs might still last.
Tyler Do'Urden
01-03-06, 07:49 AM Quickest Combat EVAR

Whenever you encounter a monster, have the PCs make a level check (1d20 + character level) versus a DC of 10 + monster CR. Include level adjustment. NPC classes like commoner count as half levels. Prestige Classes give you a +1 per five levels.
If any character beats the DC, the party beats the monster. If they all fail, they lose the fight and have to retreat.

If anybody rolls a natural 20, their character "shines," performing exceptionally well and possibly even defeating the monster singlehandedly. Give that character +10% XP for the encounter.
If anybody rolls a natural 1, they must roll again versus the same DC, similar to confirming a crit. If they miss it, that character is killed during the fight.

The combat lasts 1d4 rounds +1 per four character levels. It uses up 2d10+8 percent of their resources.

Each combat encounter should take just about five minutes, most of which will be thematic descriptions.
crystaloak
01-04-06, 03:02 AM wow

that is also the most boring way possible to handle a battle.
Ozymandias V.
01-04-06, 04:55 PM What bugs me is that combat is being treated as some kind of time-wasting annoyance. As if you're locked in a room and forced to fight the thing, and can't flee into a nearby shop (if in town) or converse with the enemy or build loyalty between characters or show your character's personality through his views on combat or begin an exciting chase through the streets or...
Fargren
01-04-06, 05:42 PM Simple house rule: if a player takes more than 10 seconds to choose what does hisr PC do, then his PC does nothing. Tha tends to speed combat up.
Lina_Inverse
01-05-06, 12:33 AM Simple house rule: if a player takes more than 10 seconds to choose what does hisr PC do, then his PC does nothing. Tha tends to speed combat up.

Better house rules, if the PC doesnt have his action by his turn. He skips it and provokes an AoO.
Sosthenes
01-05-06, 07:24 AM Reaction time is a pretty decent way to incorporate the character's intelligence into the game. X seconds plus/minus Int modifier. With a low intelligence you'll act out of sheer instinct, while a sufficient amount allows you to analyze the situation a little bit more.
Tyler Do'Urden
01-05-06, 09:25 AM Reaction time is a pretty decent way to incorporate the character's intelligence into the game. X seconds plus/minus Int modifier. With a low intelligence you'll act out of sheer instinct, while a sufficient amount allows you to analyze the situation a little bit more.
Reaction time is not based on intelligence at all, IRL or in D&D. Analyzing a situation takes time regardless of your Int. Realistically, your explanation means dumb characters should go first because they're just rushing in on instinct.
Sosthenes
01-05-06, 10:49 AM Reaction time is not based on intelligence at all, IRL or in D&D. Analyzing a situation takes time regardless of your Int. Realistically, your explanation means dumb characters should go first because they're just rushing in on instinct.

Maybe reaction time was a bad choice of words. I'm not talking about the time the characters need to act, but they time the players have thinking about their character's actions.
And speed of thought is a factor of intelligence, determining how many factors you can juggle in your mind at the same time. That's why you get your Int modifier added to skill points, after all.

Intelligence is a very hard to portray attribute of a character, so a point where you can actually simply integrate it isn't really bad. In addition, most players with high intelligence characters _need_ more time to think about their actions. The wizard with 7 spells which might be used right now could any additional second available. The barbarian? Well, charge!
(It gets more useful for extreme values. The DM portraying dumb animals and monsters is often too tactical, if he constrains himself to a single second of thought for each action... And my hubris also stops when trying to accurately play a Int 30 Necromancer.)
FriendlyBiscuit
01-06-06, 08:19 AM I JUST HAD A NERDGASM! (or maybe this is just really good Saki)
Each player has X seconds to think about, decide, and describe their character's actions, where X is equal to your character's permanent intelligence score. (meaning item boosts and buffs don't count)
Tyler Do'Urden
01-06-06, 09:24 AM So characters with an Intelligence of less than 12 never get to act? Or do they just never get to decide their actions and are thus nothing more than NPCs?
FriendlyBiscuit
01-06-06, 03:25 PM Whoops, I meant intelligence score. Heh. Seriously. One second to act. Combat would blaze by at the speed of real combat if it was by intelligence bonus. :rofl:

So yeah, you have (int score) number of seconds to act. What say you on this?
Sae Cael Oanar
01-06-06, 07:50 PM we play thirty seconds or something.

its not strict.

its there to stop really long actions.

dont rush characters.

state: if you dont say what you are gonna do, then you arent going to do anything. maybe you can assume they take total defense action.

characters are often smarter and wiser than their players. being thus, they would act smarter in battle. a wizard may know exactly what to do in every possible situation, the player does not.

i dont see the problem though. seriously if you dislike combat, you really should be playing something other than dnd. dnd is pretty much based around combat.
Ruhl-Than Sage
01-06-06, 11:47 PM i dont see the problem though. seriously if you dislike combat, you really should be playing something other than dnd. dnd is pretty much based around combat.

He's right there are a lot of other simpler systems out there.

You should try the Warhammer Fantasy Roleplaying Game. Its got a simple combat system that is very quick and very realistic. Much more brutal than D&D. This actually makes most players try to avoid combat if they can rather than rushing into battle and puts a stronger focus on role-playing.

The settings great too. But, of course settings are never set in stone.
Templar_Prime
01-16-06, 08:41 PM My group has been having a problem with combat taking too long, and it has nothing to do with how much time the players take.

It has more to do with the number of attacks. This particular game is above level 20 (which, in theory, SHOULD mean that there's LESS combat, but that's not how this particular GM likes it, so...*shrug*). Most creatures we encounter have at least 4 attacks, and there are often large groups.

Imagine if you will multiple mariliths all with the multi-weapon fighting tree, and you get an idea of hot tedious this can be.

I'm trying to think of a decent way to speed up the rolls. Any suggestions?
Realms of Chaos
01-18-06, 11:11 PM I think that I have a fairly simple system that speeds things along.

Add your average damage with your weapon to your attack roll. Then, you deal damage equal to the result-the target's ac, multiplying damage automatically by the proper amount on a threat (although a threat has the capability to not deal damage against something with great ac, adding verismilitude).
IceFractal
01-19-06, 05:46 AM Intelligence score in seconds to think could be interesting, although I'd go by the average of the Intelligence and Wisdom scores.
FriendlyBiscuit
01-19-06, 05:59 AM Intelligence score in seconds to think could be interesting, although I'd go by the average of the Intelligence and Wisdom scores.
Maybe even the sum of your Int and Wis scores. We tried my method for a session and it was hell. Well, pretty dang tough, but survivable. :twitch: :D

The sum of Int and Wis would favor the Warmage, the Swashbuckler, and the Favored Soul. (all of whom need or want decent Int AND Wis) And ya know, they're the archetypes I'd expect to never blunder. The Warmage is born/trained for battle, the Swash is just to cool to make mistakes, and the Favored Soul is perfect, at least according to his god.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Romulus LoneWolf 01-02-06, 11:51 PM	Ok, the game sessions I have with my usual party seldom last more then 3-4 hours, due to schedualing problems. But I still want to try to stuff in as much rping as I can into that time. But combat is kind of a problem, as it takes time. I'm considering the optional Injury system, along with Defense Bonuses and Damage Reduction for speeding up the tallying of damage. But I'm somewhat unsure.. ...My stated goal is to make combat run fast and easy.. What would you recommend?
Lina_Inverse 01-03-06, 04:38 AM	Change all monster stats to DCs, have PCs roll everything. Never use non-monsters in combat. Use intelligent monsters that will TPK in 2-3 rounds.... Injury bonus will GREATLY slow down your game, most monsters have fort saves of 20+ at high levels. Damage reduction also slows down the game, stick to the normal rules for both if you want speed.
Sosthenes 01-03-06, 06:54 AM	From my experience, it's not that amount of rounds is a problem (where increased lethality would help), but the sheer amount single rounds take. Some tips that might prove useful: 1) Don't roll damage. Assume the average, round down after adding dice (i.e. 1d8+4 = 8, 10d6 = 35). Do the same for healing rolls, of course. Note: Tried it, doesn't get you that much. 2) Don't confirm criticals. A threat that hits is automatically a critical, though you'd need to reduce the threat range and/or multipliers for this to work. As another option, keep the normal damage and every threat that exceeds the AC by a certain amount is a critical. Note: If you've got a large number of attacks with a high threat-range this might get you something. 3) Do most of your dice rolling at the same time. Multiple D20 for multiple attacks or at least attack and damage at the same time. Note: I prefer the attack+damage version, not as abstract as pools of D20 plus pools of damage die, YMMV. 4) If you don't know all the effects/details of your spell at once, you're not allowed to cast it. Have a reference ready. Note: Big time-saver. Especially for clerics/druids _and_ DMs, who generally have a lot of spells they're not intimately familiar with. 5) Know your abilities. Casters need to know their spells, players need to know frequent buffs and special abilities. Keep separate statistics for rages and the like, probably on an additional sheet. Note down several permutations ("Well, I'm raging, enlarged, hastened and now I smite my opponent") 6) Less AoO. Figuring out how to avoid Attacks of Opportunity or when they occur can occupy some time. Moving, casting and ranged attacks in melee should probably stay, but Bull Rushes, Unarmed Strikes, Disarms, and standing up from prone can probably go. This will also encourage more "stunts" in play. Note: You'd be surprised at the effect. Less stalling during the combat, and they simple don't _seem_ to last as long. 7) Less encounters, more reinforcements. To challenge the players, you need several battles between rest periods. If I recall correctly, the standar rules assume four encounters of your CR. Just one or two is too easy for the players and increasing the CR can have some bad results. But outside of some dungeons, four groups of enemies per day is a little hard to do. You need to prepare the encounters (both in preparation time before the session and with narrative during play). One idea would be waves of reinforcement during one main battle. They have less recovery time as with separate encounters, but their buffs might still last.
Tyler Do'Urden 01-03-06, 07:49 AM	Quickest Combat EVAR Whenever you encounter a monster, have the PCs make a level check (1d20 + character level) versus a DC of 10 + monster CR. Include level adjustment. NPC classes like commoner count as half levels. Prestige Classes give you a +1 per five levels. If any character beats the DC, the party beats the monster. If they all fail, they lose the fight and have to retreat. If anybody rolls a natural 20, their character "shines," performing exceptionally well and possibly even defeating the monster singlehandedly. Give that character +10% XP for the encounter. If anybody rolls a natural 1, they must roll again versus the same DC, similar to confirming a crit. If they miss it, that character is killed during the fight. The combat lasts 1d4 rounds +1 per four character levels. It uses up 2d10+8 percent of their resources. Each combat encounter should take just about five minutes, most of which will be thematic descriptions.
crystaloak 01-04-06, 03:02 AM	wow that is also the most boring way possible to handle a battle.
Ozymandias V. 01-04-06, 04:55 PM	What bugs me is that combat is being treated as some kind of time-wasting annoyance. As if you're locked in a room and forced to fight the thing, and can't flee into a nearby shop (if in town) or converse with the enemy or build loyalty between characters or show your character's personality through his views on combat or begin an exciting chase through the streets or...
Fargren 01-04-06, 05:42 PM	Simple house rule: if a player takes more than 10 seconds to choose what does hisr PC do, then his PC does nothing. Tha tends to speed combat up.
Lina_Inverse 01-05-06, 12:33 AM	Simple house rule: if a player takes more than 10 seconds to choose what does hisr PC do, then his PC does nothing. Tha tends to speed combat up. Better house rules, if the PC doesnt have his action by his turn. He skips it and provokes an AoO.
Sosthenes 01-05-06, 07:24 AM	Reaction time is a pretty decent way to incorporate the character's intelligence into the game. X seconds plus/minus Int modifier. With a low intelligence you'll act out of sheer instinct, while a sufficient amount allows you to analyze the situation a little bit more.
Tyler Do'Urden 01-05-06, 09:25 AM	Reaction time is a pretty decent way to incorporate the character's intelligence into the game. X seconds plus/minus Int modifier. With a low intelligence you'll act out of sheer instinct, while a sufficient amount allows you to analyze the situation a little bit more. Reaction time is not based on intelligence at all, IRL or in D&D. Analyzing a situation takes time regardless of your Int. Realistically, your explanation means dumb characters should go first because they're just rushing in on instinct.
Sosthenes 01-05-06, 10:49 AM	Reaction time is not based on intelligence at all, IRL or in D&D. Analyzing a situation takes time regardless of your Int. Realistically, your explanation means dumb characters should go first because they're just rushing in on instinct. Maybe reaction time was a bad choice of words. I'm not talking about the time the characters need to act, but they time the players have thinking about their character's actions. And speed of thought is a factor of intelligence, determining how many factors you can juggle in your mind at the same time. That's why you get your Int modifier added to skill points, after all. Intelligence is a very hard to portray attribute of a character, so a point where you can actually simply integrate it isn't really bad. In addition, most players with high intelligence characters _need_ more time to think about their actions. The wizard with 7 spells which might be used right now could any additional second available. The barbarian? Well, charge! (It gets more useful for extreme values. The DM portraying dumb animals and monsters is often too tactical, if he constrains himself to a single second of thought for each action... And my hubris also stops when trying to accurately play a Int 30 Necromancer.)
FriendlyBiscuit 01-06-06, 08:19 AM	I JUST HAD A NERDGASM! (or maybe this is just really good Saki) Each player has X seconds to think about, decide, and describe their character's actions, where X is equal to your character's permanent intelligence score. (meaning item boosts and buffs don't count)
Tyler Do'Urden 01-06-06, 09:24 AM	So characters with an Intelligence of less than 12 never get to act? Or do they just never get to decide their actions and are thus nothing more than NPCs?
FriendlyBiscuit 01-06-06, 03:25 PM	Whoops, I meant intelligence score. Heh. Seriously. One second to act. Combat would blaze by at the speed of real combat if it was by intelligence bonus. :rofl: So yeah, you have (int score) number of seconds to act. What say you on this?
Sae Cael Oanar 01-06-06, 07:50 PM	we play thirty seconds or something. its not strict. its there to stop really long actions. dont rush characters. state: if you dont say what you are gonna do, then you arent going to do anything. maybe you can assume they take total defense action. characters are often smarter and wiser than their players. being thus, they would act smarter in battle. a wizard may know exactly what to do in every possible situation, the player does not. i dont see the problem though. seriously if you dislike combat, you really should be playing something other than dnd. dnd is pretty much based around combat.
Ruhl-Than Sage 01-06-06, 11:47 PM	i dont see the problem though. seriously if you dislike combat, you really should be playing something other than dnd. dnd is pretty much based around combat. He's right there are a lot of other simpler systems out there. You should try the Warhammer Fantasy Roleplaying Game. Its got a simple combat system that is very quick and very realistic. Much more brutal than D&D. This actually makes most players try to avoid combat if they can rather than rushing into battle and puts a stronger focus on role-playing. The settings great too. But, of course settings are never set in stone.
Templar_Prime 01-16-06, 08:41 PM	My group has been having a problem with combat taking too long, and it has nothing to do with how much time the players take. It has more to do with the number of attacks. This particular game is above level 20 (which, in theory, SHOULD mean that there's LESS combat, but that's not how this particular GM likes it, so...shrug). Most creatures we encounter have at least 4 attacks, and there are often large groups. Imagine if you will multiple mariliths all with the multi-weapon fighting tree, and you get an idea of hot tedious this can be. I'm trying to think of a decent way to speed up the rolls. Any suggestions?
Realms of Chaos 01-18-06, 11:11 PM	I think that I have a fairly simple system that speeds things along. Add your average damage with your weapon to your attack roll. Then, you deal damage equal to the result-the target's ac, multiplying damage automatically by the proper amount on a threat (although a threat has the capability to not deal damage against something with great ac, adding verismilitude).
IceFractal 01-19-06, 05:46 AM	Intelligence score in seconds to think could be interesting, although I'd go by the average of the Intelligence and Wisdom scores.
FriendlyBiscuit 01-19-06, 05:59 AM	Intelligence score in seconds to think could be interesting, although I'd go by the average of the Intelligence and Wisdom scores. Maybe even the sum of your Int and Wis scores. We tried my method for a session and it was hell. Well, pretty dang tough, but survivable. :twitch: :D The sum of Int and Wis would favor the Warmage, the Swashbuckler, and the Favored Soul. (all of whom need or want decent Int AND Wis) And ya know, they're the archetypes I'd expect to never blunder. The Warmage is born/trained for battle, the Swash is just to cool to make mistakes, and the Favored Soul is perfect, at least according to his god.